These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Researching, the Future

First post First post First post
Author
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#461 - 2014-04-29 09:10:39 UTC
Instead of changing run times on BPC's etc why not build in a plant line concept. You set up the manufacturing line and point it to where the materials required are including the BPC's, define the job then set it running. The plant line then runs the defined job until it runs out of BPC's or other materials. Could be simpler than changing and potentially unbalancing the BPC run counts and the invention process that determines how many runs a BPC has for a given invention run
Rek Seven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#462 - 2014-04-29 09:17:04 UTC
In the industry update, will we be able to select multiple BPC to run several invention jobs at once or will we still have to run each job individually?

If it's going to stay the same as it is now, you are doing it wrong CCP. There is no gameplay benefit to the current system and all it does is induce tedium and repetitive strain injury on the player base.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#463 - 2014-04-29 09:26:25 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
I have a Charon BPO at ME 9. Perfect is ME 19.

If I research them to ME 10 now they'll be upgraded to ME 10%.

The people that spent twice as long researching are penalized GREATLY.

Check your maths CCP.

Have a look at my suggestion.
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:

I do think, it should be possible to partially research BPOs between levels (I get the impression this will not be possible). That way players can research a hefty BPO in stages, and also means that players can have there BPOs put between ME levels when this BPO change occurs.

Yeah, I wouldn't mind partial research being saved so you can do it in bits - it would give you the ability to stick something in research for bpo downtimes without having to commit to, say, an entire years worth of research on your titan bpo.

Imo they should do it on a percentage basis.

So for example, if my BPO is level 4 and I want it to 5, that will in total take 30 days to research. If I want to research for just 20 days, then using the interface I can set it to research to 66% of the next level, and the interface will automatically calculate that it will take just under 20 days.

Not sure if that will be easy to programme in, but I think something like that is much needed.

This way after the changes BPOs could be set to be in a much more accurate state compared to their current level of research. Taking the ME10 as an example, it would be set to at around 10% between level 9 and 10.
Joshua Blue
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#464 - 2014-04-29 09:29:35 UTC
Apologies if someone else has already suggested this.

Instead of trying to convert individual BPOs, refund people's time as "BP Points" equal to how how much time has been spent on researching that bpo to date, on both PE and ME

Convert existing BPOs to be zero researched

Then allow people to apply those "BP points" to any BPOs, on either TE or ME.

If you're feeling adventurous, allow BP points to be traded on the market, and let the market deal with it.

I think this'll save you a lot of bother.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#465 - 2014-04-29 09:49:05 UTC
Joshua Blue wrote:
Apologies if someone else has already suggested this.

Instead of trying to convert individual BPOs, refund people's time as "BP Points" equal to how how much time has been spent on researching that bpo to date, on both PE and ME

Convert existing BPOs to be zero researched

Then allow people to apply those "BP points" to any BPOs, on either TE or ME.

If you're feeling adventurous, allow BP points to be traded on the market, and let the market deal with it.

I think this'll save you a lot of bother.

It has already been explained why this will be a bad idea in the thread.
Lord Echon
Star-Crossed Enterprises
#466 - 2014-04-29 09:50:41 UTC
The new ME and TE system looks great. I always appreciate when things become more logical (which is certainly not the same as more simple or dumped down).
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#467 - 2014-04-29 09:51:57 UTC
Sabriz Adoudel wrote:
Feedback:


- Generally I prefer the proposed system to the present one.

- Currently you are focusing on preserving present levels of material waste rather than preserving present levels of research time invested into blueprints. I think this is the wrong approach.

Take a BS BPO (research time to perfect under new system: 15360000 seconds, to make the maths easier I will call this 180 days although it's actually a bit more)

The present time required to research this to level 10 is 3600000 seconds = 41 days 16 hours.

In short it is much, much more efficient to do the research to level 10 now, and people who join the game later will wind up needing to invest more time into their blueprints to even come close to competing.

