These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Researching, the Future

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#61 - 2014-04-28 16:11:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Athena
I was looking at the research time table,

Level Seconds Approx. Total
1 105 1m 45s
2 250 4m
3 595 2h

Level 3: 595 seconds... 2 hours? Er, what?

Edit: And now the dev blog has been repaired.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#62 - 2014-04-28 16:14:02 UTC
Verhanna wrote:


Months and months of my effort have been spent in these areas of the game trying to become "good" at it. What compensation for that loss is there really?



What effort did it really take to pop a BPO into a slot and let it cook indefinitely for little practical reason other than just, you could? It's AFK play of the most extended sort.
Droidyk
Maniacal Miners INC
The Legends In The Game
#63 - 2014-04-28 16:15:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Droidyk
Querns wrote:
Crebba wrote:
First of why change something to make it easier to understand?

Seriously? You're against making things easier to understand?

There's no mastery in going to chruker and looking up optimal ME on a blueprint. It's just unnecessary legwork.


Indeed, there s no need in overthinked and overcomplicated living (thinking). Making things much clearer and more in line with clarity is the right way. One can accomplish much more when thinking clearly without too much noise and when not confused.
Tarsas Phage
Sniggerdly
#64 - 2014-04-28 16:17:49 UTC
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
Verhanna wrote:


Months and months of my effort have been spent in these areas of the game trying to become "good" at it. What compensation for that loss is there really?



What effort did it really take to pop a BPO into a slot and let it cook indefinitely for little practical reason other than just, you could? It's AFK play of the most extended sort.


If he did it in a POS, he had to keep that tended (cost, effort) and protected (cost, effort) for the duration of the research.
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#65 - 2014-04-28 16:18:35 UTC
Kadl wrote:
CCP_Greyscale wrote:
Unless this leads to a major expansion of invent-to-sell, the actual throughput of invention should not significantly change as a result of shorter copy times.


You are significantly changing an aspect of the T2 production system. We can expect good players to adapt. Do you have plans if they adapt and expand invent-to-sell significantly?

Converting the old blueprints
Your right some of us have researched things above ME/TE 10, and your suggestion devalues that effort. You would like to see some suggestions and ideas.
My first idea:
Time comparison - You know how much time it would have taken to research a blueprint in the old system. You know how much time it will take to research a blueprint in the new system. Set the time equal and let the ME/TE fall into the appropriate spot.
Example: You spent 1d 11h researching your Depleted Uranium S Blueprint (to perfect). You now get an ME 9 (not perfect) blueprint since it takes 1d to get there in the new system.
It's not perfect? - Great now you can spend some more time researching since you like prefect blueprints.
What about my extra 11h? - All extra time should be returned in some form of a credit. A quick research bonus which can be used up. This means if you spent 40 days researching the Depleted Uranium we give you a Blueprint with ME 10 (perfect) plus credit for 37 days of ME research to improve your future research.
All times credited at station rates allowing benefits for those who used a POS.
No favor is really given. If you did the research time then you receive a reward. People who like perfect ME will likely get their perfection back (and spend any credited time making that happen). Everyone who did the basic ME 10 research will get their time credited to them for their efforts.
But someone else did the research!? And you bought their efforts for isk - congratulations! (Current holding character receives bonus time).
But there are so many calculations! That is why you have a computer.




So I can buy everyone's ******** ammo blueprints and after the patch instantly convert them into research time for a 10/10 titan BPO?


sounds like a great plan
gas guzzler
i'm from the government and i'm here to help
#66 - 2014-04-28 16:20:02 UTC  |  Edited by: gas guzzler
Mal Nina wrote:
[i][quote]

Will we see the ability to research invented BPCs to improve the ME/TE? if not are you finally going to get rid of BPOs and give us nuggs a chance to compete and actually make money?




t2 invention vs. t2 bpo is about to get a whole lot worse.
get a t2 BPC and look at the EXTRA MATERIALS.
Inventors will soon need 100% more of those and t2 bpo holders will need 10% less

lol HTFU noob
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#67 - 2014-04-28 16:20:10 UTC
Tarsas Phage wrote:
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
Verhanna wrote:


Months and months of my effort have been spent in these areas of the game trying to become "good" at it. What compensation for that loss is there really?



