Please, spin that with someone else.
We all know that these changes make not an iota of difference to “null sec interests”, other than to enrich the largest groups. There is a reason that you guys run the CSM every year, and this is one of them, to maintain your hegemony.
3 Likes
We’re actually planning for a near removal of our moongoo income, internally. We don’t yet know whether or not the new scheme will be taxable in any capacity. Today, we receive absolutely no taxation income from traditional mining. Refinery taxes are an absolute pittance, so we stopped charging that tax, because it was just an insult to people trying to do production.
Whether or not it actually ends up a real income source is yet to be seen.
I thought you said a while back it wasn’t that important to you? 
If nothing else it’s an important step towards removing POS. I just hope they keep a close eye on how it goes and react quickly to any imbalances.
I did say “most.” :sun:
I think they have something very different in mind when those refineries come out and there is so much new pray to shoot at. Mood poo interdiction will be the new “thing”. Your 250mm railgun II will only cost 200m and the Deimos that is supposed to wear them will only “slightly” increase to 4 billion.
Thanks for the all the fish.
1 Like
Oh yes, because a goon has never ever lied before, and we should believe every word you type.
1 Like
I mean, the data is right in the MER. You can see the total money made game-wide by refining taxes:
(source: July 2017 MER)
A paltry 240B for literally everyone in the game, highsec, lowsec, and nullsec. The slice that any one person can get of that pie is absolute trash, and is easily discarded.
Without strong API tools, it’s not going to be feasible to make much of any kind of money directly from the new moongoo scheme. It’ll have to come from secondary sources, like charging an admission fee (basically renting) or through buyback programs. How is any of that easier and more scaleable than today’s passive collection?
Don’t take that as a complaint, mind you. We’ve diversified our income, and even today less than a quarter of our total income is derived from moongoo.
3 Likes
What I don’t get is how somebody is complaining about the fuel blocks. If we take the mock-up as gospel then for 100 + 100 raw moon goo in you spend 5 fuel blocks. A current setup would use a medium POS for this which is 10 blocks base / 8 blocks in sov and I think 6 blocks in sov with a faction POS? Yes there’s a cost to running the service module. You can ignore that as a rounding error for any major reactor even if they do choose to spread their production runs across multiple structures.
Sure the time factor is different at 3h base instead of 1h. But the base will come down with skills and equipment and post change everybody will be using the same reaction speed anyway.
Other structures mostly offered you an advantage in switching across early as they had to incentivise you via competition. Refineries don’t have to worry about that since everybody will be on the same footing at day 0. Expecting moon goo / composites to carry on about the same after the incoming shake-up is naive. Even just the 9-10 days of no harvesting anywhere in New Eden is going to result in some huge upheavals as speculators divest themselves of stock and nice profits.
The entire market / process is going to be completely distorted which means the past just simply isn’t worth referring back. The only relevance it’s going to have is that it will have formed people’s thinking if they’ve been in the game for a while.
1 Like
So, According to the blog, Day One of Refineries is also day one of no more pos moon reactions.
… wouldn’t it make sense to have a cross-over period where both can work, while refineries are BPO’d and built and put in place? Then switch over, to avoid a massive gap in production while everything re-aligns?
(Or are refineries coming out before winter now?)
4 Likes
Can I just add, that player manufacturing tax needs re-working. Volume wise, refining can pay for the online module, but with comparative manufacturing volume the online cost is way out of the league
It is 20 blocks base. And it is not about the Fuel. It is about the cost of having to now use MANY characters to manage something that originally you needed 1 for.
You assume that was base skills, but we can only make that an assumption. I based my calculations on max skills due to there being 11 jobs available (which is max skilled)
I agree with most of the rest. What I am concerned about is the impact having potentially less complex materials will have on the T2 manufacturing costs.
Your calculations clearly showed the picture was lacking a detail, which until we know we can’t say anything about needing additional characters.
That’s even ignoring any additional bonuses the refineries might give once properly coded.
Being concerned on it is fair though, but prophesying doom & gloom isn’t Especially when even if you take the path of Alts the cost’s worked out close to what they used to be, and could even end up cheaper.
1 Like
There are some really exciting features coming with the winter expansion. Stay tuned for details!
3 Likes
Precisely, when we will see the details?
Why was the blurb about a high sec centred winter release removed Aug 16th?
When, and who, will give the updates?
3 Likes
This is a really late reply, but that’s straight-up wrong and you know it. In my particular use-case, 2.1x is a 9% materials bonus compared to 1.9x. And yes, my particular use-case may be extreme, but it’s not unique.
A 5% reduction to materials use in manufacturing increases to 6% from moving from lowsec to nullsec. Describing it in terms of the rig’s multiplier and measuring the percentage between the two is some weasel sh it. Don’t try to pull that on me.
Yes, and I’m saying that the 5.9% nullsec ME modifier barely gives me a 9% total materials reduction (the change from 6% to 5.9% ruined a few thresholds and barely left mine intact), while the 5.5% lowsec ME modifier gives me a 0.5% total materials reduction. You know how this works.
But no actually, you’re right, and I’m wrong. Reactions aren’t going to have any decryptor nonsense to get a headache about, so the difference between 5% and 6% will actually be a 1% difference, not a 9% difference.
The tribulations of a man who refuses to batch manufacturing jobs are completely irrelevant. You deal with the stats on the tin, not a convoluted, extreme edge case where the numbers don’t align.
T2/T3 jobs can’t be batched. The “stats on the tin” for them are different for the stats of the tin for T1 jobs. That’s why there’s so much loose profit in them: because it seems like barely anyone is able to actually read the writing on the T2/T3 tins; everyone else assumes it’s written in the same language as on the T1 tins.
But no Querns, I’ve conceded, you were right about Refinery bonuses and I was wrong. When I made that first post I was only thinking of my use-case, where lowsec ECs are unable to compete with nullsec ECs in any way whatsoever. That won’t be the case for unresearchable T1 reaction BPOs. I was surprised by your post and I took this thread way off-topic, so I’ll stop.
1 Like