These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Summer 2014] Starbase tweaks

First post First post
Author
Dei
Khanid Brotherhood
#101 - 2014-05-06 06:49:16 UTC
Has anyone thought about how they're going to transfer their stuff between arrays? I don't really want to be going to the POS all the time to move a newly copied set of BPCs to their relevant manufacturing arrays all the time. Previously it didn't matter where the BPOs/BPCs were but now they have to be with the slot location, so I can see this being a big ballache if there's no way to remotely transfer stuff between arrays at the starbase.
Celia Therone
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2014-05-06 07:48:44 UTC
Are the power grid/cpu requirements for POS modules going to change now that they have infinite slots?
Marcus Iunius Brutus
Hoborg Labs
#103 - 2014-05-06 07:50:30 UTC
Celia Therone wrote:
Are the power grid/cpu requirements for POS modules going to change now that they have infinite slots?


It seems to be undecided yet.
Sigras
Conglomo
#104 - 2014-05-06 08:02:08 UTC
I have two questions regarding how the 2% ME discount is calculated.

1. it is 2% and not 2 ME levels right? Just confirming because if not you've just condemned all invention to only ever be done in 0.0 amarr factory stations...

2. is the 2% calculated per job or per run?

I realize that in most cases #2 makes absolutely no difference, but think about manufacturing Small CCCs or even medium CCCs... a 2% discount per run is not going to help either of those products at all, but a 2% discount per job certainly could

TL;DR
is the 2% discount calculated ROUNDUP(RequiredMaterial * 0.98) * NumberOfJobs or is it calculated ROUNDUP(RequiredMaterial * NumberOfJobs * 0.98)?
zahter
Shayol Ghul Forge
#105 - 2014-05-06 08:11:22 UTC  |  Edited by: zahter
I am a t2 manufacturer for few months. I have pos and recently extended my production amount and enlarged my pos facilities. I was worried after the announcement. I was very scared of extra costs, I thought having pos was a luxury.

After I read many suggestions, spending some time reading the forum threads on changes, I wanted to make my own calculation


lets say material cost of items is "b"
lets say installing cost of job is "a"
installing cost "a" will be a function of "b". the only difference is tax of station
pos have %2 material efficiency bonus, so "b" becomes b*0.98 for pos

total cost of producing items in station =b + 1.1 x a
total cost of producing the item in pos = b x 0.98 + a

"b" being a function of "a" lets assume a coefficient "c"
b=a x c

station= b+1.1xbxc= b x (1+1.1 x c)
pos= b x 0.98 +b x c = b x (0.98 +c)

"c" is variable depending on the system and the amount of people actually using production services in system but it is same for starbase and station.

lets give "c" a value changing from %1 to %10 of the cost (this is extreme)

the ration between station and pos costs= (1 +1.1 x c) / (0.98 + c)

The ratio difference between pos and station production is not depended on item cost of production

if c is between %1 and %10
differences are always

"c" coefficient ratio station/pos
0.01 1.021212121
0.02 1.022
0.03 1.022772277
0.04 1.023529412
0.05 1.024271845
0.06 1.025
0.07 1.025714286
0.08 1.026415094
0.09 1.027102804
0.1 1.027777778

with theese rations we need to produce about 6b worth of stuff in a month to rationalize fuel costs.

6b x 0.022 = 136.6m (small caldari pos fuel cost atm)

This bonus is very small for all the work pos requires.However the speed bonus of pos is not included in these calculation. In ideal conditions a pos can produce %33 more items than a station so it will be reasonable to have one, but using a pos with full potential is full time job.

There is starbase bonus mentioned in the related devblog. We did not hear from it since. It would be a good idea to implement it with summer tweaks.
Sigras
Conglomo
#106 - 2014-05-06 10:00:06 UTC
zahter wrote:
lets say material cost of items is "a"
lets say installing cost of job is "b"
pos have %2 material efficiency bonus, so "b" becomes b*0.98 for pos

no, youre wrong POS have a 2% ME bonus so "a" becomes a*0.98 for POS

A material bonus applies to the material cost of the items ... go figure...
Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#107 - 2014-05-06 10:20:44 UTC
I don't understand why I would want to use a POS after these changes. And where is the lowsec bonus? Perhaps this needs to stay in the oven for just a little longer.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Sigras
Conglomo
#108 - 2014-05-06 10:26:40 UTC
2% material bonus isnt enough of a reason for you?

