These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#341 - 2014-04-15 18:21:58 UTC
Etara Silverblade wrote:
POSes in high-sec without standing requirements means those of up who have standings loose out. You are compensating every other piece that is being nerfed but not this. What good are my Gallente standings now that anyone can put up a tower in any system?

You are going to force some of us to find new jobs in eve as raising standings for corps will no longer be of any use.


Maybe... or maybe standings will become important in a different way. It could be the costs you pay at a station are modified by you and your corps standings with the NPC owners.

This, however, would make the temporary standings boosts you provide much less useful, as long term standings boosts become more important.

Then again, maybe standings with NPC corps will cease to be important. That's not entirely a bad thing.
Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
#342 - 2014-04-15 18:22:06 UTC
Chanina wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Aliventi wrote:
Quote:
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.

Any chance this would also apply to T2 BPOs? Right now it takes longer to make a copy than to just manufacture from the BPO. It would be a great way for a new market to spring up around T2 BPO BPCs and make it easier for new people to get in to T2 manufacturing without having to get in to invention.


That's the current plan, yes.


So you are telling that you won't touch Invention with this expansion but greatly increasing the output of high quality T2 BPCs?

Am I the only inventor here that doesn't like that change much? Yes a new guy wouldn't need that much to get into T2 Production, but
a) the very limited group of producers for this high quality BPCs and
b) the lack of competitors through invention
will yield in high prices and again a lot of profit to people who already had years of time to pull out the profit from there investment.


This 100x over! If you want to eliminate invention just come out and say it. When shall we expect Tech 2 BPOs to be seeded on the market?
theman428
Order .66.
Brothers of Tangra
#343 - 2014-04-15 18:23:04 UTC
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.

Worst change in this feature.


another Super capital nerf... thanks CCP.... with this change if you want to produce a supercapital ship you know have to risk all of your assets whcih can be hundreds of billions of isk. or spend months copying your blueprints to build 1 ship...


this has now given eve online 50% of the work for Supercap Proliferation... this changes coupled with the change to compression... expect price increases of 50%-100% of current hull values. of supercarriers and titans if they are produced at all...

good job CCP make things better for pvpers which i have no objection to but making builders scared to build now....

you should rethink this part of the changes...
Myxx
The Scope
#344 - 2014-04-15 18:25:08 UTC
Rapscallion Jones wrote:
Chanina wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Aliventi wrote:
Quote:
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.

Any chance this would also apply to T2 BPOs? Right now it takes longer to make a copy than to just manufacture from the BPO. It would be a great way for a new market to spring up around T2 BPO BPCs and make it easier for new people to get in to T2 manufacturing without having to get in to invention.


That's the current plan, yes.


So you are telling that you won't touch Invention with this expansion but greatly increasing the output of high quality T2 BPCs?

Am I the only inventor here that doesn't like that change much? Yes a new guy wouldn't need that much to get into T2 Production, but
a) the very limited group of producers for this high quality BPCs and
b) the lack of competitors through invention
will yield in high prices and again a lot of profit to people who already had years of time to pull out the profit from there investment.


This 100x over! If you want to eliminate invention just come out and say it. When shall we expect Tech 2 BPOs to be seeded on the market?

You really need to re-examine this. T2 BPO copies aren't going to get sold for the most part. They'll be used for production, alts will be made to copy in stations in total safety. We'll have to log in slightly more often, but we can still spread our production chain out if need be. This is what I'm pretty sure CCP is expecting.
Cassandra Kazan
Padded Helmets
#345 - 2014-04-15 18:26:28 UTC
I think it is fair to say that the faction standings system is a piece of EVE that has not been taken seriously as a gameplay component for nearly 10 years.

Standings are something that people grind out when it is needful, or which they pay other people to maintain for them. In light of how neglected the system is and how little compelling gameplay it provides, can anyone really argue that it should remain linked to key highsec gameplay elements?

