These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Entity
X-Factor Industries
Synthetic Existence
#281 - 2014-04-15 17:44:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Entity
Tippia wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
protip research poshavers: it is expected and anticipated your expensive bpos will be moved to station slots, you should stop appearing flabbergasted that you will have to move them

Also, read the following line in the devblog again:

• Reduce copy time on all blueprints to be less time consuming than manufacturing something out of it. This gives the option to use blueprint copies to build items at Starbases without risking the original.

Moving the BPO around will be no more needed than it currently is. The big change is rather than you will need to expend one character's research capacity on creating copies to build from.


With the volume I put out, having to make copies is not acceptable either. It would be an unnecessary clickfest to make that many copies. The number of jobs I would have to put in per session would jump from 10 to 200. and then 200 again to build the stuff.

╦......║...╔╗.║.║.╔╗.╦║.╔╗╔╦╗╔╗

║.╔╗╔╗╔╣.╔╗╠..╠ ╠╗╠╝.║╠ ╠╝║║║╚╗

╩═╚╝║.╚╝.╚╝║..╚╝║║╚╝.╩╚╝╚╝║.║╚╝

Got Item?

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#282 - 2014-04-15 17:44:37 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Imiarr Timshae wrote:
Boltorano wrote:

That lost income to mission runners will most likely result in more income for miners, which is something I'm completely fine with. "Mining with guns." should never have been a thing, and CCP has slowly been correcting that error.


Yeah. Seems reasonable to me. Create a "Sandbox", let people create their own professions and then remove them.

Sure it's corrective. But "sandbox" it is not.

sandbox means you can never change anything ever, said nobody with an ounce of sense ever

seriously is there a single time that anyone has ever used sandbox in a post in one of these threads where their post didn't amount to whining that anything could possibly change


I think what people complain about is that CCP stated several times that "no gameplay is removed", yet they remove gameplay. That has nothing to do with change happening or not. It just shows that CCP doesn't think things through.

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.

Adellle Nadair
Nuclear Midnight
#283 - 2014-04-15 17:44:49 UTC
Quote:
On the more critical side, I agree with some of the above posters that having to constantly move your blueprints around will be thoroughly annoying for large-scale producers — it's already annoying enough with just having to collect and use BPCs from all your copying labs. This ties into the issue of not being able to share I/O between arrays, so to mass-produce certain goods, you constantly have to flit about carrying the correct BP for the myriad of arrays you want to populate. You generally already have to set up a given POS for a specific task, but this just makes it a lot worse.


Agreed.

Sadly, I'm coming to understand that these devs don't understand industry. Their knowledge of pvp and Eve in general through that viewpoint has gotten better over the past several years. But they don't understand the complexities, risks and enjoyment of industry.

CCP, hire industrialists to develop and create quality changes for the indy side of eve just as you have hired PvPers to handle the combat side.
CCP Arrow
C C P
C C P Alliance
#284 - 2014-04-15 17:45:33 UTC
We will be publishing a dedicated blog specifically for the UI of the Industry window where we go into more details about what the final player experience will be. Stay tuned!

CCP Arrow   |   Director of User Experience   |   EVE Online   |   @CCP_Arrow

Dramaticus
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#285 - 2014-04-15 17:45:37 UTC
He's making a list,
checkin' it twice,
gonna find out,
who's a shitlord or not.
Miniluv is coming to town.

The 'do-nothing' member of the GoonSwarm Economic Warfare Cabal

The edge is REALLY hard to see at times but it DOES exist and in this case we were looking at a situation where a new feature created for all of our customers was being virtually curbstomped by five of them

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#286 - 2014-04-15 17:45:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Imiarr Timshae wrote:
I'm sure my friend who runs a R&D business will consider leaving since it is his primary income and now it's not a thing anymore. I'm not going anywhere Blink
But his primary income source is still a thing.

So far, contrary to all the doomsaying, the only profession that gets a slight kick in the nuts is corp-with-POS-standings creators. vOv


Entity wrote:
With the volume I put out, having to make copies is not acceptable either. It would be an unnecessary clickfest to make that many copies. The number of jobs I would have to put in per session would jump from 10 to 200. and then 200 again to build the stuff.

That will depend on the new UI a lot, though.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#287 - 2014-04-15 17:45:41 UTC
Entity wrote:

Risk free? What? Is your brain turned off or something?

- The pos alone is worth 8 billion+ (all faction stuff)
- I stand to lose a month worth of product to the tune of 20 billion if someone decides to blow it up.

I'm fine with -that- risk, but having to literally put ALL my eggs in that one easy to pop basket is completely unacceptable.

right which is why you will have to move to a station, increasing your cost and lowering your reward in exchange for the perfect safety you apparently can't do without

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
#288 - 2014-04-15 17:46:18 UTC
[quote=Rivr Luzade
I think what people complain about is that CCP stated several times that "no gameplay is removed", yet they remove gameplay. That has nothing to do with change happening or not. It just shows that CCP doesn't think things through.[/quote]

Pretty much.

