These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#261 - 2014-04-15 17:35:37 UTC
protip research poshavers: it is expected and anticipated your expensive bpos will be moved to station slots, you should stop appearing flabbergasted that you will have to move them

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

Knug LiDi
The Dark Space Initiative
Initiative Mercenaries
#262 - 2014-04-15 17:36:08 UTC
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.


That's nice - BUT - I want to know this cost BEFORE I transport materials to a particular station. I.e. the cost amount need to be reflected in the information about that station. And, of course, it is dynamic.

This is necessary. Trial and error trying to find cheap manufacturing while carrying materials is stupid. If the rate is dynamic, it needs to be on the equivalent of a market, so players have the intel to decide how far/how much. Doing this while carrying good is idiotic. Flying to 50 stations to determine a value that may change before I get back is wrong. Let me view the local 'market' for manufacturing just like a can examine the market for ore. Then I will make market decisions


If only we could fall into a woman's arms

without falling into her hands

Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
#263 - 2014-04-15 17:36:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Imiarr Timshae
Boltorano wrote:

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.


Yeah. Seems reasonable to me. Create a "Sandbox", let people create their own professions and then remove them.

Sure it's corrective. But "sandbox" it is not.

Edit : Not that it really matters in trying to argue that Eve isn't much of a sandbox these days; it was always a fucxing stupid marketing campaign.
JITAALT808
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#264 - 2014-04-15 17:36:29 UTC
Boltorano wrote:
JITAALT808 wrote:
I'm not happy that my faction standings that I worked so hard for are now useless. Did you guys give any thought to the effects on mission runners who were making a business out of POS standings? Or to mission runners in general? Basically, standings are worthless at this point. In effect, they are nothing more than a penalty on those with bad standings, as there is only one remaining benefit -- access to L4s for faction standings of 5+. All other standings above that number are quite literally useless save for the bonus bpc's (big whoop) and a reduction in taxes for trading (also big whoop for everyone but serious traders).


I appreciate that you've taken advantage of emergent gameplay and found yourself a niche way to make ISK. That said, sometimes changes should be made for the greater good of all.

It doesn't have to be a zero sum solution. Those standings were hard to get. Especially for those of us who worked to get multiple faction standings up (riding the seesaw ain't no fun). That work should count for something and there should be rewards for having done it. The most common refrain I'm seeing so far is, "well you got to use it in the past." To which I can only reply, "let's see if you say that after capitals are removed from the game and no one gets the skillpoints back. I mean, you got to use it in the past, right?"

Those standings should be worth something and they should affect something. If they don't, then the concept needs to be entirely removed from the game, and the people who put the work in should get something for it. You can bet you sweet ass that station owners are not going to get screwed over with the changes to slot mechanics (Devs have already said that another dev blog will address those changes). Why should mission runners get screwed?
Nathan Natinde
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#265 - 2014-04-15 17:36:53 UTC
I have a large POS, only one other guy has access, (and then only because I know him in RL because 'EVE') I already have billions in assembly arrays and labs at risk

The only thing that makes my industry experience bearable is that I can keep HUNDREDS of (Non stackable) T2 BPC's, Ship / Module / Component BPO's in ONE corp hanger in a station and set the jobs going on multiple characters from there. (Maxed out builder gets a whole 11 slots of each and you do not get EVE rich making T2 on one character))

So now I have to split all the blueprints up as well, have all my characters log in out at the POS and memorize which pesky array or lab I left each in. Or swallow hefty fees that apparently will make losses.

All this would be fine if I made one or 2 items, but to make ISK in EVE without a T2 BPO you should to be flexible and ready to make practically any item. I don't mind the risks, or particularly having to make more things at the POS (as long as the awful drawbacks on T2 ship arrays go away) but honestly I don't need industry to be more complicated for Blueprints.
Entity
X-Factor Industries
Synthetic Existence
#266 - 2014-04-15 17:37:16 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
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


Risk free? What? Is your brain turned off or something?

- The pos alone is worth 8 billion+ (all faction stuff)
- I stand to lose a month worth of product to the tune of 20 billion if someone decides to blow it up.