I don't think so.
Ydnari
Estrale Frontiers
#346 - 2014-04-15 18:26:34 UTC
Allison A'vani wrote:
Ydnari wrote:
Removal of all Extra materials: Doesn't this mean that Tech 2 ships at ME -6, -5, -4 (Augmentation, Attainment and no decryptor) will use 2 T1 hulls, since it being an Extra material was what kept it at 1?

So a Sin would use 2 Dominix hulls with those three invention choices.

At ME -3 and above it rounds back down to 1 T1 hull.


No, because ME is based on a %. You can not reduce the ME enough to run into this problem.


That's not how negative ME works. On a standard 10% base waste blueprint at ME-4 you get 50% waste, which rounds a single unit up to two.

http://wiki.eve-id.net/Equations

Quote:
Besides the fact that any decrypter that reduces ME is literally useless on any ship invention as it completely removes any profit all together.


It'll also apply when you don't use a decryptor, and that's not the point of my question anyway.

The same question also applies to modules, where currently the ME-5 and ME-6 decryptors can produce some of the best ISK per hour, because of the runs bonuses; they'll start using 2 base modules too.

The question is whether this has been anticipated or not, since only the extras on T1 ships that were added to avoid reprocessing were mentioned in the blog.

--
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#347 - 2014-04-15 18:26:51 UTC
Myxx wrote:
I don't think you're looking at the larger picture, but okay...

I'm looking at how it will benefit me as an industrialist; how it will benefit the dynamics of space utilisation; how it will benefit risk-taking; how it benefits the activity economy. Pretty much all of it is good.

The only annoyance so far is a bit of logistical hassle, but that one has more to do with appalling POS mechanics than anything, and the main worry there is related to information that won't be released until a later devblog.
BugraT WarheaD
#348 - 2014-04-15 18:26:51 UTC
Nice blog Ytterbium, you're way easier to read than to hear :D

[french]Saloperie d'accent français quoi, non mais c'est un monde ça ma bonne dame, même moi j'y arrive pas ![/french]

Great changes to come, hope the next blogs were as legendary as this one !
Powers Sa
#349 - 2014-04-15 18:29:25 UTC
Grarr Dexx wrote:
Will there be unavoidable manufacturing / research fees in 0.0 stations? Or are they going to get that for free like they get free repairs?

Grarr Dexx wrote:
While we're talking about unavoidable costs in 0.0 stations, is there a reason repairs can be set to 0? Who is paying the guys patching up your ships? What about the materials needed to bring back structural integrity? It makes no sense.

sov bills

I'm ok with repair bills if i get to incap services in 0.0 NPC stations.

Do you like winning t2 frigs and dictors for Dirt Cheap?https://eveninggames.net/register/ref/dQddmNgyLhFBqNJk

Remeber: Gambling addiction is no laughing matter unless you've lost a vast space fortune on the internet.
Kadl
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#350 - 2014-04-15 18:29:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Kadl
Tippia wrote:
Chanina wrote:
I like the overall attitude of this dev blog but improving use of T2 BPOs further isn't something I'm looking forward to. Not if there aren't improvements to Invented BPC quality.

Meh. They get slightly higher output on items where the market is already fully controlled by invention, and it lasts maybe one expansion cycle. I don't see inventors being particularly hurt by that one.


Slightly higher output for T2 BPOs => Slightly lower output for invention => Slightly lower profits for invention.

Your argument is that we should ignore the benefits reaped by T2 BPO owners because they are small. I think that is a move in the wrong direction, and should be avoided. I would like CCP to make a commitment to avoid improving the overall use of T2 BPO for their owners. I am uncertain whether the overall situation will improve for T2 BPO owners. For example, will they end up being required to place their T2 BPO in a POS in order to reach the old levels of production.
Myxx
The Scope
#351 - 2014-04-15 18:29:53 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Myxx wrote:
I don't think you're looking at the larger picture, but okay...

I'm looking at how it will benefit me as an industrialist; how it will benefit the dynamics of space utilisation; how it will benefit risk-taking; how it benefits the activity economy. Pretty much all of it is good.

The only annoyance so far is a bit of logistical hassle, but that one has more to do with appalling POS mechanics than anything, and the main worry there is related to information that won't be released until a later devblog.



