These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Tech is fine l2p

First post First post
Author
Rer Eirikr
The Scope
#141 - 2012-07-19 16:07:27 UTC
If anyone's having any trouble here's a guide:

http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/tinfoil20hat.jpg
wallenbergaren
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#142 - 2012-07-19 16:08:01 UTC
Rivver wrote:
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
Rivver wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
OTEC in roo-ins.

Decent first step, more interested in the long term plans to change the way moon mining / resource gathering in general is fixed... because it needs fixing.



This really changes nothing. It simply introduces a price cap. You won't see much of a difference.



And those pricecaps are awesome, because they put certain restraints on the economy, very similar to scrapmetal reprocessing, wich guarantees that no larger number of items will be sold below their raw mineral value for an extended time.
It's regulations like those that keep the player generated markets in eve online working- something that our RL governments fail continuously...Ugh


And you realize that the cap is higher than the current price of Tech?


Only if you assume that people mine cobalt at a profit...
Which they don't
Snowflake Tem
The Order of Symbolic Measures
#143 - 2012-07-19 16:09:10 UTC
Really? beat up the biggest guy on the block? - suddenly Soundwaves' surviving Fozzy attacks (waka! waka!) spring into sharp focus.

It's always nice to have a new guy to hang catastrophic failures around the neck of tho. Fozzy is so much more brave than I.

I know little about the festering heap of offal that is the moon product market other than it stinks and I won't touch it until it has been cleansed with fire. Faffing with alchemy rates is not cleansing with fire.

Aside from that I genuinely wish you the warmest of welcomes.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#144 - 2012-07-19 16:09:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
EvilweaselSA wrote:
yeah we got the inside scoop on this weeks ago

you know, when soundwave posted it on these forums
Hmm… was that before or after he said it to everyone present (and watching the stream) at fanfest?

Rer Eirikr wrote:
If anyone's having any trouble here's a guide:

http://media.treehugger.com/assets/images/2011/10/tinfoil20hat.jpg
Pff! That just proves you're in on the conspiracy. Everyone knows you shouldn't crumple the foil — that creates mini-parabolas that strengthens the signal. It needs to be smooth an angular to deflect stuff, stealth-fighter style.
R0ot
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#145 - 2012-07-19 16:09:38 UTC  |  Edited by: R0ot
So am I the only one around here that thinks it would just be infinitely easier to randomize the moons again and spread Tech moons around all regions instead of limited to one particular "area".

Good Idea / Bad Idea?
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#146 - 2012-07-19 16:10:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmy Zeta
Rivver wrote:
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
Rivver wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
OTEC in roo-ins.

Decent first step, more interested in the long term plans to change the way moon mining / resource gathering in general is fixed... because it needs fixing.



This really changes nothing. It simply introduces a price cap. You won't see much of a difference.



And those pricecaps are awesome, because they put certain restraints on the economy, very similar to scrapmetal reprocessing, wich guarantees that no larger number of items will be sold below their raw mineral value for an extended time.
It's regulations like those that keep the player generated markets in eve online working- something that our RL governments fail continuously...Ugh


And you realize that the cap is higher than the current price of Tech?


Sure. Why not? OTEC put a lot of effort into monopolizing the tech market, so why shouldn't they be rewarded for that?
But now there is a theoretical limit for how far they can raise their prices- and that sounds good to me.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.

Soto ShinDo
HeroinPixelSpace
#147 - 2012-07-19 16:10:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Soto ShinDo
What would be the alchemy reaction for TINFOIL?

Reading the last few pages I could make a fortune in EVE by selling it Lol

edit: typo
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#148 - 2012-07-19 16:11:37 UTC
Snowflake Tem wrote:
Really? beat up the biggest guy on the block? - suddenly Soundwaves' surviving Fozzy attacks (waka! waka!) spring into sharp focus.

It's always nice to have a new guy to hang catastrophic failures around the neck of tho. Fozzy is so much more brave than I.

