These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Building better Worlds

First post First post First post
Author
C C P Alliance
#241 - 2014-04-15 17:24:03 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets?


The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job.


And can I get an answer in that regard to my question? How are we supposed to compare stations in regard to the different cost levels without ferrying the stuff around? Or have you also not thought this through? Roll


You will be able to get a quote from a station you are not at, with a blueprint you don't even own. More details to follow in the UI blog.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones

Federation Uprising
#242 - 2014-04-15 17:25:05 UTC
Makoto Priano wrote:
Actually, QUESTION!

So. If you're removing the standing requirement for anchoring POSes because it doesn't add gameplay value, will you also be removing the standing requirement for installing jumpclones?

That said, if you're removing standings requirements and standings now only really matter for taxes/agent access, will you be adding new standing-gated rewards to LP stores or something like that? Pretty please?


They should probably just remove standings all together. There really is no value for having high standings anymore except for access to high level missions.

.

#243 - 2014-04-15 17:25:09 UTC
Alyxportur wrote:
You didn't explain how the price scaling will or will not be implemented for sovereignty nullsec. Does this mean that outposts will be forced into this pricing scheme? or will they remain a manually specified cost? or will we have the ability to choose between one or the other since, as it is nullsec, we own the outpost.

It applies everywhere, per a previous comment — the congestion fees become a new universal ISK sink.
Goonswarm Federation
#244 - 2014-04-15 17:25:57 UTC
Alyxportur wrote:
You didn't explain how the price scaling will or will not be implemented for sovereignty nullsec. Does this mean that outposts will be forced into this pricing scheme? or will they remain a manually specified cost? or will we have the ability to choose between one or the other since, as it is nullsec, we own the outpost.

They did: outposts have the same cost scaling mechanic and that part goes into a sink, the station owner can also manually specify a cost.

What was not specified is how fast they scale up - if, say, an amarr station with 100 simultaneous jobs has the same cost as a highsec station with 100 or if its lower, and I assume that will be mentioned when they also mention what they're doing with the slot bonus upgrades.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

#245 - 2014-04-15 17:26:58 UTC
The mentioning of Teams makes me want to have CREWS. Smile
#246 - 2014-04-15 17:27:48 UTC
Tippia wrote:

Well, for one, salvagers don't care about loot reprocessing — they care about salvage.


Alright then "looters/salvagers" I thought that was clear.

Looting and salvaging level 4's for example about 80% of the ISK comes from loot. A 30-40% drop in value is significant.
Goonswarm Federation
#247 - 2014-04-15 17:27:59 UTC
Edward Olmops wrote:
The mentioning of Teams makes me want to have CREWS. Smile

We already have them, in missile form.

Get it? CREWS MISSILES

Excuse me, I need to pay penance for this.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Amarr Empire
#248 - 2014-04-15 17:28:10 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Kadl wrote:

So an industrialist needs a spare corporation in reserve? I am not sure your suggestion addresses the claimed problem.


tying up an alt makes it at least require a mediocum of planning to trivially avoid wardecs

i would still be irritated at the ease but it would be a vast improvement you must admit


No. It just looks like an impediment to newer industrialists while older industrialists with more accounts get a pass. Designing a feature whose main focus is to hinder newer players seems foolish. The problem I see is related to the War Dec, corporation, and POS systems. All of those need real iterations to make them functional. So, yes you should be able to claim a POS or POCO location using a War Dec. Making high sec industry more convoluted does not seem like the proper solution.
#249 - 2014-04-15 17:28:59 UTC
Edward Olmops wrote:
The mentioning of Teams makes me want to have CREWS. Smile

Crews?
Caldari State
#250 - 2014-04-15 17:29:41 UTC
Grendell wrote:
I really hope you address the blueprint voting/lockdown system before making the slot changes. Allow a sort of emergency quick vote or something when the starbase gets attacked or reinforced.



You can't lockdown blueprints at the POS.

Therefore, they won't be there, because the risk of corp theft is way too high!
Mercenary Coalition
#251 - 2014-04-15 17:29:50 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets?


The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job.


And can I get an answer in that regard to my question? How are we supposed to compare stations in regard to the different cost levels without ferrying the stuff around? Or have you also not thought this through? Roll


You will be able to get a quote from a station you are not at, with a blueprint you don't even own. More details to follow in the UI blog.


Nice, that is finally good news. Blink

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

#252 - 2014-04-15 17:29:53 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Querns wrote:
On a related note:

The removal of standings for anchoring POS makes it trivial to evade destruction of your POS. Right now, if you want to move your POS to a new corporation upon wardec, it takes seven (7) days for standings to promulgate to the corporation's standings. This had the effect of severely limiting the amount of "POS cycling" that could occur. With the removal of standings from the equation, it is now a reasonable response, upon being wardecced, to create a new corporation, unanchor the POS under wardec, and sit on the moon in question in a cloaked industrial sitting in the new, unwardecced corporation, ready to anchor a new pos when the old one comes up.

