Architect Archive

The market will sort it self out. if prices were low before it was that were to low demand and always someone willing to sell at a low price.

People will pay more for a medium harvester with 7 rate then an old heavy with 7. For me as a customer I don't care that a hvy takes 10 times more resources han a medium. I only look at the result.

Old medium/heavy will not be worthless. People can't afford to swap all their old harvesters. But prices of the old harvesters will be lower than the new with higher rates. What the price will be eventually we don't know. But I am sure that the price of the old harvesters will drop. There will be a lot of people gvetting rid of their old harvesters and replacing them with new.

It is correct that the cost/resource might be lower with a medium than a heavy. But another important factor is maximizing yout lots. I want to use only heavies since this would maximize how much resources I can get. If there is some great resource (like we have now on Wanderhome 999 OQ, 887 CD Platinite copper) I want to be able to extract as much as possibe before a shift. To bad I can't afford buying more harvesters (only got 3 hvy, 3 med)

A heavy with 10 extraction is worth twice as much IMO than a medium with 7.

Hi, Architects

I'm the "miner" you are all talking about in these posts. I run two accounts, and I usually have 18 heavy harvesters running fairly consistently. I specialize in very high quality resources, mainly for the medical professions (both Doc and CM). My customers are usually Masters in their profession, and may have from 3 to 8 factories running, churning out components and finished products.

I make a good living doing this. I'm fair to my customers, and I don't "stockpile and gouge". If I have stockpiled a large amount of very good organics or inorganics, and the servers suddenly has none available, I don't up my prices and take advantage of the situation. I will still sell it at the original price. For me, it's all about a reasonable profit margin. Just because the resource is no longer available in those high qualities, and no one knows when they'll be back, my original extraction costs didn't go up. So I charge the same until I have no more in inventory.

This policy means I have more clients than I can supply. This change to extraction rates gives me the opportunity to upgrade my heavy harvesters and make them more efficient. I can get more out of a resource concentration before it shifts with my limited number of lots.

This is a GOOD thing. It's good for me, and it's good for you, the architects.

You've needed some Dev luvin' for a long time. You just got it. I hope they give you more

Sure, it's going to cost me in the short run. Improvements in technology are like that. The opposite side of that coin is that it's going to benefit me in the long run. And it's going to benefit my customers, who can't get enough of the good stuff

OK, now I am beginning to better understand why McDonalds couldn't sell 1/3 pound hamburgers in their test markets(people refused to buy them because they wanted the quarterpounders, thinking that the quarterpounders were bigger).

"In any case, as someone else pointed out, trying to compare old heavies and new mediums is not what anyone should be doing. You need to compare NEW heavies with new mediums, in which case the new heavies still have value."

Umm, so you defeat the comparison of new mediums with old heavies by declaring that I'm not allowed to do it? Yes, everyone who buys a new medium has an option to buy a new heavy. Yes, new heavies are better than new mediums. The point of the post, I hiope I have your permission to make it, is that old heavies are virtually worthless. If I write a post saying that new heavies are virtually worthless I'll be sure to paste your comments in. Thanks. That was very helpful. <backs away slowly>

However, everyone who owns old heavies makes a choice, whether they want to or not ("if you choose not to decide you still have made a choice"). They can run their old heavies, or buy new mediums. The fact that the new mediums get the same benefit for less cost remains true even if new heavies are arguably better.

If you can accomplish the same thing with two different devices, then deciding what to do must be a comparison of those devices (even if you also compare other things).

Apparently the Devs went to the same school of economics that you guys went to. They might as well start writing their "We had no idea people would be so upset over this change" post now, because as much as people do not understand simple math, markets really do work.Pretty soon the old heavies that fetched 80k last week will be worth less than 10k in a matter of days once this change is seen as permanent, if it becomes permanent. People won't understand why, but theydo understand the difference between 10k and 80k.

Hey, I have it! You people can buy up all the old heavies! Send me a /tell once we know that newmediums will stay at 7/min, you can buy all of mine for 80k a pop.

Gris, if your only point is that old harvesters don't have much resale value.... I don't think there are many people here that would disagree with you... the resale value for an old heavy will be less than the new purchase value of a top end medium that can pull equal or greater amounts.

I think the problem comes in when people start saying they should throw away the old ones cuz they're worthless when in fact they aren't... they simply aren't the best available anymore.

Bermag - "A heavy with 10 extraction is worth twice as much IMO than a medium with 7."

I agree completely. I only run heavies except on a mule account I am dumping so it wasn't worth the time for the few days I have left to replace them.

However, it is new mediums that produce at the same rate as old heavies. So, if you are going to decide what old heavies are worth, the only legitimate directcomparison is something that does the same job at the same rate.

At a minimum, old heavies will have to be worth less than new mediums, even over the nextcouple days once this kicks in. They produce the same, and cost alot more to run, every day,forever. So that immediately brings old heavies down to 10-15k (new mediums won't be much more than 20k, I can make 200 right now and at 20k that's4 million, these guys can call me an 'undercutter', I prefer the term 'filthy rich').

