These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Inaccuracies in official materials regarding manufacturing are resulting in misunderstanding
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Velicitia
XS Tech
#21 - 2013-10-18 02:21:00 UTC
Tippia wrote:
(stuff)


Hi Tippia ... been a while how you been? Cool

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Kialopreyst
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2013-10-18 02:53:53 UTC
Uppsy Daisy wrote:
Velicitia wrote:
You're understanding the maths (and what ME and PE actually ARE) incorrectly.

Your corn silo example is backwards, because it is applying wastage of one process (farming the field ... or, I guess refining would be the closest here) to the material requirements of another process (filling a silo .. or building a ship). I think the reason you're pointing this out is because the base materials are hidden from "general usage" and the BPOs just show the answers of the actual math that goes into figuring out the numbers.

1. EVERY character in this game has a 25% base wastage factor. Every level of Production Efficiency you train reduces this inherent waste factor by 5%. That is, PE 1 is reducing your character-induced waste to 20%, it is not necessarily a real-world gain of 5% (due to how the formula works, and the sheer volume of material we're talking about). Think of it like ... I dunno ... how good you are at carpentry.


2. You're also thinking backwards on how the waste factor goes. There's a rule of thumb with carpentry (or well, most any "manufacturing" profession) that you take your "needed materials" and add 5% (or so, I use 5%).

Using a 200' long fence, the BPO will have the following "base materials".

20 4x4 posts (they'll be spaced 5' apart)
200' 2x4 stringers (2 stringers between each post)
however many pickets (I don't care here).
5% Material Waste

Now, if you only buy the base materials, you will end up finding that somewhere along the line, there's something wrong with a post or a stringer, so you add in the BPO 5% waste factor when you buy your materials from the lumber yard, and end up taking home 21 posts and 210 feet of stringer.


And then, using this with your skills, you might end up needing more material. Let's say you have L4 PE.

The "Wooden Fence BPO" will then show the following:
Materials needed:
Fence Posts : 22 (you) 21 (perfect)
Stringers : 220' (you) 210 (perfect)

Now, if the "Wooden Fence BPO" had 10% material waste (you still have PE4):
Materials needed:
Fence Posts : 23 (you) 22 (perfect)
Stringers : 230' (you) 220' (perfect)



edit --> ME waste also applies to "Extra Materials" that are also included in the Materials list -- so a Shuttle that has 2500 base + 500 extra will have ME and PE waste factors shown against 3,000 units in the "Materials" columns, rather than showing whatever the ME/PE waste is for the 2500 materials and 500 Extra Materials. This is just a display bug, and you can work it out backwards to prove this (or use something like the fuzzwork BPO calculator that has the display operating properly).

edit 2 -> clarity


Hmm. Your counter explanation is almost impossible to understand, whereas the OPs is lovely and clear.

OP wins I'm afraid.


I'm no mathematical genius, but that was pretty straight forward.
Karrin Rawlter
The Darieux Society
#23 - 2013-10-18 03:50:55 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Karrin Rawlter wrote:
Did you read my initial post? I clearly understand how all of the mechanics work and have provided formulae for you. You have not addressed my assertion that declaring "Wastage Factor 10%" on a blueprint implies (Base Qty) = (Bill of Mats)*.9 whereas the game actually uses it to mean (Base Qty)*1.1 = (Bill of Mats)
Did you read my post? Because no, it implies no such thing, and your asserting that it does only shows that you're acting on presumptions rather than learn the mechanics. I did address it: it's a weird thing for you to do. The only inaccuracy in the whole thing is that presumption.


You still haven't read my original post I think. I learned the mechanics before posting and layed them out for you. This thread is about how the mechanics are presented to rookies.

As for it being weird, it's not. Many of the rookies I talked to thought that the 10% waste on a blueprint referred to 10% of the bill of a materials on a blueprint.

Also, anyone notice the irony of the recent Devblog on Spyhon Units using the term 'Wastage Factor' completely contrary to how it is used for blueprints?
Velicitia
XS Tech
#24 - 2013-10-18 09:16:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
Karrin Rawlter wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Karrin Rawlter wrote:
Did you read my initial post? I clearly understand how all of the mechanics work and have provided formulae for you. You have not addressed my assertion that declaring "Wastage Factor 10%" on a blueprint implies (Base Qty) = (Bill of Mats)*.9 whereas the game actually uses it to mean (Base Qty)*1.1 = (Bill of Mats)
Did you read my post? Because no, it implies no such thing, and your asserting that it does only shows that you're acting on presumptions rather than learn the mechanics. I did address it: it's a weird thing for you to do. The only inaccuracy in the whole thing is that presumption.


