These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Science & Industry

Forum Index

EVE Forums » EVE Gameplay Center » Science & Industry » Is CCP planning on removing data cores?

Topic is locked indefinitely.

Is CCP planning on removing data cores?
Author

Previous Topic Next Topic

The Scope Gallente Federation 1,795
Elena Thiesant The Scope Gallente Federation Likes received: 1,795	#41 - 2013-02-06 07:35:31 UTC 1 Captain Tardbar wrote: Question.... I'm still showing research agents in the agent finder. What are their purpose now? Data cores, just like always. Fewer than before they were added to FW and with a higher buyout cost, but they're still there.

Captain Tardbar

Deep Core Mining Inc.

Caldari State

Likes received: 1,190

#42 - 2013-02-06 12:35:59 UTC

Elena Thiesant wrote:

Captain Tardbar wrote:

Question.... I'm still showing research agents in the agent finder. What are their purpose now?

Data cores, just like always. Fewer than before they were added to FW and with a higher buyout cost, but they're still there.

Ok so its still possible to get passive income that way, but just not that much as it used to?

Looking to talk on VOIP with other EVE players? Are you new and need help with EVE (welfare) or looking for advice? Looking for adversarial debate with angry people?

Captain Tardbar's Voice Discord Server

Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 16
Ujio Sendai Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation Likes received: 16	#43 - 2013-02-06 14:21:02 UTC 1 Yes, I've begun getting my datacores from some R&D agents now. From my perspective the slow income rate of them is just fine. I don't have the time to work the system extensively so the passive trickle of datacores helps people like me out tremendously. I hope they leave it as is and never get rid of the R&D income.

Callduron

Dreddit

Test Alliance Please Ignore

Likes received: 638

#44 - 2013-02-06 14:44:54 UTC

I find it odd that CCP is comfortable with wiping out an income that many of us sunk a lot of time into, presumably on a sh*t happens, learn2adapt philosophy but refuses to apply that same philosophy to T2 BPOs.

There's no justification for leaving some legacy content, all concentrated into the hands of superrich players giving them a massive advantage over anyone who joined the game more recently than 6 years ago.

I'd be fine with passive datacores going if it also saw the removal of T2 moneyprinting papers.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.

Callduron

Dreddit

Test Alliance Please Ignore

Likes received: 638

#45 - 2013-02-06 14:52:25 UTC

Toku Jiang wrote:

Katran Luftschreck wrote:

In the end the ultimate goal is to further cement power in the hands of the chosen alliances with T2 BPOs.

Clearly you don't know anything about T2 BPO's or T2 production.

Are you implying T2 BPOs don't allow you to make lots of money? If so I'd like you to meet Entity, T2 BPO owner and Eve item collector.

http://home.wanadoo.nl/ntt/eve/

He buys alliance tournment ships at 50 bill a pop just to pretty up his hangars.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.

Ujio Sendai

Garoun Investment Bank

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 16

#46 - 2013-02-06 15:12:41 UTC | Edited by: Ujio Sendai

Callduron wrote:

I haven't been playing for very long, but it doesn't take a vet to see that if the game designers' goal was to stave off saturation of T2 production one of the first things to do would be to get rid of a group of BPO's that would completely debunk the invention system that everyone else has to follow.

I'm not sure what percentage of the T2 market these BPO holders make up. However I've seen the profits a small corp can do with a steady production system with the current invention limitations, so I could only imagine the impact of having T2 BPO's at a corp's disposal.

Steve Ronuken

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM

Likes received: 6,759

#47 - 2013-02-06 18:10:37 UTC

Ujio Sendai wrote:

Callduron wrote:

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter


Ujio Sendai Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation Likes received: 16	#48 - 2013-02-06 18:19:55 UTC 1 ^ Hmmm very interesting Steve... I guess if there's a stat someone is tracking it.

Ginger Barbarella

Likes received: 2,069

#49 - 2013-02-06 21:54:58 UTC

Toku Jiang wrote:

So they want to remove the passive part of getting them even though we now have to pay isk for the cores? So one would have to assume that they will be killing off the Research Project Management skill and giving us those points back?

Man CCP is becoming a bunch of ******bags

They recently implemented a purchase price as research agent of 10k ISK per datacore you buy from your research agent. On top of that, have you seen the prices you now have to pay to get DCs from FW agents?!?!!? Seriously friggin' expensive. If DCs are moved to be available only thru FW agents I'll have no choice but to end my Industrial operations across my accounts; no way I'll be paying FW prices given the number of DCs I use on a monthly basis.

