These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: The Price of Change

First post First post
Author
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#381 - 2014-04-29 19:46:18 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Sentient Blade wrote:
That's going to be a massive ISK sink.


Well Dr Ejyo is behind all of this. He knows ISK oversupply is very bad and EvE's economy needed a big overhaul to deal with that oversupply.

My vodoo senses tell me that he'll even talk at Fanfest about how he is one of the "drivers" behind the new ISK sinks.



I do not think this will work to fight ISK expansion. It is taking ISK from the wrong people.

The little guys that buy lots of ships and mods will just have to grind more to get the ISK to buy sutff, to take that extra ISK right back out of the economy.

The big ISk collects into the wallets of a few, very rich and powerful corps/alliances.

This does nothing to counter that trade imbalance that flows money into their hands.


For the same reason that only a highly progressive income tax code with lots of deductions for spending is the only way we have found to fight widening wealth disparity real life, it would take something like a wallet tax to stop the pooling of ever more ISK into the hands of the few in EVE.
virm pasuul
Academy of the Unseen Arts
The Potato Alliance
#382 - 2014-04-29 19:49:34 UTC
and you want space communism instead?

It's a space game where you pay the iron price. If you want what the rich folk have go take it from them!
Aryth
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#383 - 2014-04-29 19:50:41 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Gabriel Z wrote:
I'm a little confused about something in the dev blog.

Quote:
Every station in a system has two facility multipliers -- one for manufacturing and one for research -- and the system's various multipliers are all multiplied together and then multiplied with the price.


This seems to imply that whether a station has factory or research facilities or not, it's part of the calculation. Is that correct? Also, are they still going to have stations with the research/factory designation? Does "no slots" mean that ANY station can be used and there is no such thing a system that has a station but not industry abilities?


Yes, yes, no.

Sturmwolke wrote:
I just want to mention two things, to get this on the table.

NPC alt exploit - The formula atm does not distinguish player corp and NPC corp*. There's still a few missing pieces, will this be addresed in those?
*NPC corp manufacturing doesn't require a corp office.

Office rental griefing - With current maximum 24 offices per station and no cap to office rental, the possibility of griefing an entire solar system is high. You can either flood the station with multiple alt corps or tap a finishing touch to the last 2-3 office slots. With near unlimited isk, this can be turned into long term harassment tool, rendering a system into scorched earth for manufacturing and research activities. As with MIMAF, there will always be players who won't include the amortized monthly rental into their costs calculations.


Yes, someone with unlimited ISK to throw at a particular system has the ability to cause a huge mess with office slots. We want to take another look at the office slot system at some point, but at the same time the ability to burn huge amounts of cash on economic warfare is not entirely a negative thing.

Weaselior wrote:
Can we get current total job hours for each type of job that has the cost scaling applied to it, so we can do math about "lets say our system gets X builds, will we need a second station upgraded or is one good for now" patch planning?


As in, total global hours for each activity type?



One of the things I do the most is think of evil plans. There actually was a plan we called the "Nuke" that is being removed with these changes. Obviously it was only in the case we declared war on CCP itself and by extension their revenue stream but its nice to know even CCP probably would have a good laugh first.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Liner Xiandra
Sparks Inc
#384 - 2014-04-29 19:59:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Liner Xiandra
After reading most of the posts here, I'm not convinced that the produced_item_baseprice is a sensible measure to calculate productioncosts which are already subject to variation because of both people and station landscape.

Can't the baseprice be replaced by NPC corp/faction standings? (tied to a fixed baseprice?)
- Hisec: high corp / faction standings required to bring baseprice down
- FW lowsec: same as hisec (cant let spies run wild in your warzone ;))
- lowsec: lowered standing requirement (throw them a bone) compared to hisec
- NPC nullsec baseprice based on pirate standings. (hmm, maybe rather corp than faction)
- nullsec baseprice based on alliance standings. (eg. blues produce for less compared to neutrals or reds)

This standing mechanic is currently thrown out with the bathwater and I feel that just picking up your stuff and move 3 systems to get a better price makes the game more bland in general.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#385 - 2014-04-29 20:05:06 UTC  |  Edited by: LHA Tarawa
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Correction: 2% of product value, not of BPO value. Any work where the output is a Covetor BP (original or copy) will be keyed to 2% of the price of a Covetor.