"Reprocessing loot makes too many minerals."

Who introduced the mobile tractor, enabling mission runners to passively loot things?

Classic.
Kadl
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#289 - 2014-04-15 17:46:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Kadl
Weaselior wrote:
Kadl wrote:
No. It just looks like an impediment to newer industrialists while older industrialists with more accounts get a pass. Designing a feature whose main focus is to hinder newer players seems foolish. The problem I see is related to the War Dec, corporation, and POS systems. All of those need real iterations to make them functional. So, yes you should be able to claim a POS or POCO location using a War Dec. Making high sec industry more convoluted does not seem like the proper solution.

your proposal that we ought not improve things until there is a complete fix is dumb and wrong

by effectively charging 1/3rd a plex for a (weak) wardec immunity, and charging 2 1/3rds plex per month for complete wardec immunity, we significantly penalize the cowardly through an easy-to-implement system that dramatically improves wardecs without requiring massive change


You are making a strawman argument by pretending I want a "complete fix." I simply identified the systems where the problem actually exists and noted their sad state.

I can propose a simple alternative fix. Make it so that anyone who places a POCO or POS in a location vacated by a waring party would immediately become subject to the war. You cannot sneak a "neutral" third party in to reclaim a location since the war could be directed at control of that space location. Note now we are using war decs to control space in high sec.
Beaver Retriever
Reality Sequence
#290 - 2014-04-15 17:46:46 UTC
Death Ryder wrote:
my question to CCP Ytterbium is this....

ARE YOU A FREAKING IDIOT...

your little improvements will turn high sec into a war zone and bring production across eve to a standstill in no time what so ever as the greifer CCP so fondly coddle up to begin destroying pos's left right and center in a damn orgy of wankerness...

hahahahahahahaha

ok bro

anyway thanks for confirming this is a good change.
Victor Dathar
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#291 - 2014-04-15 17:48:35 UTC
Ok * click * guys, let me just fin * click * ish putting this * click * jobs in then I will com * click * ment.

^^^ lol that post is so bad you should get back 2 GBS m8 o7

@grr_goons : Wisdom, Insight, GBS Posts

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#292 - 2014-04-15 17:49:37 UTC
Enteron Anabente wrote:
Enteron Anabente wrote:
I would encourage you to reconsider the copy times change on T2 BPOs. Making copy times shorter than build times on those BPOs is de facto making them even better money printers than (some of them, at least) already are--if a T2 BPO owner used to be able to manufacture 10 items per day, now he will be able to manufacture 12 per day at essentially the same unit cost (yes, I just made those numbers up). This pushes small-scale T2 producers who rely on invention out of business, since the supply from the cheaper T2 BPOs will be increasing.

TL;DR: making copying times shorter than production times for T2 BPOs will concentrate more wealth in the hands of already-wealthy people and hurt small-scale industrialists. Please don't do it.


Can I at least get acknowledgement that a dev saw this, please?

I think you VASTLY over rate the wealth generated from a T2 BPO.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#293 - 2014-04-15 17:52:18 UTC
Kadl wrote:

I can propose a simple alternative fix. Make it so that anyone who places a POCO or POS in a location vacated by a waring party would immediately become subject to the war. You cannot sneak a "neutral" third party in to reclaim a location since the war could be directed at control of that space location. Note now we are using war decs to control space in high sec.

that is not simple whatsoever and would certainly require massively reworking a lot of code

it is a more elegant fix yes but it is much less likely to be implemented

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#294 - 2014-04-15 17:52:31 UTC
Death Ryder wrote:
your little improvements will turn high sec into a war zone and bring production across eve to a standstill in no time what so ever as the greifer CCP so fondly coddle up to begin destroying pos's left right and center in a damn orgy of wankerness...


I cannot think of anything that will invigorate the hisec player-base more than an orgy of wankerness.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Sturmwolke
#295 - 2014-04-15 17:54:29 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
As such, all materials currently listed as Extra Materials will become regular materials instead


What's the scope for the removal of Extra Materials? All T1, T2 blueprints?
If this affects T2 BPO, you do realize that this gives the edge back to the BPO holders vs inventions in terms of materials savings.

CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Remove the ability for players to use stations to safely store their blueprints without putting them at risk in Starbase structures. Players will still be able to start their jobs remotely (via the use of Supply Chain Management and Scientific Networking skills), but will now have to move their blueprints directly into the starbase structures that require it, like other materials.

We are aware of the significance of this change and do not expect very expensive blueprints (Battleship and above) to be risked in such a manner, but we do feel it to be a good trade-off for smaller blueprints.