The alternative is the following:

- Current BPO level 0: 0 time invested, becomes level 0
- Current BPO level 1: Current time invested 6000 seconds per level of the BPO, becomes level 5 or 6 (depending upon rounding)
- Current BPO level 2-3: 12000-18000s/level invested, becomes level 6 or 7 (depending on rounding)
- Current BPO level 4-7: Becomes level 7 or 8 (rounding)
- Current BPO level 8-17: Becomes level 8 or 9 (rounding)
- Current BPO level 18-42: Becomes level 9 or 10 (rounding)
- Current BPO level 43 or higher: Becomes level 10 regardless of rounding (as this has more time invested in research than is required to hit level 10 under the new system)

As for which way to round - I don't care, just be consistent and transparent.

This approach ensures that future EVE players are on a reasonably level playing field to existing ones.

Personal interest statement: I personally would be better off under the original Dev Blog as I have a significant number of medium-value BPOs (cruisers, battlecruisers, etc) that are researched to levels that will really benefit from the proposed change (6 or so Vexor BPOs researched to 12-24 ME, etc) and only one BPO of significant value that is massively overresearched under this proposed change (an ME 67 Talos BPO). I do also hold a fair number of module BPOs that will be significantly over-researched under the changes (such as ME 150+ 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plate I BPOs) but they are much less of my overall wealth.



- The copying issue

As stated this will have a big impact on those markets where the mistake that is T2 BPOs are a significant percentage of overall production, particularly non-Damnation/Sleipnir Command Ships and almost all of the T2 EWAR ships. Any increase to T2 BPO throughput should be nipped in the bud by having T2 BPOs take 200-250% as long to copy from as to produce from (all BPOs that are still available in the game should stick to the proposed 100%).

- Personal interest: I own no T2 BPOs and run large numbers of invention jobs, largely avoiding the markets I perceive BPOs to have a significant effect on and totally avoiding the markets I perceive them to dominate.


The concern we have with the constant-time solution is that a lot of people's blueprints will get worse (stats-wise) after the change, which seemed like a bigger source of anger than people losing time but getting better blueprints in the process.

And yeah, I think we may revisit T2 BPO copy times

DK Anaroth wrote:
Rather than worrying about getting the perfect ME baseline values to match what they were before the change, I think it makes more sense to worry about the low ME values.

As it stands with a 10/9 multiplier on the materials, the values for a "baseline" ME 0 blueprint will be going up by a 1/99 before the funky rounding. Why not just call the current ME 0 requirements the new baseline values (so have a increase of 10% to give the new baseline) . For ME > 1, you're going to have to find the appropriate match anyway no matter what the baseline adjustment is.

Assuming negative ME values correspond to -10xthe value in the new system, invention material costs may go up a bit. A ME -4 blueprint corresponded to a 150% multiplier under the old system, and would be at -40% ME under the new system about 10/9*1.4 = 155.56% which is likely to lead to increased material costs for inventors. With my 10% baseline change this would be 154% which is a bit better. Of course you can customise the percentages for each decryptor, but they would look a little funny.
Maybe it's time to remove some of the material advantages that the T2 BPOs and BPCs have over the invented copies.




If we use current ME0 as the baseline, we end up reducing the build costs of everything at perfect ME, because 1.1*0.9 = 0.99. It's not a big change, to be sure, but it didn't seem optimal.

Ming The Merciless wrote:
[quote=MailDeadDrop]
Please have a look at the number of stations with laboratory facilities versus the number of stations with manufacturing facilities. They are severely imbalanced in some regions (perhaps all).

And dismissing the problem as "oh, you'll just have to fly around some more" doesn't give me confidence that you've thought the changes through. For example, copying corporate blueprints means you'll need to have an office in the station with the laboratory facilities. Possibly several new offices if you have to use a variety of laboratory services to react to congestion pricing. And corporate blueprints are frequently locked down. Do you begin to see how this is perhaps a problem?

The demand for copy facilities is going to increase, and that is intended. But if you don't look at increasing the number of copy facilities, the demand for offices in stations which have copy facilities is *also* going to increase. And you haven't said you're going to remove office slots, like you're removing copy slots. So I don't have confidence that this aspect has been noticed and examined by CCP. Please look at it.

MDD


Quoting to get a Dev response to MDD(Greyscale is likely sleeping, he sleeps right?). 24 Offices per station, somewhere...
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#468 - 2014-04-29 09:54:04 UTC
Sigras wrote:
First of all, I have to say I respect what you're trying to do, and I understand why you're trying to do it, but I can also understand people's frustrations as they are either going to feel cheated, or theyre going to feel as though someone else got something for free.

