Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Simon Mickey
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 09:17:00 -
[1]
A lot of people have been speculating that Technetium will become one of the bottlenecks when Dominion is rolled out given the current T2 ship compositions ( see here: http://www.eve-search.com/thread/1222125 ) due to the nanotransistor reaction being critical. HOWEVER - very recent changes on Sisi show the output of the nanotransistor reaction is now yielding 3k nanotransistors - twice the amount it previously yielded.
People who are buying up technetium pre-dominion are in for a rude shock. With Neodymium and Technetium crashing, it therefore seems that the bottlenecks will return to Dyspropsium and Promethium.
So, what does this mean?
It means that the bottlenecks are wider than before. The main issue CCP has communicated is that T2 production was limited due to the amount of Dysprosium and Promethium in game. With these changes WQ moons can effectively support 1.8 - 1.6 times the amount of T2 production than pre dominion.
In conclusion, Dysprosium will rise again (probably not to the levels it once was) and in the long term (perhaps short term too) T2 ships are going to be much cheaper than they currently are.
Should be an interesting few months.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 10:30:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Akita T on 30/11/2009 10:34:44
Then could you please explain why (after a painful SiSi update ritual involving manual patching to a non-published-for-autopatcher-patch so I had to use eve-offline to reconstruct the patch name) is it that after logging in a couple of minutes ago on SiSi, the reaction blueprint was still listing a 1500 yield ? What is your source ?
P.S. http://ccp.vo.llnwd.net/o2/test/evepremiumpatch117757-117806_m.exe for those in a rush to double-check that don't get it from the autopatcher.
_
We are recruiting | Beginer's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper |
Mihoko Nakahara
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 14:19:00 -
[3]
This is what I noticed when I logged into the test server 5 mins ago. Glad I'm able to offload my technetium now while the buy orders are more than what I paid for it ^_^
|
Simon Mickey
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 14:27:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Simon Mickey on 30/11/2009 14:34:45 Hi Akita.
I only really noticed this when I was doing the reaction myself on an industry alt. I was confused like you are so I petitioned it. The response was that the blueprint was incorrect, but the reaction is correct.
(removed the log, apparently that'll earn me a ban =\)
edit: it should be noted that my speculation regarding the return of dyspro as a bottleneck is purely that - speculation.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 14:41:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Simon Mickey
I only really noticed this when I was doing the reaction myself on an industry alt. I was confused like you are so I petitioned it.
Originally by: "GM Twinni" ...stuff...
That is a pretty poor attempt of market manipulation.
And totally nonsense for the following reasons
1) Petitions are working only on TQ, GM's are busy with stuff there already and they will not work on Sisi-petitions
2) Posting GM replies on the forums is forbidden
3) If you want a reply from Sisi then you need to -bug report-
4) First stating that the changes are all on Sisi and then when being called and comming up with a completely new story ('gm confirmed it') is totally unplausible
5) You said it were last minute changes undiscovered by anyone else before and yet you claim not only that you wrote a petition regarding the test server (look at point 1 and 3) for that completely new fact but also that you got a reply within minutes or at max a few hours
Yeah, try better next time. |
Simon Mickey
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 14:50:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Simon Mickey on 30/11/2009 14:50:43
Originally by: Gnulpie stuff
You can call it manipulation all you want. I wasn't aware you couldn't petition on Sisi, I had quite a bit invested in Tech and petitioned a GM (edit: on TQ if that wasn't obvious lol) using a stuck petition to find out asap.
If you've got a lot of ISK invested in Tech and are trying to keep the price up, I don't blame you. I just felt like creating a thread to speculate due to the change in climate.
Thanks for your input though
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 14:53:00 -
[7]
@Gnulpie : my point exactly. But there still could be a very remote and bizzare chance he's right. Even if that chance is almost negligible.
@Simon Mickey : even if I would somehow manage to take your word for it for this specific set of circumstances at this precise point in time, I ran the numbers WITH that specific alteration (and only that one). And you know what, it's still technetium as bottleneck... only less of a bottleneck than before on SiSi (so overall the total moon value will decrease as T2 item production levels increase), so the price won't go THAT high, but it will still be the most valuable moon mineral on the market.
_
We are recruiting | Beginer's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper |
Simon Mickey
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 14:55:00 -
[8]
Interesting. I thought Dyspro and Prom would return to being the bottleneck, but perhaps I am wrong. That's good news for everyone invested in Technetium, I know one guy who stands to make over 400BN over it who was tearing his hair out.
|
EvilweaselSA
Weasel Enterprises Ltd GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 17:42:00 -
[9]
this was a brilliant scam, I hope you made a lot of money off it because it was really well done
|
corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.11.30 20:42:00 -
[10]
The way we should have known this was a manipulation attempt is that it's way too good of a fix. CCP would never do something so simple.
|
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.12.01 12:35:00 -
[11]
Nice try. The alleged petition response was a pretty good diversion. You almost had me worried there for a while (before I ran the numbers, that is, and saw that even if it was true it wouldn't have mattered anyway).
_
We are recruiting | Beginer's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |