Architect Archive
Thread: A Miners Message: Sent To Thunderheart
Well the main point of a lot of this is that harvesting should require active play (by the owner of the lots). If you can't be around for a week then you shouldn't necessarily expect to still have a full harvesting output that week.
StGabe.
Message Edited by StGabriel on 06-17-2004 10:33 AM
StGabriel wrote:
You also have to look at the causual gamer or those that might go on military leave, vacation, or family emergency that might need to have their structures monitored by a friend. Administration is crucial to those.
There are plenty of solutions that prevent rampant harvester sharing but still allow you to have friends maintain your buildings.
You would have to get metrics on all servers to ensure the problem is not isolated to particular servers.
Not really. First of all, you can't put specific code in only for servers that have problems. Secondly, if an abuse exists, over time more and more people use it. Thirdly, imbalances need to be fixed even if not everyone uses them.
This is a common position to take in economic debates: the position that the other sides points can't be followed up on simply because not every little last detail is known. There is always uncertainy in economic systems however. In general we see that significant imbalances do exist, and I think we've seen evidence that the devs are increasingly concerned about that. That is really enough to start thinking about solutions. We can't hide in our shells forever waiting for absolute certainty.
Since you refuse to gather facts and not speculate you have yet to prove that the supposed "rampant harvester sharing" is really that big of an issue if cross server trading is eliminated.
Any limitations on alternate characters that are paid the full prices for should never be limited. If you pay the 15.00 per character you are paying for a full functioning character.
Yes there is always uncertainty in economic systems and no you cannot know every little detail. My issue is your position is based on no factual numbers at all. Normally with the uncertainty in economic systems you can use trends and numbers to at least make a sound theory on what will happen.
We have yet to see what the post holo grind resouce business will be, and that is a key factor. Since elite crafters basically mine soley because of avaailability and price my guess is what we will see is the heavy resource miners switching from "mine anything" to mining quality and at reduced prices and you will also see many of the resource corporations stop or lower production because of lower demand.
Yes the devs are concerned, so are we all. The proper focus is not to inhibit game playability but to do something practical to elimiate cross server trading and if too much resource is being mined it is better controlled by the people that have the metrics. The devs have the ability to limit the resouce spawns and how fast they shift. They can do that properly after they see how the post holo grind situation looks.
We all must remember that the "resource vendor/company" is a player created profession. In beta the mining profession was dumped for good reason. I think you will see that once things smooth out after the holo grind people will just slow production themselves because the money will just not be there to mine as much.
StGabriel wrote:
In cases where friends are away for the reasons I have previously posted one on the main things nbeeed to ebe done besides maintenence and power is make sure the hopper is not full lol
Well the main point of a lot of this is that harvesting should require active play (by the owner of the lots). If you can't be around for a week then you shouldn't necessarily expect to still have a full harvesting output that week.
StGabe.
Message Edited by StGabriel on 06-17-2004 10:33 AM
SunCrusherTx wrote:
This is all well and good that we can debate the socialistic and capitalisticaspects about lot swapping.
I'm very glad to see that we've got a Correspondent posting in this thread. I really appreciate your input.
However, let's get straight to the point. We need a Dev to post SOE's stance on the issue. I'm not looking for someone to postsome rumor or discussion from FanFest. Is this a Publish 9 issue? Is this after JTL? Or after the combat rebalance? Or after the Smuggler Revamp? What time table are we dealing with? And what are the Dev's thoughts about how to fix it?
VERY WELL SAID!!!
Yes the devs have the metrics we should get their exact position. And their ideas on stopping cross server lot trading.
Perosonally anythng this drastic should be left to after the holo grind is gone so everyone can see how that alters things, with the excpetion of a solutionto cross server trading because that is absolutely not something that should happen or be allowed to happen,
I have gathered facts, evidence of single players owning 400+ harvesters. That is enough to say that imbalances exist. That imbalances of this gross nature exist is enough to say that there need to be fixes.
Any limitations on alternate characters that are paid the full prices for should never be limited. If you pay the 15.00 per character you are paying for a full functioning character.
And we're not talking about limiting that. You can't prevent a second character from being full functioning. What you CAN do is make sure that to get twice the output from twice the characters, you have to do twice the work. That is at least somewhat fair. More importantly, you can prevent one character (with a second account or not) from having 10 times the resource output with much less than 10 times the work (as is possible with lot trading).