Have you considered your system may just not have enough granularity to it? I imagine you've considered it at least a little bit because you chose a 10 level system instead of a 5 level system like the skills have even though you're modeling it after skills.

What you're essentially trying to do is take a system with 1000 levels and squash it down to a system with 10 levels and keep everyone using the system currently at the same place... This seems to be an almost insurmountable task.

I suggest you move from a 10 level system to a 100 level system. This is very simple and very relate-able, and it also allows you to move research along in increments of 0.1% because in industry 1% is a HUGE FREAKING DEAL. In PvP 1% does make a difference but rarely is it going to be the difference between life and death, but in industry, everything is a numbers game; there's no skill or "getting better" here. Everything in industry comes down to the math and getting rounded up to the nearest percent is completely unfathomable because it is such a big deal. Even 0.1% is a big deal, but it is the most reasonable number I could come up with.

This would allow you to round ME levels to the nearest 0.1%, so
OLD --> New
ME 0 = ME 0
ME 1 = ME 50
ME 4 = ME 80
ME 9 = ME 90
ME 20 = ME 95
ME 100 = ME 99
ME 222 = ME 100

You still have a few problems like the fact that researching from level 99 to level 100 would take like a year for some BPOs and nobody is willing to research their BPO for that long, but I think this system would be much better and leave people feeling much less ripped off.

I also want to put my vote in here for a time equivalent BPO conversion as the argument is that you spent X time researching this BPO, and you got X time with the new system, you lost nothing and you're still where everyone else is who researched for X time.

Also all of the above aside, I want to state that I thought the old system where you asymptotically approach perfect but never quite get there was better because you could spend years trying to get several of the BPOs to perfect if you really wanted to specialize.

Thoughts?

This could work also. I definitely think 10 levels are not enough, 100 levels would be a much better figure.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#469 - 2014-04-29 09:56:58 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Greyscale
ergherhdfgh wrote:

I've got to be missing something here. It seems to me you have selected the most complicated way to "simplify" this system. The old way was less complex than what you are doing here.

This could have been a **** ton simpler if you would have just said that you are changing the way ME is figured and instead of getting half the distance closer to perfect with each ME now it will just reduce by a fixed percent with 10 ME being perfect and we are removing the term "wasteage factor" from the info tab.

It sounds to me like that is exactly what you are doing but just decided to take 20 steps to get there. I mean seriously you are taking **** out just so you can add it back in just so you can take it back out just to wind up back exactly where you were.

This dev blog could have been as simple as:
" hey guys we are changing the way ME is figured now ME 10 is perfect and here's the new scale:
ME1 = 1%
ME2 = 2%
ME3 = 3%
ME4 = 4%
ME5 = 5%
ME6 = 6%
ME7 = 7%
ME8 = 8%
ME9 = 9%
ME10 = 10 %
Thanks hand have a nice day. "




Problems with this:
- If the table you're suggesting is the old->new translation, a bunch of people get screwed because their blueprints just got way worse (ME5 currently gives a 5% reduction)
- Without changing the base build costs at all, this means a 10% reduction in all build costs because we're no longer using waste
- If we do change the base build costs to current base+waste, all build costs decrease by 1% at max ME; not a huge issue but it's changing the balance math

The reason the changeover is complex is because the current system is complex, and we need to jump through a bunch of hoops to force it into a simpler system without messing with the balance too much.

Magic Crisp wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Magic Crisp wrote:
Regarding the maxruns, please do NOT change the current effective limits on BPOs. Currently we can install unlimited number of jobs from maxrun BPOs as far as it fits into 30d. If you don't know why, then think of things like nanite pastes. maxrun is 15, producers are manufacturing them in batches of multiple thousands. If you still fail to see this, please try to manufacture 10K runs of nanite paste per week, using 15run jobs.

Please take extreme care on whatever you ruin.


Can you explain more clearly what a bad change would be here? I think I understand the situation you're describing but I'm not sure what the thing you're worried about is. Would kicking the maxruns number up be a bad thing?



First, thank you for answering and caring.

