Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Honest answer on the direction of EU

Well then thats risky, cause I have seen some guys globalling for long periods on them, with no really big hit so they probably lost huge amounts when going for the ath before running out of money...

Would be sad if they felt bitter and decided to blab to the authorities :silly2:
 
attachment.php


wtg MA :wtg:

:mad:
 
Bad TT return of loot and no markup loot keeps me away from Entropia..... Maybe they fix the tt return of loot comparing the amount of ammo spent hunting or other professions.
 
Kitch said:
its not cool :D anything but..
Click to expand...

It actually is, if you're trying to start the game or expand your customer base.

Which is what MA is trying to do.

The markup has been deliberately decreased in order to facilitate the skilling of professions, replacing highly skilled players lost to long term recidivism.

The markup has been deliberately decreased in order to turn around rumors that EU is too expensive.

Ultimately they are looking for more players, not less players. This is their strategy. And you know what?

It's working.
 
Magyar_Republic said:
It actually is, if you're trying to start the game or expand your customer base.

Which is what MA is trying to do.

The markup has been deliberately decreased in order to facilitate the skilling of professions, replacing highly skilled players lost to long term recidivism.

The markup has been deliberately decreased in order to turn around rumors that EU is too expensive.

Ultimately they are looking for more players, not less players. This is their strategy. And you know what?

It's working.
Click to expand...


If the plan is to decrease mark ups, then why introduce shrapnel to increase mark ups? :scratch2::scratch2:

Of course other effect of shrapnel is to increase player turnover, but still one change (expl ammo bp and consequences) goes against the other (lowering supply on hunting loot via shrapnel).

Just strikes me as not the reason tbh, i tend to think unintended consequences, not a big plan.
 
Magyar_Republic said:
It actually is, if you're trying to start the game or expand your customer base.

Which is what MA is trying to do.

The markup has been deliberately decreased in order to facilitate the skilling of professions, replacing highly skilled players lost to long term recidivism.

The markup has been deliberately decreased in order to turn around rumors that EU is too expensive.

Ultimately they are looking for more players, not less players. This is their strategy. And you know what?

It's working.
Click to expand...

This!

I know people often assume MA don't know what they're doing but they're the only ones that can see the entire picture. I generally assume that they wanted this change and a lot of the newer players are liking these changes. I think this change is no different to what has come before. When something like this happens the market takes a while to adjust and settle and there's always at least a few players who can't profit the way they were before. Unfortunately it happens. You have to go find a new way to profit.
 
Magyar_Republic said:
It's working.
Click to expand...

Maybe for a very short transitory period in a new players career, or, in the case of a player who assesses and thinks forward, not at all.

Thats because they will reason that there is no "potential" to make it worth their while to invest into the "profession" when said profession is non existant, and really just some nice words above the avatars head..
 
Magyar_Republic said:
It actually is, if you're trying to start the game or expand your customer base.

Which is what MA is trying to do.

The markup has been deliberately decreased in order to facilitate the skilling of professions, replacing highly skilled players lost to long term recidivism.

The markup has been deliberately decreased in order to turn around rumors that EU is too expensive.

Ultimately they are looking for more players, not less players. This is their strategy. And you know what?

It's working.
Click to expand...

Reduced markup makes the game more expensive to play

Rgds

Ace
 
MarieWoodell said:
This!

I know people often assume MA don't know what they're doing but they're the only ones that can see the entire picture. I generally assume that they wanted this change and a lot of the newer players are liking these changes. I think this change is no different to what has come before. When something like this happens the market takes a while to adjust and settle and there's always at least a few players who can't profit the way they were before. Unfortunately it happens. You have to go find a new way to profit.
Click to expand...

Well if there is no markup in anything...

Then no one will be able to profit

:yay::yay::yay:

Edit: Sorry for my attitude, I am just trying to work out what is happening so I can decide if it's worth sticking around or not. Which is surely what any new players worth their salt will be doing also...

-kitch
 
Last edited:
Ace Flyster said:
Reduced markup makes the game more expensive to play

Rgds

Ace
Click to expand...

Not for your new player, who is basically depositing $20 a month, and is TTing most loot.

The reduced markup is likely paying for the stability in TT costs.

At some point the old community here must concede that they are actually in the minority, when it comes to both population and size of monthly investment. Holding massive CLD and land areas as well, they largely live off payouts. There are some who still deposit, but they are getting fewer and further between.