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac

Steve Ronuken

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM

Likes received: 6,759

#50 - 2013-02-06 22:18:10 UTC

Ginger Barbarella wrote:

Toku Jiang wrote:

Uh, you mean around 100,000 isk each? which is a good conversion rate for LP (it's around the 1000 isk per lp mark.)

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

DeODokktor

Dark Templars

The Fonz Presidium

Likes received: 80

#51 - 2013-02-07 02:25:58 UTC

The passive isk argument was made up from the start. Invention has been a big flop because a lot of people fail to add properly. People cant take in the cost of datacores to produce a realistic value of the products they are making. CCP "Fixed" this by giving a easy way to "grind" cores.

A lot of us were "farming" cores, But even when they were 300k/unit we werent making tons of isk.
I had about 17 chars doing this, and 5 accounts that were reserved just for doing production / research / cores.

((3 chars * 6 agents * 120rp/day) / 50)*300k = 12.96m
so nearly 13 mil a day or about 395 mil a month.

With the changes now...
((3 chars * 6 agents * 120rp/day )/100)*(100k-10k)=1.94m
so nearly 2 mil a day or about 59 mil a month.

To get 6 agents (before the standing chamges came through) required a LOT of time and isk to grind chars up to the standings to run your high quality l4 agents. RPM V was a big slog as well. It wasnt something you just decided to do. Even throwing isk at it, you were looking at a good 6 months to train 1 char on your account up to run those 6 agents. So investing 2 years of training time (with plexes or $$$) was costly. 2 years of training time so you can half-pay for an account that doesnt even have a combat char on it. If you were to try to slip in these R&D chars around a main then the timings were not realistic as you would take too much away from your main.

Should you do it now?... I would say no, but RPM 3 or 4 might be okay if your really needing to make that 50 mil a month. It will take you a month to pay back the skill!.

And then there are other considerations too, none of the l4 agents are grouped together closely at all, so prepare for a lot of travel.

The nerf seen me stop all but two of my accounts, so I guess ccp has done well. Shame that they allowed 1 grinder to make as many cores in one day as it took my whole account to make in a year.

Will they get rid of R&D agents now, Probably...
Why?... I am sure they will say no one is using them.
It should have been reworked, but R&D should have been the only source of cores, and a fun tree should have been put in for players, not a nerf.

Also, one guy earlier says he was making cores while his account was inactive, that's been fixed for years, so no he wasnt.

Callduron

Dreddit

Test Alliance Please Ignore

Likes received: 638

#52 - 2013-02-07 02:39:22 UTC

Thanks for the links to CCP Diagoras's tweets, Steve.

Just taking the first one.

CCP Diagoras wrote:

Excl. drones/charges, the most produced T2 items from BPOs in March were: Exp. Cargohold (19%), Rocket Launcher (94%), Cap Recharger (22%).

How is it even remotely ok that one or two rich old players control 20% of two of the highest volume modules in the game and 94% of Rocket Launcher IIs when hundreds of their competitors are left fighting over the scraps they leave?

CCP wouldn't even be hurting anyone if they removed these as anyone who has one is already superrich and they're hardly likely to rage quit.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.

Steve Ronuken

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM

Likes received: 6,759

#53 - 2013-02-07 02:53:33 UTC

Callduron wrote:

Thanks for the links to CCP Diagoras's tweets, Steve.

Just taking the first one.

CCP Diagoras wrote:

Excl. drones/charges, the most produced T2 items from BPOs in March were: Exp. Cargohold (19%), Rocket Launcher (94%), Cap Recharger (22%).

20% is hardly control. You can't price set with only 20% of the market.

And I'll quite happily take the current 300,000 isk per hour for manufacturing expanded cargoholds. (and that's including the datacore prices)

Or the 800,000 isk per hour for Rocket launcher IIs. A profit margin /that/ big suggests that there are few people making them. Which in turn suggests it's a market with no space to absorb higher volume.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter


DeODokktor Dark Templars The Fonz Presidium Likes received: 80	#54 - 2013-02-07 11:12:05 UTC 1 Like I said... People cant add... You need 100% of the market to dictate where it will sit. CCP is also avoiding listing consumption numbers. Some tech2 isnt even profitable to build from the BPO, yet people invent it and then complain that BPO owners are the problem. 1+1 = 83, DARN THOSE BPO HOLDERS.

RichtPaul

Shadow Industries I

Likes received: 118

#55 - 2013-02-07 15:10:19 UTC

DeODokktor wrote:

Some tech2 isnt even profitable to build from the BPO

Invention ME = -6 to -1
Includes cost of decyptors, datacores, logistics and time.

BPOs
Can be ME and PE researched. No invention needed.

"T2 BPOs aren't profitable".