To be honest the best would to keep it as it is now. That is, not enforcing maxrun limits when manufacturing from BPOs, the only time constraint is the 30d limit. Kicking maxruns is a nasty workaround. Usually builds from BPOs happen when maxruns way too small compared to the amount of product required. Such things are like the above said pastes, capital and supoercapital manufacturing, tech2 construction part manufacturing, most importantly.

Bumping maxruns would require going from the current 5-ish to like 1K or so. Having limits on BPCs is okey, even bumping them bigtime to support building from BPCs. Building from BPOs allow us to ignore the maxrun limits and install longer times.

So the tradeoff is something like:
using BPCs: shortening total manufacturing time by parallel builds
using BPOs: avoid vasting slots, manufacturing shittons of items in a single job.

So, multiple BPCs can be used to speed things up, or a single BPO can be used when time doesn't really matter.

And in a few particular case, like the nanite paste, currently it requires cycling jobs every 10-ish minutes when using BPCs, for a complete day or so.

Math, for nanite paste: to manufacture 4500 runs, with the current 15 maxrun limit. that'd be 300 jobs, let's say a toon has 10 slots for easier math. That'd be 30 cycling of the jobs, with a 10 minute manufacturing time it'd take 5 hours. Instead of this, people just take the BPO insert a 4500 run job, and forget about it for a week. Less hassle, less pain, more real life, less pain in the fingers.

I hope this explained the current usecases, their reasons and what we would prefer to avoid hassles with the new system. If not please ask and i'll try to explain some points with more details.


Excellent, thanks :) If I have further questions I'll reply later :)

[quote=Muninn Ogeko]First of all, I'd like to say that I like how much more intuitive this system will be for new players.

Any chance of matching research times on ME 10 blueprints before and after the changeover? With the current dev blog suggestions, the time to get ME 10 for new players will be ~4.27x the amount that was required for existing players.

If you've spent the last 4-5 years (6 years,7 months unskilled) researching a titan blueprint's ME, after the change you will have a blueprint that a new player will need 21 years (28 years unskilled) to match. For the same 4-5 year investment, they can get a blueprint that is 2% less efficient. For smaller items, while the gap is less extreme, it is still the same ratio. Obviously, people are unlikely to care much in the case of ammunition, where 3 days is nothing, but for capital components or even battleships, it's a big deal.

I worry about changes that consolidate more power in the hands of those that already have it, and prevent new players from competing on a level playing field.

If you set the research time for rank 1 ME 10 to be 60000 instead of 256000 (and scaled the other costs down accordingly), you will have the same time to research ME 10 blueprints before and after the change (though you may be attached to the 256000 number for its obvious link to skill costs). You could also set the rank to be based on the current research time divided by 25600 instead of by 6000 (which lets you keep the 256000 seconds for rank 1 ME 10, but means that a lot of...
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#470 - 2014-04-29 10:00:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Medalyn Isis
CCP Greyscale wrote:
reply

Greyscale, I have two major issues of concern with these changes.

The first you have already addressed, in regards to the T2 BPC copy time and further proliferation into T2 Invention markets. If anything, my opinion is T2 BPOs need to be nerfed, and certainly not buffed. It is not fun finding out a lot of markets for certain items are simply out of your reach when it comes to efficient T2 manufacturing if you don't have the T2 BPO.

The second thing, this issue with only 10 levels is far to much of a blanket approach. Did you consider increasing the level count to perhaps 100 instead of 10 as mentioned. This would allow for current BPOs to be much more accurately represented in the new system, which seem to be a source of much pain with this current 10 level blanket approach you are taking. And also, researching thing from level 9 to 10 could mean a BPO and research slot is locked up for years. Making this a 100 level system would massively alleviate this and make a lot more sense.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#471 - 2014-04-29 10:06:45 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
If ME 10 in the old system is not equivalent to ME 10% in the new system when why are ME 10s being turned into ME 10%s.

Because we're being incredibly generous and rounding up in all cases, with the goal that no blueprint gets *worse* as a result of the transition.

I agree, no BPO should be worse, but that is like you say incredibly generous. With a 100 level system, this would not be so pronounced. As being generous to some is still going to be a big nerf to others.

If everyone was given level 5 skill in all gunnery skills, no one would be worse off, but the amount of tears would be enough to fill an ocean.