Once people realize that the market is flooded with old heavies, and that they save >1300 credits a day running new mediums instead, the price will go to less than 10k, then 5k, then you'll see them, unbought, on the bazaar, virtually worthless, with me dancing the mamba in the background singing "I don't care, I don't care" and waving my arms rythmically over my head. Less pause and think about that for a moment, shall we? Picture it in your mind. Done? Good. Now, is that really what you want?

Ropok "I think the problem comes in when people start saying they should throw away the old ones cuz they're worthless when in fact they aren't... they simply aren't the best available anymore."

Fair enough, and I did change it to virtually worthless, but you're right, I muddied things by saying destroy the old heavies. However, I think it's much more than simply not being the best anymore. They are much less valuable than things which cost 3500 resources to make. That'smore than just "not the best" for 25,000 resource structures.

As I said in the last post, once this kicks in and we know it will stick, old heavies will have to be worth less than new mediums. IMHO that means their value goes from 80k or more tounder 20k within about 48 hours. I can make 4 million creditsif I sell 200 mediums at 20k a pop, and I have the resources stockpiled. Once people start toreplace their heavies, more and more old heavies come on the market and within a few days, maybe a week, there simply won't be buyers at even 10k, they'll be on the bazaar, unsold (etc ).

If the Devs take thousands of structures in the game, that players have paid hundreds of millions of credits for across the servers, and make them nearly worthless in the course of under a week, people will be rightly pissed off.

Yes, I should have said virtually worthless, or even 1/10 the value, but it's the same thing in the end. People work hard, pay good money for stuff, and the Devs trash it with ill-planned changes dropped on live servers with no testing. They should add"TC" to the name of every server.

Whose garage are they using to program this thing in, anyway?

I'm reading part of this post I'm I keep thinking about something GreenMarine said, that it seems a lot of folks have forgotten (I'll copy/paste)

6. To do this properly the recipes for medium and heavy harvesters may change. For example, the heavy gas harvester may require a new "heavy" version of the fluidic drill pumping unit.

How much you want to bet that medium harvesters will soon have a dramatic increase (near Med Chems) of their resources required? How much you want to bet that the architects will have to think smart and sell these higher quality harvesters for a higher price. When the dust settles on this, I plan on selling by the extraction rate and hopper size. A Medium WILL be less than a heavy with same extraction rate only because it's hopper size is about 50% of the heavy. But I will be charging more than 25k that I'm charging now. And I'll make that money too.

I don't want to preach that my prices are right, Dalyn's are wrong (Even if I do believe Dalyn's methods and beliefs are slightly skewed, off topic) I have my prices, you have yours. That's how it is. I don't make every sale, I don't care. I make enough that I don't have to be a slave to my profession. I keep my customers happy (as I'm sure you do too) and we all win. Just remember... NOTHING with harvesters is set yet. It's too early to have stupid debates like this one when we know little to no facts.

Now that I've said my piece on this thing... Checking out (I hate all the incessant whining that I hear from archs on this board. There are good things, and I love reading those, but I hate sifting through the other 70% of the whineposts).

Canda - good point on prices, and I agree that the Devs might use this to undo their mistake in medium mineral requirements (Ithink that they meant to have 3 walls, not 3 modules, which would put med min in the same range as chem and gas, as you say).

However, even if medium minerals end up in the 40k-50k range, this is still a real problem for the game IMHO. Mymath example even assumes medium prices ofnearly 40k.

Given the difference between the costs to run a medium and the costs to run a heavy, heavies will have to sell for much less than a 7 medium to sell at all. At 1300 a day extra to run a heavy, even if you're gonna run your harvester for onlytwo weeks, that's almost 20k that the heavy will cost you extra. So mediums at 40k means heavies at 20k or less, 50k mediums still means 30k heavies, tops.

Even if medium minerals jump to 13k resources (which the Devs have not said, but might happen), the change will instantly wipe out most of the value of existing heavies. IMHO making a change that cuts heavies from 80k to 20k, even 30k, is a bad move.

Plus, step back a second and look at the overall picture:

- Are resources coming into the game too quickly, or too slowly? It seems to me that the real problem in resources is that they are too plentiful, too easily. Bumping up all harvesters is a bad idea independently of any effect on existing harvesters.

- It is perfectly reasonable for the Devs to make experimentation have an effect, and overall I think that having most resources in a structure mean nothing to the final product (walls etc), is a good idea because architects will still buy the junk resources which the game gives us, and in great quantities.

- Having mediums jump to 7 is the fundamental problem. IMHO if mediums were very tough to get to six, and moderately tough to get to 5, we simply don't have the problem that I am talking about. Everyone can decide for themselves what they want to use, there are plusses and minuses to old heavies and new mediums, especially if they correct the resource difference between Chem/Gas/Flora (roughly 13k each)and Solar/Water/Mineral (roughly 4k each).

