probably just an error when it synched prices
And since there isn't nearly enough space in the rep comment, thanks again Grim, defender of slightly less horrible posting than Whitehounds.
Also, going to be interesting to see what the barge/exhumer changes do to low end mineral prices. Maybe some hisec dwellers will pick up mining now that it'll get (very)slightly less tedious since you won't have to dump into cans as often and such. One could dream eh?
Grim you nigger, that was my ban to give
(4:14:52 AM) grimbold_dengrist: all Marivauder does as a mod is post about being a mod
(11:47:38 AM) endie: If you lot don't stop that I'm moving this corp to test
We value you as a member of the EVE Online community; however toxic behavior will not be tolerated. ~CCP
Sweet jesus christ. CCP butchered all known chemical nomenclature. I'm no inorganic chemist but this butchery of metal alloy nomenclature cannot stand.
FUCK CCP BECAUSE CAESARIUM ISN'T AN ELEMENT. I can't even tell if they are actually using correct IUPAC because idk if this made up element is more or less electronegative than cadium. If it is less electronegative then this would maybe be correct if this shit existed. PS maybe ccp meant Caesium.
>100 x Silicon Diborite 100 x Caesarium Cadmide 100 x Vanadium Hafnite make phenolic composites? APPARENTLY CCP CAN MAKE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS OUT OF INORGANIC ONES. IDK HOW THAT WORKS.
Why doesn't CCP just call it carbide like they do everything else? I guess archaic nomenclature makes them seem smart. This implys a bianary compound in which carbon is the more electronegative element but they don't seem to state what that element is. IS THIS A SALT LIKE CARBINE, OR MAYBE IONIC, OR COVALENT. FUCK I DON'T THINK CCP KNOWS.
EVE is real
I tried using the data from the website linked earlier. Once you add in fuel costs, the prices shift dramatically downward bvious:
I wasted three hours trying to figure out how to make isk from the mins and reactions I can manage in Derelik. All I learned is that I'm a market retard who can't understand how anyone actually makes isk in reactions. With two large towers I'd be making a whopping 5 mil per week by my numbers. An I fucking up my math or something? towers would run about 235M/w to run and the product would take in 5 mil above that.
Who runs a tower to make in a week what a forsaken hub nets in about a minute and a half?
/ pissed because It took so much of my time to learn I'm still a scrub. LOL
Confirming T2 ship production is the African diamond industry of EVE.
edit: btw whats this thread about now? It started off with lots of cool info.. Can someone who knows about all this market shit give another update/summary on whats happened over the last week of speculation and firesales? Where is everything likely to stabilize? How long does it take for something like this rapid drop in tech prices to filter through the market and be seen in cheaper ships?
[quote="Dental Floss"]It's times like these, when I look at some of my alliance mates' posting that I wish we had never formed a rep circle so some of us could learn to post better on their own merit rather than being propped up.[/quote]
They never adequately explained how a jump drive operates, and why it can fit in something as small as a carrier, but not a machariel.
If you kill enough of them they stop fighting - Gen. Curtis Lemay
Fear the KKM
It's the tech 2 wizardry that allows it in a BS. Now we just need a T2 mach.
And now we have a new class called alchemy but it doesn't produce potions. :/
I put on my robe and wizard hat
then jump in my freighter and empty fucking silos
tbh you gotta do what you gotta do not shoot yourself when piloting a freighter.
Cobalt's slowly dropping while Crystalline Carbonide spiked 30% today. It seems the goo is entering the market faster than it can be reacted.
From the CSM minutes:
elsewhere:Seleene commented, at this time in the discussion, that he was still waiting for the ‘money-shot’, what about Technetium, POSes, sovereignty? CCP Soundwave’s reply was that these topics were not on the schedule for the Winter 2012 release, but they would be covered in more detail in the next session about EVE Future, i.e. the release/s beyond Winter 2012.
If you want more than that, just hit the PDF and read from page 42 on.Continuing on other future matters, ring mining. The basic idea is that it would be a group PvE activity that allows players to gather moon materials – in the spirit of talking about the future, without it being decided or set in stone, CCP Soundwave included the word “replacing”, i.e. the idea of moving moon-goo entirely to the ring mining venue. The argument for this statement is that moons are basically ATMs, you plant down a structure and receive money, an awful gameplay mechanic.
Seleene commented that he agreed to the assessment that it is an awful gameplay mechanic but pointed out that moons and their resources is a great conflict driver and perhaps it would be better to ‘upset’ the balance by adding alternative sources of moon-goo rather than removing the current source entirely. He then asked, “How would you go about doing this?”
