These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

High sec Mission runners just got completely screwed by CCP

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#721 - 2014-03-29 01:58:00 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Likely you are right, considering that overall production must drop to coincide with the reduction of mineral availability, this would be a perfect time to reduce the "free" lines available to the playerbase. Otherwise without a reduction in production availability, you are going to have a massive bout of market inflation on hand.

Mineral availability isn't being reduced, though, nor would it have any connection with a required reduction in free manufacturing facilities. And either way, reducing those manufacturing lines would certainly not keep any inflation at bay.


Oh it most certainly is being touched. Unless you believe all reprocessing will be done in Nullsec from now on (don't make me laugh).

You are either going to have more market competition as "gun miners" go to market to maintain current production.
Or you are going to have less production as "gun miners" take 45% longer to gain required production minerals.

You simply CAN NOT, have one without the other. It is mathematically impossible.

Either less production, or more miners.

Or Market inflation.

Im not sure what you and Lucas find so hard about this. Unless of course you really think that Minerals reprocessed from missions/ratting/plexing/PVP Loot never reach the market as raw minerals or as produced goods. Use your head.

And clearly you do not know what market inflation is.
We discussed this. At length, remember? You spewed a lot of flawed math and overestimated by a massive margin the number of minerals from gun mining.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#722 - 2014-03-29 02:02:22 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
So are you purposely ignoring sov costs? You can't hold an outpost without them. Sov bills are their fuel.

Also, they are supposed to be better than a POS, always have. You'll just have to deal with that.


Do you need to pay sov costs for the outpost, or for the sovereignty?

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#723 - 2014-03-29 02:36:01 UTC
I don't think I've posted in this thread yet.

I don't really have anything to contribute since I can't even remember the last time I ran a mission. But it bumps this to the top and helps remove all those locked threads off page one, so there's that.

Mr Epeen Cool
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#724 - 2014-03-29 02:37:35 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
I don't think I've posted in this thread yet.

I don't really have anything to contribute since I can't even remember the last time I ran a mission. But it bumps this to the top and helps remove all those locked threads off page one, so there's that.


TBH, locked threads beat the ravings of one of the world's leading conspiracy theorists any day. Big smile

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#725 - 2014-03-29 03:28:13 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
I think everyone wants to be able to blow up outposts in the future, and if these changes are on the road to making nullsec more livable and redoing the sov system (I think they are), that's probably the plan. The biggest issue with destructible outposts was over what to do with people's assets left inside.

I think that making outposts useful as more than just as a place to dock is what has to come first, though. I'm hoping that's what's going on.


A destructible outpost is still a lower risk investment than a POS. More hit points to start with, and you'll be facing bigger fleets since outposts are more important to everyone in the alliance.

Outposts already have more value than a POS due to material logistics. When CCP gets around to rebalancing manufacturing lines, you'll see outposts becoming even more valuable simply because you have so much more storage capacity than a POS. Outposts don't need an advantage in game mechanics to support their value. They're already worth everything alliances pay for them, otherwise alliances wouldn't build them.


Maybe they'll be better targets (less timers) or more desirable targets than now if they were destructible. I don't know and I don't really want to speculate, I just wanted to bring up the possibility that changes to the risk of operating in outposts may be planned
Mario Putzo
#726 - 2014-03-29 03:51:20 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Likely you are right, considering that overall production must drop to coincide with the reduction of mineral availability, this would be a perfect time to reduce the "free" lines available to the playerbase. Otherwise without a reduction in production availability, you are going to have a massive bout of market inflation on hand.

Mineral availability isn't being reduced, though, nor would it have any connection with a required reduction in free manufacturing facilities. And either way, reducing those manufacturing lines would certainly not keep any inflation at bay.


Oh it most certainly is being touched. Unless you believe all reprocessing will be done in Nullsec from now on (don't make me laugh).

You are either going to have more market competition as "gun miners" go to market to maintain current production.
Or you are going to have less production as "gun miners" take 45% longer to gain required production minerals.

You simply CAN NOT, have one without the other. It is mathematically impossible.

Either less production, or more miners.

Or Market inflation.

Im not sure what you and Lucas find so hard about this. Unless of course you really think that Minerals reprocessed from missions/ratting/plexing/PVP Loot never reach the market as raw minerals or as produced goods. Use your head.

And clearly you do not know what market inflation is.
We discussed this. At length, remember? You spewed a lot of flawed math and overestimated by a massive margin the number of minerals from gun mining.


