These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Material Efficiency skill changed to Advanced Industry

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#181 - 2014-07-17 11:57:56 UTC
Celor Ma'fer wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.

It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit.



I'd have to say that for the SP put into the skill I'd also say that 10% total bonus is too low. I know that the skills are different, but for the base Industry skill (1x) you get a 4% per level reduction and for the Advanced Industry (3x) you get a 2% reduction per level. Doesn't quite make sense. I would say it should be at least 4% per level.


They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.
Trademaster Rob
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#182 - 2014-07-17 12:02:08 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.

It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit.


tbh this is a great response. If a skill was to powerful to begin with and it's somewhat tweaked with the new skill, that would be better then to replace it with something completely different. Also it being communicated is a big plus ;)

How this will pan out I don't know, but at least it's something to start with and only time will tell.
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#183 - 2014-07-17 12:05:01 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things.

I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction.

You really think players would prioritize that skill?
Trademaster Rob
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#184 - 2014-07-17 12:06:49 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.

It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit.



why don't you just drop the idea and consider your players that did not even ask for this teams mess,

I honestly prefer having a skill that reduces materials requirements over time production
install cost reduction fee skill? you already waving an oops its expensive for everyone out there regardless how you work your magic and attempt to force this teams mess.

bad call greyscale.. bad call


Sorry but I don't agree. Games need to move forward be it good or bad they still need to move forward. They have an idea which is almost untested in practice. Let's first give it a try and keep CCP warm for future expansions. These changes are prob also with future in mind. But that's speculation ;)
Claudius Dethahal
Amarrians for Tax Reform-Kador
#185 - 2014-07-17 12:22:12 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.

It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit.



I'd personally like to see higher levels of the skill allow more change how the installation cost works. Something that allows capital limited producers to trade a lot of time for cost efficiency, high volume users could see a small effect on cost for scale, and there be a way to rush orders at a higher cost (something akin to paying overtime and wasting materials) for times when a major alliance changes doctrine and makes thousands of new hulls/buys out half of Jita.

That seems like it fits with the goals of the expansion and offers a rich array of choices to manufacturers to balance with the push pull mechanics.
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#186 - 2014-07-17 12:22:54 UTC  |  Edited by: asteroidjas
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.

It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit.

This is better, but it still needs to be something WORTH the train from 4-5. Others have shown you the math, look hard at it and think "is that something most current industrialists would choose to train from 4 to 5?)

CCP Greyscale wrote:


They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


But the 2% from AWU is 2% extra...not 2% of 10% of something else. You try to use logic, but then don't look at the facts of it.
Meytal
Doomheim
#187 - 2014-07-17 12:23:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Meytal
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things.

I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction.

You really think players would prioritize that skill?

With the margins I deal with, I wouldn't notice 0.04% cost reduction. It's less than an rounding error. I would barely notice 5-10% cost reduction. What will happen to those margins come Crius remains to be seen, obviously.

I would certainly train this skill to 4, but never to 5. I would even go so far as to laugh at people who trained it to 5, it's so underwhelming.


It really sounds like you guys are grasping for something, anything, to avoid reimbursing the skill. An aspect of the game that used to exist,for which this skill was trained, no longer exists. Just reimburse the skill. If it's too late to get it into Crius release, do it in a point release.

Sometimes you do have to HTFU and make changes that you may not want to make and deal with customer support responses for the few issues that arise, not necessarily because it makes everyone happy, but because it's the proper and correct thing to do. Getting rid of the mandatory skill is the right thing to do. Reimbursing for its removal is also the right thing to do.

Edit: Remove the skill books at Crius release, and set the skill as non-trainable to lock people into what they have when Crius drops. This will help avoid gaming the system.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#188 - 2014-07-17 12:26:11 UTC
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things.

I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction.

You really think players would prioritize that skill?


Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#189 - 2014-07-17 12:26:21 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Celor Ma'fer wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Hi everyone,

We're throwing around ideas for better bonuses for this skill that we can get implemented for the initial Crius release. How does say 2%/level install cost reduction feel? It ends up being most advantageous in major industry hubs or when using teams, but new players can still compete on price by building in less busy systems.

It is of course not as powerful as the current TQ version of this skill, but the whole point of this change is that it's currently *too* powerful, so we're deliberately trying to tone it down a bit.



I'd have to say that for the SP put into the skill I'd also say that 10% total bonus is too low. I know that the skills are different, but for the base Industry skill (1x) you get a 4% per level reduction and for the Advanced Industry (3x) you get a 2% reduction per level. Doesn't quite make sense. I would say it should be at least 4% per level.


They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


Don't potentially unbalance your game trying to mix and match the market based on the skill chain. You are almost at a good part but by changing the skill as listed here will break your strategy of it not being a requirement.

Give the skillpoints that would have been used to refund the skill and hand it out as unallocated skill points, then leave the people who trained the skill with the skill. My concern with the change is that I trained the original skill up because that meant I would have to haul less material to make what I wanted. Now that is not an issue anymore.

That is the only thing that will make people feel better. This isn't a minor change, this is a completely different skill.

Yaay!!!!
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#190 - 2014-07-17 12:29:04 UTC
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.

The Rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#191 - 2014-07-17 12:33:47 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.

I still like the logic of having industry, and then advanced industry skill giving a slightly lower bonus to time efficiency. That makes a lot of sense. I just think the 1% bonus originally proposed per level is laughable.

Cost bonus is ok though, but I'd prefer it to give 2% bonus to manufacture time still. There are already enough things affecting install cost without adding another skill to the equation.
Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
#192 - 2014-07-17 12:34:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Rapscallion Jones
Vaju Enki wrote:
No SP refund. Their was no refunds during ship balancing.


And there were no eliminations of a skill's purpose. The earlier analogy made by someone else of taking Surgical Strike, which confers a significant bonus to all turret based systems, and re-purposing it confer a marginal valued fall off bonus, is an apt analogy. Give me one concrete example where this kind of thing happened and I'll agree with you.

Yes, ship balancing changed ships bonuses, but no skills were changed.
Meytal
Doomheim
#193 - 2014-07-17 12:38:10 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Depends what you're building where .... If you're building components for a dread

That's just the thing. This is a skill everyone had to train. The only reasonable changes only benefit a small subset of people.

I do T2 production. Anything under 100% profit margin is too small for me to worry with, unless the market is completely saturated. I still remember how I started and what I was thinking about at the time as well: If I use this particular (T1) module, I'm sure others do as well, so it may be profitable to make some of these and sell them. And it was.

That's how your new, prospective industrialists are going to get into industry, and what many people who have this skill trained are still currently thinking. They're not going to build Titans.
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#194 - 2014-07-17 12:39:13 UTC
CCP, look at your other market related skills that effect a % of another % based cost

Accounting: 10% per level Reduction in transaction tax. (3x skill)

Broker Relations: 5% per level Reduction in market order costs. (2x skill)

Now look at your new idea....it just doesn't hold water.
Throwaway Sam Atild
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#195 - 2014-07-17 12:39:34 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things.

I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction.

You really think players would prioritize that skill?


Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).


This is in line with my thinking, and almost certainly too thin to be of any worth to anyone. You're saving 20M per ship if you train the skill all the way to the top. Training it 4 -> 5 is going to save you 4M per ship. Training it 3->5 8M per ship.

At a glance, you'd be using all 10 lines for at the very least 3 days. So you'd be saving 8M per 3 days doing dread construction.

My wild guess would be that there is no question that someone building at this scale isn't going to care about 3M per day. I don't see any compelling reason for someone to train this skill to V under any circumstances.

Also this is a pretty extreme case. The argument you seem to be making is that a very small portion of the population may find some benefit in this skill. That's great, but the problem that we started with is that a very large portion of the population has already trained this skill when it did something entirely different.
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#196 - 2014-07-17 12:53:43 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).

But if you are building your cap parts in a system with low cost....how much more are you saving? If someone is sooo concerned about saving .04% of their install costs, they will likely be the ones moving their 'home base' to the systems that yield the best rates...
X ATM092
The Hatchery
RAZOR Alliance
#197 - 2014-07-17 12:53:44 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things.

I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction.

You really think players would prioritize that skill?


Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).

I think this is an excellent compromise.
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
Coalition of the Unfortunate
#198 - 2014-07-17 12:59:57 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


Advanced weapon upgrades is maybe a bad example. Weapon Upgrades deals with 5% CPU which first and foremost tends to effect your ability to wedge in the tanking modules which consume heavy CPU. Advanced Weapon Upgrades deals with something different, the power grid of weapons, which allows you to have the extra fitting stats to add the T2 weapons with their greater requirements. Most people don't need that level V for it, except as a barrier to something completely different, siege mode and marauders.

The main problem is that it's an awful lot of skill points to go from level IV to V. For an optional, specialist skill, such as a time reduction, most people would only train it to IV. This is due to training it to V being sp-inefficient, and industrialists do love their efficiency.

There are plenty of options available for interesting specialized skills, but not ones people would, en-mass, willingly invest 750,000+ skill points in training to V, and there in lays the problem.

I liked the idea of a time reduction, although I think the percentage offered was underwhelming and definitely put it in the "Not worth Ving" category.

Reducing installation cost, it's certainly an idea, but like you mentioned, it would disproportionately benefit people who build in major trade hubs, which is the opposite of what should be encouraged. I fully expect Jita to simply buy up every single team every time, I don't think a reduction in costs there would be a good thing.

I'm suck for solutions. Now the skill is no longer essential, I think the only way you're going to come around a way of making something worth level Ving, is to have the bonus be an exponent to give the higher level, higher SP investment more of an impact, which I can't see happening.
Celor Ma'fer
Jouhinen Inc
#199 - 2014-07-17 13:02:50 UTC
X ATM092 wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things.

I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction.

You really think players would prioritize that skill?


Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).

I think this is an excellent compromise.


A compromise to what?
Celor Ma'fer
Jouhinen Inc
#200 - 2014-07-17 13:08:07 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

They're both affecting different things though - and the general pattern in EVE skills (that we are trying to adhere to more closely whenever we touch skill bonuses) is that more advanced skills take longer and give lower bonuses. That's why f.ex the advanced weapon skills only give 2%/level - quick to learn, slow to master.


Yet that's 10% on top of the TOTAL damage - and even then most players will not prioritize IV -> V over other things.

I'm not sure if you read my earlier post after my edit, but with your new skill at 10% we are - using you average from the dev blog of 2% - talking about a 0.2% reduction in total build cost for 768k SP invested, with the step from IV -> V being a 0.04% cost reduction.

You really think players would prioritize that skill?


Depends what you're building where. If you're building ammo in the back of beyond it'll basically make no difference. If you're building components for a dread (let's say ~2bn worth) for sale in a major hub and you want to build in-system, you might be looking at a 10% base rate, so 200m, then 10% reduction on that is saving you 20m per ship (ie 1% of build cost).



So you are essentially trying to push all big Industrialists to manufacture in the main trade hubs then? Surely that's not a good idea as most if not all of the teams will end up being in the trade hubs, leaving none for those of us who manufacture away from them.

Also if no-one is manufacturing outside of trade hubs, cause that's where the best teams are and where you get the most out of this skill. Then there will be a drastic reduction in the amount of hauling required. Freight companies will suffer and dare I even say gankers, as most people will just be flying from their POS to the station in the same system.

I could be completely wrong on the 2nd part...