This is a d_ick move tbh. Focus on the process. It makes research and the copy industry much more tedious as you have to keep moving your BPOs in/out of the station. Scale that to hundreds of different BPOs/BPCs and several POSes, it becomes a nightmare. Instead of improving, you're devolving it into something far worse. This is an inane change, imo.

For capital production, copy process for things like ship packs or components copy will be made difficult for small/medium enterprises that run on small or medium POSes. You are effectively asking them to commit billions into a target. With the wardec mechanics giving less than 24 hrs to react, EVE becomes your second work place. You're changing the scenery from "casual" to logging everyday and checking for wardecks. God forbid if you have a RL situation which prevents you from taking the necessary actions. This move will definitely thin out the semi-casual industrialists. So you're happy kicking out the casual players?

And what exactly do you mean by "do not expect very expensive blueprints (Battleship and above) to be risked in such a manner"?
Heavy Met4l Queen
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#296 - 2014-04-15 17:54:37 UTC
I like this thread. This is a good thread.

In the game of conquest, who cares about the pawns if the king yet reigns?

Enteron Anabente
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#297 - 2014-04-15 17:54:54 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Enteron Anabente wrote:
Enteron Anabente wrote:
I would encourage you to reconsider the copy times change on T2 BPOs. Making copy times shorter than build times on those BPOs is de facto making them even better money printers than (some of them, at least) already are--if a T2 BPO owner used to be able to manufacture 10 items per day, now he will be able to manufacture 12 per day at essentially the same unit cost (yes, I just made those numbers up). This pushes small-scale T2 producers who rely on invention out of business, since the supply from the cheaper T2 BPOs will be increasing.

TL;DR: making copying times shorter than production times for T2 BPOs will concentrate more wealth in the hands of already-wealthy people and hurt small-scale industrialists. Please don't do it.


Can I at least get acknowledgement that a dev saw this, please?

I think you VASTLY over rate the wealth generated from a T2 BPO.


I've done the calculations myself and decided not to buy any T2 BPOs anytime soon, so I'm well aware what the income from owning one is. I'm still opposed to making them more profitable and pushing out people doing invention.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#298 - 2014-04-15 17:56:15 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Entity wrote:

Risk free? What? Is your brain turned off or something?

- The pos alone is worth 8 billion+ (all faction stuff)
- I stand to lose a month worth of product to the tune of 20 billion if someone decides to blow it up.

I'm fine with -that- risk, but having to literally put ALL my eggs in that one easy to pop basket is completely unacceptable.

right which is why you will have to move to a station, increasing your cost and lowering your reward in exchange for the perfect safety you apparently can't do without


And if you have 30b in potential loot, it is worth your time to hire a merc corp (or five) to protect your besieged POS.

This is win, win.
Khoul Ay'd
The Affiliation
#299 - 2014-04-15 17:56:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Khoul Ay'd
Imiarr Timshae wrote:
It's interesting to see that CCP have decided to make the summer expansion not a patch expansion or a content expansion but are actively killing ingame professions.

30-40% reduction in loot reprocessing is very harmful to salvagers.
Limitless station research slots is fatal to highsec researchers who use POS.
No standings requirement to anchor POS is fatal to people who boost standings for POS deployment.

That's two professions dead and a third drastically nerfed right there.

I wonder what the logic is behind this.


Additional mini-professions killed:

- corp/faction standings boosters (this means mission runners)
- corp creation services
- research corps (indy fee for service)
- moon holding/pos planting

++ Where are all of the ice products coming from to feed all of the coming 0.8 - 1.0 poses that will go up. CCP, you do remember that you nerfed ice mining for the small-time operators a few expansions ago, right?

The things we do today we must live with forever.... Think about it

Knug LiDi
The Dark Space Initiative
#300 - 2014-04-15 17:57:26 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Knug LiDi wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets?


The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job.


That's nice - BUT - I want to know this cost BEFORE I transport materials to a particular station. I.e. the cost amount need to be reflected in the information about that station. And, of course, it is dynamic.

This is necessary. Trial and error trying to find cheap manufacturing while carrying materials is stupid. If the rate is dynamic, it needs to be on the equivalent of a market, so players have the intel to decide how far/how much. Doing this while carrying good is idiotic. Flying to 50 stations to determine a value that may change before I get back is wrong. Let me view the local 'market' for manufacturing just like a can examine the market for ore. Then I will make market decisions


You will be able to request a quote from a station before a) going there b) moving materials and even c) purchasing the blueprint.



Singular quote system will be very slow. Can we not have a region-wide response to the same query? These values should be calculated (daily?) and stored for recall. This could be similar to the contract market. Give me a table of choices ! Just like shopping for mission agents.

If only we could fall into a woman's arms

without falling into her hands