More accurately, the major objection is that the mine is in no way shape or form what it was described to be. Most notably, a significant reduction in the burden placed on fleets to complete their starbase.
And, in particular, it does not help the problem of small fleets vs large fleets.
_________________________________________________ [Kluless][Kold][Steel Heels][Snagtooth] [Louis Cipher][Outta Gum][Thysa Kymbo][Spanner][Frakk] [D'Mented][D'Licious]
Joined October 2009. READ BEFORE POSTING
And, in particular, it does not help the problem of small fleets vs large fleets.
I think it does, but not in the way people were hoping.
Does the Mine generate an overall reduction in costs? All other things being equal, it does: it provides bonuses to projects yet to be bought (including itself), reducing their costs and therefore reducing the total costs necessary to max out all fleet holdings.
Does this help small fleets vis a vis large fleets? Yes, I think that it does, because small fleets are almost certainly less advanced than large ones and therefore they will obtain more benefit from the discount. A fleet already at a T5 starbase will see a very limited reduction in total costs compared to a fleet with a T2 starbase.
I think, however, that there is a disconnect in expectations here. Yes, the Dilithium Mine reduces costs, and yes, it probably results in a larger discount going to small fleets. But the discount is not as large as people were expecting, certainly.
The second important facet to consideration in the analysis of the "cost reductions" of the dilithium mine is what costs should be involved. I see many people saying that the dilithium mine will only "pay for itself" over a large number of holdings. While this is true, I think it's somewhat deceptive, in the sense that the dilithium mine is itself a holding which you would otherwise have to pay for, with all of the same benefits and features that you would expect of any other holding (consoles, equipment, etc, etc): it just happens to also reduce costs.
Ultimately, I don't think Dan Stahl was wrong when he said that this reduces costs across the board and that it helps small fleets. It does both. It just doesn't do it to the extent that a lot of people were hoping or expecting.
And, to an extent, I can understand why. it's one thing to, as they have done, "backdate" bonuses, so that people who are lagging behind can 'catch up'. It's quite another to give an ongoing bonus into the future. This is problematic because you want those early adopters paying a lot of money to get the shiniest, and then you want to drop the price after all the early adopters have bought so that everyone else who wasn't willing to spend that money can buy in, too. I imagine the solution depends on a variety of factors, including fleet churn, which are hard to measure from the outside.
Just out of curiousity, what is the appeal of small fleets in the first place? Just curious.
Surely at one time or another even the uber fleets of death started with a small number.
Bottom line is Fleets and holding construction are part of the game for players to pick up and run with or not. I lost count of the number of sticks of scaffolding (New Fleet Tier 0), I was defending in Fleet Alerts.
Holdings are a long term project to form a fleet around and give a reason for engagement. Your new to STO and see there's a feature of making and being in a fleet. Sure a lot will sign up to an existing fleet, but a lot won't, feeling a sense of forging their own fleet, simply because it's a cool idea and once you start you see it provides additional benefits.
Quite honestly seeing a new fleet, with new players show the game is growing the numbers who support its existance and which we all feel passionately about. Sure a lot will get bored quick and look for the next f2p, shiny mmo etc.
Also it gets easier running missions with fleet m8s rather than pugs the majority of the time.
I think its pretty off, that people are actively discouraged from making new fleets and ive seen some ESD chat belittling the inevitable, need two more to form a fleet calls.
As its a feature of the game, so why, why you ask? Because IT IS part of the game, and its not for anyone one of us to say to another player who can't do this or that in-game.
To inform them I often point them in the direction of STO WIKI.
kind of a silly standpoint. If it were only about money we'd be able to sink the cooldown time of base projects at 2 dil per second. The major objection for a lot of people is the massive time waste
Not silly at all if you want to try to keep people pouring money in over the long term.
It's a balancing act between giving people enough to stay and pump money in - and frustrating them and having them stop or move on.
Maybe if you were to finish it in one day - 2 months later you have left the game right when a new lock-box must have ship comes out that you would spend $200 on.
