But they do up to a point, go to a super market in a affluent area and you will pay far more for the same product as you would in a poor area. Some Online supermarket prices also change depending on postcodes even if coming from the same store. Dont believe me try it!
Notice Notice regarding supply and demand of high-end minerals
- Thread starter Stephen Benedetti
- Start date
But they do up to a point, go to a super market in a affluent area and you will pay far more for the same product as you would in a poor area. Some Online supermarket prices also change depending on postcodes even if coming from the same store. Dont believe me try it!
Has been this way since 2014, the problem is: The demmand now is TOO LOW.
They made this way to nerf bigger ships and buff medium/small ships. (Again).
Like another people said on this topic they should rename the game to Elite: Python.
The effect of the tax seems to depend on the commodity - commodities which don't show much price change between 0% and 100% demand also don't seem to show much tax. And before 3.6, gems didn't change price based on demand, so weren't noticeably taxed.
Thinking back I'd definitely noticed the bulk tax on Coffee/Animal Meat prices years ago - I just didn't realise that's what I was seeing.
Yes - there's a big difference between demand 100t (baseline 100t) and demand 100t (baseline 10000t). Access to historic market data is very valuable for figuring out what's actually going on.
The pricing algorithm is entirely deterministic, though - fixed pricing curves, consumption rates, responses to BGS states (which are themselves deterministic), etc. All the uncertainty comes from not knowing what the other players have been up to. If you were the only player of the game the prices would be extremely static and predictable - as, indeed, they are for most commodities because there aren't enough people trading them.
I'd rather see demand being more responsive than it currently is to player activity - most goods the uncertainty is very low because the market is rarely touched compared to its natural "return to equilibrium" rates - but that would increase uncertainty, not decrease it, in terms of the profitability of any individual trade run. If you want consistent pricing without major fluctuations, you need player activity to have even less effect on prices than it currently does.
That’s good news.
The word “future” makes me a little nervous, though. Are we talking Fleet Carriers “future”, New Era “future”, or revamped ice planets “future”?
Oh hush Alec, you're ruining all the outrage for the 'experts' who stridently proclaimed that trading has NEVER worked like that over the last 15 pages with your sense and facts.
True, people still rage about modes so from that perspective, the bulk sales tax is a recent addition
Just a thought. If you have effectively admitted its not working as intended, and you can clearly change demand at the server side (no hotfix required), then why not let up on the nerf bat a smidge.
Please increase demand at least a little bit whilst we wait for the forthcoming fix, coming soon (tm).
Please increase demand at least a little bit whilst we wait for the forthcoming fix, coming soon (tm).
We're just stuck on the 'why' rather than 'how' it's changed. We've tested the new update and have figured out that there's a 'min/max vs demand' tax.
What we have always called the 'Cargo Tax' that we're all seeing have an impact has been in the game for a number of years, researched and concluded over a year ago. The change is that is has been substantially increased based on cargo vs demand. Large ships are not retired, but large cargo holds need to be finding demands above the likes of 16k and above and the right BGS states. Cargo Tax conclusion
As far as hotspots are concerned, there is no evidence proving any reduction of a hotspots size/area. If there was, Borann A 2's popularity, since 2018 Q4, would have shrunk drastically following the finding of its Triple Hotspot for LTD mining. Core mined asteroids share the same, persistent ability of being mapped as the laser mined asteroids do. The differences being that laser mined rocks rejuvenate after 2 hours, cores taking 6+ days and laser mined rocks being client side available to all, cores being server side and only available to those who get to them first. Hotspot Cartography
We've also not discovered any hard evidence on the galaxy wide demand theory, as currently the demand resets after 10 mins. Other than the normal faction control and state changes, we haven't seen anything out of the norm that would make this a thing. If anyone has anything we love to talk and get on t he same page.
If it's a credit issue over enjoyment of the trade, there's no real solution for you. As much as us Miners wanted an increase to pay, there were many of us agreed the eventual price hike was overcooked for what it was, causing a meta influx of miners. Many more from the other trades understandably feeling an immediate 'What about our value' when compared to the considerable rise of mined goods. A way of encouraging the use of the new mining mechanics? Possibly. In hindsight, maybe could have set the prices as they are now rather than the high prices we did receive to then have to observe them being reined back in. Everyone likes to have things given (contagions excluded), but never taken away; fact of life. Truthfully though, mining still remains one of, if not the most, profitable trades in comparison to others, leaving the only real butt hurt to stem from either pure greed or being late to the party. We can only encourage you to stick at it or wait for the next meta if this one doesn't meet expectations any more.
Our question is couldn't we get a bit more of an explanation so that we may understand/believe these changes fully, as the logic of the changes and their implementation, alongside such minimal information, leaves us a bit confuddled? Whether it be factual, logical or Lore reasoning we don't mind. We'd just like it to make sense so that we can concentrate on getting a handle on it. We'll sure as hell be mining regardless over at our end lol.