I see. Then I misunderstood. We have different ideas as to what is good for the use of moons and starbases.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#352 - 2014-04-15 18:30:09 UTC
Saeth Thara wrote:
I also feel the change to require the BPO to be in the POS is a bad idea, and would rather it remained in its current form (as it's not really broken as far as I can see). At the moment my pos, including mods, contents of labs etc is worth around 3B. This amount of isk is not insignificant to me, but would be a loss I could bear. After this change if I just wanted to keep my current production going I would need to have almost 27B at the POS, which is not something I could afford to risk losing.

The proposed improvement to the labs would have to be huge in my eyes to balance out the extra leg work and risk involved in moving a large number of bpos to the pos .

In addition I can't always get online everyday and the same is true of many of the people I play with, and as such if my corp was war dec'd it would be entirely possible for the pos to be shot down before anyone got online to empty it out. In light of the fact you are giving people a much bigger reason to attack a pos are you planning to make any changes to reinforce mechanics and/or the attributes of pos in order to help balance the risk to reward?

If you really are hell bent on making changes to this particular mechanic are there any other options you might consider? Perhaps adding a pos mod that allows the bpo to remain in a station – which would then mean less fitting for labs? Or adding a scaling system whereby the closer to the pos the bpo is the faster it researches (so max speed if its in the pos, then getting slower if in the same system but in a station/different pos)?

Aside from this most of the other changes look interesting and make sense to me, but I would also be interested, as others are, to hear what if any plans you have for standings and the benefits derived from them, as you are removing one of the main reasons people have worked on them in the past.


Casual players are not allowed to play Eve.
Didn't you get the memo?
They are directing anyone who has a real life and can't commit at least 2 hours a day every day to Eve to wait for Star Citizen to boot up.

I must admit, Mike Azariah has done another bang-up job defending the high sec casual player.
Jayem See
Perkone
Caldari State
#353 - 2014-04-15 18:30:34 UTC
That's going to be a bit of a game changer!

The link on the launcher page isn't working btw - just to let you know Big smile

Aaaaaaand relax.
theman428
Order .66.
Brothers of Tangra
#354 - 2014-04-15 18:32:32 UTC
Myxx wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Myxx wrote:
I don't think you're looking at the larger picture, but okay...

I'm looking at how it will benefit me as an industrialist; how it will benefit the dynamics of space utilisation; how it will benefit risk-taking; how it benefits the activity economy. Pretty much all of it is good.

The only annoyance so far is a bit of logistical hassle, but that one has more to do with appalling POS mechanics than anything, and the main worry there is related to information that won't be released until a later devblog.



I see. Then I misunderstood. We have different ideas as to what is good for the use of moons and starbases.



sorry using your quote here but tippia not all of it is good... this will utterly destroy the ability to make supers and titans. people will have to spend months of time copying BPOs to make these ships since they cannot be produced in a station or in high sec... so tell me how thats good for the economy.
Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
#355 - 2014-04-15 18:35:17 UTC
Myxx wrote:
Rapscallion Jones wrote:
Chanina wrote:


So you are telling that you won't touch Invention with this expansion but greatly increasing the output of high quality T2 BPCs?

Am I the only inventor here that doesn't like that change much? Yes a new guy wouldn't need that much to get into T2 Production, but
a) the very limited group of producers for this high quality BPCs and
b) the lack of competitors through invention
will yield in high prices and again a lot of profit to people who already had years of time to pull out the profit from there investment.


This 100x over! If you want to eliminate invention just come out and say it. When shall we expect Tech 2 BPOs to be seeded on the market?

You really need to re-examine this. T2 BPO copies aren't going to get sold for the most part. They'll be used for production, alts will be made to copy in stations in total safety. We'll have to log in slightly more often, but we can still spread our production chain out if need be. This is what I'm pretty sure CCP is expecting.