Does the Mine generate an overall reduction in costs? All other things being equal, it does: it provides bonuses to projects yet to be bought (including itself), reducing their costs and therefore reducing the total costs necessary to max out all fleet holdings.
No it doesn't. You don't get to assume hypothetical holdings from the future when determining whether it reduces costs, as you have no idea what conditions will exist then, or even if said holdings will ever be implemented. (I know they're "in the plan." Many things that have been "in the plan" have never arrived.)
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
No it doesn't. You don't get to assume hypothetical holdings from the future when determining whether it reduces costs, as you have no idea what conditions will exist then, or even if said holdings will ever be implemented. (I know they're "in the plan." Many things that have been "in the plan" have never arrived.)
As I said, even if there are no hypothetical holdings in the future, the mine's reductions at least apply to future levels of itself (so the T1 mine holding bonus applies to T2), so it does definitely provide a cost reduction.
Now we're simply haggling over how large a cost reduction: and as I said as well, this benefits small fleets the most because they presumably have the furthest to go, and therefore the furthest currently existing projects that will benefit from the cost reduction.
As I said, even if there are no hypothetical holdings in the future, the mine's reductions at least apply to future levels of itself (so the T1 mine holding bonus applies to T2), so it does definitely provide a cost reduction.
Now we're simply haggling over how large a cost reduction: and as I said as well, this benefits small fleets the most because they presumably have the furthest to go, and therefore the furthest currently existing projects that will benefit from the cost reduction.
Since you don't get to break-even, it's hard to see how introducing the Mine helps small fleets build up their Starbase as it was promised to do. It doesn't matter if the Mine helps build itself if it's a net loss.
Arguing that small fleets get the biggest benefit because they have the furthest to go is irrelevant unless the small fleets actually have the resources to benefit from the discount. They didn't before the mine, and they'll have even less after building the Mine, should they choose to do so.
No, the only winners here are the big fleets. Again.
"Participation in PVP-related activities is so low on an hourly, daily, weekly, and monthly basis that we could in fact just completely take it out of STO and it would not impact the overall number of people [who] log in to the game and play in any significant way." -Gozer, Cryptic PvP Dev
Since you don't get to break-even, it's hard to see how introducing the Mine helps small fleets build up their Starbase as it was promised to do. It doesn't matter if the Mine helps build itself if it's a net loss.
The mine is never a net loss: it's always a net benefit because its bonus applies to itself and to any other projects you have not yet completed.
Would this be easier for you to understand if the Dilithium Mine holding was a separate item (with no cost reductions) and the devs simply dropped all project costs by a flat 15%?
The dilithium mine is only a net loss if you assume that it has no other purpose than to reduce costs and you build it for that purpose.
But that's not true. It has all the benefits of any other fleet holding, and you should not buy it simply because it reduces costs.
Arguing that small fleets get the biggest benefit because they have the furthest to go is irrelevant unless the small fleets actually have the resources to benefit from the discount. They didn't before the mine, and they'll have even less after building the Mine, should they choose to do so.
But after the mine everything will be cheaper. They will benefit from it. Whether they choose to take advantage of this benefit is entirely up to them.
Comments
And, in particular, it does not help the problem of small fleets vs large fleets.
[Kluless][Kold][Steel Heels][Snagtooth]
[Louis Cipher][Outta Gum][Thysa Kymbo][Spanner][Frakk]
[D'Mented][D'Licious]
Joined October 2009. READ BEFORE POSTING
I think it does, but not in the way people were hoping.
Does the Mine generate an overall reduction in costs? All other things being equal, it does: it provides bonuses to projects yet to be bought (including itself), reducing their costs and therefore reducing the total costs necessary to max out all fleet holdings.
Does this help small fleets vis a vis large fleets? Yes, I think that it does, because small fleets are almost certainly less advanced than large ones and therefore they will obtain more benefit from the discount. A fleet already at a T5 starbase will see a very limited reduction in total costs compared to a fleet with a T2 starbase.
I think, however, that there is a disconnect in expectations here. Yes, the Dilithium Mine reduces costs, and yes, it probably results in a larger discount going to small fleets. But the discount is not as large as people were expecting, certainly.
The second important facet to consideration in the analysis of the "cost reductions" of the dilithium mine is what costs should be involved. I see many people saying that the dilithium mine will only "pay for itself" over a large number of holdings. While this is true, I think it's somewhat deceptive, in the sense that the dilithium mine is itself a holding which you would otherwise have to pay for, with all of the same benefits and features that you would expect of any other holding (consoles, equipment, etc, etc): it just happens to also reduce costs.
Ultimately, I don't think Dan Stahl was wrong when he said that this reduces costs across the board and that it helps small fleets. It does both. It just doesn't do it to the extent that a lot of people were hoping or expecting.
And, to an extent, I can understand why. it's one thing to, as they have done, "backdate" bonuses, so that people who are lagging behind can 'catch up'. It's quite another to give an ongoing bonus into the future. This is problematic because you want those early adopters paying a lot of money to get the shiniest, and then you want to drop the price after all the early adopters have bought so that everyone else who wasn't willing to spend that money can buy in, too. I imagine the solution depends on a variety of factors, including fleet churn, which are hard to measure from the outside.
Surely at one time or another even the uber fleets of death started with a small number.
Bottom line is Fleets and holding construction are part of the game for players to pick up and run with or not. I lost count of the number of sticks of scaffolding (New Fleet Tier 0), I was defending in Fleet Alerts.
Holdings are a long term project to form a fleet around and give a reason for engagement. Your new to STO and see there's a feature of making and being in a fleet. Sure a lot will sign up to an existing fleet, but a lot won't, feeling a sense of forging their own fleet, simply because it's a cool idea and once you start you see it provides additional benefits.
Quite honestly seeing a new fleet, with new players show the game is growing the numbers who support its existance and which we all feel passionately about. Sure a lot will get bored quick and look for the next f2p, shiny mmo etc.
Also it gets easier running missions with fleet m8s rather than pugs the majority of the time.
I think its pretty off, that people are actively discouraged from making new fleets and ive seen some ESD chat belittling the inevitable, need two more to form a fleet calls.
As its a feature of the game, so why, why you ask? Because IT IS part of the game, and its not for anyone one of us to say to another player who can't do this or that in-game.
To inform them I often point them in the direction of STO WIKI.
Not silly at all if you want to try to keep people pouring money in over the long term.
It's a balancing act between giving people enough to stay and pump money in - and frustrating them and having them stop or move on.
Maybe if you were to finish it in one day - 2 months later you have left the game right when a new lock-box must have ship comes out that you would spend $200 on.
See the point?
No it doesn't. You don't get to assume hypothetical holdings from the future when determining whether it reduces costs, as you have no idea what conditions will exist then, or even if said holdings will ever be implemented. (I know they're "in the plan." Many things that have been "in the plan" have never arrived.)
As I said, even if there are no hypothetical holdings in the future, the mine's reductions at least apply to future levels of itself (so the T1 mine holding bonus applies to T2), so it does definitely provide a cost reduction.
Now we're simply haggling over how large a cost reduction: and as I said as well, this benefits small fleets the most because they presumably have the furthest to go, and therefore the furthest currently existing projects that will benefit from the cost reduction.
Since you don't get to break-even, it's hard to see how introducing the Mine helps small fleets build up their Starbase as it was promised to do. It doesn't matter if the Mine helps build itself if it's a net loss.
Arguing that small fleets get the biggest benefit because they have the furthest to go is irrelevant unless the small fleets actually have the resources to benefit from the discount. They didn't before the mine, and they'll have even less after building the Mine, should they choose to do so.
No, the only winners here are the big fleets. Again.
Would this be easier for you to understand if the Dilithium Mine holding was a separate item (with no cost reductions) and the devs simply dropped all project costs by a flat 15%?
The dilithium mine is only a net loss if you assume that it has no other purpose than to reduce costs and you build it for that purpose.
But that's not true. It has all the benefits of any other fleet holding, and you should not buy it simply because it reduces costs.
But after the mine everything will be cheaper. They will benefit from it. Whether they choose to take advantage of this benefit is entirely up to them.