A covetor costs ~30m isk. 2% of 30m is 600k.

I currently value the production cost of a Covetor BPC at 115k isk.


I had to go back and reread the blog to make sure I understood. I think people are missing something on copy cost, or I am adding something in.


Manufacture: Price of item * cost % (let's go with 14%) = cost

Copy: Price of item bp produces * 0.2 = "value" of BPC produced. That value * cost % = cost.


So, if a covetor is 30M, then the BPC would be valued at 600K, and then the cost multiplier is applied to that.

60M * 0.02 * 0.14 = 168K

Adding the 168K to the price of the ship,

If you are doing the copy at a POS in a low use system with only 1% flored tax.

60M * 0.02 * 0.01 = 15.6K for the copy



The ramification is that if I am doing the copies in a POS at a rarely used system with 1% tax, I can crank out copies for 1/14th the cost of making copies in station.

In a worst case, where I'm getting 4% on POS and you're getting 11% in station, I'm making copies at 1/3rd the cost of making copies in station.

I stand by my belief that there will be a lot of 1-player alt corps with a very hardened, large, high-sec POS, and an alt-login/logout hell to deliver and re-start copy jobs.
Korthan Doshu
Doomheim
#386 - 2014-04-29 20:11:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Korthan Doshu
"CCP Greyscale" wrote:
We are totally open to suggestions for what to do with starbases as they relate to industry. In particular, if anyone who does starbase work can spend a few minutes outlining the *simplest* changes they think would be sufficient to keep starbases in a reasonable place for this release, we're very interested in hearing them. Yes, we know "throw it out and start over" would be great, but we're not getting that done between now and the summer release, no matter how much we'd like to.


[EDIT: TLDR -> Scale costs based on jobs in an array rather than counting arrays. You can get people to use more arrays more easily and naturally that way without upsetting the status quo too much or putting too much of a burden on your servers.]

Having multiple assembly arrays or laboratories in one POS only makes sense in a world of slots. It rests on the idea that players shouldn't be able to set up one POS and run an infinite number of character jobs out of it. There is an assumption here that it should not be the same logistical feat to have one or twenty people doing industry out of a starbase. The system-wide congestion numbers won't capture this limitation because it takes a much larger number of character jobs to meaningfully impact costs than one player or group will likely be able to bring to bear. The current system is cool because it says one or a small group of players can optimally live in one starbase and, if they get too big, they have to get another starbase. But usually you need multiple characters to get a lot of use out of a starbase; it's a great mechanic. In other words, starbases aren't a fixed cost; they're a step-variable cost because of slots and fuel. The stap-variable cost nature of starbase production is also cool because you have to make decisions about how to budget CPU among defense and production.

Introducing minor bonuses to having multiple arrays in one starbase won't allow industry players in highsec--whether a small corporation or a single player with a few characters--to have this happy compromise of step-variable costs. Essentially, if the bonuses are too minor (or you don't implement them) they'll be able to run an infinite amount of characters out of one starbase. A five person alt corp will need the same number of arrays as a fifty person corporation. I can only see this as moving the ball toward groups that can run a larger and larger volume through starbases. If the bonuses just add a multiplier to the congestion costs (as with outpost upgrades), players running a large enough number of jobs will just lump as many arrays of a particular kind in one starbase as possible, do the same for the next one, etc. (So you'd have to have one POS for all labs, another for all assembly arrays for one product, etc.) No matter what you do, you're fundamentally changing the step-variable nature of starbase costs into fixed (if repeating) costs. Either you can get the volume to justify the expenditure or not.