You agreed to all the math. Shall we go back through it step by step.

The only thing we don't agree on is the amount of minerals involved in industry (be it market or production) from Reprocessing (note: Not just mission loot).

So you argue your arbitrary lowball, ill argue my arbitrary highball, and at best we meet in the middle, where we still don't have enough minerals to go around.

Next!
Dealth Striker
Perkone
Caldari State
#727 - 2014-03-29 04:26:14 UTC
Not sure about "completely" screwed.
It will definitely change game play for some.
CCP must have decided that they can survive on the money coming in from mid and long term players. There is no way that most new players are going to survive these changes plus the ones that have been dealt in the past.
To think of all the time and resources spent on trying to get and hold on to new players - imo, a vast amount of that will have been wasted once these changes come out if not already.
Striker Out!!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#728 - 2014-03-29 04:57:07 UTC
Dealth Striker wrote:
Not sure about "completely" screwed.
It will definitely change game play for some.
CCP must have decided that they can survive on the money coming in from mid and long term players. There is no way that most new players are going to survive these changes plus the ones that have been dealt in the past.
To think of all the time and resources spent on trying to get and hold on to new players - imo, a vast amount of that will have been wasted once these changes come out if not already.


Its a drop of 3.7% in a mission runners income if they loot. If they blitz missions (which earns you more isk) then they lose nothing.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#729 - 2014-03-29 15:21:29 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Dealth Striker wrote:
Not sure about "completely" screwed.
It will definitely change game play for some.
CCP must have decided that they can survive on the money coming in from mid and long term players. There is no way that most new players are going to survive these changes plus the ones that have been dealt in the past.
To think of all the time and resources spent on trying to get and hold on to new players - imo, a vast amount of that will have been wasted once these changes come out if not already.


Its a drop of 3.7% in a mission runners income if they loot. If they blitz missions (which earns you more isk) then they lose nothing.


It was never anything like you say.
Jester posted a graph, albeit 3 mission nerfs ago, that shows gun mining provided up to 70% of some minerals.
But you keep on spouting off these idiotic numbers.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#730 - 2014-03-29 15:23:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Ramona McCandless
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


It was never anything like you say.
Jester posted a graph, albeit 3 mission nerfs ago, that shows gun mining provided up to 70% of some minerals.
But you keep on spouting off these idiotic numbers.


This is of course, complete nonsense

And has no citation.

Vaccinate your kids.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Inspiration
#731 - 2014-03-29 15:26:19 UTC
Bagrat Skalski wrote:
Talking about industry, why is that survey there? I predict some buff. But first goes the nerf.


Maybe I was not the only one seeing the need for large changes needed with respect to refining/recycling. I proposed it slightly different, but the core idea's stuck. Many more must have had the same core ideas!

I am serious!

Kyperion
#732 - 2014-03-29 15:27:47 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Dealth Striker wrote:
Not sure about "completely" screwed.
It will definitely change game play for some.
CCP must have decided that they can survive on the money coming in from mid and long term players. There is no way that most new players are going to survive these changes plus the ones that have been dealt in the past.
To think of all the time and resources spent on trying to get and hold on to new players - imo, a vast amount of that will have been wasted once these changes come out if not already.


Its a drop of 3.7% in a mission runners income if they loot. If they blitz missions (which earns you more isk) then they lose nothing.

Missioners are probably half of the retention losses in EVE.... I know its the reason I've walked away a time or two.

That whole system needs to be scrapped and replaced with a pure PVP 'fight club/arena' system, similar to a certain other game's 'arena' system..... or something equally radical.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#733 - 2014-03-29 15:34:00 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dealth Striker wrote:
Not sure about "completely" screwed.
It will definitely change game play for some.
CCP must have decided that they can survive on the money coming in from mid and long term players. There is no way that most new players are going to survive these changes plus the ones that have been dealt in the past.
To think of all the time and resources spent on trying to get and hold on to new players - imo, a vast amount of that will have been wasted once these changes come out if not already.


Its a drop of 3.7% in a mission runners income if they loot. If they blitz missions (which earns you more isk) then they lose nothing.

Missioners are probably half of the retention losses in EVE.... I know its the reason I've walked away a time or two.

That whole system needs to be scrapped and replaced with a pure PVP 'fight club/arena' system, similar to a certain other game's 'arena' system..... or something equally radical.