Stop... just stop. The only fields it's not profitable to invent from T2 BPOs are imaginary areas. T2 BPO owners needs to admit that their BPOs are quite profitable. Certain fields like command ships, logstics, recon, and a few other low volume T2 ships introduced before T2 BPO changes are quite literally dominated by BPO influence and production.

DeODokktor

Dark Templars

The Fonz Presidium

Likes received: 80

#56 - 2013-02-07 15:31:09 UTC

RichtPaul wrote:

DeODokktor wrote:

Some tech2 isnt even profitable to build from the BPO

"SOME" is a key word, removing it makes a big change.

Yes, many t2 bpo's are great earners, after that the majority are good earners, then there are the break-evens, then there are the no-profits.

Yes, BPO's can be researched, the price difference moving from -1 to +1 can be a large-ish jump, going from +1 to +10 can be small (or nothing) for tech2. But ask yourself this, HOw many people inventing are producing with -4 or worse prints for ships?... It's a lot more than you think.

I am not saying that some bpo's dont make mad isk, they do, just saying that the whole t2 bpo ownership thing is perhaps overrated.

There are thousands of tech2 bpo's out there, The complaints about the ownership of those bpo's being in the hands of a few hundred key players isnt the fault of those few hundred, it is because the others sold out. If we paid 10 years profit for a bpo, then why is it wrong that we make 10 years profit?... Does someone entering invention spend 40 billion on making ships?.. No... When someone is doing invention and CCP nerfs the S*** out of an item, does the invention owners 40 billion isk inventment turn into a 30 billion isk loss?... No...

Most of my t2 bpo's have been idle since Feb 2012, a lot of us "older" t2 owners really only produce from our key prints these days anyhow. Trust me on this, if we wanted to spoil invention we wouldnt do it by just underpricing our items ;P... I typically sell well over "invention" sellers anyhow, to me they have killed the game as my profit has REALLY taken a beating.


Callduron Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore Likes received: 638	#57 - 2013-02-08 01:58:22 UTC 1 None of the above is any reason to keep them in game. They are out-dated as AOE Doomsdays. Did it suck for titan pilots when they could no longer solo 200 people? Sure. Pretty good news for everyone else though. I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/ I post on reddit as /u/callduron.

H2O Hairey

Brutor Tribe

Minmatar Republic

Likes received: 24

#58 - 2013-02-12 09:47:49 UTC

True i also think T2 bpo should be nerfed (ccp might be afraid some will rage quite? Lol

)
But back to datacore's, last couple of weeks allot of characters have cashed in
all there old rp-accounts at the old 50rp/datacore rate, i.s.o. 100rp/dc, and the extra purchase
price to the research agent of 10k ISK per datacore.

So no i don't think ccp is gona remove datacores.
They will try to make it more expensive and more focused to FW and less to
research agents.

Carniflex

StarHunt

Mordus Angels

Likes received: 381

#59 - 2013-02-12 15:26:56 UTC

The argument how T2 BPO's are "limited" and how invention is better are not too convincing in my opinion. As far as I can see nothing prevents the poor T2 BPO owner doing invention in-addition to spending that one manufacturing slot for that T2 item.

T2 BPO's are not competing with invention as there just is no competition with the lack of decryptor, datacore, BPC' costs on BPO's. Invention just fills whatever demand is left over the T2 BPO's.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.

Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn

Department 10

Likes received: 258

#60 - 2013-02-12 16:26:31 UTC

Captain Tardbar wrote:

I heard from someone on EvE that CCP is going to remove research NPCs and datacores.

If this is true, how will research be handled?

If they are going to remove them in the first place...

These rumours generally originate from the same certain person fairly high up in CCP. I'm not going to mention his name but you should be able to figure out who he is. Blink

These rumours will generally not actually happen as many people would unsub as a result which is bad for CCP. A couple of the more famous rumours coming from this person include removing ice belts from high sec & removing the ability to do invention in laboratories in POSes in high-sec space. These rumours will not come to pass at least not in the blanket formats suggested. For example it might be good idea to make ice belts not an inexhaustable supply like ore belts. But it would'nt be logical or workable to remove ice belts from high sec entirely.

I personally think it was a bad call to have datacore mainly being supplied by Factional Warfare. But we are not in control and have little say in what happens. New Eden mirrors Earth. Roll

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four. ' The Walking Dead. ' .

Previous page1234Next page

Science & Industry

The Scope

Gallente Federation

Deep Core Mining Inc.

Caldari State

Garoun Investment Bank

Gallente Federation

Dreddit

Test Alliance Please Ignore

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM

Dark Templars

The Fonz Presidium

Shadow Industries I

Brutor Tribe

Minmatar Republic

StarHunt

Mordus Angels

Department 10