CCP Soundwave responded that the initial plan was replacing the current moon mining function with ring mining, but it was decided to place POSes higher on the priority list than ring mining and thus that plan is currently on hold. There will however be a change done regarding moon-goo in Winter 2012, but it hasn’t been decided exactly how that change will be done. There is also the matter of how to go about doing this change gracefully regarding the community.
Two step asked why the composition of the tech II components is simply not changed to remove the dependencies of specific moon materials. It would be quick and easy to do and could be done several times to keep balance on moon material value until ring mining is done.
Seleene and UAxDEATH both stated that this would not change anything in the end, at least it would not be a conflict driver, if anything it would perhaps just increase the workload on diplomats to organize deals between coalitions.
Two step pointed out that some of the moon minerals were more regionalized than others and currently the one in the highest demand was mostly present in the north. Changing the requirements of tech II components would make 0.0 entities move around more and create fights.
UAxDEATH said that this was not a correct assessment; resources are not as big of a reason for fighting as personal vendetta (or hate).
Elise pointed out that when alchemy first came out it did wonders for the then-problem of R64s (but created the current problem). It not only did it bring about a certain balance in the pricing of those resources but it also encouraged smaller entities to go and fight over moons that provided the goo that is possible to alchemagic into R64s.
Seleene said that while that solution was good, it was almost that he wished the change had never gone through due to the effects it had (the Technetium situation).
Two step added that every ship uses Tech and as such it is of course the prime candidate to control, plus the aforementioned localization of it makes it much easier.
Elise said that moons were a huge conflict driver for one month of the year, the eleven other months it is not.
I p much agree with this one.CCP Unifex wanted to explore the topic of conflict drivers a little bit further and asked, if moon minerals are taken off the table, what is it that drives conflicts in EVE?
Seleene responded by saying that these days the major players in each alliance all hang out in the same jabber channels and conversations after fights are more akin to chat after a friendly match (even though titans and super caps were destroyed) rather than ‘hatred’ – everyone is so filthy rich that losses really don’t matter. The ‘romance’ of old times, where hate and animosity where driving factors are largely gone. The sense of loss has turned from ‘damn, now I have to go and mine to afford all this stuff again’ to ‘man, now I have to go to the market and spend money.’
Raketefrau's quote from the minutes is entirely true. There is too much isk flowing into the system steadily right now at the alliance level. Ships used to be paid for by individuals, when a fight was lost, there was anger. Now they just post to the killboard and wait for the check from the alliance SRP program. The SRPs of today have reduced the grunt level hatred that used to motivate leaders to war and drive tensions between groups. Re-evaluateing the volume of moon goo required to build t2 ships to devalue moon mining could result in the reduction of SRP programs.
Sure, by reducing the demand, the profit of each moon drops, fuel costs are high and as such would result in less moons being mined. This would push up the price per unit, but the overall lessened demand would result in less isk flowing into moon holder's wallets.
I believe a reduction in SRP programs would drastically reshape the face of nullsec. I may be wrong, but I think that reinstating the personal loss and expenditure of old would do wonders to increase the volume of conflict.
I like SRPs, but I like blowing ships up more.
Dominion sov in place for about three and a half years then, best case scenario.these topics were not on the schedule for the Winter 2012 release
I should have just shot myself (ingame)
The only thing I dislike about the ring mining is it seems like they intend to force it to be a fleet effort. If it's like an incursion where you can't really solo, then the idea that it pushes isk from the alliance level down to the grunt is incorrect. It shifts the location of the alliance income and makes it necessary to actively grind (yay?) but the same people will be the beneficiaries. People still won't buy their own ships.
Shifting loss to a personal expenditure without increasing the per pilot isk generation of nullsec would be a straight up nerf to activity.
Alliances are extreemly risk adverse with supercap fleets already. That would just extend down the ship classes to BS or BC fleets if people weren't wealthy enough to replace them.
Hours and hours and hours of grinding Forsaken hubs does not make me want to defend Dek... SRP from Tech does.
Was it really better with out SRP tho??
Right now in the south there is a major (hundreds of pilots) fleet fight almost every night. Sometimes multiple fights. It's a lot of fun.
Would this be possible if every ship loss meant pilots jumping to their mission/mining clones after every loss?
The issue at hand is that not all SRPs are alike. Goons can afford to replace motherfucking Tengus. PL has a SRP for supercaps. That's not merely a reward for holding more space; that's a reward for holding POSes (not sov) in a specific region of space with a terribly unbalanced passive resource.
I like SRPs, but when there's no risk-aversion to flying T3 or Super fleets, people with less robust SRPs just dock up and play Civ5.