The game is catering to new players. Brand new. Their focus has been for the last 18 months on improving the new player experience. It's no coincidence that during this time we see things like shrapnel, markup plummeting across the board, etc.

The 2000 or so active old players right now are taking a hit so that 20,000 new players can come on board, and stay.

Ultimately this is for the best. EU has been steadily declining in population until 2013, when this strategy was adopted. Now it is increasing.

We have to face the facts. MA realized their strategy was no longer working. It became outdated after the financial crash of 2008. They had to either change the way their game functioned to reflect current economics, or face the prospect of shutting down their servers, likely this year.

Glad they decided to change it up. How about you?
 
Magyar_Republic said:
Not for your new player, who is basically depositing $20 a month, and is TTing most loot.

The reduced markup is likely paying for the stability in TT costs.

At some point the old community here must concede that they are actually in the minority, when it comes to both population and size of monthly investment. Holding massive CLD and land areas as well, they largely live off payouts. There are some who still deposit, but they are getting fewer and further between.

The game is catering to new players. Brand new. Their focus has been for the last 18 months on improving the new player experience. It's no coincidence that during this time we see things like shrapnel, markup plummeting across the board, etc.

The 2000 or so active old players right now are taking a hit so that 20,000 new players can come on board, and stay.

Ultimately this is for the best. EU has been steadily declining in population until 2013, when this strategy was adopted. Now it is increasing.

We have to face the facts. MA realized their strategy was no longer working. It became outdated after the financial crash of 2008. They had to either change the way their game functioned to reflect current economics, or face the prospect of shutting down their servers, likely this year.

Glad they decided to change it up. How about you?
Click to expand...


TT returns are staying the same, so reduced markup means peds don't last as long, saying otherwise is like saying the earth is flat.

Rgds

Ace
 
Ace Flyster said:
TT returns are staying the same, so reduced markup means peds don't last as long, saying otherwise is like saying the earth is flat.

Rgds

Ace
Click to expand...

You are only correct under the assumption that:
-you are a miner
-you don't use mining amplifiers
-you don't use limited gear

But then again haven't experienced miners always had it too easy anyway? :)
 
Harmony. said:
You are only correct under the assumption that:
-you are a miner
-you don't use mining amplifiers
-you don't use limited gear

But then again haven't experienced miners always had it too easy anyway? :)
Click to expand...

All hunters with unlimited gear as well :)

Rgds

Ace

EDIT: and yes miners have had it easy for a long time
 
Harmony. said:
You are only correct under the assumption that:
-you are a miner
-you don't use mining amplifiers
-you don't use limited gear

But then again haven't experienced miners always had it too easy anyway? :)
Click to expand...

And of course expl bp crafters as well!!! Cant forget those lol

Rgds

Ace
 
And amped miners as well.

As you pay markup on 100% (ish) but only get markup back on 90% ish

Rgds

Ace

EDIT: I said it the wrong way round, you only pay markup on less tt spent than you recieve in tt returns
 
Last edited:
Ace Flyster said:
TT returns are staying the same, so reduced markup means peds don't last as long, saying otherwise is like saying the earth is flat.

Rgds

Ace
Click to expand...

I actually get some changes, like shrapnel and smoothed hunting returns for example - although return % will be same the perceived "bang for buck" has been increased. Before changes after a $20 depo a player was left with a large variety of crap that was unsellable, now with caly punies being changed to ammo, shrapnel and noob weaps i guess makes the first few deposits last longer.

If increases playerbase then all good, but still think expl ammo bp was bad decision, not so much lower cost per clk ones but the III and IV (2 & 20 ped per clk).

Maybe expl clicking will slow down and all will return to some level, guess time will tell.
 
Norbert said:
If increases playerbase then all good, but still think expl ammo bp was bad decision, not so much lower cost per clk ones but the III and IV (2 & 20 ped per clk).
Click to expand...

I agree. Explosives were a horrible decision. Only 1 BP needed. Having 4 levels goes around the crafting system.
 
who said nanocubes would be available from tt forever?

:rolleyes:
 
ermik said:
who said nanocubes would be available from tt forever?

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I would say it would be a bad precedent to bait and switch but it is hardly unprecedented.
 