My issue is your position is based on no factual numbers at all.
On any server you can find markets where items are being sold at just above cost and on any server you can find that most crafters aren't making terribly good livings compared to those they sell to.
We have yet to see what the post holo grind resouce business will be, and that is a key factor.
While we wait, more resources get stored away that will imbalance the economy for months if not years to come. We can't just sit around in blank catharsis saying, "maybe, just maybe, this change will magically fix everything". The imbalances in resource acquisition still exist. Holo-grinding is simply a sink on these imbalances. Players will have big infrastructures in place for massive harvesting now and will have less sinks for this meaning that if anything there will just be larger gluts.
The proper focus is not to inhibit game playability but to do something practical to elimiate cross server trading and if too much resource is being mined it is better controlled by the people that have the metrics.
I'm not sure what you mean by inhibiting playbility. Is the fact that a bishop can only move diagnally in chess an inhibition of "game playability"? If the economy is unbalanced unchallenging that should be fixed just as any other game imbalance would be.
I think you will see that once things smooth out after the holo grind people will just slow production themselves because the money will just not be there to mine as much.
If the money isn't there it is because crafting markets have already bottomed out and become stagnant. If crafting markets were actually dynamic with solid demand then of course the money would be there. And if the money is there and abuses exist to massively harvest, they WILL be used.
Message Edited by StGabriel on 06-17-2004 10:54 AM
Dvnce wrote:
TheOxygen wrote
If these turn out to be SOE's reasonings for implementing a change, I'd like to address them point-by-point.
1. This is difficult to actually validate. Yes, they do take up land. So do player cities. In fact, I've had more trouble running into cities while looking for a good resource spot than I ever have with static harvesters (and there are a decent amount on Lowca). This arguement is truly flimsy at best, and I'd like to see some raw data backing it up if the Dev's ever list it as a serious issue.
The idea is that this land is not available from live active players.. because it is blocked by ghost players.. ( they even put in place means to make cross server citienzen swap.. unattractive..) so that is the idea of this..
Surely you're not echoing that other thread where the person suggested that people were harvester griefing by hogging "all the good spots"? And what is a live active player anyways? A paying customer? Lot renting is an absent activity most of the time. It's viable economically but you'd have to rationalize to say that the lot rentee was an active player, they might be more active than the lot trader from another server, but not by much.
2. I simply don't buy this arguement. If they were concerned about database and storage, they wouldn't be constantly adding limited-use schematics and looted parts that are required for these schematics, which just adds additional hassle to professions like Weaponsmith that already have a ton of resources that they have to find storage for.
This is legit.. and as for the limited use schematics.. that an indication of the REAL issue.. the intention was that there would be more variety in what is crafting.. they never wanted one guy to be able to make 1000 identical of items.. let alone being able to make 10 schematics of the same 1000 items.. it was hoped that there would be ALOT more variety in the market..
I noticed you didn't really respond to this assertion other than saying "this is legit". Hard for a dev to complain about database issues when putting new schematics with new resource requirements and new looted components. How many geo cubes do you think are out there now? As for the 1000 schematic thing, it's kind of pointless to mention what they originally intended, since they caved to playerbase pressure and changed the policy. Why continue to bring up something that is irrelevant now. Just like the Miner profession from beta.
3. This is a downright fallacy. Yes, static harvesters are great for pulling up large quantities of resources. But the "best"? This is simply untrue. It is simply uneconomical to maintain harvesters for months on end, hoping that something good will spawn with any decent concentration under them.
Even Grind resources in mass supply can create an imbalance.. ( heck without all the walls we are able to make we wouldnt be able to flood the market with our harvesters.... )
I agree that even grind resources in mass supply can create an imbalance, but that's not specific to lot trading. Doing it via lot renting accomplishes the same negative result.
4. Is this such a bad thing? Armorsmiths are already making a killing on selling composite armor. Why do anything to drive the prices up even higher? Also, if resource prices go up (which they would), it would exclude new crafters from having access to decent resources, limiting them to making sub-par goods or simply not making any goods at all for months on end until they are able to mine current resources which are comparable to the best spawns, or until they can afford those best spawns themselves. It would also limit the purchasing power of exisiting crafters who may not be able to afford a price hike from their input suppliers.
