These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#841 - 2014-04-16 12:32:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Querns wrote:
I thought of a potential gotcha: Will POS assembly modules also have their slots removed? Will you be able to, e.g., run an infinite number of ammo jobs from a single ammo assembly array?


Yes, slots are being removed on everything, however, cost scaling will still be applicable to Starbases as well. Please wait for the appropriate blog for more details.


Wait, what?!
So what is my incentive to pay 300 000 000 isk a month for fuel if i still have to pay for production slots????
Banko Mato
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#842 - 2014-04-16 12:35:14 UTC
Some of the changes look really nice, a big reduction in the click-fest that (T2) manufacturing currently means is always a good thing. After having only gone through the first half dozen pages of this thread i still wonder, how the hassle of always having the right materials/BPs in the right array will be addressed?

For example, when having 20+ labs/arrays on the pos, the ability to remotely install jobs i for naught, since for every few jobs one would have to be physically present in order to move all the crap from one array into the next one.

Would dropping individual storage space on pos modules in favor of a centralized solution be an option for that expansion? Meaning that the storage space of e.g. the corp hangar array gets multiplied by 10 or something like that (math guys to the front) and all "consuming" arrays/labs on the same pos are linked to it and take the materials they need from that central storage. Or maybe keep individual storage and make it possible to link individual consumers to certain storage modules.

And WTB option to stack freaking BPCs...
Aeonidis
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#843 - 2014-04-16 12:35:18 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Aeonidis wrote:
seriously if that were the case there would be dozens up on the market for every module and ship in the game at any given time. but there aren't, why?
In many cases, because people are bad at maths and don't understand opportunity costs. You don't have to look around much to find BPOs for sale, nor do you have to do much maths to notice that it'll take you half a decade or more to earn them back… and yet people buy them.


That would be a scam not an opportunity cost. If its so easy to sell them for the "cash" opportunity cost how many do you have up for sale atm?

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#844 - 2014-04-16 12:36:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
You really don't see how printing blueprints faster than you can use them is an opportunity for expanding you capacity to manufacture if you employ more slots/alts?
Not in a way that in any way affects how little control they have over the market, no. You are still limited by what the BPO can produce, and that limit will still be much the same as it always was.

Quote:
And no, you will not have any idle time.
You do if you try to speed up the manufacturing by running the copies in parallel.

Quote:
You have 10 blueprint copiers? A new manufacturing alt can be spawned at the end of pictured cycle.
…if you have 10 blueprints. Each blueprint still doesn't produce much more than it did before. The 10% is not enough to overcome the massive volume advantage invention enjoys. If BPOs had 30% of the volume before, they will now have 32%, and that's before we take into account the increased speed of invention.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#845 - 2014-04-16 12:36:34 UTC
Aeonidis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Aeonidis wrote:
your grasping at straws now, anyone who owns a T2BPO has multiplied their "opportunity cost" many times over since the lottery or hasn't played Eve in over half a decade.

Eh, no. The opportunity cost doesn't go away — they still have the opportunity to just turn that BPO into liquid cash. Moreover, many current BPO holders were not around for (or did not win) the lottery and had to buy them later.



seriously if that were the case there would be dozens up on the market for every module and ship in the game at any given time. but there aren't, why? because its more profitable to copy and manufacture from them instead. None of this doesn't change the fact that T2Bpo's are an outdated and broken mechanic that pulls a vast sum of ISK into the hands of a very few players at the expense of the entire marketplace.

There isn't really much point in arguing over what an opportunity cost is or isn't. It's factual. The word means what the word means. You pretending it doesn't has no effect on that. Words don't work that way.

If the T2 BPOs have a value on the open market, which they provably do, then there is an opportunity cost associated with owning them.

Manufacturing from a T2 BPO yields a return on that investment. But that return is small, often less than 1% per month.

It is a trivial task to find a dozen easy ways to generate more than 1% per month on a large amount of isk.

The reason why most people hold T2 BPOs is because their value has tended to increase over time, so they are speculating on future prices. That is the part of the T2 BPO that many cherish and that is exactly the part of the T2 BPO that has no negative effect on invention.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#846 - 2014-04-16 12:37:03 UTC
Max Kolonko wrote:
Wait, what?!
So what is my incentive to pay 300 000 000 isk a month for fuel if i still have to pay for production slots????