I'm fine with -that- risk, but having to literally put ALL my eggs in that one easy to pop basket is completely unacceptable.

╦......║...╔╗.║.║.╔╗.╦║.╔╗╔╦╗╔╗

║.╔╗╔╗╔╣.╔╗╠..╠ ╠╗╠╝.║╠ ╠╝║║║╚╗

╩═╚╝║.╚╝.╚╝║..╚╝║║╚╝.╩╚╝╚╝║.║╚╝

Got Item?

Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries
#267 - 2014-04-15 17:37:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Lors Dornick
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
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

Success in industry should be about knowing what to build, how, where, when, sourced from where and sold at the right place and at the right time.

Edit: and for the right price.

It should never be about to be able to stand or navigate a stupid UI.

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.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#268 - 2014-04-15 17:38:03 UTC
Imiarr Timshae wrote:
Boltorano wrote:

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.


Yeah. Seems reasonable to me. Create a "Sandbox", let people create their own professions and then remove them.

Sure it's corrective. But "sandbox" it is not.

sandbox means you can never change anything ever, said nobody with an ounce of sense ever

seriously is there a single time that anyone has ever used sandbox in a post in one of these threads where their post didn't amount to whining that anything could possibly change

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

GeeBee
Backwater Redux
Tactical Narcotics Team
#269 - 2014-04-15 17:38:53 UTC  |  Edited by: GeeBee
"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).
Remove the ability for players to use stations to safely store their blueprints without putting them at risk in Starbase structures. Players will still be able to start their jobs remotely (via the use of Supply Chain Management and Scientific Networking skills), but will now have to move their blueprints directly into the starbase structures that require it, like other materials.
Improve Mobile Laboratories and Assembly Arrays to compensate for such risk – we’ll give you final numbers as soon as we have them.
Reduce copy time on all blueprints to be less time consuming than manufacturing something out of it. This gives the option to use blueprint copies to build items at Starbases without risking the original."

Please remove / increase the 5 max runs per blueprint copy stat on capital component blueprints, building hundreds of these from copies will be insane.

Edit, Nevermind this has been covered already and responded to by CCP already.
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#270 - 2014-04-15 17:39:08 UTC
Knug LiDi 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.


That's nice - BUT - I want to know this cost BEFORE I transport materials to a particular station. I.e. the cost amount need to be reflected in the information about that station. And, of course, it is dynamic.

This is necessary. Trial and error trying to find cheap manufacturing while carrying materials is stupid. If the rate is dynamic, it needs to be on the equivalent of a market, so players have the intel to decide how far/how much. Doing this while carrying good is idiotic. Flying to 50 stations to determine a value that may change before I get back is wrong. Let me view the local 'market' for manufacturing just like a can examine the market for ore. Then I will make market decisions


You will be able to request a quote from a station before a) going there b) moving materials and even c) purchasing the blueprint.

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

Boltorano
Distinguished Gentleman's Boating Club
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#271 - 2014-04-15 17:39:12 UTC
JITAALT808 wrote:
I appreciate that you've taken advantage of emergent gameplay and found yourself a niche way to make ISK. That said, sometimes changes should be made for the greater good of all.
It doesn't have to be a zero sum solution. Those standings were hard to get. Especially for those of us who worked to get multiple faction standings up (riding the seesaw ain't no fun). That work should count for something and there should be rewards for having done it. The most common refrain I'm seeing so far is, "well you got to use it in the past." To which I can only reply, "let's see if you say that after capitals are removed from the game and no one gets the skillpoints back. I mean, you got to use it in the past, right?"

Those standings should be worth something and they should affect something. If they don't, then the concept needs to be entirely removed from the game, and the people who put the work in should get something for it. You can bet you sweet ass that station owners are not going to get screwed over with the changes to slot mechanics (Devs have already said that another dev blog will address those changes). Why should mission runners get screwed?


CCP can come up with other ways to make standings useful to have, I just wouldn't expect answers to that in the feedback thread for an industry dev blog.
gifter Penken
State War Academy
Caldari State
#272 - 2014-04-15 17:39:23 UTC
Querns wrote:
Honestly, any situation in which the potential for theft increases is a good thing for eve. Trust being a weak link is one of the things that makes Eve great, and makes it actually stand out from other games in the same market.