I see where you are coming from with not wanting to make anyones BPO worse, but I think this approach is wrong in this instance as it is being a little too generous.
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
Parasitic Legion.
#472 - 2014-04-29 10:11:47 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
If ME 10 in the old system is not equivalent to ME 10% in the new system when why are ME 10s being turned into ME 10%s.

Because we're being incredibly generous and rounding up in all cases, with the goal that no blueprint gets *worse* as a result of the transition.

I agree, no BPO should be worse, but that is like you say incredibly generous. With a 100 level system, this would not be so pronounced. As being generous to some is still going to be a big nerf to others.

If everyone was given level 5 skill in all gunnery skills, no one would be worse off, but the amount of tears would be enough to fill an ocean.

I see where you are coming from with not wanting to make anyones BPO worse, but I think this approach is wrong in this instance as it is being a little too generous.

If they went to a 100 point system they could measure "waste" in the 0.X% again. They could keep the reduced research times by dividing the presented stats by 10, then only problem with that is it would take seconds to go from ME0 to ME1

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Yuki Kasumi
Some names are just stupid
#473 - 2014-04-29 10:17:06 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


Yuki Kasumi wrote:
I'm trying to determine comparable levels of research before and after patch and came up with the following, is this correct?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AdDnVTuqXiEqcZF7nb0JXt_dXRYE6lMaJ6Fcnp1qLQU/edit#gid=0


No, we're rounding generously :) In Excel it'd be Floor() rather than Round(), IDK exactly if that works in google docs.





Thank you for clarifying CCP Greyscale. I have updated the spreadsheet to reflect this, using floor instead rounding.
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#474 - 2014-04-29 10:30:07 UTC
At least one good thing came from me reading this devblog. It got me to check if I had any blueprints and I found a secure container with about 200 researched BPOs, that I didn't recall owning. The changes in general look positive. The current system is many things, but user friendly isn't one of them.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#475 - 2014-04-29 10:51:16 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Greyscale
Medalyn Isis wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
reply

Greyscale, I have two major issues of concern with these changes.

The first you have already addressed, in regards to the T2 BPC copy time and further proliferation into T2 Invention markets. If anything, my opinion is T2 BPOs need to be nerfed, and certainly not buffed. It is not fun finding out a lot of markets for certain items are simply out of your reach when it comes to efficient T2 manufacturing if you don't have the T2 BPO.

The second thing, this issue with only 10 levels is far to much of a blanket approach. Did you consider increasing the level count to perhaps 100 instead of 10 as mentioned. This would allow for current BPOs to be much more accurately represented in the new system, which seem to be a source of much pain with this current 10 level blanket approach you are taking. And also, researching thing from level 9 to 10 could mean a BPO and research slot is locked up for years. Making this a 100 level system would massively alleviate this and make a lot more sense.


Yes, we did talk about it, and it does result in a nicer mapping from old to new. We'd generally prefer not to, though, as a) it's also preserving some of the complexity of the old system (not by much, granted, but simpler = better all other things being equal), and b) honestly it looks much cleaner in the UI just showing whole numbers. It's still a pretty easy thing to switch back mechanically, so we might revisit before release.

Yuki Kasumi wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:


Yuki Kasumi wrote:
I'm trying to determine comparable levels of research before and after patch and came up with the following, is this correct?

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AdDnVTuqXiEqcZF7nb0JXt_dXRYE6lMaJ6Fcnp1qLQU/edit#gid=0


No, we're rounding generously :) In Excel it'd be Floor() rather than Round(), IDK exactly if that works in google docs.





Thank you for clarifying CCP Greyscale. I have updated the spreadsheet to reflect this, using floor instead rounding.


Looks good. I actually screwed this up in one of my internal docs, had the numbers too low - comparing your data to mine made me realise the mistake, so I fixed it. Thanks :)

Destination SkillQueue wrote:
At least one good thing came from me reading this devblog. It got me to check if I had any blueprints and I found a secure container with about 200 researched BPOs, that I didn't recall owning. The changes in general look positive. The current system is many things, but user friendly isn't one of them.