I suggest that a new corporation be required to wait seven (7) days before being eligible to anchor a new pos. This brings the new era in line with the convoluted, yet functional system that exists today.

This is a good idea and should get implemented.


Its a stupid idea, all you need is several alts in different corps as backups. You're goons, the second a new feature is added you *always* look for ways to circumvent it and laugh in CCPs face (see mobile bounty system in useless anoms)
Synthetic Existence
#253 - 2014-04-15 17:30:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Entity
So you're saying 8 years of operating a hisec POS with 2.5 trillion ISK worth (that's 2500 billion) of BPOs, you're suddenly expecting me to put said 2.5 trillion ISK into a paper space container and not locked down in my hangar?

I like the changes but that part is just flabbergastingly stupid

╦......║...╔╗.║.║.╔╗.╦║.╔╗╔╦╗╔╗

║.╔╗╔╗╔╣.╔╗╠..╠ ╠╗╠╝.║╠ ╠╝║║║╚╗

╩═╚╝║.╚╝.╚╝║..╚╝║║╚╝.╩╚╝╚╝║.║╚╝

Got Item?

Circle-Of-Two
#254 - 2014-04-15 17:30:31 UTC
Imiarr Timshae wrote:
Tippia wrote:

Well, for one, salvagers don't care about loot reprocessing — they care about salvage.


Alright then "looters/salvagers" I thought that was clear.

Looting and salvaging level 4's for example about 80% of the ISK comes from loot. A 30-40% drop in value is significant.


That lost income to mission runners will most likely result in more income for miners, which is something I'm completely fine with. "Mining with guns." should never have been a thing, and CCP has slowly been correcting that error.
C C P Alliance
#255 - 2014-04-15 17:30:38 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Canenald wrote:
Sounds to me like manufacturing and research is about to be dumbed down.

Yeah, just like the creation of a GUI dumbed down computer use. Roll

Hell, now EVERONE will be able to do it... sheesh.


We talk a lot about good and bad complexity within the team. A fair portion of the industry changes are pretty clear examples of removing bad complexity, while still keeping the interesting problems for players to solve.

Some of the changes are also centered around cleaning up years of legacy code, freeing us up to better iterate on the feature and do more sexy looking UI Cool

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones

Goonswarm Federation
#256 - 2014-04-15 17:31:24 UTC
Seriousrly who in their right mind puts billons worth of BPO's at a ******* POS? and with the standings change to anchoring people have been crying for a change since forever, Now CCP makes is easier so you dont have to rescue "The Damsel" 1,000,000th time and people stll *****?
Solar Assault Fleet
#257 - 2014-04-15 17:31:55 UTC
Kaius Fero wrote:
I have not much to comment except this:
Quote:
Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements (minus some protected solar systems, like Jita or new player starting systems of course).


Now.. tell me this was a typo! Are you guys serious about this?! I mean.. there are thousand of players whom spent like months grinding those stupid cosmos missions just to be able to drop a POS in hi sec and now your like.. "lol suckers!"

Erh, yes.

It's happened before, and it'll happen again.

Luckily standings are useful for more stuff than hanging towers.

And yes, I've spent quite sometime grinding standings, and even doing Cosmos, to be able to hang towers ;)

CCP Greyscale: As to starbases, we agree it's pretty terrible, but we don't want to delay the entire release just for this one factor.

Goonswarm Federation
#258 - 2014-04-15 17:32:00 UTC
Kadl wrote:
No. It just looks like an impediment to newer industrialists while older industrialists with more accounts get a pass. Designing a feature whose main focus is to hinder newer players seems foolish. The problem I see is related to the War Dec, corporation, and POS systems. All of those need real iterations to make them functional. So, yes you should be able to claim a POS or POCO location using a War Dec. Making high sec industry more convoluted does not seem like the proper solution.

your proposal that we ought not improve things until there is a complete fix is dumb and wrong

by effectively charging 1/3rd a plex for a (weak) wardec immunity, and charging 2 1/3rds plex per month for complete wardec immunity, we significantly penalize the cowardly through an easy-to-implement system that dramatically improves wardecs without requiring massive change

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

#259 - 2014-04-15 17:33:16 UTC
Btw, as far as defending a pos goes in highsec: Ever heard of a dickstar? In highsec, those can be especially annoying to deal with. your goal with risking stuff in a starbase might not work the way you think it will.
Goonswarm Federation
#260 - 2014-04-15 17:33:35 UTC
Entity wrote:
So you're saying 8 years of operating a hisec POS with 2.5 trillion ISK worth (that's 2500 billion) of BPOs, you're suddenly expecting me to put said 2.5 trillion ISK into a paper space container and not locked down in my hangar?

I like the changes but that part is just flabbergastingly stupid

the real issue here is your apparent belief you should be entitled to get the most advantages possible from your 2.5 trillion in bpos absolutely risk free and how long that was tolerated

eight years was 7.9 too long

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Forum Jump