I don't know if that is necessarily a bad thing, but I do wonder whether this would be an unintended consequence of this change. I think the status quo of step-variable costs favoring only having a small number of industrial characters in each starbase is something that should only be upset if you have a good reason. If you don't, I would consider reintroducing slots in starbases through a back door (until you have a better solution later). Essentially, for every job beyond a certain number at an array, there should be a cost increase that eventually requires you to use another array. In other words, you need a congestion tax for /each array/ that counts the jobs /going right now, at that array/. If you get the formula just right, you can keep the step-variable nature of starbase costs in the production chain and give room for bonusing unique arrays (their congestion costs ramp up less quickly).

This proposal may also have computation benefits. The bonus from having multiple arrays comes from costs internal to each array individually; presumably you can rather easily count the number of jobs already installed at an array /right now/. You don't have to count the arrays at the starbase, average them over time, etc. Further, I think this proposal may be the least earth-shattering change that you can do before a real, thought-out POS revamp comes later.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#387 - 2014-04-29 20:17:44 UTC  |  Edited by: LHA Tarawa
virm pasuul wrote:
and you want space communism instead?

It's a space game where you pay the iron price. If you want what the rich folk have go take it from them!



Was that directed at me?

If so, then no. I am not the one worried about ISK expansion. That is CCP.

Real world, all that money is offset by debt, so too much money means too much debt, creating economic instability as the massive debt is constantly threatening to topple into default.

As for a high income tax being "communist" or "socialist" real world, I have to ask, what do you think the income tax is in a communist or socialist country?


If you produce 100 times as much value as the average person, and therefore have an income 100x higher than average, what "should" you receive as reward? 100x as much goods and services? OR...the ability to hoard vast sums of money, locking the economy into a cycle of unsustainable debt growth and instability?

I high income tax rate with deductions for almost all spending simply requires high income individuals convert that income into goods and services to avoid the income tax... which prevents hoarding of money, short-cirtuiting the unsustainable debt that comes from money hoarding.

Wow, that was off-topic.
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#388 - 2014-04-29 20:22:14 UTC  |  Edited by: asteroidjas
CCP Greyscale wrote:
For NPC stations, these multipliers range between 0.95 and 0.98, based on how well the station's activity (factory, testing facility, warehouse etc) is judged to be suited to building and/or researching things. Stations can have different ratings for manufacturing and research. These are not huge numbers, but because they multiply together they can have a big effect. In manufacturing, the current record-holder in empire space is Nonni, with a multiplier of around 0.48 - building things in Nonni will, all other things being equal, halve the cost of installing a job.



Okay, here's where i'm most confused...

So, you start by saying that all NPC stations in empire have multipliers that range between 0.95-0.98. Then you say that Nonni has a 0.48.

How does 0.48 fall between 0.95 and 0.98 ????

And having said that, if all the station multipliers range between .95-.98, how exactly is .75 "mid range system"???

Do i really need to go back to college and get an accounting degree to understand this stuff?

Also, i did not see any info on exactly what types of stations give the better 'bonuses' to reducing the cost, is there any way players can find this info?

I'm also confused on the point where it was said that the more eligible stations in a system will grant a discount to the costs, but isn't that then offset by the number of jobs that will be in that system b/c there are alot of stations that off the 'slots' so to speak? (yes i know, slots are dead)

And to "how to simplify POS's for this change"......a centralized hanger where we won't have to constantly be moving stuff between arrays depending on what we want to do with it. Remember, you want us to switch to using LOTS and LOTS of copies instead of BPO's...this becomes a huge nightmare in the current POS Array setup.

Yes we'll now be able to work jobs remotely, but that doesn't much matter if we have to babysit the tower to constantly move BPC's/items back and forth depending on what we want to do with them.
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#389 - 2014-04-29 20:25:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Kun'ii Zenya
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Correction: 2% of product value, not of BPO value. Any work where the output is a Covetor BP (original or copy) will be keyed to 2% of the price of a Covetor.


A covetor costs ~30m isk. 2% of 30m is 600k.

I currently value the production cost of a Covetor BPC at 115k isk.


I had to go back and reread the blog to make sure I understood. I think people are missing something on copy cost, or I am adding something in.