Happy to help :)
Basil Vulpine
Blueprint Haus
Blades of Grass
#476 - 2014-04-29 10:56:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Basil Vulpine
In being generous to current BPO owners you are raising an incredible barrier for entry in several markets. The value of ME10 BPOs is going to skyrocket as things currently stand.
People with researched BPOs currently have already benefited from them in whatever way they currently use them. They have time now to try and adjust for what things will look like after the patch.

Please however you scale the research times when you do the conversion just calculate research time currently invested in to the BPO and then apply that to the new BPO. Round up if you feel you must. It's the only thing that will make the long term balance reasonably fair. Given some of the extremely long new "perfect" research times it also means you cut down on the number of people with over researched BPOs and so reduces that problem. Sure I may now suddenly have more waste when I'm building things but so does everybody else who was as deeply invested as I am.

If you are going to adjust by having the waste %ages be about the same before and after then round towards a bit of extra waste because again the new ME10 is going to be too easy to reach by rounding error compared to the research times now and later.

If you don't go with being reasonable then you also need to look at the edge cases where people are actually going to have more waste after patch than before which is mostly the capital ship hulls.

Using a Moros as an example, currently if I have a BPO at ME6 then I have no wasted capital components when I build the hull.
After the expansion I will have an ME6 BPO still which we'll call a 4% waste. Any component that has more than 25 parts in the current "perfect" amount will therefore have 1 unit of waste. That's 6 different cap comps.

If you are going to be generous to some people then you are going to be unfair to others, be it current losers or future generations who arrive to the game later. You are expecting new players still I assume. People will cry regardless of how you change things, do a proper long term fix, not something half ass in the hopes you'll get less roasting on the forums. You'll just get a different roasting.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#477 - 2014-04-29 10:58:12 UTC
Basil Vulpine wrote:
In being generous to current BPO owners you are raising an incredible barrier for entry in several markets. The value of ME10 BPOs is going to skyrocket as things currently stand.
People with researched BPOs currently have already benefited from them in whatever way they currently use them. They have time now to try and adjust for what things will look like after the patch.

Please however you scale the research times when you do the conversion just calculate research time currently invested in to the BPO and then apply that to the new BPO. Round up if you feel you must. It's the only thing that will make the long term balance reasonably fair. Given some of the extremely long new "perfect" research times it also means you cut down on the number of people with over researched BPOs and so reduces that problem.

If you are going to adjust by having the waste %ages be about the same before and after then round towards a bit of extra waste because again the new ME10 is going to be too easy to reach by rounding error compared to the research times now and later.

If you don't go with being reasonable then you also need to look at the edge cases where people are actually going to have more waste after patch than before which is mostly the capital ship hulls.

Using a Moros as an example, currently if I have a BPO at ME6 then I have no wasted capital components when I build the hull.
After the expansion I will have an ME6 BPO still which we'll call a 4% waste. Any component that has more than 25 parts in the current "perfect" amount will therefore have 1 unit of waste. That's 6 different cap comps.

If you are going to be generous to some people then you are going to be unfair to others, be it current losers or future generations who arrive to the game later. You are expecting new players still I assume. People will cry regardless of how you change things, do a proper long term fix, not something half ass in the hopes you'll get less roasting on the forums. You'll just get a different roasting.


If you have an ME 6 BPO now you will have an ME 9% BPO after the change.
Nicole Hastings
Caldari Research Corporation
#478 - 2014-04-29 11:06:15 UTC
I think I understand how this is meant to work, but I believe some of the confusion is how the conversion from old ME to new ME was explained in the devblog.

Can someone verify my math?

If I have a blueprint with 3.3% waste at ME3 currently (numbers are made up), I will end up with a ME7 blueprint after the patch? 10% base waste - 3.3% = 6.7% waste reduction = ME7 rounded up.

Am I doing this right? If so I guess this change is alright. I agree with the cries for more data before the patch though; I'm sure we're all going to have a lot of spreadsheet editing to do.
Midori Tsu
Evolution
Northern Coalition.
#479 - 2014-04-29 11:09:22 UTC
I'd prefer a 100 level system from the get go.
Cultural Enrichment
Jenkem Puffing Association
#480 - 2014-04-29 11:11:41 UTC
I'm not sure this has been answered yet:
if I start a research job from, say, 0 to 1 ME before the patch hits, will I deliver a 1 ME BPO or a 5 ME BPO?