What effort did it really take to pop a BPO into a slot and let it cook indefinitely for little practical reason other than just, you could? It's AFK play of the most extended sort.


If he did it in a POS, he had to keep that tended (cost, effort) and protected (cost, effort) for the duration of the research.




The fact that he wasted his time and money is no one else's concern.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#68 - 2014-04-28 16:21:31 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
I assume that research that starts now, and ends after the expansion, will likewise be converted this way when it comes out (e.g. converted to the 'new' ME that makes it as good as before)?


Yes.

Tam Althor wrote:
Ok, seeing as you want us to build from bpc's, how about adjusting the maximum number of runs allowed on capital component bpc's?


Doing this :)

Yuki Kasumi wrote:
The devblog states that battleships will be rank 60. Does this mean that researching a battleship blueprint to rank 10 on the new system would take 3d * 60 = 180d?


In the current plan, yes. We're actively looking for feedback on the ship numbers in this thread!

Celia Therone wrote:
What happens with bpos that are currently perfect out of the box, like many small rigs? Are they going to get 10 levels of research before being listed as perfect which all don't actually do anything to help?


Essentially, yes. Where there's no saving to be had even at 10% reduction, the research doesn't do anything. There's no obvious solution to this, other than capping max level on a per-blueprint level, which probably causes more problems than it solves.

Magic Crisp wrote:
Regarding the maxruns, please do NOT change the current effective limits on BPOs. Currently we can install unlimited number of jobs from maxrun BPOs as far as it fits into 30d. If you don't know why, then think of things like nanite pastes. maxrun is 15, producers are manufacturing them in batches of multiple thousands. If you still fail to see this, please try to manufacture 10K runs of nanite paste per week, using 15run jobs.

Please take extreme care on whatever you ruin.


Can you explain more clearly what a bad change would be here? I think I understand the situation you're describing but I'm not sure what the thing you're worried about is. Would kicking the maxruns number up be a bad thing?

Lena Lazair wrote:
Quote:
This would mean that ME/TE 1 become ME 5%/TE 10%, ME/TE 5-9 become ME 9%/TE 18%, and anything over ME/TE 10 currently move to ME 10%/TE 20%.


So if I have a blueprint with ME 4 that is currently perfect under the existing system, it will now require days/weeks to re-perfect it? That seems really odd.

What I expected to see is that the perfect ME/TE for any given blueprint be calculated, and then blueprints transitioned to the new system based on a ratio between their current number and the perfect number. E.g. if I have a blueprint at ME 4, and a perfect ME would be 5, then I'm at 0.8 and should get an ME 8% (or TE 16%) on the new blueprint.

Obviously you won't be able to go with a 100% perfect value as the upper end for a lot of things, since many blueprints have ridiculous upper-ends on that scale, but some reasonable margin would probably make most people happy (e.g. 95% or 98% being the "perfect" ME used to scale the top end of the ratio).


If it's perfect currently, it'll be perfect after the change without further research. ME4 currently gives you an 8% waste reduction, so it'll be converted to ME 8% in the new system. If it was effectively perfect at ME4 before, it'll be effectively perfect at ME 8% after.

Am I explaining this clearly enough?

Weaselior wrote:
I THINK i've done the math here correctly but I'm not positive, could you confirm for the ME levels not listed (ME 2-4) for the conversion, they correspond to:

Current ME2 = future ME 6%
Current ME3 = future ME 7%
Current ME4 = future ME 8%

(obviously this is assuming the 10% waste bpos)


Yup.

Ulrich Cadalene wrote:
Are we going to see a decryptor rebalance as well or they'll just stay at the same equivalent me/te levels?


Not right now, we'll convert their stats into percentages but otherwise they're not being touched at this time.

5n4keyes wrote:
Really loving the changes to research, couple of questions however!

- With these changes, does this mean that POS modules for example are now ME researchable, since currently you can research ME but it does nothing. Im assuming yes, as they are extra materials.