Manufacture: Price of item * cost % (let's go with 14%) = cost

Copy: Price of item bp produces * 0.2 = "value" of BPC produced. That value * cost % = cost.


So, if a covetor is 30M, then the BPC would be valued at 600K, and then the cost multiplier is applied to that.

60M * 0.02 * 0.14 = 168K

Adding the 168K to the price of the ship,

If you are doing the copy at a POS in a low use system with only 1% flored tax.

60M * 0.02 * 0.01 = 15.6K for the copy



The ramification is that if I am doing the copies in a POS at a rarely used system with 1% tax, I can crank out copies for 1/14th the cost of making copies in station.

In a worst case, where I'm getting 4% on POS and you're getting 11% in station, I'm making copies at 1/3rd the cost of making copies in station.

I stand by my belief that there will be a lot of 1-player alt corps with a very hardened, large, high-sec POS, and an alt-login/logout hell to deliver and re-start copy jobs.


No, you are leaving out the POS fuel costs. Fueling the POS for a month means you'll spend at least 100 million isk for a small.

Now maybe that will let you crank out a whole bunch of BPCs, and the price per copy isn't that horrendous, but a POS is not free.

Edit, and 400 million/month for a large. You better make a whole lotta BPCs. To get back at the 168,000 price you'll need to make almost 2,400 BPCs.
Darin Vanar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#390 - 2014-04-29 20:27:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Darin Vanar
So you took away everything from the benefits of owning a POS, and took away nothing from the drawbacks.

You even admit this, that you don't know what to do with POSes at this point.

So then, in an attempt to marginalize the situation, you slap a needless 10% tax on high sec station production in hopes that those people who do own a POS, will be jumping for joy that they don't have to pay one. And if they do decide to set one, it will go into their corporation's coffers. This is a major slap in the face to all EVE players.

You don't know what to do with POSes at this point in time, when the expansion is just about set to release? I'll tell you what you have to do with highsec POSes at this point. You have to make them immune from wardecs in highsec. You have basically given out all the benefits of having a POS to everyone and their alt in highsec, so you have to take away the drawback. You have basically turned highsec POSes into player owned housing. It serves no purpose in highsec and I really feel sad for all those people who invested so much time to keep their 8 lab slots running only to be trolled like this. Now, they get nothing out of it, and they have to pay 500m in fuel costs every month to keep it running, when you have basically given away a POS to everyone, but with the safety of a station.

I think they deserve their POS to be immune to wardecs as long as they keep it fueled. Otherwise, it's not fair to those people and it's really bad for the game (highsec station production as a whole) to stick a 10% tax of the value of the item, on top of everything else, because you have just introduced exponentially scaling inflation into the game mechanics. It's clearly a knee jerk reaction in response to not knowing what to do with POSes at this point that they have been basically been given out for free.

So what do you get for having a POS? How about some security and being able to safely run your own BPOs and copies, which now every other player in highsec gets for free - in station - except those players who do own a POS, and pay a 500m bill for it. I don't even know why I'm typing this, it's clear to me we have an in progress EVE NGE on our hands if this situation is not dealt with.
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#391 - 2014-04-29 20:30:13 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:

words...
!


TLDR:
"we are making building stuff more complicated and much much more expensive. but we give you nice pictures instead."
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#392 - 2014-04-29 20:39:07 UTC
asteroidjas wrote:

Okay, here's where i'm most confused...

So, you start by saying that all NPC stations in empire have multipliers that range between 0.95-0.98. Then you say that Nonni has a 0.48.

How does 0.48 fall between 0.95 and 0.98 ????

And having said that, if all the station multipliers range between .95-.98, how exactly is .75 "mid range system"???

Do i really need to go back to college and get an accounting degree to understand this stuff?

Also, i did not see any info on exactly what types of stations give the better 'bonuses' to reducing the cost, is there any way players can find this info?