Because they're yours and you'll pay lower congestion charges for them than if you join the public pool at the nearby station.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#847 - 2014-04-16 12:40:31 UTC
Aeonidis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Aeonidis wrote:
your grasping at straws now, anyone who owns a T2BPO has multiplied their "opportunity cost" many times over since the lottery or hasn't played Eve in over half a decade.

Eh, no. The opportunity cost doesn't go away — they still have the opportunity to just turn that BPO into liquid cash. Moreover, many current BPO holders were not around for (or did not win) the lottery and had to buy them later.



seriously if that were the case there would be dozens up on the market for every module and ship in the game at any given time. but there aren't, why? because its more profitable to copy and manufacture from them instead. None of this doesn't change the fact that T2Bpo's are an outdated and broken mechanic that pulls a vast sum of ISK into the hands of a very few players at the expense of the entire marketplace.



T2 BPOs currently sell for around 5-10 years of production profit.

Sure, it's capex without depreciation (possibly even increasing in value), but it's not, currently, a particularly good investment. It's just a low effort one.


The reduction of copy times could be a concern for T2 invention, if the T2 BPO copy times are reduced too far. Right now, you can't produce from a T2 BPO in parallel by using copies. So the volume is gated by the number of blueprints.

The scale of the reduction is the important part. As we don't know this, there's not much of a coherent argument, one way or another. Just time for raising of concerns. Not argument over those concerns.

There's a set demand for T2 goods (yes, it varies a bit. I'm simplifying, but not over-simplifying. Reduction in cost would stimulate demand, but this doesn't mean it would then push costs back up to a viable level). If the T2 BPO supply volume is increased significantly (say, each copy only takes a second. Exaggerated for effect), then invention could be squeezed to the point it's not worth it. (See current low volume markets for what happens when T2 BPOs can fulfil the supply.)


Extra materials being removed could be a concern, if extra materials are just pushed into basic materials, and thus affected by ME, if there are no other changes. ME -4 doubles material requirements. So a blueprint requiring a ship (or, say, a 425mm Railgun I), would then require 2, unless a decryptor is used to adjust this. This would massively impact the viability of invention, compared to BPOs.

I'd hope this hasn't gone unnoticed.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#848 - 2014-04-16 12:41:18 UTC
Aeonidis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Aeonidis wrote:
seriously if that were the case there would be dozens up on the market for every module and ship in the game at any given time. but there aren't, why?
In many cases, because people are bad at maths and don't understand opportunity costs. You don't have to look around much to find BPOs for sale, nor do you have to do much maths to notice that it'll take you half a decade or more to earn them back… and yet people buy them.


That would be a scam not an opportunity cost. If its so easy to sell them for the "cash" opportunity cost how many do you have up for sale atm?

1. Open the contracts system.
2. Set Item Category to Blueprint Original.
3. Set "Sort Pages By" to "Price (Highest First)".
4. Buy whichever one you want.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#849 - 2014-04-16 12:41:54 UTC
Aeonidis wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Aeonidis wrote:
your grasping at straws now, anyone who owns a T2BPO has multiplied their "opportunity cost" many times over since the lottery or hasn't played Eve in over half a decade.

Eh, no. The opportunity cost doesn't go away — they still have the opportunity to just turn that BPO into liquid cash. Moreover, many current BPO holders were not around for (or did not win) the lottery and had to buy them later.



seriously if that were the case there would be dozens up on the market for every module and ship in the game at any given time. but there aren't, why? because its more profitable to copy and manufacture from them instead. None of this doesn't change the fact that T2Bpo's are an outdated and broken mechanic that pulls a vast sum of ISK into the hands of a very few players at the expense of the entire marketplace.


Its not more profitable to copy and manufacture by yourself. Either you copy for sale or produce from original.

Copy time as it is currently for t2 bpo is waaay longer than production, so in time it takes you to make enough copies to produce with all yohr slot capabilities you would produ e more one slot at a time
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#850 - 2014-04-16 12:43:53 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Extra materials being removed could be a concern, if extra materials are just pushed into basic materials, and thus affected by ME, if there are no other changes. ME -4 doubles material requirements. So a blueprint requiring a ship (or, say, a 425mm Railgun I), would then require 2, unless a decryptor is used to adjust this. This would massively impact the viability of invention, compared to BPOs.