I know little about the festering heap of offal that is the moon product market other than it stinks and I won't touch it until it has been cleansed with fire. Faffing with alchemy rates is not cleansing with fire.

Aside from that I genuinely wish you the warmest of welcomes.


Clearly the solution is to add moon goo into wormhole space. There's hundreds of completely empty wormholes just waiting to poop out tech. Combine that with NOT listening to the terrible ideas about "stabilisers" and whatnot and you'd actually have some interesting mechanics imo.
Aprudena Gist
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#149 - 2012-07-19 16:11:48 UTC
R0ot wrote:
So am I the only one around here that thinks it would just be infinitely easier to randomize the moons again and spread Tech moons around all regions instead of limited to one particular "area".

Good Idea / Bad Idea?

Yes because scanning every single moon in the game again sounds like good gameplay design.
Spurty
#150 - 2012-07-19 16:13:05 UTC
Soto ShinDo wrote:
Spurty wrote:
Jarin Arenos wrote:
Out of curiosity, when was the last time someone actually threatened CFC's tech sov? Like... legitimately, not just trolling.


Would need to be :

A) - Equal in size (Have a chance at success)
B) - Not have space already (Have a need to fight)
C) - Not be blue to them (or a pet, Merc)

There is no such entity, nor will there be with zero barriers capping point C.

Healthy for EVE?


LOL - NCDot. member whining about OTEC. Hilarious!


I high-lighted the whiny part.

gees.. another day, another plonker

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Hatsumi Kobayashi
Perkone
Caldari State
#151 - 2012-07-19 16:13:13 UTC
Everything is a conspiracy.
Thulium is the future.

No sig.

GRIEV3R
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#152 - 2012-07-19 16:13:24 UTC
Oh man, OTEC is probably going to QQ pretty hard at this. But I'm pretty sure they've already extracted their trillions out of it already.

on a semi-related note, wouldn't it be spiffy if, in the real world, if we don't like OPEC having a monopoly on virtually all the oil on Earth, we could just "tweak" the laws of chemistry and physics so anyone can make a replacement for oil in their basement?

ah, if only reality had benevolent Devs.
Soto ShinDo
HeroinPixelSpace
#153 - 2012-07-19 16:13:27 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Snowflake Tem wrote:
Really? beat up the biggest guy on the block? - suddenly Soundwaves' surviving Fozzy attacks (waka! waka!) spring into sharp focus.

It's always nice to have a new guy to hang catastrophic failures around the neck of tho. Fozzy is so much more brave than I.

I know little about the festering heap of offal that is the moon product market other than it stinks and I won't touch it until it has been cleansed with fire. Faffing with alchemy rates is not cleansing with fire.

Aside from that I genuinely wish you the warmest of welcomes.


Clearly the solution is to add moon goo into wormhole space. There's hundreds of completely empty wormholes just waiting to poop out tech. Combine that with NOT listening to the terrible ideas about "stabilisers" and whatnot and you'd actually have some interesting mechanics imo.


Are you serious Shocked?

Wormhole clearly need more money-makers Roll
Rer Eirikr
The Scope
#154 - 2012-07-19 16:13:44 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Clearly the solution is to add moon goo into wormhole space. There's hundreds of completely empty wormholes just waiting to poop out tech. Combine that with NOT listening to the terrible ideas about "stabilisers" and whatnot and you'd actually have some interesting mechanics imo.


Yea that and your request for Ice belts not 3 pages ago too right? Roll
Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#155 - 2012-07-19 16:14:42 UTC
papamike wrote:

The second evolution IMO was the introduction of a slave system where alliances began incorporating renters or pets to help finance supercapital programs.

Therefore the system of alliances owning moon goo cartels is by no means the 'traditional' allaince structure, nor is it the only way alliances can generate wealth to help subsidise pvp ventures. What you will probably see is a return to renter alliances and the need for larger pvp focused alliances to protect industrially based corps or renters incorporated into their space.


