These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Engineering Complexes a bit worse than a large POS in hisec?

Author
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#21 - 2016-10-14 11:10:35 UTC
It's unfortunate, but the plan is to replace POSes with the new structures. Therefore there is no need, balance-wise, for the new structures to be competitive with POSes in the long term. They only have to be competitive with NPC stations, which may also receive further neutering in order to achieve the desired balance. So really, their bonuses and functional design can be terrible and they'll still end up being the best option once everything else has been nerfed into the ground or removed entirely.

My main concerns about the EC's are:

They are too expensive to fuel
Their vulnerability windows are too big
There are too many rigs

I think this makes them highly unattractive to smaller industrialists. Those players will be required to use either POS, NPC stations or a public EC/Citadel with the desired combination of services and rigs. Sadly, two of these options are "legacy" features and the remainder is renting from a landlord rather than striking out on your own. For some of the more independently minded industrialists this may be a bit stifling.

I'd either rectify those three issues, by reducing fuel consumption, reducing vulnerability windows and halving the number of rigs, or make a range of S-size personal use industrial structures that allow the small industrialist some small factories and labs of their own. I fully support the idea that the EC and the Citadel should be co-operative structures, but I also believe there should be more structures for the individual industrialist (who can still co-operate with others while using his own facility). An S-size facility could be torn down and moved easily if you relocate or wish to avoid exposure to a war dec, can have simple defence/destruction mechanics like the existing S-size structures, can have zero fuel requirements and a modest initial cost to reflect that only a maximum of 11 jobs could ever be installed in one (because that's the maximum any character can have). They would be everything an EC isn't and thus allow the EC to be what it is without excluding people from their desired industrial gameplay.
Namdor
#22 - 2016-10-14 15:31:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Namdor
Tipa Riot wrote:
Well, you say everything is fine and scales, because you can use other people's facilities to compensate for the higher fuel and installation costs ... but why would somebody sane invite competitors who wreck the costs in that system?

There is a fundamental difference in how Citadels react to scale compared to EC. More people using citadel services -> better for everybody. More people using EC -> worse for everybody.


That's not really a fair assessment. You're treating the cost index as if it's the sole variable of any importance.

They would want to do it if the taxes they can collect will exceed the delta in their own personal index cost. It's not a very tricky question. Index costs don't increase linearly - a relatively small increase in the index value requires a relatively large increase in job-hours (about 75% more job hours to go from 3% to 4%, say),

People already do large volumes of industry in relatively high index systems - this is demonstrably true, given the fact that high-index systems exist at all. Why would those people NOT prefer to do the manufacturing they're already doing in, say, Bahromab (~3.9% index) in an EC with an ME bonus that effectively offsets that index value, instead of doing it in an NPC station and just eating the cost?
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2016-10-14 17:53:16 UTC
Assuming there are a lot of public ECs anchored ... otherwise a few worth considering will attract more people than from just one system, so better keep it closed circle ...

... and you say already 75% increase in jobs will push the index by 1% point ... this the difference between one and two chars doing production ...

Well, let's see what happens, new profits will be there as always if the environment is complex ... and hope it's not too tedious and kills the fun playing.

I'm my own NPC alt.

SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#24 - 2016-10-14 18:21:56 UTC
Tipa Riot wrote:


... and you say already 75% increase in jobs will push the index by 1% point ... this the difference between one and two chars doing production ...



No, that's the difference between 3% and 4%, not the amount to bump it by 1% at any value, so that would only be true if one character were sufficient to hit 3% to begin with, which it generally isn't, afaict. It would be easier to calculate the thresholds with an approximate value for the total number of job-hours installed in the universe, but I don't know of anywhere that's available.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2016-10-14 20:22:29 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Tipa Riot wrote:


... and you say already 75% increase in jobs will push the index by 1% point ... this the difference between one and two chars doing production ...



No, that's the difference between 3% and 4%, not the amount to bump it by 1% at any value, so that would only be true if one character were sufficient to hit 3% to begin with, which it generally isn't, afaict. It would be easier to calculate the thresholds with an approximate value for the total number of job-hours installed in the universe, but I don't know of anywhere that's available.

Ok, right. I'm not so familiar with the exact formula, but I see that my industry activity regularly bumps the index in my system by 0.5-1% point starting from a similar baseline. This correlates just too well with my pauses and vacations, to be pure coincidence.

I'm my own NPC alt.

SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#26 - 2016-10-14 20:34:19 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Tipa Riot wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Tipa Riot wrote:


... and you say already 75% increase in jobs will push the index by 1% point ... this the difference between one and two chars doing production ...



No, that's the difference between 3% and 4%, not the amount to bump it by 1% at any value, so that would only be true if one character were sufficient to hit 3% to begin with, which it generally isn't, afaict. It would be easier to calculate the thresholds with an approximate value for the total number of job-hours installed in the universe, but I don't know of anywhere that's available.