No pvp arenas. It does not fit in with EVE and would massivly damage the game.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#734 - 2014-03-29 15:34:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


No pvp arenas. It does not fit in with EVE and would massivly damage the game.


Just say no to tourneys, kids

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#735 - 2014-03-29 15:36:09 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dealth Striker wrote:
Not sure about "completely" screwed.
It will definitely change game play for some.
CCP must have decided that they can survive on the money coming in from mid and long term players. There is no way that most new players are going to survive these changes plus the ones that have been dealt in the past.
To think of all the time and resources spent on trying to get and hold on to new players - imo, a vast amount of that will have been wasted once these changes come out if not already.


Its a drop of 3.7% in a mission runners income if they loot. If they blitz missions (which earns you more isk) then they lose nothing.


It was never anything like you say.
Jester posted a graph, albeit 3 mission nerfs ago, that shows gun mining provided up to 70% of some minerals.
But you keep on spouting off these idiotic numbers.


You say I use idiotic numbers while using numbers from several years ago before the removal of meta 0 loot...
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#736 - 2014-03-29 15:43:42 UTC
Kyperion wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dealth Striker wrote:
Not sure about "completely" screwed.
It will definitely change game play for some.
CCP must have decided that they can survive on the money coming in from mid and long term players. There is no way that most new players are going to survive these changes plus the ones that have been dealt in the past.
To think of all the time and resources spent on trying to get and hold on to new players - imo, a vast amount of that will have been wasted once these changes come out if not already.


Its a drop of 3.7% in a mission runners income if they loot. If they blitz missions (which earns you more isk) then they lose nothing.

Missioners are probably half of the retention losses in EVE.... I know its the reason I've walked away a time or two.

That whole system needs to be scrapped and replaced with a pure PVP 'fight club/arena' system, similar to a certain other game's 'arena' system..... or something equally radical.


You have a PvP arena.

it is called SISI

it even has access to new stuff that has not made it to game yet

no one bothers
Kyperion
#737 - 2014-03-29 15:57:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyperion
baltec1 wrote:
Kyperion wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dealth Striker wrote:
Not sure about "completely" screwed.
It will definitely change game play for some.
CCP must have decided that they can survive on the money coming in from mid and long term players. There is no way that most new players are going to survive these changes plus the ones that have been dealt in the past.
To think of all the time and resources spent on trying to get and hold on to new players - imo, a vast amount of that will have been wasted once these changes come out if not already.


Its a drop of 3.7% in a mission runners income if they loot. If they blitz missions (which earns you more isk) then they lose nothing.

Missioners are probably half of the retention losses in EVE.... I know its the reason I've walked away a time or two.

That whole system needs to be scrapped and replaced with a pure PVP 'fight club/arena' system, similar to a certain other game's 'arena' system..... or something equally radical.


No pvp arenas. It does not fit in with EVE and would massivly damage the game.

Well, Missions are pretty lame, it makes absolutely NO logical sense that we do the same exact mission over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.....
.......and if the 'New player experience' consisted of PVP and only PVP I think you'd find a lot more people in low/nullsec
Kyperion
#738 - 2014-03-29 16:00:39 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kyperion wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dealth Striker wrote:
Not sure about "completely" screwed.
It will definitely change game play for some.
CCP must have decided that they can survive on the money coming in from mid and long term players. There is no way that most new players are going to survive these changes plus the ones that have been dealt in the past.
To think of all the time and resources spent on trying to get and hold on to new players - imo, a vast amount of that will have been wasted once these changes come out if not already.


Its a drop of 3.7% in a mission runners income if they loot. If they blitz missions (which earns you more isk) then they lose nothing.

Missioners are probably half of the retention losses in EVE.... I know its the reason I've walked away a time or two.

That whole system needs to be scrapped and replaced with a pure PVP 'fight club/arena' system, similar to a certain other game's 'arena' system..... or something equally radical.


No pvp arenas. It does not fit in with EVE and would massivly damage the game.

And just how in the hell would PVP tournaments 'damage' the game???????? That makes no sense.
Minty Aroma
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#739 - 2014-03-29 16:04:54 UTC
Does anyone actually loot anymore in highsec - blitzing SoE missions makes tons more than looting ever does- why would you bother?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#740 - 2014-03-29 16:08:18 UTC


Same way they have killed pvp in every single other MMO that added them. If you want arena pvp you go play one of those other countless MMOs that has it.