You still haven't read my original post I think. I learned the mechanics before posting and layed them out for you. This thread is about how the mechanics are presented to rookies.

As for it being weird, it's not. Many of the rookies I talked to thought that the 10% waste on a blueprint referred to 10% of the bill of a materials on a blueprint.

Also, anyone notice the irony of the recent Devblog on Spyhon Units using the term 'Wastage Factor' completely contrary to how it is used for blueprints?


(edit --> also, don't argue with tippia, you'll lose).

OK, stop. I know where your problem is .

You want to apply the waste to the "Bill of Materials", and that's not where the waste gets applied.

The "Bill of Materials" tab shows the exact number of units of something that you will need in order to build the BPO, without taking manufacturing array inefficiencies into account (the "Advanced" Ship Assembly Arrays add an additional 10% to what you need) ... and barring display inaccuracies.

The tab shows the RESULT of the formula that you put in your OP. Seriously, this is like, at worst Freshman Year Algebra.


A = 2500
B = 0
C = 1

X = A + ( ( ( 0.1 / ( 1 + B) * A) + (( 0.25 - ( 0.5 * C) ) * A ) <== solve for X.


And no, they're not doing it wrong with the siphon --> they're using the "Waste" against a known number, so it works like refining or your (horrible, TBH) corn refining example.

Output of a POS is 100 units of moongoo per hour, of which the siphon steals 60 (or 25). Of these 60 (25) units that are stolen, some of it is lost to transit (20%) ... so you end up with 48 (20) units of material actually in the siphon hold.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#25 - 2013-10-18 11:36:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Karrin Rawlter wrote:

You still haven't read my original post I think. I learned the mechanics before posting and layed them out for you.

You don't think very well and you're still missing the point: that your assertions are based on incorrect assumptions. The mechanics you lay put are described in such a way as to further suggest that you don't actually understand them.

Quote:
This thread is about how the mechanics are presented to rookies.

As for it being weird, it's not. Many of the rookies I talked to thought that the 10% waste on a blueprint referred to 10% of the bill of a materials on a blueprint.
…which is close enough not to matter. The blueprint shows the final calculation (other than facility penalties since rhe blueprint can't predict the future). Unless you have a perfect BP and perfect skills, that means it shows the materials cost including waste, not the base costs.

The mechanics are not presented differently to newbies that they are to anyone else. It's WYSIWYG all the way, and if they want to understand the maths behind what you get, they have the same source for it as everyone else. And yes, it is weird to just go by assumptions than to research and learn the actual mechanics. But that's your problem and had little to nothing to do with newbies.
Quote:
Also, anyone notice the irony of the recent Devblog on Spyhon Units using the term 'Wastage Factor' completely contrary to how it is used for blueprints?

How is it ironic that something that is not a blueprint does not use the mechancs of blueprints?
Jasmine Assasin
The Holy Rollers
#26 - 2013-10-18 14:55:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Jasmine Assasin
I don't know math very well but I know one thing for certain, if a BP says I need a certain amount of material then I should be able to produce said item with what the BP says.

Every time I have made something from a BP when I go to manufacture it I always end up having to buy more material.

This is my problem with production right now. I should be able to produce an item using exactly the material count the BP says. In practice it's never worked that way for me. I find it rather frustrating. That's what I want fixed.
Lady Areola Fappington
#27 - 2013-10-18 15:07:01 UTC
Oh god math. I was told there would be no math.

See, this is why I don't make things. One glance at the formulas, and I said "screw this I'll just go ganking".


CCP, encouraging ganking with high order mathematics erryday.

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#28 - 2013-10-18 15:27:40 UTC
Karrin Rawlter wrote:

As for it being weird, it's not. Many of the rookies I talked to thought that the 10% waste on a blueprint referred to 10% of the bill of a materials on a blueprint.




While i may, or may not agree with your OP, saying that because many rookies thought something makes it weird is a flawed suggestion.

Many rookies also think you can buy and sell to any order you want to on the market, actually, scratch that, many non-rookies also think that ^^

For me, "waste factor 10%" would mean I need 10% extra materials in order to do something, because 10% of them are going to be wasted because I suck at the task.

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Nanatoa
#29 - 2013-10-18 15:32:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Nanatoa
The system is quite simple and clear, OP just fails to understand it (despite it being explained very well by Tippia).

Perhaps if we dumb it down a bit:

Prod.Eff.0:
It takes 100 Widgets to produce a Superwidget. Your production efficiency sucks, so you will need to input 25% more widgets than are strictly needed. -> You take 125 Widgets and produce a Superwidget.

Prod.Eff.5:
It takes 100 Widgets to produce a Superwidget. You are God of Production and can do this perfectly. -> You take 100 Widgets and produce a Superwidget.

"Stay the course, we have done this many times before." - (CCP) Hilmar, June 2011
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#30 - 2013-10-18 15:33:39 UTC
Jasmine Assasin wrote:
I don't know math very well but I know one thing for certain, if a BP says I need a certain amount of material then I should be able to produce said item with what the BP says.

Every time I have made something from a BP when I go to manufacture it I always end up having to buy more material.

This is my problem with production right now. I should be able to produce an item using exactly the material count the BP says. In practice it's never worked that way for me. I find it rather frustrating. That's what I want fixed.



That's due to a display bug on the blueprints, when you have less than Production Efficiency 5. We're reported it, but so far, no fix.


I'd suggest using a blueprint calculator ([shameless plug] such as the one on my site [/shameless plug]) which displays all the numbers correctly.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Karrin Rawlter
The Darieux Society
#31 - 2013-10-18 16:21:04 UTC
I want everyone in this thread to pause and take a deep breath.

Now I want you all to understand that there is no question about how the manufacturing mechanics actually work. If you read my original post at the start of this thread you'd see that I understand the mechanics the way the game uses them. In fact, I spend the first half of my post proving how the game uses mechanics. So I don't need a 4th post saying "durr wastage factor means +% base". Or velicitia again trying to tell me "what I'm doing wrong". My in-game production matches exactly according to the math in the initial post. I do not need your advice or help.

Perhaps many of you are confusing my post with a request for clarification on how the mechanics work. If that is the case I urge you to improve your reading comprehension skills.

The point of the original post (again, all you have to do is actually read it) is to show that the way the mechanics are presented to rookies are misleading. I have shown that this is true in the 2nd half of my original post.

If I get one more post from some mouth-breathing lackawit telling me "here's what production efficiency actually does" I'm going to blow my brains out. That's a messy morning, so please, spare me the trouble and stop trying to explain to me how manufacturing works. Read the ******* original post and lets talk about how the concepts of wastage factor and production efficiency could be made clearer for the rookie player.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#32 - 2013-10-18 16:35:01 UTC
OK, but just to clarify, Velicitia is correct, and there's no other way to explain that what you are requesting in you OP is not helpful.
You keep saying "you can look at it either way", but you can't. The way you describe about the cornfield is talking about subtractive waste, while manufacturing is additive waste. That's why to you, it seems unclear. Please bear with an explanation that is as clear as I can muster, and try not to blow your brains out.

With subtractive waste, you have you input, and x amount of input goes to waste, while the rest goes to product. This is what you are saying. And this happens when you are doing things such as making drinks. You have X litres of raw material and it produces Y
litres of product.
Y = X - Waste. Subtractive waste.

With additive waste, you have a Product X, which has a set raw mass, and a set of materials Y. For this example we are manufacturing a chair. A chair is precise, it's no good having a chair with really short legs, while others don't they must all be the same, thus have the same material used. Now if you, your materials, your design, and your tools are all perfect, you won't lost any. But if not, then you may have excess off cuts of wood, or pieces you cut incorrectly and must discard. Those pieces are useless and thus discarded. This is additive waste, where the waste is in addiction to the raw material for manufacture. this is what EVE works on
X + Waste = Y

EVE manufacture works on additive waste, while refining works on subtractive waste. It's pretty much that simple, and the BPOs show it to be so.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Karrin Rawlter
The Darieux Society
#33 - 2013-10-18 16:44:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Karrin Rawlter
Lucas Kell wrote:
You keep saying "you can look at it either way", but you can't. The way you describe about the cornfield is talking about subtractive waste, while manufacturing is additive waste. That's why to you, it seems unclear. Please bear with an explanation that is as clear as I can muster, and try not to blow your brains out.


God damn it man. God damn it. I KNOW HOW THE ******* GAME WORKS. READ THE ORIGINAL POST. I do not misunderstand how the game works. I understand clearly everything you've just typed. Your typing was a total waste. I fully understand that the game formula is (Base qty) + (Wastage factor*base quantity), and your inability to comprehend that I am not asking for clarification of the mechanics makes me want to pull the trigger.

What I quoted you saying above is my explanation to Velicitia that 10% of the corn spoiling on the field and 10% of the corn spoiling in the machine are both the same, in your words "10% subtractive waste". Velicitia must have completely missed the point that the corn example was an example of how things would work if rookie's FALSE assumptions were true. I already understand that the game does not work like this. You are misunderstanding what my corn example references. The corn example is A DELIBERATELY INCORRECT EXAMPLE TO DISPLAY HOW ROOKIES THINK OF WASTAGE FACTOR. Please Please Please god read the original post. There's a big section right below the corn example where it says "BUT THIS IS NOT HOW EVE WORKS!"

NOW, do YOU see how listing '10% waste factor' on a blueprint, and listing the final total of inputs on a blueprint and nothing else, would lead most rookies to conclude that the 10% wastage factor on a blueprint equates to 10% of the bill of materials (aka the inputs), as these are the only two values displayed on a blueprint? Before you reply to this question it's important that you understand that I am not claiming the game works this way. I am merely suggesting that this is the way those two numbers incorrectly relate to rookies because they are both on the blueprint.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#34 - 2013-10-18 17:55:00 UTC
Karrin Rawlter wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
You keep saying "you can look at it either way", but you can't. The way you describe about the cornfield is talking about subtractive waste, while manufacturing is additive waste. That's why to you, it seems unclear. Please bear with an explanation that is as clear as I can muster, and try not to blow your brains out.


God damn it man. God damn it. I KNOW HOW THE ******* GAME WORKS. READ THE ORIGINAL POST. I do not misunderstand how the game works. I understand clearly everything you've just typed. Your typing was a total waste. I fully understand that the game formula is (Base qty) + (Wastage factor*base quantity), and your inability to comprehend that I am not asking for clarification of the mechanics makes me want to pull the trigger.

What I quoted you saying above is my explanation to Velicitia that 10% of the corn spoiling on the field and 10% of the corn spoiling in the machine are both the same, in your words "10% subtractive waste". Velicitia must have completely missed the point that the corn example was an example of how things would work if rookie's FALSE assumptions were true. I already understand that the game does not work like this. You are misunderstanding what my corn example references. The corn example is A DELIBERATELY INCORRECT EXAMPLE TO DISPLAY HOW ROOKIES THINK OF WASTAGE FACTOR. Please Please Please god read the original post. There's a big section right below the corn example where it says "BUT THIS IS NOT HOW EVE WORKS!"

NOW, do YOU see how listing '10% waste factor' on a blueprint, and listing the final total of inputs on a blueprint and nothing else, would lead most rookies to conclude that the 10% wastage factor on a blueprint equates to 10% of the bill of materials (aka the inputs), as these are the only two values displayed on a blueprint? Before you reply to this question it's important that you understand that I am not claiming the game works this way. I am merely suggesting that this is the way those two numbers incorrectly relate to rookies because they are both on the blueprint.
No, NOW I do not see how listing 10% waste and listing how many mats are required is an issue. The blueprint shows how many miners it needs. It also shows the % waste. So I know that display value / (1+waste)=base

How does changing the words wastage factor 10% to material factor 1.1, and putting either 4% or 20% on the production efficiency description suddenly make it better?
At present 5% of base mats is wasted per level of prod eff you are missing. So at max level that is 0%. If they change it to say "PE reduces the initial materials requirements for production by 4% per level. " Thats' subtractive waste, so they would need to change the way manufacture works. If they changed it to "PE reduces the additional materials required due to capsuleer inefficiency by 20% per level." then you'd need to look at what the what the 100% waste amount is, which shockingly is 25% of base cost. If any change is needed it needs to simply be put on Production Efficiency "Reduces manufacturing waste by 5% per level to 0% at level 5. Does not affect waste from blueprint quality."
Other than that, no, I don't think anything needs to be changed and even that is only barely an issue. I think you misunderstood it, you then proceeded to fire off an idea on GD to get it changed so it suit you, rather than being accurate to real world terminology, and now you rage out because we are pointing out that it IS using real world terms, and what you want is for it to be displayed in the way you work it out.
The reason we keep saying the same thing, is because both the skill and the wastage factor ARE showing what the game does, and makes full sense.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Karrin Rawlter
The Darieux Society
#35 - 2013-10-18 19:06:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Karrin Rawlter
Lucas Kell wrote:

The reason we keep saying the same thing, is because both the skill and the wastage factor ARE showing what the game does, and makes full sense.


Perhaps it makes sense to you only now that you have been playing the game for some months.

The thing is a factor is always supposed to be multiplied. So when EvE presents you with a factor of .10, and a bill of materials, those things should interact via some multiplication, either of the base or bill of materials. But the practical consequence of wastage factor is not to multiply the base by 0.10, or the bill by 0.90, but to multiply base by 1.10.
This relationship is not evident to rookies who look at the blueprint.

You gave a true formula assuming Prod Eff 5: (display value) / (1+waste factor)=base
Let me ask you, looking at the blueprint, how the hell is a rookie supposed to discern that?

Most rookies I've talked to thought that you multiplied something by the wastage factor (you don't) and/or that the wastage factor % was a % of the bill of mats (it isn't). Having that 'secret' 1+ in there (x +.1x = 1.1x) is confusing them.

Now, unless you think I'm lying and that I actually didn't talk to a bunch of rookies and vets about this over the past week, that's one issue. But if you accept that I talked to a lot of rookies, and a lot of them were confused, then please tell me how you think we can reduce this confusion.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#36 - 2013-10-18 19:18:56 UTC
Well I think you are the first I've ever met that was this confused. The 1+ is not secret, it's the standard way to work with additive percentages. Honestly, if a rookie is unable to perform that basic level of math, perhaps manufacturing is not for them.
I really don't think CCP could make it much simpler than it is already. You waste 10% and this this how many materials you will need to build item X - [list of materials]
I think making it 1.1 would be more confusing than a nice easy 10%

Honestly, if I think there's an area rookies will fall down on, it's figuring out how ML affects waste. Since a single level of Ml halves the wast, then halves it again, for an exponential reduction in saving per level.
This is why so many rookies spend months chucking hundreds of levels into ML when it's either not needed or costs far more than they save.
Take this for example, someone's selling an Antimatter Charge S BPO on contract with ML 100. It hit perfect ML (so 0% waste) at ML 36.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#37 - 2013-10-18 21:16:05 UTC
I agree with Lucas, and this post is very handy for that http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=348689

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Velicitia
XS Tech
#38 - 2013-10-18 22:05:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
Karrin Rawlter wrote:

NOW, do YOU see how listing '10% waste factor' on a blueprint, and listing the final total of inputs on a blueprint and nothing else, would lead most rookies to conclude that the 10% wastage factor on a blueprint equates to 10% of the bill of materials (aka the inputs), as these are the only two values displayed on a blueprint? Before you reply to this question it's important that you understand that I am not claiming the game works this way. I am merely suggesting that this is the way those two numbers incorrectly relate to rookies because they are both on the blueprint.


Actually, you can ...

(from wikipedia)

A bill of materials (sometimes bill of material or BOM) is a list of the raw materials, sub-assemblies, intermediate assemblies, sub-components, parts and the quantities of each needed to manufacture an end product.

(emphasis added)

You cannot, then, by definition have a "Bill of Materials" that is subject to additional waste (excepting that the facilities you're using are worse off than anticipated --> EVE Equivalent is an Advanced Ship Assembly Array). The BOM tab even goes so far to say "This is everything you need, unless you use a sub-par manufacturing facillity"


Edit --> also, there's really no need to be so upset sounding ... we're trying to help, and all you're doing is continuing to go on about how something with the math (or the way BPOs work) is incorrect.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Velicitia
XS Tech
#39 - 2013-10-18 22:17:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Velicitia
Karrin Rawlter wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:

The reason we keep saying the same thing, is because both the skill and the wastage factor ARE showing what the game does, and makes full sense.


Let me ask you, looking at the blueprint, how the hell is a rookie supposed to discern that?


Work it in reverse -- same as the most bitter (or would that be "veteran"?) of bittervets had to do.

As far as I know it, CCP has never actually published the formulas. Yeah, they've confirmed things after the players have come up with it ... but looking as far back as I can (thank you old forums, google, wayback machine, etc), there is not a post from CCP to the effect of "OK Manufacturers, here's the formula for how we calculate waste on a BPO".

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#40 - 2013-10-18 22:34:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
Baggo Hammers wrote:
Move this to Science and Industry where the really OCD folks can have a whack at it!

Someone call me?

Not looking at any math, I must agree that there are several examples of poor descriptions in the EVE client. I've complained / filed bug reports over the years about some of them, and the responses I've gotten leaned towards the RP / lore side of excuses.

I also think that manufacturing is slowly getting more and more needlessly complex.

As for math, it is clearer to express it as:

Total Material Amount = base material amount * (1.25 + base waste / (ML + 1) - Production Efficiency * 5%)

base material amount = ROUND(material amount on a ML 0 BPO / (1 + waste on a ML 0 BPO)) at "perfect" skill
base waste = waste on a ML 0 BPO

The base waste on extra material is 0%.
Previous page123Next page