These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Malcanis for CSM 8 Vote till you drop

First post
Author
Xearal
Dead's Prostitutes
The Initiative.
#521 - 2013-03-07 23:12:44 UTC
I sort of stumbled across you while browsing other topics that you commented on.

I think you will be a great asset to the CSM and CCP and Eve were you on the council. You will definitely have my ( and my alts ) votes.

Being an industrialist myself ( though not super 'hardcore', but not a small blip either ), I've poured over spreadsheets, did the math-fu, and found out that yes, as things are at the moment, there's no real point in doing Industry in Nullsec, unless you're either a massive industrial machine, or the guy in an alliance that builds supers en masse for said alliance.

Convenience, Risk, production costs, estimated margins, everything on my sheets tell me, doing industry at my level ( about 6-8B turnover a month ) is simply not worth it. Which really makes me sad, because I've gotten rather bored sitting in high sec. Hence between my hauling runs and production setups, I tend to live my life in NPC null and in low-sec.

Does railgun ammunition come in Hollow Point?

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#522 - 2013-03-08 06:57:19 UTC
Thank you. It is precisely people like you that I would dearly love to see enabled to come to 0.0.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#523 - 2013-03-08 07:56:07 UTC
Not just enabled, encouraged.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Frying Doom
#524 - 2013-03-08 07:56:17 UTC
Hello I am wondering as to your opinion of this

Frying Doom wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
How much is the cost to keep an NPC station in highsec running (that people use like crazy) again?

Well as the objective of this from my perspective is for player structures to be better than NPC ones. So the cost to use a slot would be more than that of a player owned one.

For the costs of the facilities you would need to ask CCP as that is a lore thingy.

But on a case of balancing, I can see the need for making an Outpost good with a slot usage isk sink involved but as to the number of slots.

Tippia wrote:
If CCP allowed multiple outposts per system, most nulsec areas would then have the potential to easily equal hisec for industry and research, but you would have to work for it.
Actually, it wouldn't. Outposts are still so hideously unable to even begin to come close to the capabilities of even a single station that you'd run out of planets long before you got something that even remotely resembled a highsec system.

I suppose I'll have to post my standard improvement requirement list in this thread too…

1. One outpost per system probably has to remain for sov reasons (sov needs a revamp, but let's break one thing at a time).
2. Every outpost type gets 50 each of every industry slot type. Industry-specific outposts get twice that (up from a best-case scenario of 10 of one type).
3. Every outpost type gets 20 offices; Gallente outposts get twice that (up from 4–8 / 24).
4. Every outpost type gets a 30% refinery; a 50% refinery is a single basic upgrade.
5. Basic industry upgrades add 50 each of every slot type (up from 5 of a specific type); Intermediate upgrades add 100 (up from 7); Advanced upgrades add 150 (up from 9). Time bonuses could probably remain the same.


So an Advanced upgraded Outpost would have 350 slots of each type (Industry Type having 400).

That is a lot of slots
NPC stations have normally 50 manufacturing slots, 10 copy slots. 20 Invention slots. 20 material research slots and 20 time efficiency research slots.

Frankly I thought my position (as you can only have one per system) of 50% of what you are requesting, with 75% as an out side was frankly a bit unbalanced towards outposts given the extra risk involved in an Outpost. but the fact that you will not take less than what is a massive number of slots is frankly a bit naive as you would frankly be lucky to get 50% of what was asked for.


Yet having five high sec systems that out produce all of nullsec combined is perfectly fine. Even with 400 slots high sec would out produce null. What exactly is unbalanced about tippias idea?

Ok so lets just look at Goonswarm and Test the biggest 2 to answer that.

Goonswarm 71 outposts
Test alliance 67 Out posts

So combined 138 Outposts
So under Tippias proposal they would have 48300 Manufacturing slots equaling 966 Hi-sec stations
48300 Copy Slots equaling 4830 High sec stations
48300 Invention slots equaling 2415 Hi-sec stations
48300 Material Research Stations equaling 2415 Hi-sec stations
48300 Time Efficiency Research equaling 2415 Hi-sec stations.

These calculations done at 350 per station so assuming they all have advanced upgrades but are not Industry type.

All of Hi-sec Empire contains 2996 Stations so just between the outposts owned by goonswarm and TEST would be greater than the manufacturing capability of the whole of high sec.
So yeah I do feel that would be unbalanced and having gone over the numbers like this I would be more inclined to say 5-10% of the amount you want would be balanced.


In relation to a rebalancing of industry via the prioritization of reward=risk*capital expendature

What would you consider to be a fair balanced number of slots for outposts? with the assumption that bot they and NPC stations had an isk sink usage cost, presuming you are not against that idea.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#525 - 2013-03-08 07:58:18 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Not just enabled, encouraged.


He doesn't need encouraging; he already wants to. The problem is that he has analysed the situation and decided, correctly, that he'd be heavily penalised in his chosen profession for doing so.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#526 - 2013-03-08 09:17:01 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:


What would you consider to be a fair balanced number of slots for outposts? with the assumption that bot they and NPC stations had an isk sink usage cost, presuming you are not against that idea.


If CCP give me Outpost-focused wishes, what I would like to see is outposts that are defined by being a bonus platform that can be customised with modules - very analogous to fitting a ship.

To use an example, an Amarr outpost should have a unique and unduplicatable manufacturing bonus, something that no NPC station has and no other outpost can get, just as a ship (For example, a Force Recon) has a specific set of bonuses.

The players should then be able to customise the outpost as they like. The model I'd like to see is that outposts have 4 prime characteristics; manufacturing, refining, research and offices. Each outpost should therefore have 10 upgrade slots; 4 primary, 3 secondary, 2 tertiary, 1 quaternary. The Primary slots will always be dedicated to that outpost's bonused function: Amarr outposts can fit 4 manufacturing upgrades, 3 upgrades of whatever the owners decide is that station's secondary function, 2 for what the tertiary function is and 1 for what the quaternary function. Likewise, a Caldari station can fit 4 research upgrades, etc etc. An upgrade would cost 1B for the first in a function, 2B for the second, 3B for the 3rd, 4B for the 4th. So to completely upgrade an outpost with 10 upgrades would cost 10 + 6 + 3 + 1 = 19 billion ISK

As for the precise numbers, obviously that's up to CCP, but a fully upgraded Amarr station should provide at least as many slots as a top-end hi-sec system (400-450). That obviously implies +100 slots per upgrade level.

I haven't gone over the numbers of research slots needed yet, but again the principle of a fully upgraded Caldari outpost being at least as good as the best hi-sec systems should be maintained.

On a side note, I'd be absolutely fine with outpost upgrades being a shootable service and a suitable medium-gang objective to provoke fights.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Frying Doom
#527 - 2013-03-08 09:21:50 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:


What would you consider to be a fair balanced number of slots for outposts? with the assumption that bot they and NPC stations had an isk sink usage cost, presuming you are not against that idea.


If CCP give me Outpost-focused wishes, what I would like to see is outposts that are defined by being a bonus platform that can be customised with modules - very analogous to fitting a ship.

To use an example, an Amarr outpost should have a unique and unduplicatable manufacturing bonus, something that no NPC station has and no other outpost can get, just as a ship (For example, a Force Recon) has a specific set of bonuses.

The players should then be able to customise the outpost as they like. The model I'd like to see is that outposts have 4 prime characteristics; manufacturing, refining, research and offices. Each outpost should therefore have 10 upgrade slots; 4 primary, 3 secondary, 2 tertiary, 1 quaternary. The Primary slots will always be dedicated to that outpost's bonused function: Amarr outposts can fit 4 manufacturing upgrades, 3 upgrades of whatever the owners decide is that station's secondary function, 2 for what the tertiary function is and 1 for what the quaternary function. Likewise, a Caldari station can fit 4 research upgrades, etc etc. An upgrade would cost 1B for the first in a function, 2B for the second, 3B for the 3rd, 4B for the 4th. So to completely upgrade an outpost with 10 upgrades would cost 10 + 6 + 3 + 1 = 19 billion ISK

As for the precise numbers, obviously that's up to CCP, but a fully upgraded Amarr station should provide at least as many slots as a top-end hi-sec system (400-450). That obviously implies +100 slots per upgrade level.

I haven't gone over the numbers of research slots needed yet, but again the principle of a fully upgraded Caldari outpost being at least as good as the best hi-sec systems should be maintained.

On a side note, I'd be absolutely fine with outpost upgrades being a shootable service and a suitable medium-gang objective to provoke fights.


Actually after reading that it is a shame such a thing would probably require more resources than CCP would ever delicate.

Having a station that can be fully customizable actually sounds kind of neat.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#528 - 2013-03-08 09:27:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcanis
tbh there's not much in my ~wish~ that should be all that development-intensive. Outpost upgrades already exist, they're just insultingly terrible and eye-wateringly expensive. Increasing the number of upgrades, changing the amount of slots they give and reducing their cost should all be fairly simple. The code for shootable services already exists. The only really new part would be the fitting limitations.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Fearghaz Tiwas
Perkone
Caldari State
#529 - 2013-03-08 14:10:36 UTC
Malcanis has clearly thought about EVE in the bigger picture and the balance required between different play-styles. His philosophy holds true to what I see as the correct vision for EVE. Keep Hi-sec interesting, and make null sec more diverse.

Definitely getting my vote
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#530 - 2013-03-08 14:16:13 UTC
Fearghaz Tiwas wrote:
Malcanis has clearly thought about EVE in the bigger picture and the balance required between different play-styles. His philosophy holds true to what I see as the correct vision for EVE. Keep Hi-sec interesting, and make null sec more diverse.

Definitely getting my vote


Apparenlty he also thinks that double-taxing novice miners in hisec is good for something... but don't ask him what. Question
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#531 - 2013-03-08 14:18:45 UTC
(If you don't ask me, then you won't get an answer that she doesn't like!)

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#532 - 2013-03-08 14:19:48 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Apparenlty he also thinks that double-taxing novice miners in hisec is good for something... but don't ask him what. Question

Care to step up to the plate with an elucidation of what you're on about?

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#533 - 2013-03-08 14:25:09 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Apparenlty he also thinks that double-taxing novice miners in hisec is good for something... but don't ask him what. Question

Care to step up to the plate with an elucidation of what you're on about?


Checkable facts are just null zealot propoganda, Zim. You know that!

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#534 - 2013-03-08 14:26:18 UTC
Oops. My bad.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Indahmawar Fazmarai
#535 - 2013-03-08 14:34:18 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Apparenlty he also thinks that double-taxing novice miners in hisec is good for something... but don't ask him what. Question

Care to step up to the plate with an elucidation of what you're on about?


Checkable facts are just null zealot propoganda, Zim. You know that!


I am waiting for an answer, what's the purpose to double tax novice miners by NPC taxing the hisec refining of minerals? It's a pretty simple question. Question
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#536 - 2013-03-08 14:39:02 UTC
That's not "double taxing novice miners", that's single taxing hi-sec miners.

The purpose is to emulate the NPC corp tax, ie: to allow scope for player owned facilities to tax their members while having to compete against free, invulnerable NPC facilities.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#537 - 2013-03-08 14:40:40 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
double tax

Elucidation is requested.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Fearghaz Tiwas
Perkone
Caldari State
#538 - 2013-03-08 16:31:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Fearghaz Tiwas
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Fearghaz Tiwas wrote:
Malcanis has clearly thought about EVE in the bigger picture and the balance required between different play-styles. His philosophy holds true to what I see as the correct vision for EVE. Keep Hi-sec interesting, and make null sec more diverse.

Definitely getting my vote


Apparenlty he also thinks that double-taxing novice miners in hisec is good for something... but don't ask him what. Question


You mean taxing all miners in high sec? And in fact margin traders I believe... sounds about right. Hi sec taxes are stupidly low for the benefits people get
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#539 - 2013-03-10 13:14:20 UTC
No but you see highsec is supposed to be the best at absolutely everything with no downsides whatsoever, just like CCP intended!

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Xearal
Dead's Prostitutes
The Initiative.
#540 - 2013-03-11 18:33:54 UTC
Thanks for the reply Malcanis! :)

Aside from outposts, what I personally would like to see is POSses getting a good upgrade.
Get rid of the forcefield, put every thign you anchor now inside the POS as modules, and let people dock up into one.

The biggest benefits of this would be, you'd no longer have the hassle of moving stuff from one bay to another, or corp hangar to manufacturing bay and such, it would allow for setting up a more personal space for a corp member in a POS by allocating part of the general corp bay to personal use. Personal POSses woudl also be possible, giving the power of an individual to setup a manufacturing empire anywhere at the price of using a POS.
Also, it would make leaving BPO's and such at a POS a less risky proposal, as right now, if your POS goes into reinforce when you have stuff in it, you can't take it out until it's repaired ( modules are offline etc. )

As for the docking bay itself, it would be a limited bay, with X m3 hangar bay for ships and Y M3 for other stuff, possibly with additional room implemented by Silo modules for moongoo and such. As a corp pos, part of this could be allocated to individual players so they have their 'own' little space inside the POS to do their thing.

Anyway.. I'm rambling on.. if you want to hear more about my silly ideas on POS revamps, Mail me ;)

Does railgun ammunition come in Hollow Point?