PD - iMU
What we have always called the 'Cargo Tax' that we're all seeing have an impact has been in the game for a number of years, researched and concluded over a year ago. The change is that is has been substantially increased based on cargo vs demand. Large ships are not retired, but large cargo holds need to be finding demands above the likes of 16k and above and the right BGS states. Cargo Tax conclusion
As far as hotspots are concerned, there is no evidence proving any reduction of a hotspots size/area. If there was, Borann A 2's popularity, since 2018 Q4, would have shrunk drastically following the finding of its Triple Hotspot for LTD mining. Core mined asteroids share the same, persistent ability of being mapped as the laser mined asteroids do. The differences being that laser mined rocks rejuvenate after 2 hours, cores taking 6+ days and laser mined rocks being client side available to all, cores being server side and only available to those who get to them first. Hotspot Cartography
We've also not discovered any hard evidence on the galaxy wide demand theory, as currently the demand resets after 10 mins. Other than the normal faction control and state changes, we haven't seen anything out of the norm that would make this a thing. If anyone has anything we love to talk and get on t he same page.
If it's a credit issue over enjoyment of the trade, there's no real solution for you. As much as us Miners wanted an increase to pay, there were many of us agreed the eventual price hike was overcooked for what it was, causing a meta influx of miners. Many more from the other trades understandably feeling an immediate 'What about our value' when compared to the considerable rise of mined goods. A way of encouraging the use of the new mining mechanics? Possibly. In hindsight, maybe could have set the prices as they are now rather than the high prices we did receive to then have to observe them being reined back in. Everyone likes to have things given (contagions excluded), but never taken away; fact of life. Truthfully though, mining still remains one of, if not the most, profitable trades in comparison to others, leaving the only real butt hurt to stem from either pure greed or being late to the party. We can only encourage you to stick at it or wait for the next meta if this one doesn't meet expectations any more.
Our question is couldn't we get a bit more of an explanation so that we may understand/believe these changes fully, as the logic of the changes and their implementation, alongside such minimal information, leaves us a bit confuddled? Whether it be factual, logical or Lore reasoning we don't mind. We'd just like it to make sense so that we can concentrate on getting a handle on it. We'll sure as hell be mining regardless over at our end lol.
PD - iMU
So, you are basically saying that large ships ARE RETIRED since this demmands DOES NOT EXIST anymore.
After the changes, these are the actual demmands: (Note: Usually the stations that have MORE DEMAND PAY LESS PER TON)
Painite: up to 3k
VO: up to 5k.
Benitoite: up to 5k.
Serendibite: up to 4k.
Musgravite: up to 4k.
LTD: up to 7k. (Today - Every day the overall demmands and price decrease)
The LDT demmand and price have decreased ALOT since this announcement, probably its the nerf hammer already hitting the market.
So, we're earning too much, and will be nerfed as per policy?
Gliese 384 - Zoline Enterprise - 127,870 demand
Gliese 384 - Zettel Station - 76,571 demand
Gliese 384 - Scott Station - 50,715 demand
The prices and demand vary in every system with every daily tick depending on Cmdrs BGS work. Lakon lives matter!
I was 3 jumps away from Borann yesterday with 17k. Unless they really have nerfed it today then it’s still possible to find.
EDIT: Second thoughts following this reply, I could be looking at old data here. Would be good to see some more stations updated so we can make better judgement on impact.
Last edited:
Price Update: 9 days ago
Yeah, its exaclty THAT i am mentioning there, using updated data can help you.
I am also selling to a station with 20k demand yesterday, now the demand is gone, the bigger demand (actually updated) is 7k to LTD.
The data I'm seeing is from today. There are no stations with prices listed above 1 million for LTDs. High demand is 7K and high price is 960K (the same station). There is also a station with 16K demand, but 907K price.
My home station is quite close to a station with 67K demand. I can go there tonight and get an update.
From what I'm seeing, yes, prices are dropping. I don't know about demand though, that's still yet to be determined.
960K price is still good imo. Maybe it'll drop more? I would say it's still worth mining at anything above 250K per ton. I seriously doubt it'll go that low.
Maybe this is "sky is falling" territory to some people. I don't see it as a reason to get angry at anyone.
My home station is quite close to a station with 67K demand. I can go there tonight and get an update.
From what I'm seeing, yes, prices are dropping. I don't know about demand though, that's still yet to be determined.
960K price is still good imo. Maybe it'll drop more? I would say it's still worth mining at anything above 250K per ton. I seriously doubt it'll go that low.
Maybe this is "sky is falling" territory to some people. I don't see it as a reason to get angry at anyone.
The problem is that people cannot understand how dumb is this situation.
Scenario1: Price decrease to 250K, this is not a problem IF THERE IS A normal DEMMAND.
The problem is the price falling to 1/3 of the usual and the demmand also decrease to something RIDICULUS and dumb like Painite demand now.
Trying to explain:If the price crashes and they nerf the demmand too much like they did with another minerals so the price will crash EVEN MORE to larger ships.
The price listed will be 250K but when you come to sell your mined stuff the station will pay like 30-50% less.