Yesfalling pricesis a bad thing.. It is too easy to get the best of the best.. which is making the market for lesser quality items.. ( things that people who dont have the best resources and arent master make) .. even more miniscule..
Yes, but rising prices are a bad thing as well. The way an interactive, dynamic economy should work is for prices to fluctuate and not be geared either to rise or fall, so don't flail against low prices and promote high pricer dogmatically. The thing is the benefit to which group - the supplier and the customer, that's the difference in this last set. Obviously Dvnce is promoting the supplier over the customer in this instance.
StGabriel wrote:
Since you refuse to gather facts and not speculate you have yet to prove that the supposed "rampant harvester sharing" is really that big of an issue if cross server trading is eliminated.
I have gathered facts, evidence of single players owning 400+ harvesters. That is enough to say that imbalances exist. That imbalances of this gross nature exist is enough to say that there need to be fixes.
Any limitations on alternate characters that are paid the full prices for should never be limited. If you pay the 15.00 per character you are paying for a full functioning character.
And we're not talking about limiting that. You can't prevent a second character from being full functioning. What you CAN do is make sure that to get twice the output from twice the characters, you have to do twice the work. That is at least somewhat fair. More importantly, you can prevent one character (with a second account or not) from having 10 times the resource output with much less than 10 times the work (as is possible with lot trading).
My issue is your position is based on no factual numbers at all.
On any server you can find markets where items are being sold at just above cost and on any server you can find that most crafters aren't making terribly good livings compared to those they sell to.
We have yet to see what the post holo grind resouce business will be, and that is a key factor.
While we wait, more resources get stored away that will imbalance the economy for months if not years to come. We can't just sit around in blank catharsis saying, "maybe, just maybe, this change will magically fix everything". The imbalances in resource acquisition still exist. Holo-grinding is simply a sink on these imbalances. Players will have big infrastructures in place for massive harvesting now and will have less sinks for this meaning that if anything there will just be larger gluts.
The proper focus is not to inhibit game playability but to do something practical to elimiate cross server trading and if too much resource is being mined it is better controlled by the people that have the metrics.
I'm not sure what you mean by inhibiting playbility. Is the fact that a bishop can only move diagnally in chess an inhibition of "game playability"? If the economy is unbalanced unchallenging that should be fixed just as any other game imbalance would be.
I think you will see that once things smooth out after the holo grind people will just slow production themselves because the money will just not be there to mine as much.
If the money isn't there it is because crafting markets have already bottomed out and become stagnant. If crafting markets were actually dynamic with solid demand then of course the money would be there. And if the money is there and abuses exist to massively harvest, they WILL be used.
Message Edited by StGabriel on 06-17-2004 10:54 AM
I have gathered facts, evidence of single players owning 400+ harvesters. That is enough to say that imbalances exist. That imbalances of this gross nature exist is enough to say that there need to be fixes.
Then share this information, who is it? How prevelent is it on all the servers? So they constanmtly control 400 lots with havesters down?
On any server you can find markets where items are being sold at just above cost and on any server you can find that most crafters aren't making terribly good livings compared to those they sell to.
What crafting professions, I sure don't see this on Valcyn. Crafters are making very good livings. This is not an issues in any crafting froum but this one. The elite crafting forums have issues with lakc availability of quality resource at to high of a cost actually
While we wait, more resources get stored away that will imbalance the economy for months if not years to come. We can't just sit around in blank catharsis saying, "maybe, just maybe, this change will magically fix everything". The imbalances in resource acquisition still exist. Holo-grinding is simply a sink on these imbalances. Players will have big infrastructures in place for massive harvesting now and will have less sinks for this meaning that if anything there will just be larger gluts.
From what I have seen in game and in the crafting fourms is that this "glut" is from grind resource that most elite crafters do not want to touch. Since the holo grind econmy requires huge amounts of resource this is the case. The quality resource spawns are infrequent and the demand for them is now greater than the supply. That is one reason you will see a VAST decrease in mining once the holo grinding economy goes away. Why wait? Well informed decisions can be mmade very soon. The holo grind will be ended very soon.
If the money isn't there it is because crafting markets have already bottomed out and become stagnant. If crafting markets were actually dynamic with solid demand then of course the money would be there. And if the money is there and abuses exist to massively harvest, they WILL be used.