I'm also confused on the point where it was said that the more eligible stations in a system will grant a discount to the costs, but isn't that then offset by the number of jobs that will be in that system b/c there are alot of stations that off the 'slots' so to speak? (yes i know, slots are dead)


No, you do not need an accounting degree. But you do need to know 4th grade multiplication and reading comprehension. The .98-.95 is a factor that represents the ability of any one station to do its job. When you have multiple stations in system, those factors multiply together to give a lower multiplier, resulting in lower install costs compared to systems with less facilities of that nature.

Now, if that system has a high fraction of global work, then that will offset the savings. But it is possible that you could find a system with lots of factories and little work being done, resulting in a lower install cost per job.

Lore-wise, this represents the workers in that area being more desperate for work and thus willing to work for less.

As far as which stations are best at certain task, we'll just have to wait and see. But I'm sure it will figure in racial station type, owning corp mission, and available facilities. No matter what, I'm sure that the factor will be available via the SDE.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#393 - 2014-04-29 20:40:55 UTC
I am extremely concerned that this is totally shattering the current balance.
CCP, you claim in your Dev blog that you don't want to change the current balance between high & low, yet you are giving Null sec a 30%! Discount on T2 manufacturing.

Most modules are produced at -4 ME. Meaning +50% relative to perfect. This means Null gets to do them at a mere +20%. On top of the fact that the Null Blocs are the ones who control most of the valuable T2 BPO's you have now handed them the entire T2 Invention market. As well as ensuring that they can make anything T1 cheaper than highsec can.

This is on top of the fact they already get more minerals per refine so already were producing effectively cheaper, since the market will now be based on ore price, not mineral price. And adjusted for your refine rates.

This is exactly what I was rallying against in the refine all the things blog, cumulative effects which mount up to unbeatable advantages. If you sum in the additional benefits here, Null Sec can now make an individual T1 ship over 20% cheaper (Starting from x units of ore) than high sec can, and a T2 Ship as much as 50% cheaper, without taking into account any build cost savings as well.
Yet you have the gall to claim you don't want to alter the balance at all. I'm calling you out on the floor as outright liars on this blog, as I can't believe you honestly think this level of advantage isn't going to massively change the balance.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#394 - 2014-04-29 20:41:25 UTC

Several points to add:
For everyone worried about a forever increasing prices because of forever increasing costs, you're out of your mind. While we may have an infinite loop of prices, the loop uses fractional values that will converge to a new price point. Endless series often converge, especially when dealing with fractions.

There will be a MAJOR bump in module prices across the board.

My build costs for:
Heavy Neutron Blaster II's will bump from 1.3m to 1.6m isk.
150mm Light Autocannon II's will bump from 500k to 650k isk.
Light Missile Luancher II's will bump from 700k to 1m isk.

For modules, the largest price increases will come from having the "extra materials" suddenly subject to ME levels. The BPC costs and build costs will also play a bump, but from the numbers I've noticed it won't be exuberant. I firmly believe our economy can handle this, and those who prepare will be much better off.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#395 - 2014-04-29 20:42:33 UTC
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Correction: 2% of product value, not of BPO value. Any work where the output is a Covetor BP (original or copy) will be keyed to 2% of the price of a Covetor.


A covetor costs ~30m isk. 2% of 30m is 600k.

I currently value the production cost of a Covetor BPC at 115k isk.


I had to go back and reread the blog to make sure I understood. I think people are missing something on copy cost, or I am adding something in.


Manufacture: Price of item * cost % (let's go with 14%) = cost

Copy: Price of item bp produces * 0.2 = "value" of BPC produced. That value * cost % = cost.


So, if a covetor is 30M, then the BPC would be valued at 600K, and then the cost multiplier is applied to that.

60M * 0.02 * 0.14 = 168K

Adding the 168K to the price of the ship,

If you are doing the copy at a POS in a low use system with only 1% flored tax.

60M * 0.02 * 0.01 = 15.6K for the copy



The ramification is that if I am doing the copies in a POS at a rarely used system with 1% tax, I can crank out copies for 1/14th the cost of making copies in station.

In a worst case, where I'm getting 4% on POS and you're getting 11% in station, I'm making copies at 1/3rd the cost of making copies in station.