How is it that there are so many people who are terrible at math and still do industry?
Marcus Iunius Brutus
Hoborg Labs
#109 - 2014-05-06 10:30:36 UTC
Sigras wrote:
2% material bonus isnt enough of a reason for you?

How is it that there are so many people who are terrible at math and still do industry?


Plus time bonus for assembly arrays that stays the same and no NPC tax for job installation.
Uncle Shrimpa
Lap Dancers
Brothers of Tangra
#110 - 2014-05-06 10:39:20 UTC
Zappity wrote:
I don't understand why I would want to use a POS after these changes. And where is the lowsec bonus? Perhaps this needs to stay in the oven for just a little longer.


Higher refine rate than highsec and the ability to make capitals (Dreads and carriers) that isn't enough?

CCP Greyscale -Yup, we have data on what happens currently, but we're expecting those use patterns to change substantially when this release. There's a degree of "suck it and see" happening here :)

Ian Stanley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#111 - 2014-05-06 10:43:19 UTC
Lemmih AI wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

  • X-Large Assembly Array is being renamed Capital Assembly Array to better reflect what it actually does.
  • Capital Assembly Array is being renamed Supercapital Assembly Array for the same reasons.

That sounds great except the part where the same name refers to a different item before and after an instant in time. It could be very confusing when people find older guides on the internet. If you renamed the X-Large Array to "Capital Ship Assembly Array", at least there'd be some indication that the names have changed, but even that would still be confusing.

CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Advanced Mobile labs:
Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.75 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for copying: 0.6 (was 0.65).
Time multiplier for invention: 0.5 (was 0.5).

Considering that slots are going away, I really can't see anyone favoring the Advanced Mobile Lab over the Mobile lab with these stats. Maybe if copy time dropped all the way to .5 or if it had a stronger bonus to invention than the mobile lab (the whole reason for the Advanced Mobile labs was to support copying for invention, right?), it would be worth considering. Alternately, if there was an advantage to having multiple labs, it might get used, but when you just need one lab for all your research, the Mobile Lab is the clear winner.


i also for one wants a stronger bonus as right now there is no reason to choose the adv mobile lab over mobile lab!
Gawain Edmond
Khanid Bureau of Industry
#112 - 2014-05-06 11:08:13 UTC
Sentient Blade wrote:

Also, 2% barely justifies the 600m isk/month cost a worthwhile POS takes to run IMO. Especially with infinite slots available in stations which are risk-free.



really? that 2% for me would cover the cost of the pos on it's own and if the production tax is cheaper than building in a station where lots of people are building and the right teams can be bought in then it makes manufacturing in low sec profitable and that's with just 1 person using a tower if a whole group of people is using the tower then that 2% mineral cost stacks up to a pretty huge saving
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#113 - 2014-05-06 11:23:35 UTC
I liked the original 5% plan better, but I would rather have the 2% than no bonus
Besides 2% is a nice round consistent number
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#114 - 2014-05-06 11:24:05 UTC
It should be noted that /right now/, there are plenty of free industrial slots out there.

And yet, you have people who manufacture out of POS, with no material bonus.

What you were getting:
Improved output (around 33% more modules)
Available slots. (Relatively minor, unless you decided to go to a slammed system, or a system with no station services)


What you will be getting:
Reduced build cost (no NPC tax. Possibly some mechanic for having more than one array/lab).
Reduced build cost (base out of a low moon, no station service system, and you'll have very low costs due to the low percentage)
Reduced Material cost. (2%. Not significant for some things, due to how the numbers work. for T2, this will be likely minimal on most modules. You can't treat it as a flat modifier. More significant on Expensive T1 things (high mineral counts = bigger effect)
Reduced build time.

I still want to see what the layout is of build hours, but I don't think we'll get that before release (Greyscale and I disagreed on the utility, at the industry round table. I can see his point (Everything will change, as people who don't pay attention in advance cotton on), but I don't agree with it.)

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#115 - 2014-05-06 11:31:40 UTC
Plug in Baby wrote:
Nothing about a capital component lab so lowsec can build capitals that can compete with null?

I heard such a lab with a large ME bonus was planned? Or is capital production going to null for sure now?


CCP Greyscale is working on that.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#116 - 2014-05-06 11:32:30 UTC
FFGR wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

We are giving all assembly arrays a 2% material reduction to manufactured products (except for the Supercapital Assembly Array, since there is no station competition when building super capital ships).