- What is going to happen to jobs in research, some of us might have some stupidly long BPO research going, which depending on when they patch is out, might overlap. Will all research get insta finished come patch day and then converted, or will research be lost?


Yes, starbase modules should now be researchable as we're getting rid of extra materials

We're working out a solution for research jobs in progress right now, with the same broad goals as other blueprints, ie everything you have in research should end up as good or better after the change.

Obil Que wrote:
Odd question, but does this mean that researched BPCs, now having defined levels, could be sold directly on the market since there are only a static number of ME/TE combinations for each BPC?


Unfortunately no, we aren't quite at that point yet. We'd have to have a separate DB type for every combination of ME and TE research, which proliferates our blueprint count rather badly (ie 100x more blueprints).

Mal Nina wrote:

Will we see the ability to research invented BPCs to improve the ME/TE? if not are you finally going to get rid of BPOs and give us nuggs a chance to compete and actually make money?



We're not planning on letting any BPCs be researched right now, and we don't have a concrete plan in place regarding the future of T2 BPOs right now.

Callic Veratar wrote:
My suggestion to maintain the previous ME research would be to add a custom field to every researched BPO on patch day. (Something like how meta level was used for the Inferno modules).

The BPO maintains that unique bit if info and, for those that care, it becomes a collector's item. All it needs is a good name, possibly even using Meta Level?


This is an interesting idea.

[quote=Theodore Knox]an we get an indication of what the tiering or...
Madfranco
Eightfold Arrow
#69 - 2014-04-28 16:25:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Madfranco
Edit: Greyscale answered to the edited-out part while i posted it

Could you please allow batching (or some kind of stacking at BPC level) of invented BPC, or at least increse the minimum number of some classes of BPC (rigs for example, small ones especially)?

Having to log multiple times in the day to restart production of some T2 items even when you use the max run decriptor is imho a flawed mechanic.....

And this may even relate to some research jobs, i would really like the batching system used in the actual copy sistem to be estended to production and invention, at least for the shorter run items, as long as i frontload the components....
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#70 - 2014-04-28 16:26:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Querns
edit: I should read the entire reply post before asking; apparently this information can be back-calculated from existing info

CCP Greyscale wrote:
Yuki Kasumi wrote:
The devblog states that battleships will be rank 60. Does this mean that researching a battleship blueprint to rank 10 on the new system would take 3d * 60 = 180d?


In the current plan, yes. We're actively looking for feedback on the ship numbers in this thread!

I don't suppose you guys have an internal spreadsheet detailing the "blueprint rank" of all types of blueprints that you'd be willing to publish, do you? It might help inform some of the feedback you're soliciting.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#71 - 2014-04-28 16:28:23 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
MailDeadDrop wrote:
Since you're trying to move Eve away from "build from original (BPO)" and more towards "build from copy (BPC)", can we have an increase in station copy facilities to be closer to on-par with station manufacturing facilities? Now it seems like there's 10x or more manufacturing facilities for every copy facility.

MDD


As mentioned in this previous devblog:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/building-better-worlds/

We are removing the slots and introducing a cost scaling system instead. The next devblog will cover that in more detail.

So many blogs because so many changes Bear

That doesn't help me when the station I'm in has manufacturing facilities but does not have laboratory facilities. Or are you saying that all stations will have all services now?

MDD
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#72 - 2014-04-28 16:28:37 UTC
The only problem I can see with the changes is that most current industrialists (especially those practicing the clickfest of invention) are absolutely neurotic and have an overwhelming obsession with "PERFECT".
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#73 - 2014-04-28 16:28:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Can you explain more clearly what a bad change would be here? I think I understand the situation you're describing but I'm not sure what the thing you're worried about is. Would kicking the maxruns number up be a bad thing?

he basically wants to make sure if he's building off bpcs that he can install reasonable numbers

the issue you're going to have with "max-run" bpcs is invention: module invention needs max-run bpcs. If you make that too high, you're going to effectively nerf invention

i.e. if you make an armor explosive hardener I max-run bpc whatever lets you install 30d worth of armor explosive hardener Is, anyone inventing them either doesn't get 10 run bpcs from a successful invention cause they use one-run copies, or they have to copy for nearly an entire month to get a max run bpc. both are not ideal and will significantly raise the price of invention.

this is not a problem with capital components so you can go hog wild raising the bpc cap there - it's only module bpos that are used in invention where you have to be careful about increasing max run size

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#74 - 2014-04-28 16:30:02 UTC
Kadl wrote:
CCP_Greyscale wrote:
Unless this leads to a major expansion of invent-to-sell, the actual throughput of invention should not significantly change as a result of shorter copy times.