- Having heavies jump to 10 or whatever might make old heavies worth less, but not by so much that itmakes them nearly worthless.

So I am not saying that they shouldn't make changes, but they really ought not gut thngs that so many players have paid so much money for. They also shouldn't dramatically increase the rate at which resources come into the game. Unless....

Well, if city structures are going to chew up so many resources that there is aneed to alter the balance in resource extraction, then I can understand the boost to theoverall resource faucet. Bump upthe drain = bump up the faucet.

IMHO it ought to be by improving heavies, or slightly boosting mediums,not by making newmediums the equal of oldheavies.

---

Bermag wrote:
The market will sort it self out. if prices were low before it was that were to low demand and always someone willing to sell at a low price.

People will pay more for a medium harvester with 7 rate then an old heavy with 7. For me as a customer I don't care that a hvy takes 10 times more resources han a medium. I only look at the result.

Old medium/heavy will not be worthless. People can't afford to swap all their old harvesters. But prices of the old harvesters will be lower than the new with higher rates. What the price will be eventually we don't know. But I am sure that the price of the old harvesters will drop. There will be a lot of people gvetting rid of their old harvesters and replacing them with new.

It is correct that the cost/resource might be lower with a medium than a heavy. But another important factor is maximizing yout lots. I want to use only heavies since this would maximize how much resources I can get. If there is some great resource (like we have now on Wanderhome 999 OQ, 887 CD Platinite copper) I want to be able to extract as much as possibe before a shift. To bad I can't afford buying more harvesters (only got 3 hvy, 3 med)

A heavy with 10 extraction is worth twice as much IMO than a medium with 7.

---

I wouldn't count on that. =)

Second, people may assume that prices will increase, I doubt that. As for demand, I also doubt a big increase here as people will initially buy and then not need you again.

Also, we are breaking the exact number down here:

http://forums.station.sony.com/swg/board/message?board.id=architect&message.id=30251

I found them quite interesting. Take a look =)

gris, so if you sell the new medium pulling at 7 for 40k, you're selling it for the same price the current medium of most other types currently sells for... so, you're assuming no price increase at all.... is that correct?

I'm personally in the camp that thinks prices won't necessarily increase from current rates... but... I'll be following pricing on my server that the others set and probly be just a bit above it unless its really high to begin with.

and again, you're talking about resale value of current units... from a dev standpoint isn't it a good thing if some of those old harvesters get destroyed? heck from an architect standpoint anyone arguing for decay should be thrilled that these will go away (and i think most have said they are). This change does not FORCE someone to replace harvesters, but if they choose to they can improve on what they currently have... the only people i feel for are people that bought harvesters just before this all happened who would otherwise have purchased differently.

"The old larges aren't worthless yet! Do not start giving them away or destrying them yet! The extraction ratesshould be fixed. I am not making any equipment for sale until this is settled. I am hoping that when the devs do implement the change, they realize that the best extraction rate of a medium should never surpass a basic large. Any large harvester should be an upgrade, some better than others and the costs will reflect it. Having uber mediums will make every yahoo go out and become a miner competing for mining areas. "

That makes so much sense seriously! Hes correct! Itll be fun makind 40k for 2 mediums a day with extraction rate of 7 then 2 heavys for 300k at an extraction rate of 7 or 8 or god knows 4! I mean really o yea i almost forgot up 100 exp. and assembly is good 1 more chance to blow something. This will finish architects i gauruntee you. I know 5 Master Architects on Gorath and they will quit if this crap happens. Let's leave it the way it is and experiment on turret damage (if it ever comes) lets also do some funky stuff ith furniture, and curse ourselves for taking a week as an Installation Designer to get 1 heavy harvestor going! I mean its like having a crap computer and a great computer and saying o my this crap computer has a 7% sped for 20,000 and this geat computer has a 7 or 8% speed for 150,000- sounds liek bs to me. We aren't communits last i checked...........

Raged Mind Master Architect

---

Kerico wrote:

---

Degasai wrote:

The opposite side of that coin is that it's going to benefit me in the long run.

---

It's going to cost you in the long run... your supply will be 50% more.. so will everyone elses. Demand will not increase 50%.Prices will drop and so will your sales.

---

In some cases, you would be right. In my business, this is incorrect. As I said in my post, my customers are demanding much more of the highest stat resources than I can supply with my 18 lots. These are people who don't have lots of their own on which to place harvesters. Most of them have surrendered surveying to place skill points elsewhere. They are "professionals", whose lots are taken up by factories. They demand large quantities of resources. Their needs are not met by the average Joe Dabbler who throws out harvesters to supplement his income and support his flamethrower habit. In order to provide these crafters with what they want, you have to actually work at it.

Macro-economically, you're assumption is correct: Increased supply + static demand = lower prices. It will be interesting to watch how these changes effect the economy, if they even make it to Live.