T1 barges and Exploration frigates are still overpriced. especially the Asteros. 75M for an astero hull is already more than 50% higher and would be somewhat fair. over 100M is ludicrous.
55M for a t1 barge? you can’t make enough to make that worth it hisec mining for days. the only option would be to take it where its more likely to be destroyed in the first hour lol.
Caps should have been more expensive. T1 barges and Asteros are not capital ships nor even close.
The funny thing is that Gerard is happy because the T2 ships are priced where he wants them to be. That isn’t because of CCP’s “fixes”… it’s because CCP cancelled further fixes before they messed with T2. T2 prices are good because they’re still based on the “pre-fix” model.
It’s basically a “I’m happy I got my cake, and I don’t care who else got screwed out of theirs” response.
CCP messed up bad, and it cost them players, it cost them goodwill, and it has a long-term negative affect on most in-game production and economy cycles. As well as new player “onboarding” as they call it. It was just another rich get richer, poor get screwed over set of moves by CCP.
And the hilarious thing is, their stated set of goals with that whole suite of changes was to address “economic inequality” and “range of opportunities” for the less wealthy.
Looking at their stated mission and goals, I can only conclude that almost everything CCP attempted since Q1 2020 has been a massive failure.
But I’m sure CCP Rattati and others are spinning it at the office as “Job Well Done, Congrats Everyone!”.
There’s no such thing as “overpriced” in EVE. ISK isn’t currency. The only difference between ISK and Tritanium, or Vanadium, or Robotics is that you don’t need to transport it in a cargo hold. ISK is a resource essentially like any other, and all resources engage in a perpetual balancing act against each other. If your Astero “costs” too much ISK, you should try focusing your efforts on generating wealth through other resources that offer more favorable exchange rates for your time.
The only thing we have approaching a real currency in functionality in this game is PLEX. And based on the astronomical rise in PLEX cost, especially over the last few years, it’s easy to tell that the market is massively deflated, which means that things have become cheaper to buy, and not more expensive. There’s just too much stuff, and too many people making more and more stuff. Contemporary prices only seem high to brand-new players who haven’t figured out how to put the game on farm yet.
Your Astero used to cost half of what it does today, but you likely had to work the same amount of time in the past to acquire one as you do today (cases of CCP-driven balancing acts for specific goods aside). Because I don’t know if you were around back then, but battleships for example used to cost like 80 million ISK, except back then, to get that 80 million ISK, you had to fellate a Goon director behind a dickstar PoS just to get ratting rights to a system you could farm for 20 million per hour on a good day. Then incursions and wormholes came out, and now if you’re making 150 million per hour, you get called a noob on Reddit.
From an economic standpoint you’re right Destiny. price = what people will pay for it, which is influenced by how expensive it is to make due to competition between manufacturers.
However it is STILL “Overpriced” from the perspective of people struggling to make their first billion mining.
There are some ridiculous disparities, though. For example, despite its ugly appearance you can actually get a Praxis to higher DPS and EHP than an Apocalypse…using the same laser turrets and ammo. My Apocalypse can manage 900 DPS…my Praxis can manage 1200 DPS with fewer turrets ! And yet the Praxis is less than half the cost of the Apocalypse. A lot of the blingy ships seem to me to be not worth the huge extra price. What can my 1.2bn ISK Nightmare do that my 200m ISK Praxis can’t…both have mega lasers, similar DPS, similar EHP, similar range, etc.
And if you go further back you still had the T2 cartels. Anything T2 was EXPENSIVE even for today’s standards, while today’s income in EVE is far higher on average, not even comparable.
There is overpriced in terms of relative price for the same functionality. As per my Praxis/Apocalypse example. I mean…am I supposed to believe that a Nightmare, for example, is somehow 20 times ‘better’ than a Gnosis to justify 20 times the price? It simply isn’t.
That’s caused by the SoCT ships being too easily available and as a result cheaper than their competition, which needs to be built by players.
SoTC ships should be given to player in blueprint form, rather than given as ready-to-fly battlecruisers and battleships at a fraction of the cost of battlecruisers and battleships.
If those ships were made with minerals and other components, lke other ships, their price would be following the market much better.
But its not just SoCT ships. What I mean is that if you leave out the bling and ‘prestige’ and focus purely on what ships can actually do in terms of DPS, etc…the price curve is exponential rather than linear. Is a 1.2bn Nightmare really 30 times ‘better’ than a 40m Moa ?
Yes.
That is the case everywhere in EVE, intentionally so.
People can pay ten times more or hundred times more for their ship and ship fit for a marginal increase in power, which increases both risk and reward, but allows cheaper ships to still be useful due to them being more cost-effective.
If power increase went linear with the cost, why would anyone ever fly cheap ships and modules if they can afford more expensive versions?