And meanwhile inventors wait until October or December to be competitive with your buff while they work out what to do next.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#356 - 2014-04-15 18:35:35 UTC
theman428 wrote:
sorry using your quote here but tippia not all of it is good... this will utterly destroy the ability to make supers and titans. people will have to spend months of time copying BPOs to make these ships since they cannot be produced in a station or in high sec... so tell me how thats good for the economy.

yeah no

i make supers and titans and i am not at all complaining about these changes, because i spent the thirty seconds to puzzle out how I adjust given these new systems

if you can't figure it out you probably shouldn't be building supercaps in the first place

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Adellle Nadair
Nuclear Midnight
Diplomatic Incidents.
#357 - 2014-04-15 18:35:59 UTC
Additional thoughts on why forcing bpos to be moved to a pos is a terrible idea:

For the players who do industry who want to copy their expensive bpos in the safety of a station, the amount of busy work required is hugely increased. A central location where a player can install multiple types of jobs is no longer possible. The player will need to move the bpo to a different station in system, if possible, more likely several systems away. And if the player does any amount of actual industrial activity they will have to move many multiple bpos to many multiple different stations/systems to be able to run jobs that vary in length. To do industry requires using multiple characters, meaning each location will have to have a corp office to enable sharing of the bpos. And all of this amounts to a large addition to the busy work required to do industry. This change WILL INCREASE the amount of work and time needed to install any job.

The fancy new UI has no possibility of making reducing the busy work to the level it currently exists at or reduce the amount of clicks needed to install a job. While the actual installation of a job may be easier, now the bpo will need to be moved. Meaning it will have to be moved from the station hanger to the ship, the ship flown to the other station, possibly several jumps away, then moved to the station hanger/corp hanger and then the job is installed. The amount of clicking won't change any appreciable amount, only now it will take a lot longer to do!
Myxx
The Scope
#358 - 2014-04-15 18:36:27 UTC
Rapscallion Jones wrote:
Myxx wrote:
Rapscallion Jones wrote:
Chanina wrote:


So you are telling that you won't touch Invention with this expansion but greatly increasing the output of high quality T2 BPCs?

Am I the only inventor here that doesn't like that change much? Yes a new guy wouldn't need that much to get into T2 Production, but
a) the very limited group of producers for this high quality BPCs and
b) the lack of competitors through invention
will yield in high prices and again a lot of profit to people who already had years of time to pull out the profit from there investment.


This 100x over! If you want to eliminate invention just come out and say it. When shall we expect Tech 2 BPOs to be seeded on the market?

You really need to re-examine this. T2 BPO copies aren't going to get sold for the most part. They'll be used for production, alts will be made to copy in stations in total safety. We'll have to log in slightly more often, but we can still spread our production chain out if need be. This is what I'm pretty sure CCP is expecting.


And meanwhile inventors wait until October or December to be competitive with your buff while they work out what to do next.

um... no. This is actually liable to be more annoying for me than it is you.
Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
#359 - 2014-04-15 18:38:04 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Casual players are not allowed to play Eve.
Didn't you get the memo?
They are directing anyone who has a real life and can't commit at least 2 hours a day every day to Eve to wait for Star Citizen to boot up.

I must admit, Mike Azariah has done another bang-up job defending the high sec casual player.


Eve's gameplay should require constant attention and not allow casual play. Current design philosophy (from what you've said).

Eve's skill training system requires barely any attention at all but completely restricts your ability to do practically everything gameplay-wise. Current skill training philosophy.

It's like living in crazyland.

Personal Standings Services - Free 3rd Party & Collateral Holding Service - 7+ Day Old Corps for Highsec POS Sales
Adellle Nadair
Nuclear Midnight
Diplomatic Incidents.
#360 - 2014-04-15 18:38:43 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
theman428 wrote:
sorry using your quote here but tippia not all of it is good... this will utterly destroy the ability to make supers and titans. people will have to spend months of time copying BPOs to make these ships since they cannot be produced in a station or in high sec... so tell me how thats good for the economy.

yeah no

i make supers and titans and i am not at all complaining about these changes, because i spent the thirty seconds to puzzle out how I adjust given these new systems

if you can't figure it out you probably shouldn't be building supercaps in the first place


You are an edge case variant. And are in no way representative of the majority that this change effects.