Assuming people are stupid, which they are not.

Make the risk of theft higher, We'll just create alt corps to own the BPOs, make BPCs, and make the BPCs available to the larger corp.

More hassle, but no more risk.


You can not make us play STUPID! You an only alter how we avoid risk.
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#273 - 2014-04-15 17:39:26 UTC
Lors Dornick wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
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

Success in industry should be about knowing what to build, how, where, when, sourced from where and sold at the right place and at the right time.

Edit: and for the right price.

It should never be about to be able to stand or navigate a stupid UI.


This.

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

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#274 - 2014-04-15 17:39:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Weaselior wrote:
protip research poshavers: it is expected and anticipated your expensive bpos will be moved to station slots, you should stop appearing flabbergasted that you will have to move them

Also, read the following line in the devblog again:

• Reduce copy time on all blueprints to be less time consuming than manufacturing something out of it. This gives the option to use blueprint copies to build items at Starbases without risking the original.

Moving the BPO around will be no more needed than it currently is. The big change is rather than you will need to expend one character's research capacity on creating copies to build from.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#275 - 2014-04-15 17:40:47 UTC
I've only had my first read of this and without the rest of the unpublished details and time to digest it all I can't really say much other than...

Impressive.
Elem Ental
Knights Emerald Scots
#276 - 2014-04-15 17:40:48 UTC
That screenshot....I am smitten by its beauty <3
I seem to have forgotten, AH YES! Summer looks to be an exciting time indeed! Looking forward to it...Hey! Where the flop did my pants go!?
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#277 - 2014-04-15 17:40:55 UTC
Entity wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
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


Risk free? What? Is your brain turned off or something?

- The pos alone is worth 8 billion+ (all faction stuff)
- I stand to lose a month worth of product to the tune of 20 billion if someone decides to blow it up.

I'm fine with -that- risk, but having to literally put ALL my eggs in that one easy to pop basket is completely unacceptable.

You are only turning over 20b a month on 2.5t isk?

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

asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#278 - 2014-04-15 17:41:34 UTC  |  Edited by: asteroidjas
And the station's Office Rent costs at the limited number of research stations is going to skyrocket exponentially. It means all those who have offices in systems with no existing research stations will have to move their office and all their stuff to another system entirely.

Also, this will be a nightmare to be forced to build from blueprints that are in POS's, unless they only have to be in the shield and can be used by any array. How is this going to be addressed?

With all the hassle, it might not even be worth many industrialists to continue to have POS's in HS, since they will have to now shuttle all the materials and blueprints to/from each lab/array if they want to do something different with it.

Slightly good news for some of us who like to bash towers of afk-research-alts, but then, why would any of the AFK research alts even need a tower after this?

edit--

Also, that whole 'one window to rule them all' theme didn't work so well last time you tried it....you sure its a good idea to try it again via "Unified Industry" screen?
Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
#279 - 2014-04-15 17:41:45 UTC
Weaselior wrote:

seriously is there a single time that anyone has ever used sandbox in a post in one of these threads where their post didn't amount to whining that anything could possibly change


Hey, I don't mind. I run a POS standing business - just got into it - but I'm not fussed. All I started out asking somewhere in this mess was "I wonder what their reasoning is." As per usual I know people who are quitting over the reprocessing change if nothing else. I'm sure my friend who runs a R&D business will consider leaving since it is his primary income and now it's not a thing anymore. I'm not going anywhere Blink
gifter Penken
State War Academy
Caldari State
#280 - 2014-04-15 17:44:34 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.



Agreed. Salvage prices have already taken a HUGE nose dive since the creation of noctis and salvage drones. Trit bars down from 130k to 16K. Armor plates down from 300K to 150K. Even tripps have taken a huge hit, though I don't have the exact drop in my head.

I did some playing around with ninja salvaging. Not worth it anymore, unless you are stealing loot on occasion. The loot in one can (like a large weapon and armor mods) is worth more than all the salvage for the entier mission. It should be renamed from ninja-salvage to ninja-looting, as that is the only real money.