I stand by my belief that there will be a lot of 1-player alt corps with a very hardened, large, high-sec POS, and an alt-login/logout hell to deliver and re-start copy jobs.


No, you are leaving out the POS fuel costs. Fueling the POS for a month means you'll spend at least 100 million isk for a small.

Now maybe that will let you crank out a whole bunch of BPCs, and the price per copy isn't that horrendous, but a POS is not free.

Edit, and 400 million/month for a large. You better make a whole lotta BPCs. To get back at the 168,000 price you'll need to make almost 2,400 BPCs.


Point taken. 3 million a day for a small, 12 million a day for a large.

I expect most corps to have a POS for the compression array (huge benefit) and a refinery array, to avoid having to grind NPC corp standing.
Zifrian
The Pannion Domin
Ghostbirds
#396 - 2014-04-29 20:57:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Zifrian
That was the most confusing dev blog I've ever read....and I read it twice. Wasn't all this supposed to make things easier to do industry? This seems way overly complicated for most people. Sure some of us will figure it out but you really should find a way to make this simpler to figure out your costs of a job. I'm also not big on "base prices" for anything.

I have a feeling I really won't understand these changes fully until I can test them. How long will this be live on the test server? How open to suggestions will you be then?

Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!

Import CCP's SDE - EVE SDE Database Builder

Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries
#397 - 2014-04-29 21:04:37 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
STARBASE STRUCTURES QUESTIONS


For the sake of simple clarity, can't you stop calling the structures in question "STARBASE" and just call them "POS" like everyone else?

Not to be confused with PoS which is something completely different, while possibly used to describe certain code base ;)

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.

Kethry Avenger
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#398 - 2014-04-29 21:07:03 UTC
With all the changes going ever which way I think I will have to get my industry alt training industry skills again to play around with these changes. Smile


Important question.

Will there be enough sinks added with this change to be able to lower how much it costs to lose pods?

I ideally would prefer a system where you have to pay a onetime fee for an upgraded model of clone but then only pay a flat fee of say 100,000 isk or something trivial or linearly scaling when you lose your pod.

When the last change was made to lower costs of clones it was stated that further reductions could be made in the future when more sinks where present. I hope this is that time.

Cause industry is nice but being less risk averse in PvP is awesome.Twisted
Ms Sade
Hammertime Holding
Division Nine Alliance
#399 - 2014-04-29 21:07:16 UTC
Liner Xiandra wrote:
After reading most of the posts here, I'm not convinced that the produced_item_baseprice is a sensible measure to calculate productioncosts which are already subject to variation because of both people and station landscape.

Can't the baseprice be replaced by NPC corp/faction standings? (tied to a fixed baseprice?)
- Hisec: high corp / faction standings required to bring baseprice down
- FW lowsec: same as hisec (cant let spies run wild in your warzone ;))
- lowsec: lowered standing requirement (throw them a bone) compared to hisec
- NPC nullsec baseprice based on pirate standings. (hmm, maybe rather corp than faction)
- nullsec baseprice based on alliance standings. (eg. blues produce for less compared to neutrals or reds)

This standing mechanic is currently thrown out with the bathwater and I feel that just picking up your stuff and move 3 systems to get a better price makes the game more bland in general.


I'm not sure standing is the best way to define costs, but I certainly agree that faction and corp standing should be a modifier for all NPC stations.
Bertrand Prout
Sunday Sessions
#400 - 2014-04-29 21:07:59 UTC
T3 producers seem to be subject to bigger build costs than the other kinds according to the example at the end of the blog. It looks like 40 RE slots used a few times a day can generate crazy costs like that 35% ;).

Now there is one question I got.. is the RE installation cost going to be based on the relic price, since we don't know the bpc type until the job is done and delivered? Afaik, relics are considered as BPOs with 1 run in game. Also, it seems to be rather easy to avoid costs by being a bit nomadic and moving your T3 setup from a system to another every month or, since less people do T3 production. Perhaps it needs to be merged with invention.