Ok, right. I'm not so familiar with the exact formula, but I see that my industry activity regularly bumps the index in my system by 0.5-1% point starting from a similar baseline. This correlates just too well with my pauses and vacations, to be pure coincidence.


It's Sqrt(SystemJobHoursInstalled/UniverseJobHoursInstalled) pretty much. So, index^2 is the rough percentage of job hours for the system. IIRC it's done as a running average over a week or so. The TL;DR is that an increasing index means an increasing number of job hours in the system to further raise the index.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Francis Podkill
Podkill Consolidated
#27 - 2016-10-15 05:35:09 UTC
Main issue with these are the ridiculous price tag compared to a POS.
I can do invention/research and production in one single medium POS with nice bonusses (hyasyoda, thukker component, etc) and offline/online whatever I feel like.

a 5B complex is unable to match the functionality of a 300m tower.

When replacing something you should at leas aim to have the same feature set as what you're removing, then improving from there. What's happening now is when you compare Complex with POS:

- Features / bonusses removed
- Price tag increased 7-30x
- Fuel cost increased
- Flexibility GREATLY reduced (pos deploys in an hour or so, ability to toggle modules removed)

Basicly CCP is proposing dropping pos without giving back a functioning alternative for small-med sized corps.
Alicia Dnari
Dnari Mining and Manufacturing
#28 - 2016-10-15 16:25:06 UTC
As one of the "smaller industrialists" I have to say that I could maybe put up a useful POS in high-sec. Maybe. If nobody blew it up. If I didn't try to keep it running all the time. If if if…

These other structures? No chance.
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#29 - 2016-10-16 09:09:19 UTC
Alicia Dnari wrote:
As one of the "smaller industrialists" I have to say that I could maybe put up a useful POS in high-sec. Maybe. If nobody blew it up. If I didn't try to keep it running all the time. If if if…

These other structures? No chance.

I've got a pretty old large POS, at 5.75 years old, and I've no real idea what I'm going to do.

I might try an Astrahus with a research lab, or just stick to NPC stations. I don't see a future for me in an EC.

Re: EC asset safety, keep in mind that it isn't free, its 15%.
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#30 - 2016-10-16 10:27:22 UTC
I have a small POS in highsec. The design lab justifies the cost in time savings for invention/copy jobs. I also have a couple of assembly arrays - ME bonus probably pays the fuel bill, I haven't crunched the numbers. Engineering Complexes in their current form have no place in the future of my highsec business - I'll use the POS until CCP removes it from the game and then work from an NPC station. For my nullsec alliance, on the other hand, EC's make perfect sense.

I don't see a lot of small industrialists moving to EC's owned by others unless CCP adds enforceable lease agreements to the game and I expect a lot of frustration if CCP tries to force us down that road. I don't see any need for a "small" Citadel but a small EC in the same price/functionality range as a small POS is something they should seriously consider - there are a lot of small industrial players in this game!
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2016-10-16 11:14:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tipa Riot
Nothing new, it's the same pattern we see since Citadel, play big or get out, or suck up to some landlord. The game becomes more and more polarized.

I'm my own NPC alt.

KenFlorian
Knight Odds
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#32 - 2016-10-16 13:46:03 UTC
My plan is to stay in my large POS until it blows up again or is removed from the game OR I can assemble a small group of formerly independent hgh-sec industrialists into a co-op. With neither in-game name cachet nor a clear idea of what this would mean in practice, it's probably not gonna happen


Now that 12 of the 13 solo high sec industrialists have weighed in on this thread and the 13th, NevilleSmit, said similar things on his blog, we can return to our former solitary lives.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#33 - 2016-10-18 18:53:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
Mephiztopheleze wrote:
Messenger Of Truth wrote:
All in all, I'm not convinced that these engineering complexes are an improvement for many hisec manufacturers. (Clearly they provide interesting improvements in null, low and WH space though).


If you want the safety of HiSec manufacturing, you have to accept some kind of trade-off in return for hanging onto CONCORD's apron strings.

If you want all the you beaut bonuses and goodies that come with holding Sov, go out and claim yourself some Sov. Protip: the ONLY actual real benefits of holding Sov are 1: Ability to anchor an SCSAA, 2: Certain iHub upgrades that give rather major benefits to hard-core mining corporations and 3: Sov POS Fuel Bonuses. That's pretty much it at the moment. In return for these somewhat meager rewards, you have a mountain of hassle and annoyances. Not least of which is playing Sov Lazor Shenanigans.


Also cyno jammers and jump bridges. Also system upgrades, which are kind of a big deal.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#34 - 2016-10-18 23:44:13 UTC
Crius utterly failed to turn industry into a group endeavour, despite this clearly being one of the design goals. The new structures provide much better permissions and access control. It looks like CCP has decided this is the time to make another push away from solo industry and towards corp structures. I think this is a positive change on the whole. But it will certainly impact solo indy.