The crafting markets are not bottomed out nor will they when the holo grind ends. Publish 9 will begin the end of the holo grind. Only those with the determination to do all professions will deem it necessary to keep grinding at that point since even though they can unluck they will not know about it until publist 10.
Basically the money will not be there to run 400+ harvesters simply because less resouce will be required and what should happen is more quality resource will probably be mined allowing the elite crafters to make a choice of mining themselves or purchasing resource which they would rather do. Thus stopping them mining on their own.
The holo grind has a negative effect on us all. We need to remember what the pre-holo grind economy was as a model and I just dont see what you are saying will be an issue in the post holo grind,
bluejanus wrote:
Dvnce wrote:
TheOxygen wrote
If these turn out to be SOE's reasonings for implementing a change, I'd like to address them point-by-point.
1. This is difficult to actually validate. Yes, they do take up land. So do player cities. In fact, I've had more trouble running into cities while looking for a good resource spot than I ever have with static harvesters (and there are a decent amount on Lowca). This arguement is truly flimsy at best, and I'd like to see some raw data backing it up if the Dev's ever list it as a serious issue.
The idea is that this land is not available from live active players.. because it is blocked by ghost players.. ( they even put in place means to make cross server citienzen swap.. unattractive..) so that is the idea of this..
Surely you're not echoing that other thread where the person suggested that people were harvester griefing by hogging "all the good spots"? And what is a live active player anyways? A paying customer? Lot renting is an absent activity most of the time. It's viable economically but you'd have to rationalize to say that the lot rentee was an active player, they might be more active than the lot trader from another server, but not by much.
(I am not so good with colour)
Our opinion on if its taking up space isn't the issue. The Devs feel that me placing 60 Heavy Harvestors in on group adds to the "urban blight" and stops folks from dropping their Player cities. One must remember there is only so much flat ground on these planets..and its best used for player cities and "hopefully" people who drop large Harvestors. If i have that flat space all but "secured" by my fleets of harvestors..and enough of us do it..where will you drop?
I think that is where they are comming from.
(I'Thoth)
2. I simply don't buy this arguement. If they were concerned about database and storage, they wouldn't be constantly adding limited-use schematics and looted parts that are required for these schematics, which just adds additional hassle to professions like Weaponsmith that already have a ton of resources that they have to find storage for.
This is legit.. and as for the limited use schematics.. that an indication of the REAL issue.. the intention was that there would be more variety in what is crafting.. they never wanted one guy to be able to make 1000 identical of items.. let alone being able to make 10 schematics of the same 1000 items.. it was hoped that there would be ALOT more variety in the market..
I noticed you didn't really respond to this assertion other than saying "this is legit". Hard for a dev to complain about database issues when putting new schematics with new resource requirements and new looted components. How many geo cubes do you think are out there now? As for the 1000 schematic thing, it's kind of pointless to mention what they originally intended, since they caved to playerbase pressure and changed the policy. Why continue to bring up something that is irrelevant now. Just like the Miner profession from beta.
Conservation of Database storage has to start SOMEWHERE, that somewhere is at the bottom of the proverbial food chain....Resources. They have many other options like decreasing the amount from 1000 to 100 items from a scematic, bringing down everyone to only being admin on ONE house...many options. But they feel if they can limit the influx of raw materials used to make things, that they wont HAVE to screw with anything else.
(i personally think they dropped the ball early by allowing people multi housing and more than two factories with the remaining for harvestors..those were supposed to be in the realm of the Merchant [multiple housing] and Industrialist [multi factories] and of course the Mining Professions [ for multi harvestors])
(I'Thoth)
3. This is a downright fallacy. Yes, static harvesters are great for pulling up large quantities of resources. But the "best"? This is simply untrue. It is simply uneconomical to maintain harvesters for months on end, hoping that something good will spawn with any decent concentration under them.
Even Grind resources in mass supply can create an imbalance.. ( heck without all the walls we are able to make we wouldnt be able to flood the market with our harvesters.... )
I agree that even grind resources in mass supply can create an imbalance, but that's not specific to lot trading. Doing it via lot renting accomplishes the same negative result.