Yes, because a system where 90% of the population get shat on to finance the fun of the other 10% sounds like a great way to keep people playing. Theres a reason the feudal system almost died out and it has very little to do with Tech.
Mioelnir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#156 - 2012-07-19 16:15:16 UTC
papamike wrote:
This system you mention is not the 'traditional' system of alliance management. It is a product of the moon and sov changes of the last 3-4 years.

'Traditional' alliance structures were far more fuedalistic in nature where your right to access the wealth of a region, blue standings and infrastructure was gained by essentially declaring feality towards your corp ceo and upwards to alliance leadership through your corp leadership. The right to access the wealth (traditionally 0.0 ratting, mining and 10/10 plexes) was gained by ensuring that you arrived to fight to defend it when the banners are called.

Good examples of these types of alliances still exist in the majority of 0.0 alliances that dont hold tech moon cartels but the originals were the likes of Stain Alliance and Stain Empire.

The second evolution IMO was the introduction of a slave system where alliances began incorporating renters or pets to help finance supercapital programs.

Therefore the system of alliances owning moon goo cartels is by no means the 'traditional' allaince structure, nor is it the only way alliances can generate wealth to help subsidise pvp ventures. What you will probably see is a return to renter alliances and the need for larger pvp focused alliances to protect industrially based corps or renters incorporated into their space.

It wont mean you cant keep on pvping and getting paid for it through ship replacements. What it does mean is that large fleet losses will be far more painful to an alliance, and far less sustainable. I dont see a problem with this.


The system he describes did however not only come from those changes.
There were other realizations involved as well. For example that the people that pay you for access to a 0.0 system are generally not the people you want to have to call upon for its defense; they are usually rather useless. Additionally you will need some sort of bidirectional communication channel over which you will leak bits of critical information into corporate structures that are probably much easier to infiltrate than your own.

And you did not address his main point, that from conquering the towers to the protection of the supply routes, moon mining is player-driven pvp income. And it is to be converted into stupid plex carebear ****, further removing EvE from its once proud pvp core.
And if you take the 1500 players that regularly show up for tech timers (both sides combined), average the form up, actual fight etc at 4 hours and take 80m isk/h as base for PVE activities in 0.0, those people could actually have earned 480billion ISK. New ISK, not ISK aquired from other players via market.
In the end, this means that the tech moon needs to be uncontested for over 40 months, to generate more income than the people that fought over it could have earned instead.

The economy would be lying weeping in a corner, were it not for the fact that these fights over tech towers occur with all their ship losses, instead of those players doing something else.

That said, the t2 production system in the days of dysprosium and promethium was broken. And the fixed technetium system is broken even more. It is just sad, that more and more sandbox content gets replaced with themepark **** as that is easier to balance.
Soto ShinDo
HeroinPixelSpace
#157 - 2012-07-19 16:17:18 UTC
Spurty wrote:
Soto ShinDo wrote:
Spurty wrote:
Jarin Arenos wrote:
Out of curiosity, when was the last time someone actually threatened CFC's tech sov? Like... legitimately, not just trolling.

rabblerabble


LOL - NCDot. member whining about OTEC. Hilarious!


more rabblerabble


You DO realize that your own alliance is part of OTEC? Roll
Why don't you leave it if you don't like it?
Spurty
#158 - 2012-07-19 16:18:18 UTC
R0ot wrote:
So am I the only one around here that thinks it would just be infinitely easier to randomize the moons again and spread Tech moons around all regions instead of limited to one particular "area".

Good Idea / Bad Idea?


I'm a proponent of such an idea.

Opponents state that keeping it static causes tension and pvp to happen.

We know the realities not quite what is desired.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

R0ot
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#159 - 2012-07-19 16:18:44 UTC
Aprudena Gist wrote:
R0ot wrote:
So am I the only one around here that thinks it would just be infinitely easier to randomize the moons again and spread Tech moons around all regions instead of limited to one particular "area".

Good Idea / Bad Idea?

Yes because scanning every single moon in the game again sounds like good gameplay design.


Someone always does it....
R0ot
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#160 - 2012-07-19 16:20:20 UTC
feck...