Ps: Trying to sell 512 painite to a station with 3k Demand right now decrease the price per ton in about 40%. (Listed 320K but the station pays 192/Ton.)
This is another nerf on big ships, like they did on missions, passengers, combat... This is the "sky is falling" territory.
The entire "new system" is almost ubiquitously hated by the ACTUAL player base, though from many comments on these forums, which Dev team seems to listen to it is not so apparent.
Every content creator hates it.
Ever poll of ACTUAL PLAYER BASE hates it.
I hate it.
It is broken full stop, go back to the old system until it is fixed. Prices were OK. People were enjoying mining. People build ships JUST FOR MINING! Which, especially big ships, are now just scrap.
LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY PLAY YOUR GAME!!!
There is a reason this game is being abandoned by people in droves. I was its biggest supporter, now I just dont care, so ed off am I. This is just the straw that breaks the Camel's back.
You have community managers who live stream who dont even know what ship they are flying. You have a Dev team that keep on nerfing features without any good reason or anything else to replace them, no matter how much the community likes, enjoys or finds them useful.
All of this is for 2 reasons :
1. DEVS DO NOT PLAY THEIR OWN GAME! And they don't have anyone who does to tell them they are making mistakes.
2. DEVS DO NOT LISTEN TO THOSE WHO DO, RELYING UPON THIS TOXIC MESS OF A FORUM FOR FEED BACK.
This forum is NOT representative of the player community due to its toxicity it drives players away, people just dont like being subtly put down, demeaned, insulted, all in very clever ways that do not quite hit the bar needed for a warning, happens ALL THE TIME. THIS DRIVES PLAYERS AWAY FROM THIS FORUM and leads to a negative feedback loop where only toxic people or the type of people who can suffer a forum like this long-term seem to be heard. There is a reason I hardly post anymore, I am just fed up with it. And most people will post 1 time then wont bother or will look at other threads and realise they dont want to bother being here, and who can blame them.
Best thing to do is just close this forum, and start again, this time with POSITIVE CRITERIA for moderation, not a negative one, that any and all posts MUST positively contribute, be on-topic, relevant, and add something positive to the discussion, with any mean-ness nastiness, or anything else which may offend or upset people disallowed. This kind of schoolyard half-policed method of moderation is NOT WORKING, harming this game, and harming FDev bottom line as it is diminishing the value of the Elite franchise.
And other game forums are NOT LIKE THIS ONE!!! There is no reason it is like this. The famous reputation this forum has needs changing, and a full hard reset is the right way to do it.
And here is another idea: Replace community managers with new hires from the PLAYER BASE who have at least 1000 hours in game. Then you will get people who know what ship they are flying at the very least. They actually do have love for this game, which is critical for that role, not just the pretend love that people have when they are paid to do a job. They will be able to give great feedback to the Devs and filter it through their own experience. There must be many players out there who would be willing, even on a part-time basis if their lives wont allow it.
Then these kind of mistakes, the Dev time needed to fix them, the money that costs, the reputation loss, the ed off players, and all of the money that costs. Someone higher up in FDev than the people who normally look after the forum need to understand this and make a management decision. Bad feedback is hurting your bottom line.
Dont care anymore.
Gavin786 (notice no CMDR Gavin786) Signing Off
![[PS4] Filthymick420](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/201/201444.jpg?1555738739){kind=avatar}
I just think people are upset by this because one thing a game developer should never say is...
'I think people are enjoying this way too much we should take that away from them in some manner'
because let's face it, if you're just making average pay for what you're doing then it's a job. no one likes a job. I only like the pay, if it's worth it. but if it's the same pay as everything else, they might as well do something else that they enjoy more. Because not everyone who was mining to make money enjoyed mining but they did enjoy making money.
'I think people are enjoying this way too much we should take that away from them in some manner'
because let's face it, if you're just making average pay for what you're doing then it's a job. no one likes a job. I only like the pay, if it's worth it. but if it's the same pay as everything else, they might as well do something else that they enjoy more. Because not everyone who was mining to make money enjoyed mining but they did enjoy making money.
There does seem to be something very odd going on with LTD demand.
Other gems have regeneration rates around a year, LTDs seem to regenerate instantly.
Though LTD prices didn't go that much above 1 million before 3.6.
1.6 million is theoretically possible now at full demand with the new Public Holiday state, but that won't line up with the others required very often.
I'm extremely pleased with the new changes: They support in any regard what I already did before the changes, that is small ship core mining (even without collector limpets). I know bulk mining as well but always liked this one much better. And now it really starts to shine...
I like the new changes too but they have exposed the bulk tax a bit too harshly (these things never matter until you notice them!). I don't min/max mining but it's a bit depressing to be left thinking, the more you find of a certain mineral the less per ton you're going to be getting. I've found I've gone from seeking to fill cargo with one hard earned commodity and "be a diamond miner" for example to 'grab anything' because - if it's lower value - at least it doesn't devalue the higher value commodity I just found earlier as much. This cuts discriminattion out of mining. Very pleased to hear FD are looking at it.