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

SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#35 - 2016-10-19 20:18:39 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
Alicia Dnari wrote:
As one of the "smaller industrialists" I have to say that I could maybe put up a useful POS in high-sec. Maybe. If nobody blew it up. If I didn't try to keep it running all the time. If if if…

These other structures? No chance.

I've got a pretty old large POS, at 5.75 years old, and I've no real idea what I'm going to do.

I might try an Astrahus with a research lab, or just stick to NPC stations. I don't see a future for me in an EC.

Re: EC asset safety, keep in mind that it isn't free, its 15%.


It's free if there's an NPC station in system.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2016-10-19 22:39:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Tipa Riot
Zappity wrote:
Crius utterly failed to turn industry into a group endeavour, despite this clearly being one of the design goals. The new structures provide much better permissions and access control. It looks like CCP has decided this is the time to make another push away from solo industry and towards corp structures. I think this is a positive change on the whole. But it will certainly impact solo indy.

The problem IMO is, that production, like trading and most of PvE is better done solo ... simply because the payout does not scale with the number of people involved. Exceptions are Incursions (by design) and mining to some extent (fleet boosts, protection, hauler ...).

I'm my own NPC alt.

Zappity
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#37 - 2016-10-20 15:39:40 UTC
Tipa Riot wrote:
The problem IMO is, that production, like trading and most of PvE is better done solo ... simply because the payout does not scale with the number of people involved. Exceptions are Incursions (by design) and mining to some extent (fleet boosts, protection, hauler ...).

But isn't that about to change for production? The fact that a single structure will no longer be the optimal solution means that, for most people, an efficient operation will demand involvement with other people. This might be in the form of accessing publicly available facilities which specialise in production of [item category] or it may be a corp.

Efficient solo operations will demand multiple structures (or a single large one) owned by a single person. I think they will be less common going forward.

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

Arronicus
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#38 - 2016-10-22 06:21:35 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Tipa Riot wrote:
The problem IMO is, that production, like trading and most of PvE is better done solo ... simply because the payout does not scale with the number of people involved. Exceptions are Incursions (by design) and mining to some extent (fleet boosts, protection, hauler ...).

But isn't that about to change for production? The fact that a single structure will no longer be the optimal solution means that, for most people, an efficient operation will demand involvement with other people. This might be in the form of accessing publicly available facilities which specialise in production of [item category] or it may be a corp.

Efficient solo operations will demand multiple structures (or a single large one) owned by a single person. I think they will be less common going forward.


This mirrors my thoughts on the matter, and honestly, I think it's a good thing. Considering there's no longer serious issues of assett security (risk of theft from thieves in hangars with varying access headaches), I think people will be a LOT more likely to band together to share these sorts of structures. Interestingly, via standings, you could also create a production alliance of small corps not vulnerable to one single wardec, by having them not in the same alliance together, but each simply granting each other docking access to their engineering complexes.

Even though I am a multiboxer, and do all the jobs for my own production, what really keeps me in eve, and MANY other players, is the social interaction, which is something you simply dont get in solo corps. I definitely think this style of creating a middle mode, a blend between outpost and post (albeit with non-existant defences) is a very nice compromise, even if the fuel cost seems kinda harsh. Though I did hear rumors about the fuel consumption getting slashed on production services?
SurrenderMonkey
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#39 - 2016-10-22 15:30:13 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Tipa Riot wrote:
The problem IMO is, that production, like trading and most of PvE is better done solo ... simply because the payout does not scale with the number of people involved. Exceptions are Incursions (by design) and mining to some extent (fleet boosts, protection, hauler ...).

But isn't that about to change for production? The fact that a single structure will no longer be the optimal solution means that, for most people, an efficient operation will demand involvement with other people. This might be in the form of accessing publicly available facilities which specialise in production of [item category] or it may be a corp.

Efficient solo operations will demand multiple structures (or a single large one) owned by a single person. I think they will be less common going forward.



Well, sort of. I think it's more accurate to say that owning the infrastructure supporting production is about to become more of a team support.

The actual operational aspects of the production process, specifically, will still be a solo thing, imo.

This is a lot like some PvE, as well - most people run anomalies solo, but the infrastructure to support that (holding sov, entrapment arrays, whatever) is a group thing.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2016-10-22 16:38:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Tipa Riot
The point I want to make is, that the payout = profit of production is not scaling with more people involved. Say you produce one Sleipnir, then you can split the work between different people, doing invention, T1 and T2 production each in their specialist EC ... but finally you sell only one Sleipnir, and the market can absorb only a limited amount of Sleipnirs per time. So the profit from this one Sleipnir goes to 3 people now, but you can't just produce 3x the numbers to compensate ...

Hence the most efficient way will still be the solo industrialist with an army of alts.

I'm my own NPC alt.