I'd hope this hasn't gone unnoticed.
Yup. This has by far a higher problem potential than a simple status-quo-maintaining adjustment to BPO copying speeds.
Oberine Noriepa
#851 - 2014-04-16 12:44:54 UTC
That UI mock-up is nice! I think the cost scaling is a great idea. An industry update has been needed! Really looking forward to this summer. Cool

Antihrist Pripravnik
Scorpion Road Industry
#852 - 2014-04-16 12:49:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik
Tippia wrote:


Quote:
None of this doesn't change the fact that T2Bpo's are an outdated and broken mechanic that pulls a vast sum of ISK into the hands of a very few players at the expense of the entire marketplace.

It's not really a fact, though, nor is it any different from how any other manufacturing works.


That's just a troll, to be honest.

For any other manufacturing activity you can obtain needed materials and tools by playing the game and not using the market whatsoever.
T2 BPOs were belonging to that group a long time ago until that feature has been discontinued. You can not under any circumstances obtain T2 BPOs like any other necessary material or tool for any other type of production.

The ONLY exception are NPC SEEDED T1 blueprints that you must buy from the market at a fixed price. They are ALWAYS available to ANYONE who is willing to buy them in an UNLIMITED quantity.

You want T2 blueprints to be the same as any other industry item in the game - then either make them obtainable through gameplay like they were before, which current owners are exploiting (not an "exploit - exploit" in terms of game rule breaking btw) or seed them by NPCs on the market like T1 BPOs are. Until then, yes - they are much different from any other manufacturing activity in the game.

And yes - players that have obtained them by using a discontinued game mechanics HAVE an unfair advantage over all other players simply because of the fact that they are profiting from a game mechanic that is not available to players any more.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#853 - 2014-04-16 12:50:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Medalyn Isis
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Extra materials being removed could be a concern, if extra materials are just pushed into basic materials, and thus affected by ME, if there are no other changes. ME -4 doubles material requirements. So a blueprint requiring a ship (or, say, a 425mm Railgun I), would then require 2, unless a decryptor is used to adjust this. This would massively impact the viability of invention, compared to BPOs.

I'd hope this hasn't gone unnoticed.

Exactly this. I just mentioned this a page back and it went unanswered and unnoticed.

This is one of the biggest change as it will have a dramatic affect on the material cost of many invention items. The only reason I can think people wouldn't be discussing this is because the ones who have noticed are busy buying up the T2 items which are going to be massively affected by this.

ME -4 which is the standard T2 BPC you get from an invention job will be unviable in the new system for many T2 items as it will double the extra material requirement.

In the end it would balance out if supply from T2 BPOs remains constant. Although it means that T2 items in general will increase in price. And T2 BPO holders will be able to make more profit by manufacturing from them.

This could entice more T2 BPO holders to start using them for manufacturing though instead of just as an investment.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#854 - 2014-04-16 12:54:20 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
And yes - players that have obtained them by using a discontinued game mechanics HAVE an unfair advantage over all other players simply because of the fact that they are profiting from a game mechanic that is not available to players any more.

Not really, no. It's just an advantage — one that almost anyone can acquire if they're a bit daft. It is far from an unfair one.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#855 - 2014-04-16 12:55:12 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
And yes - players that have obtained them by using a discontinued game mechanics HAVE an unfair advantage over all other players simply because of the fact that they are profiting from a game mechanic that is not available to players any more.

The mechanic I used to get my T2 BPOs is available to everyone, right now. Even to someone like you.

I even gave you clear, step by step instructions.
Antihrist Pripravnik
Scorpion Road Industry
#856 - 2014-04-16 12:57:10 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
And yes - players that have obtained them by using a discontinued game mechanics HAVE an unfair advantage over all other players simply because of the fact that they are profiting from a game mechanic that is not available to players any more.

Not really, no. It's just an advantage — one that almost anyone can acquire if they're a bit daft. It is far from an unfair one.


