EVE Information Portal

With Phoebe (coming in a few days on November 4th) we will see brilliant change coming to the Invention system, for example:

• Merging Tech-3 Reverse Engineering into the Invention system and selection of the subsystem you want to invent
• Multiple invention runs per installed invention job
• Removal of Interfaces
• Generic decryptors instead of race specific decryptors
• Update of build material requirements for Tech 3 component production

Discover what other exciting changes we will get and read CCP Ytterbium's latest blog Invention updates in Phoebe!

You've badly screwed up how to compensate for directed subsystem invention.

Before, you had to run 4 jobs to get the 1 you wanted: so for each subsystem you consumed (on average) four times one invention job. Now, you'll do one invention job, but the manufacturing will cost a lot more. Your goal, presumably, is to keep the end price of the subsystem constant. However, you've badly screwed up the balance of the components.

Post-patch, you will use 1/4th as many relics, decryptors, and datacores as you did pre-patch. Their price will fall through the floor. However, material use will go way up, bottlenecking melted nanoribbons even more. What you're basically doing is murdering the value of sleeper sites and transferring it to sleeper salvage. That sounds like a side effect that was not well considered.

The correct fix would be to require 4x the relics you required before for a single job, which will maintain the balance of value between reverse engineering materials and construction materials.

So you say:


That doesn't make sense, sorry. If it was to give 1% bonuses, then on lvl5 3 skills would give a total of 0.95^3=.857375 time factor, that is a 14.2% reduction.

If it was not percentages but percentage points then it would be 15%.

Could you please elaborate on this? :)

Whoops, missed that part. However, unless you did your math very carefully, that won't work (at least for salvage, might work for gasses). Sleeper salvage is a naturally bottlenecked system: the salvage is produced in one fixed ratio, and consumed in another. You can't seek out specific salvage (you get whatever your salvagers give you), and you can't shift what you build to avoid specific salvage (or if you do, someone else must build with it because at the end of the day you need a full set of subsystems and a hull).

In these sorts of systems, one item is used up completely and there is an excess of the others. The one used up item will gain all of the value attributable to the whole bottlenecked system, while the others become worthless. To the extent you boost their use, it doesn't matter, unless you get it to exactly the use of nanoribbons (in which case they'll both share the value) or boost it above nanoribbons (in which case they become bottlenecked and the nanoribbons become worthless).

I guess I'll poke around at the math some to see what the end results will be since I don't know what goes into particular T3 components off the top of my head, but if your goal is to boost the price of non-nanoribbon salvage (instead of the gasses) it won't work.

And you're still going to have the problem of relics becoming stupendously worthless.

I really like teams and the idea of "bending" the dynamic industrial spacescape a bit to fit your purposes.
Only the possibility to snipe the auction pretty much defeats its purpose.

Yeah, I have the money for a team, I have a setup that would do well with a team, and I want a team. But I sure as hell am not setting an alarm for when the team I need is about to finish auction so I can actually get it. If I could set an ebay-like bid and forget about it, I'd be using them constantly.

In which category does the Venture/Prospect fall? Frigate or Mining Barge

also :grrCCP: for making me change my excel sheets every 6 weeks

Variable invention outcomes as described was a nuisance and I am glad they're not shipping it with Phoebe.

They also didn't say it was dropped, but needed more work, which they decided to spend on power projection instead, so we may see a more elegant version of it at a later date.

I like how CCP is constantly stating how they have all their teams compartmentalized so that delaying one thing doesn't mean they can work on something else....then they come out with this...saying their invention team has decided to go and work on Null/Low force projection instead of the 'feature' that most of the feedback was negative for?

Generally they're saying that when some idiot asks why they updated the model of a ship instead of [desired programming change], when they're pointing out that their artists are not programmers and if they weren't doing ship art they wouldn't be doing programming.