MA want to get a lot of new players who will earn a little on each other, and then they want to remove the small number of players who earn a lot of money (enough for a good life IRL) on all others. That is correct. Absolutely no reason to give possibility for 100 people to earn $100,000. It is better to divide these $100 thousand to 10 thousand people. Less possibility to withdraw all money (10k of poor players can do less withdrawals, than 100 rich), thereby achieving several goals:
1. Increase the number of poor players (more profit for MA)
2. Increase in turnover (more profit for MA). 1000 of poor players can do bigger turnover than 10 rich players.
3. Increase in deposits (100 x $5-20 deposits instead of 3 x $100-200) with a simultaneous decrease in the probability of withdraw.
4. Reduction in the MU of UL things - this is extremely important in this strategy, as in this case, the money simply will be removed from MU and stay in MA (Your item was TT+1000 a year ago, now it is TT+300, 700 PED just stay in MA)
Overall I think this is genius strategy, it undermines the credibility of 90-95% of the old players, and increases the level of trust of new ones. In this strategy older players should not be taken into account because they have already paid to MA everything they could. MA need to decrease possibilities of withdrawals for them, with decreasing of MU for all 'invested' items. It works.
Maybe you wonder why I write this - as old player. But it seems to me, that this strategy is 100% correct, although it displeases too many old players. Cost to play will be less for new players. But by increasing their quantity, MA will earn more, than they can earn from little quantity of old players.

Generally the rule 'number of players' works for everyone.
It is better to sell 200 units of F-101 than one Terramaster 8.

Think about it. You can think that this is apocalypse, but for me and many others it is a new hope.
 
Scurvy Sityl said:
No, please elaborate? (In PM, if you think it's OT)
Click to expand...

At one time you could buy orange paint and storage boxes in the trade terminal.

When coloring was introduced players bought orange paint and boxes from the TT, colored them to gain skill, then sold the boxes back to the TT. Rinse and repeat.

MA had to remove both from the TT.
 
Then I wonder if this was a ploy to generate interest in the blueprint and possibly test volume on what could be other means like probes and reg ammo before removing nanocubes and adding it to either loot or shrapnel conversion. I'm highly curious now.
 
atomicstorm said:
Then I wonder if this was a ploy to generate interest in the blueprint and possibly test volume on what could be other means like probes and reg ammo before removing nanocubes and adding it to either loot or shrapnel conversion. I'm highly curious now.
Click to expand...

Personally, I'm okay with nanocubes being replaced as material for explosives by shrapnel, or some underappreciated ore or animal oil that has markup of like 100.5%.

Boosts returns for miners/hunters, charges gamblers a bit of markup fee, and maybe encourages crafter to craft something other than explosives so that markup on metal residue doesn't hit 100.01% and maybe we can get some more rk-20 bps dropping when people craft tools instead of explosives again.

But then again, I'm just a nub and may be way off base.
 
atomicstorm said:
Then I wonder if this was a ploy to generate interest in the blueprint and possibly test volume on what could be other means like probes and reg ammo before removing nanocubes and adding it to either loot or shrapnel conversion. I'm highly curious now.
Click to expand...

This is not a trick. Nanocubes and shrapnel caused a decrease in the total ingame MU. A decrease in the MU means less withdrawals, while maintaining or increasing of MA profits due to increasing playerbase. Do not compare it with the orange paint (although an interesting fact, I didn't know about it), there is a general change in gameplay.
 
Shrapnel increased hunting loot mu (even with calypso half assing their loot tables). Explosives reduced overall mining and crafting mu by crashing residue prices allowing for over supply.
 
Last edited:
atomicstorm said:
Shrapnel increased hunting loot mu (even with calypso half assing their loot tables). Explosives reduced overall mining and crafting mu by crashing residue prices allowing for over supply.
Click to expand...

A little bit wrong. A simple calculation shows that if you spend 1000 ped in a session, now may get 10-100 ped useful loot with Markup 110-120% (really this is 5-10 PED average MU)
The rest is ammo, 450 PED (100% MU) and shrapnel 450 PED (101% MU (4,5 PED)). Let it be 15 PED of MU.
In old time you got 100 ped of Fine Wool 107% (7 PED), 500 ped of oils with 102-105% MU (10-25 PED), and a bunch of garbage with a 101% MU, 400 PED TT. Let it be 30 PED of MU. If you calculate - you get a little much more money than you can get now! This explanation not show full picture, but you can extrapolate.

And access to TT for manufacturers simply reduced the demand for mining resources and thereby reduce the MU on them.

And as i wrote above:
Less MU ingame - less withdrawals, less demand on high-MU items and so on...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top