Rapid Equipment Assembly Array and Equipment Assembly Array will now have the same ME reduction, while Rapid will make products faster.


The Rapid Equipment Assembly Array still has a ME penalty, good catch, going to update original post.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#117 - 2014-05-06 11:35:49 UTC
Uncle Shrimpa wrote:
Echo Mande wrote:
All in all decent, though I would also like more hangar space.

Will missile sentries get looked at (CPU use dropped to 0)? They really need it.

One thing you could also look at is the CPU and power use by the various assembly arrays. If the intent is to promote construction and shipbuilding at POSses then in my opinion these values could stand being lowered a bit.

The ship arrays could also use some changes. The small and medium arrays have fairly small hangar sizes (2M m3 for a medium) compared to the modified non-ship arrays. The ship arrays' CPU and power could also use a tweak (down) or alternately the basic ship arrays' values could be lowered and the advanced arrays could be modified to allow building of T1 and T2 ships. Note that a decent production run of marauders or HACs can easily use multiple freighterloads of materials.



Fozzie mentioned making missile batteries not horrible during the stream. He said prolly not this expansion, maybe a point release, but it is on someone's radar

So far their increases on cargo of pos mods have been incredibly anemic at best. We are trying to get them increased to decent levels.....


I can talk with Fozzie regarding CPU requirements on missile batteries when he's around.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#118 - 2014-05-06 11:37:37 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Lemmih AI wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

  • X-Large Assembly Array is being renamed Capital Assembly Array to better reflect what it actually does.
  • Capital Assembly Array is being renamed Supercapital Assembly Array for the same reasons.

That sounds great except the part where the same name refers to a different item before and after an instant in time. It could be very confusing when people find older guides on the internet. If you renamed the X-Large Array to "Capital Ship Assembly Array", at least there'd be some indication that the names have changed, but even that would still be confusing.

CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Advanced Mobile labs:
Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.75 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for copying: 0.6 (was 0.65).
Time multiplier for invention: 0.5 (was 0.5).

Considering that slots are going away, I really can't see anyone favoring the Advanced Mobile Lab over the Mobile lab with these stats. Maybe if copy time dropped all the way to .5 or if it had a stronger bonus to invention than the mobile lab (the whole reason for the Advanced Mobile labs was to support copying for invention, right?), it would be worth considering. Alternately, if there was an advantage to having multiple labs, it might get used, but when you just need one lab for all your research, the Mobile Lab is the clear winner.


We can add "ship" to the Capital / Supercapital Assembly Arrays to avoid confusion.

Regarding Mobile Labs, we have more changes coming in - I'll update the original post when I'm done reading the feedback P
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#119 - 2014-05-06 11:39:06 UTC
Oxide Ammar wrote:
Is it possible that medium ship assembly array overlap the small one, and large array overlap the medium and small one ? means I can build anything starting from frigs to BS in the large ship array ?


No sorry, we like the individual capabilities of each - having them overlap would obsolete the smaller ones as soon as you have enough Starbase fittings.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#120 - 2014-05-06 11:45:32 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


Then, laboratories:


Mobile labs:
Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.7 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for Research TE: 0.7 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for copying: 0.7 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for invention: 0.45 (was 0.5).

Advanced Mobile labs:
Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.75 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for copying: 0.6 (was 0.65).
Time multiplier for invention: 0.5 (was 0.5).

Hyasyoda mobile labs:
Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.65 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for Research TE: 0.65 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for invention: 0.45 (was 0.5).


Wouldn't it make more sense to do this instead:

Research Lab: (WasMobile lab)
Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.7 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for Research TE: 0.7 (was 0.75).
No Copy, (was Time multiplier for copying: 0.75).
No Invention (was Time multiplier for invention: 0.5).

Invention lab: (was Advanced Mobile)
No ME research (was Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.75).
Time multiplier for copying: 0.6 (was 0.65).
Time multiplier for invention: 0.5 (was 0.5).

Hyasyoda mobile labs:
Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.65 (was 0.75).
Time multiplier for Research TE: 0.65 (was 0.75).
No Invention (wast ime multiplier for invention: 0.5)

That way you have more incentive to have different types of labs on your pos? And choices are easier, and you can create more named modules better in the future based on this gradient?



Just want to say, I quite like this idea. Provides a better differentiation between the lab types.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter