These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Dev blog: Building better Worlds

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#101 - 2014-04-15 16:02:38 UTC
Are there any plans to provide some other reason to have faction standings? Selling POS corps was a small but reasonable income stream for anyone who took the time and effort to grind out faction standings. I'm not exactly sad to see that mechanic go, but it does mean faction standings are now essentially useless. Other than those few (not at all worth the effort) one-time BPC agents at the extreme upper end, it seems like faction standings are nothing more than an RP thing now.
Morphisat
Millard Innovation Inc
#102 - 2014-04-15 16:03:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Morphisat
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Garth of Izar wrote:
how does this effect locked down BPOs? Can't lock down at a POS AFAIK


Yes, we had a look at that as well. Allowing people to lock blueprints down in Starbases with current vote / lock mechanics would not be a good idea, so it won't be possible for now.


Well this doesn't look like a good idea. People do manufacture other stuff besides Ammo and Hammerheads II. Even still, when those get stolen you need to reresearch them, etc etc. Even (researched) battleship and BC bpos are rather pricey, you can really expect people to just keep them at a POS. I guess you can copy them and use the copies. But still ...

All the other stuff sounds good though, really like the screenshot shown here. Just the moving around of BPOs / BPCs sounds cumbersome.
H3llHound
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2014-04-15 16:03:35 UTC
Devs, have you considered that reducing the copy time on T2 BPOs can lead to a big value decrease to invention?

Right now Invention has the plus of making huge volumes to make good profits by using ten lines. Lets say T2 Ammo: WIth one T2 BPO i can only run one assembly line but have the bonus of decreased time per cycle and reduced materials. With Invention I need more time, use more materials but can run 10 assembly lines at the same time.

Now with enough time a T2 BPO owner could come to a point where he also has 10 assembly lines running with his T2 BPCs from his researched T2 BPO, thus having a huge adventage over those who run invention.
El 1974
Green Visstick High
#104 - 2014-04-15 16:03:54 UTC
Jai Centarium wrote:
I'm slightly concerned about the removal of standings requirements for high-sec POSes. POS spam is bad, and should be something reserved for high-end industrial corps, not every 1-month old character with Anchoring III and a ton of ISK from selling a PLEX.

Maybe change how those standings requirements are used?

Something like instead of charters as fuel, you're required to pay the soverign empire a certain amount of ISK every month for anchoring rights, or else their navy shows up and blows your POS to hell? That way a corp with mixed members can just pay the fee (opening up high-sec POSes to larger corps that may have diverse members, but consequently, better tax income), while a small, focused corp can still get in the door.

Starbase charter consumption should depend on standing.
Valterra Craven
#105 - 2014-04-15 16:03:57 UTC
A dev blog on industry and still no nuking of t2 bpos to make actual t2 production competitive = a fail dev blog
Nemo Sokarad
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#106 - 2014-04-15 16:04:45 UTC
Does this mean that it will be possible to ME research POS and POS module BPOs now or will their materials still be listed under Extra Materials?
Morphisat
Millard Innovation Inc
#107 - 2014-04-15 16:05:39 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:
A dev blog on industry and still no nuking of t2 bpos to make actual t2 production competitive = a fail dev blog


Well I guess CCP can't please everybody ;).
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#108 - 2014-04-15 16:06:05 UTC
And another question: When can we expect the replacement of the POS code with something more ... modern ... more intuitive ... less soul crushing? Hopefully before the next decade is half over?Roll

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
Aareya
Backwater Redux
Tactical Narcotics Team
#109 - 2014-04-15 16:06:08 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
penifSMASH wrote:
How will cost scaling affect industry in conquerable stations? Will there be unlimited manufacturing/research/etc slots like in npc stations? If so will the station owner still be able to set costs of running jobs

Grarr Dexx wrote:
Will there be fees for building in 0.0 or can they just set them all to 0? Is there going to be any point to building anything outside of 0.0?


The cost scaling will affect all build/research locations, including conquerable stations and outposts. All slot limitations are being removed everywhere in EVE, and locations that formerly had slot bonuses will receive other bonuses instead. More info on that will be in future blogs.

The industry outpost upgrades to null sec outposts (particularly, the Amarr ones) primarily focus on the increase of industry slots. With the removal of slot limitation, will you be altering the bonuses involved with these outpost upgrades?

Twitter:   @AareyaEVE
Blastcaps Madullier
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#110 - 2014-04-15 16:06:27 UTC
"Any industry feature must be balanced around our risk versus reward philosophy"

Does this mean your finaly going to nerf moon mining to rebalance RISK vs reward? :)
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#111 - 2014-04-15 16:06:42 UTC
penifSMASH wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
penifSMASH wrote:
How will cost scaling affect industry in conquerable stations? Will there be unlimited manufacturing/research/etc slots like in npc stations? If so will the station owner still be able to set costs of running jobs

Grarr Dexx wrote:
Will there be fees for building in 0.0 or can they just set them all to 0? Is there going to be any point to building anything outside of 0.0?


The cost scaling will affect all build/research locations, including conquerable stations and outposts. All slot limitations are being removed everywhere in EVE, and locations that formerly had slot bonuses will receive other bonuses instead. More info on that will be in future blogs.

Station owners will be able to set part of the cost of running jobs (in the form of taxes), but other parts of the cost will be out of the owner's control. Costs will not ever be able to be set to zero. Again, more info on this will be available in the upcoming blogs.


Where does this mysterious cost go to? Currently, market taxes, clone costs, industry costs and any fees that are station related go to the corp that owns the conquerable.


The taxes go to the corp that owns the station, the scaling costs (more info will be coming in a future blog) are sunk out of the game.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#112 - 2014-04-15 16:07:47 UTC
Aareya wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
penifSMASH wrote:
How will cost scaling affect industry in conquerable stations? Will there be unlimited manufacturing/research/etc slots like in npc stations? If so will the station owner still be able to set costs of running jobs

Grarr Dexx wrote:
Will there be fees for building in 0.0 or can they just set them all to 0? Is there going to be any point to building anything outside of 0.0?


The cost scaling will affect all build/research locations, including conquerable stations and outposts. All slot limitations are being removed everywhere in EVE, and locations that formerly had slot bonuses will receive other bonuses instead. More info on that will be in future blogs.

The industry outpost upgrades to null sec outposts (particularly, the Amarr ones) primarily focus on the increase of industry slots. With the removal of slot limitation, will you be altering the bonuses involved with these outpost upgrades?

Yes.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#113 - 2014-04-15 16:09:04 UTC
basically my concern with the changeover is this: currently, any number of titan bpos are sitting safely in a station, building in a pos or copying in a pos with the expectation they're safe

come changeover day, either these get grandfathered and the bpo is delivered back into the station upon completion/pos death, or it's delivered into the pos.

we need to know now, because there's only a short period of time to adjust planned builds before you're locked in (unless you care to self-abort a titan) assuming this patch comes out in june or so. I assume this will be a coding mess either way, but it's sort of key to know now how it will be handled.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Allison A'vani
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#114 - 2014-04-15 16:09:40 UTC
Are you going to reimburse the skill points wasted on the scientific networking skill? Literally the only reason anyone trained it was to train it to 1 to copy and manufacture in a POS in the same system.
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
#115 - 2014-04-15 16:11:01 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
About being able to anchor POSes anywhere in high sec: Does that mean the very high security systems will become available? For example, right now you cannot anchor a POS in a 1.0 system. Will that change?


Can someone answer this one please?
Will we be able to set up towers in 0.8+ sec?
penifSMASH
ElitistOps
Deepwater Hooligans
#116 - 2014-04-15 16:11:20 UTC
Allison A'vani wrote:
Are you going to reimburse the skill points wasted on the scientific networking skill? Literally the only reason anyone trained it was to train it to 1 to copy and manufacture in a POS in the same system.


CCP please reimburse me five-hundred (500) skill points.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#117 - 2014-04-15 16:11:20 UTC
^^ :argh:

Allison A'vani wrote:
Are you going to reimburse the skill points wasted on the scientific networking skill? Literally the only reason anyone trained it was to train it to 1 to copy and manufacture in a POS in the same system.

You want reimbursement for a skill you only trained to level one?

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#118 - 2014-04-15 16:11:36 UTC
Blastcaps Madullier wrote:
"Any industry feature must be balanced around our risk versus reward philosophy"

Does this mean your finaly going to nerf moon mining to rebalance RISK vs reward? :)

as your alliance just found out by getting its moons curbstomped holding moons ain't risk free

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Boltorano
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#119 - 2014-04-15 16:11:44 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

The taxes go to the corp that owns the station, the scaling costs (more info will be coming in a future blog) are sunk out of the game.


I approve. It never made sense to me that an outpost could provide infinite free repairs and other services without any sort of operational cost.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#120 - 2014-04-15 16:12:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Oh, and one more thing: I might have missed it but will the “congestion charges” count up per activity or in total? And/or will it be split by the actual installation?

In other words, will my manufacturing be more expensive because I'm in a station that sees a lot of ME research? Or will my ME research become more expensive because I'm using a lab array that already holds a bajillion invention jobs (but if I pick lab #2, I won't have to pay that tax)? Or is it rather the case in both examples that my manufacturing is only made more expensive by other manufacturing and my ME by other ME jobs, both of them happening in the exact same installation that I'm using?


…or should I wait for the fifth blog before asking? P