That’s a wealth gap issue, and not a productivity issue. If you apply various economic controls in order to bring down the cost of the Astero to 60 million, you’d be changing a whole lot of other things with it. Such as, for example, the profitability of professions that supply Astero components (like the 46-X chips needed for the blueprint). Or you could hypothetically just give everyone a whole bunch of Asteros. Well, now everyone is using Asteros because they’re so good and free, and no one’s buying other similar ships, tanking their price and the prices of their components, and making a whole lot of players poorer as a result.
Nightmare versus Praxis? My money’s on the Nightmare every time, unless the Praxis is fit specifically as a counter.
But that, along with a similar exponential curve for skills training, is precisely what holds people back in Eve. I think more people drop out because of that than because of ganking or other gripes. Eve relies on people becoming addicted and not thinking 'sheesh…I’ve been playing this game a year and a half and I still don’t have a blingy Paladin '. There aren’t that many games that require the patience of Job.
As usual you’re bending over backwards to make a nonsense argument.
The price of Astero’s already was stable at 60M ISK, for years. CCP had to apply a whole series of breakage “fixes” in the resource/production/trade mechanics in order to cause the inflated prices we’re seeing now.
You also needn’t go back over a decade to pre-Incursion days to make a false price comparison on battleships. Until the “EVE Economic Outlook” and further “fixes” from CCP in 2020 and beyond, Raven’s had been stable at around 130M ISK for years. Now they trade around 330M - over 2.5 times what they traded at just a few years ago.
Player incomes certainly haven’t multiplied by 2.5 times since 2020 - that’s what “overly inflated prices” means.
So to reduce the difference between new players and players who have much more times the money and much more training time you have, you want a linear instead of exponential cost, and think that will help new players?
You couldn’t be more wrong; the opposite is true.
Where right now a veteran player has 30% more performance from their 100 times more expensive setup, they’ll get 100 times more performance if performance scales linearly with cost.
How does that help new players? They will be much further behind!
In the MMO’s I play, they’re almost all set up similar to EVE in that respect. You can get “standard” performance quite cheaply (say, 75-80% of the max), and “very good” performance (82-88% of the max) for what would amount to say between 500 million - 2billion ISK in EVE. Significant cost, requiring fair grinding, but achievable for just about anyone who puts their mind to it.
Then in EVE and every other MMO I play, every step of getting 1-2% closer to max gets very expensive. That’s basically the bait that keeps the whales and DPS e-peeners playing and paying… climbing that last 12% of “max DPS”.
My Praxis…
1152 DPS with Conflag…44km range
800 DPS with Scorch…83km range
500 DPS with Radio…100km range
220 of DPS is from Drones
Turret Tracking 3.23
102K EHP evenly distributed, but could increase to 130K if I remove the warp disruptor and replace with shields.
Max sub-warp speed 670 m/s
My Nightmare…
918 DPS with Gleam…range 54km
570 DPS with Aurora…range 170km
100 of DPS is from Drones
…144K EHP
…Turret Tracking 0.67
…Max subwarp speed 540m/s
The Nightmare has the range advantage but far worse turret tracking. Within 44km the Praxis has 25% more DPS, and more drones.
I wouldn’t be quite so sure the Nightmare would win. Which is my whole point, about cost disparities.
But you’re comparing pulses versus beams?
With pulse the DPS is pretty much the same for both ships ( both using conflag and scorch ) but the Nightmare range advantage disappears and the Praxis then has a small range advantage. They are pretty evenly matched. The beam laser Nightmare version is doctrine primarily because of the longer range.
But more to the point…I flew the Beam laser Nightmare 32 jumps to a base the other day…and it could have encountered the Pulse laser Praxis on the way. Or, indeed, could be a straggler after some mission…etc. Can’t always rely on being in a fleet.
Then you change your setup before you go, or use an alt to move. But the comparison has to be apples-to-apples. Can’t compare the effectiveness of two ships using entirely different archetypes of setups.
The manufacturing cost of pirate ships in general has gotten stupid – the new gas material cost had added a flat 50 mil to both frigates and cruisers, and about 400 mil to the battleships.
This made the floor of the ship’s cost equal to the materials needed to make it, which is significantly different from the old floor of about equial to a T1 ship where rarity caused the price… I guess goons complained about bhalgorns being valued at the same profit levels as T1 battleships at ~200m was such a big issue that now all pirate ships have about 1 bil of material costs.
With the recent lowering of a lot of T2 ship costs, why bother with a pirate battleship when a marauder costs the same amount of materials!?
why bother with a stratios when a T3C costs about the same?
And then there’s the new player experience, with the base missions still giving out a pittance which is woefully inadequate to give a new player a start. Even as an experienced player starting up a new alpha char, I needed to sell all of the ships I received from the quests in order to get into a T1 destroyer with T1 equipment! That really needs to get adjusted upwards a bit.
though the flashy hand-holding tutorial is amusing, though it gives a very incorrect expectation of how the game will hold you hands as you play it… but I digress.