Well i can attest to one thing, when all else fails i can pull ORE or POWER and sell it to break even ...not to even mention if (remembering i have mine spaced out pretty well) something DOES spawn good there, I can do what I'm doing now and save it forever. (
IE: from ONE weekly spawn of awsome stat Copper used for both DE and WS i got over 3 Million Units. It will be a while till i run out of it. Which, I might add, over a period of two or three months can net me anywhere from 6 Million Credits to 15 Million Credits,and if IUSUALLY have what people want, In reliable and sizable quantities,I WILL get preferred Business)
And their rational is that if they make it a true Pain in the Neck to mass harvest, be it same or cross server,..so few will do it that the influx of raw material will fall to a lvl where people will have to begin to subsistance mine at least partially for things again, which dosen't always happen anymore.
I do agree over all that they should take a "wait and see" stance and let the natural supply vs demand forces work out befor touching this Hot Potatoe...but then again I bet they would like to have it the way they want it LONG BEFORE demand goes thru the roof again with JTL.
(I'Thoth)
4. Is this such a bad thing? Armorsmiths are already making a killing on selling composite armor. Why do anything to drive the prices up even higher? Also, if resource prices go up (which they would), it would exclude new crafters from having access to decent resources, limiting them to making sub-par goods or simply not making any goods at all for months on end until they are able to mine current resources which are comparable to the best spawns, or until they can afford those best spawns themselves. It would also limit the purchasing power of exisiting crafters who may not be able to afford a price hike from their input suppliers.
Yesfalling pricesis a bad thing.. It is too easy to get the best of the best.. which is making the market for lesser quality items.. ( things that people who dont have the best resources and arent master make) .. even more miniscule..
Yes, but rising prices are a bad thing as well. The way an interactive, dynamic economy should work is for prices to fluctuate and not be geared either to rise or fall, so don't flail against low prices and promote high pricer dogmatically. The thing is the benefit to which group - the supplier and the customer, that's the difference in this last set. Obviously Dvnce is promoting the supplier over the customer in this instance.
Not much I can add here. Without seeing the natrual supply and demand situation befor pub 9 hits..its hard to say what will occure. I do know that if they don't fix this i could easily eek out my existance very easily.I made enough in one month selling mainly ore (selling itat 2cpu)to pay my next two months upkeep..and that was with me using a third of my heavies to pull the power just so i wouldn't have to shell out another 30 million to buy it.
Even if they nix lot trades..i cannot say 100% that i won't atleast try and continue to do it in some fashion. It will be harder..but the harder they make it the more satisfaction i get actually being able to pull it off and continue to meet the demands of those who buy my product. Short of them calling it an exploit (which i would then stop all together more than likely) I might have a few folks change my stuff weekly instead of twice a week as i do it now...and then spend all day saterday changing out those with whom i trade with. Short term i might enjoy it.
If i blend the two systems (on and cross server) I could then have more time to do other things and still pull what I need...statics are awsome at pulling Ore
(I'Thoth)
Message Edited by ThothTheWise on 06-18-2004 01:38 AM
ThothTheWise wrote:
bluejanus wrote:
Dvnce wrote:
TheOxygen wrote
If these turn out to be SOE's reasonings for implementing a change, I'd like to address them point-by-point.
1. This is difficult to actually validate. Yes, they do take up land. So do player cities. In fact, I've had more trouble running into cities while looking for a good resource spot than I ever have with static harvesters (and there are a decent amount on Lowca). This arguement is truly flimsy at best, and I'd like to see some raw data backing it up if the Dev's ever list it as a serious issue.
The idea is that this land is not available from live active players.. because it is blocked by ghost players.. ( they even put in place means to make cross server citienzen swap.. unattractive..) so that is the idea of this..
Surely you're not echoing that other thread where the person suggested that people were harvester griefing by hogging "all the good spots"? And what is a live active player anyways? A paying customer? Lot renting is an absent activity most of the time. It's viable economically but you'd have to rationalize to say that the lot rentee was an active player, they might be more active than the lot trader from another server, but not by much.
(I am not so good with colour)
Our opinion on if its taking up space isn't the issue. The Devs feel that me placing 60 Heavy Harvestors in on group adds to the "urban blight" and stops folks from dropping their Player cities. One must remember there is only so much flat ground on these planets..and its best used for player cities and "hopefully" people who drop large Harvestors. If i have that flat space all but "secured" by my fleets of harvestors..and enough of us do it..where will you drop?
I think that is where they are comming from.