Until there is a possibility to obtain T2 BPOs like there was before, the unfair advantage will always be there. You can play with words and semantics, but this fact remains.
Gynax Gallenor
Conquering Darkness
#857 - 2014-04-16 13:03:27 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Extra materials being removed could be a concern, if extra materials are just pushed into basic materials, and thus affected by ME, if there are no other changes. ME -4 doubles material requirements. So a blueprint requiring a ship (or, say, a 425mm Railgun I), would then require 2, unless a decryptor is used to adjust this. This would massively impact the viability of invention, compared to BPOs.

I'd hope this hasn't gone unnoticed.


I think you got your arithmetic slightly wrong there Steve.

ME -4 gives 50% waste, not 100%, so it doesn't double the materials required.

To use your specific requirement, you would then need 1.5 of the T1 item, which gets rounded to 1 doesn't it? (I have it in my head that decimals are always rounded down, but I could be wrong about that)

Best of luck with the CSM vote BTW.

Fly Reckless, cos flying safe is no damn fun!

http://flyreckless.com/newsite/

Aeonidis
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#858 - 2014-04-16 13:04:37 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Extra materials being removed could be a concern, if extra materials are just pushed into basic materials, and thus affected by ME, if there are no other changes. ME -4 doubles material requirements. So a blueprint requiring a ship (or, say, a 425mm Railgun I), would then require 2, unless a decryptor is used to adjust this. This would massively impact the viability of invention, compared to BPOs.

I'd hope this hasn't gone unnoticed.

Exactly this. I just mentioned this a page back and it went unanswered and unnoticed.

This is one of the biggest change as it will have a dramatic affect on the material cost of many invention items. The only reason I can think people wouldn't be discussing this is because the ones who have noticed are busy buying up the T2 items which are going to be massively affected by this.

ME -4 which is the standard T2 BPC you get from an invention job will be unviable in the new system for many T2 items as it will double the extra material requirement.

In the end it would balance out if supply from T2 BPOs remains constant. Although it means that T2 items in general will increase in price. And T2 BPO holders will be able to make more profit by manufacturing from them.

This could entice more T2 BPO holders to start using them for manufacturing though instead of just as an investment.


Although this should have been addressed the second CCP decided to push extra materials up I would not put it past them to have not considered it. If they intend to do that they might as well just remove invention from the game as it will no longer be viable gameplay. btw I noticed your previous post and liked it as well. From what I can tell this game has gotten so convoluted over the years that, now, when the Devs are set to push a major expansion such as this they release the blogs first so that we as players can help them cover all the little things they missed. This was a good catch on your part, bravo.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#859 - 2014-04-16 13:05:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Until there is a possibility to obtain T2 BPOs like there was before, the unfair advantage will always be there. You can play with words and semantics, but this fact remains.

The fact is that it's not unfair. It is available to anyone who wants to (stupidly) throw their money at such a low-ROI investment.

Moreover, any advantage BPOs offer can be countered by the many advantages invention offer. Like Akita T said, it offers an advantage, but that does not mean that the advantage is insurmountable or unfair or in any way out of whack with what other advantages you can buy yourself. The fact is that among the many advantages available to industrialists, it's a pretty bad one to have on the scale of things.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#860 - 2014-04-16 13:08:51 UTC
Gynax Gallenor wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Extra materials being removed could be a concern, if extra materials are just pushed into basic materials, and thus affected by ME, if there are no other changes. ME -4 doubles material requirements. So a blueprint requiring a ship (or, say, a 425mm Railgun I), would then require 2, unless a decryptor is used to adjust this. This would massively impact the viability of invention, compared to BPOs.

I'd hope this hasn't gone unnoticed.


I think you got your arithmetic slightly wrong there Steve.

ME -4 gives 50% waste, not 100%, so it doesn't double the materials required.

To use your specific requirement, you would then need 1.5 of the T1 item, which gets rounded to 1 doesn't it? (I have it in my head that decimals are always rounded down, but I could be wrong about that)

Best of luck with the CSM vote BTW.



bah. yes. 50%. But iirc, that rounds up. (I'm seeing other things rounding it up. It's possible this is an artefact of my calculator. I'll have to double check it in game. Expanded CargoHold II's are showing 2 Nocx in their base materials at ME -4)


Extra materials and ME could be very significant with T2.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter