These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: Starbase happy fun time

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#141 - 2011-11-07 16:46:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Is it entirely impossible to give the towers different fuel cycle times, or does that complicate the matter too much?

IOW, faction towers have a cycle time of (say) 1h 5 minutes instead of a flat 1h, so that after a full day, it has only gone through ~22 fuel cycles.



edit: note to self — reload the page before posting in order to note the many other posts saying the same thing… Oops
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#142 - 2011-11-07 16:46:48 UTC
These changes are horrible and will obviously favor the big power blocks over the little guys, and will drive people out of wormholes! Derpity derp sandbox!

Wait, wrong thread - this sounds fantastic :)

Very nice CCP.

+1 on the color-coded racial fuel pellets.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Silk Vixen
Perkone
Caldari State
#143 - 2011-11-07 16:46:52 UTC
Tazmikella wrote:
Seriously. Do you want to just kill the game? It is good intent to create "blocks" that people can use to fuel, but you are going about it all wrong and will harrass to stop people from using POSes all together.

Couldn't have put it better myself.
Crunchmeister
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#144 - 2011-11-07 16:47:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Crunchmeister
I like the concept of the fuel blocks. I like the standings systems for jump bridges too. This should have been done I have a long time ago.

few problems with the fuel system as proposed though.

1. Fuel block runs are too small and take too long to produce. This is going to tie up assembly lines for a long period of time for people producing their own fuel.

2. Faction towers are essentially nerfed to hell with this making them no more valuable than a regular tower. So now to I buy a regular tower for 150M isk, or a faction tower for 2+B isk... That's now a no brainer.

3. Fuel bonuses due to sov need to be worked out. Reasons to hold sov are already becoming more scarce. If we're losing the fuel bonus from sov, then it's 1 less reason to hold sov in a system.

People were constantly telling me I was crazy. For a long time I didn't believe them, but after a while, I started to think they might be right.

But it turns out that they were all wrong. One of the voices in my head is a psychiatrist and he says I'm perfectly sane.

Silk Vixen
Perkone
Caldari State
#145 - 2011-11-07 16:47:29 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Is it entirely impossible to give the towers different fuel cycle times, or does that complicate the matter too much?

IOW, faction towers have a cycle time of (say) 1h 5 minutes instead of a flat 1h, so that after a full day, it has only gone through ~22 fuel cycles.

Not if you're lazy like Greyscale!
Harleigh
Genbuku.
Psycho Unicorn Squad
#146 - 2011-11-07 16:47:32 UTC
Maybe for some of the larger operators out there, they like the Faction tower fuel bonus as an way to extend time, but there are a number of us including myself who invested in the faction towers to get the benefits of reduced consumption in situations where we could not achieve it using sovereignty such as high/ low sec towers.

Given the high costs of fuels these days is there no way that the fuel consumption bonuses can be re-evaluated? Given that the small uses 1 block , Med 2 and the large 4 .. how about the factions just using 3 ? That would drop to 2 in 0.0 where sov is achieved just like it is today that would put a large faction burn at 50% of a large.

This would keep the other half of us happy and remove the need to manipulate the fuel bay sizes at all.
Raid'En
#147 - 2011-11-07 16:47:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Raid'En
nevermind, i misread.


you should edit the blog, the "4 units" thing is too easy to misunderstand. i saw dozen of guys who read it wrong like me.
Dalton Vanadis
Imperium Technologies
Sigma Grindset
#148 - 2011-11-07 16:48:06 UTC
Largo Coronet wrote:
Scrapyard Bob wrote:
Approximate POS fuel costs per 30 days right now:

Amarr: 136 / 213 / 366
Caldari: 140 / 220 / 381
Gallente: 176 / 291 / 523
Minmatar: 139 / 217 / 375

Estimated costs after the fuel pellets get introduced:

Amarr: 87 / 171 / 341
Caldari: 90 / 178 / 354
Gallente: 122 / 241 / 480
Minmatar: 89 / 175 / 348
Question: Do these estimates factor in sov costs?

And one more thing: Instead of the "half-and-half" baloney, why not just give all existing POS a month's free fuel and have done with it? None of this "HAY! LET'S INCLUDE A NEEDLESSLY STUPID TRANSITIONAL PERIOD THAT MAKES EVERY CORPS LOGISTICS TEAM RUN AROUND LIKE HAMSTERS ON SPEED FOR A WEEK!"

For ONCE, can you stop trying fancy crap and just swap over with a pile of free stuff to make the change easy?

This probably was the simplest solution for the dev team to implement, especially given how many other projects are going on and their stated planned full overhaul of the POS system. The downfall is that yeah, corps run around like mad and the market goes ballistic for a month, but that happens every expansion; get over it.
MooKids
Azure Twilight Engineering
#149 - 2011-11-07 16:48:11 UTC
I'm sure it has been said, but I can't bother looking through all the pages.

But for the faction towers, how about instead of increasing the fuel bay size to compensate, the fuel cycle is increased. So regular towers are once an hour, tier 1 faction are one hour and 15 minutes, tier 2 faction are one hour and 30 minutes, or something like that. I'm sure that is a change everyone would be happy with.
Gizan
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#150 - 2011-11-07 16:48:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizan
So, let me get this strait, your making it cost MORE to run towers now? your fuel blocks use almost twice what my medium gally tower uses now!

Furture
* 8x Coolant
* 4x Enriched Uranium
* 400x relevant racial Isotope
* 4x Mechanical Parts
* 20x Oxygen
* 1x Robotics
* 150x Heavy Water
* 150x Liquid Ozone
Current
4x coolant
2x Enriched uranium
225 isotopes
3x mech parts
1x robos
32x LO
10X HW
Callic Veratar
#151 - 2011-11-07 16:49:21 UTC
Tazmikella wrote:
8x Coolant
4x Enriched Uranium
400x relevant racial Isotope
4x Mechanical Parts
20x Oxygen
1x Robotics
150x Heavy Water
150x Liquid Ozone


Read the blog, and the 15 responses to this again. You get 4 blocks for the that price. Cost for starbases did not just quadruple.
Jenn Makanen
Doomheim
#152 - 2011-11-07 16:49:35 UTC
Just a quick question for people using Faction Towers.

How long does it take for the fuel savings to make up for the cost of buying the tower in the first place?

(If you bought it when they were cheaper, it's another matter)
Neo Agricola
Gallente Federation
#153 - 2011-11-07 16:50:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Neo Agricola
Gizan wrote:
So, let me get this strait, your making it cost MORE to run towers now? your fuel blocks use almost twice what my medium gally tower uses now!

Nope.
more or less the same...

EDIT:
except faction / sov issue..

DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=706442#post706442 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710
Praerian
Perkone
Caldari State
#154 - 2011-11-07 16:50:45 UTC
Faction POSES need sorting better.

Make Faction poses only cycle fuel every two hours instead of one, they need some lovin.
Kalissa
Sacred Templars
Fraternity.
#155 - 2011-11-07 16:50:59 UTC
I swear there is just too much common sense coming from CCP these days. Lol

Who are you people and what have you done with the real CCP???



Nice going guys!
Creat Posudol
German Oldies
#156 - 2011-11-07 16:51:15 UTC
Taedrin wrote:
I am actually somewhat unhappy with these changes.

1) Having virtually EVERYTHING anchor and online in seconds is WAY too fast. It would be better, IMO, to allow multiple items to anchor/online at once, or to be able to queue up anchoring/onlining actions around a tower so that you can simply tell the tower where you want everything to be, and it will anchor it for you - freeing you up to go do some other activity instead of having to sit there and baby-sit the thing.

That would most likely be a much more complicated change: instead of just adjusting a couple of database entries you'd have to implement a way to queue or (un-)anchor modules in parallel. The dev blog and posts by devs in this thread have made it quite clear that they are working on or towards a real solution to the disaster which are POS'. I'd rather see them spend some small amount of time on quick and easy fixes, which also achieve a goal well enough, instead of using much more time to rework the current system with similar results. That time can be used to either fix something else or work on the new system already (fingers crossed!).

I do agree though that it shouldn't be possible to anchor and online a tower in mid-combat, apart from that the change seems just fine though
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#157 - 2011-11-07 16:51:49 UTC
can you even get faction towers anymore? i heard they don't drop bpcs or w/e anymore.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#158 - 2011-11-07 16:51:51 UTC
seriously cut out the cycle time nonsense

it's way easier to increase blocks produced and do different fuel consumption amounts cause that breaks nothing and requires no new code

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Dalton Vanadis
Imperium Technologies
Sigma Grindset
#159 - 2011-11-07 16:52:37 UTC
Kralin Ignatov wrote:
mkint wrote:
Old system: Do math, haul fuel to POS

New system: do easier math, haul fuel to POS, haul assembly arrays to POS, re-manufacture fuel

This whole things sounds like another nerf to low/null/w-space PI for those who make their own fuel.


Nope. Since you can't get all the ice fuel from w-space anyways, and unlikely to get all componets from the planets, you'll be buying fuel blocks in k-space anyways. easier math, easier to haul, etc.

As for low sec / null sec, you are gonna need to refine that ice anyways, which requires a refining array or station already. This just requires more uses of production slots. So I hope CCP plans to boost those.


Usually it's been pretty easy to make all the PI in the wh systems I've been in. And hauling ice in is already done. It's still an extra mod on the POS though, however, run it for a week, get fuel for a weeks, it all works out.
Grace Murray
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#160 - 2011-11-07 16:52:41 UTC
Wow, thanks for yet another w-space nerf in the winter patch. Now, not only is PI going to cost us a lot more, but instead of fueling our tower mostly on PI goods from in our system, and only needing to haul in ice goo for fuel, we either need to buy it ALL, or haul everything out, find a nearby factory, buy ice goo, and haul it all back in again.

CCP, PLEASE stop only considering the "big alliance in nullsec" case when you design these things. That's not your entire player base, and homogenizing your game takes out a lot of what makes it cool in the first place.