(I'Thoth)
Is it possible for the economy to support harvesters that cover every flat piece of land on a whole planet? Probably not, since although you'd produce a lot more resources, you'd flood the market and lower the price of resources, and not allow you to maintain all those harvesters. The fear of industrial blight covering the whole planet is alarmist and ridiculous. If this is the beginnings of eco-ism SWG style, better protest the killing of wildlife on planets.
There is a lot of flat land everywhere. It's laughable to suggest that these large plots of harvesters are interfering with the establishment of player cities, and more so establishing player cities is not even a priority for most players. Btw, you used the phrase "best used". Who decides what's the best use of land? Are cities that will never be self-sufficient or profitable, the best use of land for players? Cities that provide redundant lower quality services in comparison to a NPC city. I hope you don't mention RP, since it's not a high priority for most players.
Giamai wrote:
it has been stated that any presumed resource glut will not end with the end of hologrinding...but a little anecdotal evidence for you to consider from my recent observations:
the last 2 weeks i have been wandering the planets nonstop..and i'm seeing the usual fields of harvesters but many of them are now on fire..thats new. it suggests although not proof mind you that some of the static fields of harvesters are being abandoned. due to low demand, my friends that sell resources for a living say there is no reason for them to continue the static harvester bit. the guild "surveyor" is grinding a combat prof now.
fewer starport spammers are hawking resources, instead all you see now are people spamming vendors with finished items..lots of paintings and vehicle ads. the people who are advertising just resources are fewer than they once were.
my weaponsmith just made master and i didn't have a couple types of iron stocked up yet. generally if i need some resource i haven't seen spawn yet i'll do some shopping. surprisingly, it is no longer the brandy vendors that are nearly empty but the resource vendors were pretty light on5 different planets last weekend. i spent hours roaming around before i found what i needed.. on scenic Lok lol
it should be noted that even though giaman is a newbie ws, i seem to be selling weapons already. i don't foresee any problem making a living at this. my main source of incomefrom the weaponsmith treecontinues to be off the smuggler vendor admittedly, can't keep WUK's around much but there is always demand for slicing
the smarter people who have chosen to pursue a mining business will probably switch gears a bit and target specific audiences but mainly that will require more work then many will be accustomed to. it is this opportunity cost that may limit the number of individuals in this market and in some regards the number of people who would be especially interested in cross server lot trading for harvester placement.
on a side note, since it is not yet clear what the shipwright crafting requirements are, only a very few will likely stockpile resources this early on. it isn't clear what would be needed or how much or what stats are important so stocking up now would be a blind pursuit.
/agree
On Valcyn we are seeing the same thing. Partially due to the fact the resoource glut is in reources for grinding and miners we not necessarily looking for quality. It will somily not be profitable for them to keep up production on that type of resource and run static harvesters.
They will surely swithch gears to more quality of resource which spawns less frequently anyway.
Yeah we dont know what shipwright will do. I exepct some stocking up also but I agree with not knowing stats it is just guess work
joined42904 wrote:
There will be some stocking up. There's already a thread here begging the devs to make shipwright dependant on some new resource that spawns for the first time after JTL. I'm all for that.
What's more important, we packrats aren't going to destroy any grinding level materials at all. Not when there is a chance that they would be worth something again for folks grinding shipwright...and ships are so huge...they might require a whole lot of resources. If the devs do anything like what they did with vehicles...those resources will be "any metal." Perfect for the cross-lot resource farmers and their stockpiled goods. (Thout I hope the devs don't do that.)'
I have seen a few harvesters on fire, too. Not nearly as many as I would like, but heck some folks pay a few months in advance...so maybe the real cross-lot bonfires are reserved for August...if they happen then due to the JTL issues.
The simple thing is that cross-lotting has become abusive. Its abuse has been demonstrated by single-person harv farms of 400. Once something becomes this obviously abused, something should be done to stop it permanently. That is what I advocate. It's abusive. No need to see if it corrects itself. Have the 800-lb gorilla step on it and squish the problem forever.
The economies of scale for folks with multiple accounts should likewise be curtailed by removing admin so that the time commitment per harvester becomes the same as the single person running harvesters. Multiple accounts should give an advantage in that each account is fully functional...but they should not reduce the time needed to run harvesters (other than not needeing to buy a waypoint if one of your toons is a surveyor.)