You are significantly changing an aspect of the T2 production system. We can expect good players to adapt. Do you have plans if they adapt and expand invent-to-sell significantly?

Converting the old blueprints
Your right some of us have researched things above ME/TE 10, and your suggestion devalues that effort. You would like to see some suggestions and ideas.
My first idea:
Time comparison - You know how much time it would have taken to research a blueprint in the old system. You know how much time it will take to research a blueprint in the new system. Set the time equal and let the ME/TE fall into the appropriate spot.
Example: You spent 1d 11h researching your Depleted Uranium S Blueprint (to perfect). You now get an ME 9 (not perfect) blueprint since it takes 1d to get there in the new system.
It's not perfect? - Great now you can spend some more time researching since you like prefect blueprints.
What about my extra 11h? - All extra time should be returned in some form of a credit. A quick research bonus which can be used up. This means if you spent 40 days researching the Depleted Uranium we give you a Blueprint with ME 10 (perfect) plus credit for 37 days of ME research to improve your future research.
All times credited at station rates allowing benefits for those who used a POS.
No favor is really given. If you did the research time then you receive a reward. People who like perfect ME will likely get their perfection back (and spend any credited time making that happen). Everyone who did the basic ME 10 research will get their time credited to them for their efforts.
But someone else did the research!? And you bought their efforts for isk - congratulations! (Current holding character receives bonus time).
But there are so many calculations! That is why you have a computer.


Plans if invent-to-sell expands: nothing concrete, it would depend on what exactly happened, where things settled and how much of a problem we felt it was. The potential problem with this outcome is that the invention market crashes - the concern isn't that players are smart, it's worry that they might be opposite ;)

We're very un-keen on making any blueprints worse as a result of this change, that feels far more painful than "wasted time" and a better blueprint.

Time credit is something we could investigate, although it potentially requires a lot of work to allow you to cash it in.

Vincent Athena wrote:
I was looking at the research time table,

Level Seconds Approx. Total
1 105 1m 45s
2 250 4m
3 595 2h

Level 3: 595 seconds... 2 hours? Er, what?


Uh... yeah. Huh.

Looks like the table got truncated, let me see if I can fix that.
Myxx
The Scope
#75 - 2014-04-28 16:32:09 UTC
I and others feel like CCP is being intentionally vague. This is frustrating. You give details of low end items, but don't flesh out your maths for higher end bpos (capitals and such).
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#76 - 2014-04-28 16:32:39 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
the dropoff in value of ME after 20 was so severe that only fools researched anything besides capital component bpos over that

And niche mineral compression producers. But we're a small & dieing breed. Lol

MDD
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#77 - 2014-04-28 16:32:48 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
MailDeadDrop wrote:
Since you're trying to move Eve away from "build from original (BPO)" and more towards "build from copy (BPC)", can we have an increase in station copy facilities to be closer to on-par with station manufacturing facilities? Now it seems like there's 10x or more manufacturing facilities for every copy facility.

MDD


As mentioned in this previous devblog:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/building-better-worlds/

We are removing the slots and introducing a cost scaling system instead. The next devblog will cover that in more detail.

So many blogs because so many changes Bear

That doesn't help me when the station I'm in has manufacturing facilities but does not have laboratory facilities. Or are you saying that all stations will have all services now?

MDD


Ah no it doesn't, but the stations that do have copy facilities will no longer be capped. Yes you may need to do some flying around.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
Nanaki
UK Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#78 - 2014-04-28 16:35:14 UTC
so whats the ranks on orcas freighters dreads carriers and supers? would be good to know
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#79 - 2014-04-28 16:40:34 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Greyscale
Madfranco wrote:
Edit: Greyscale answered to the edited-out part while i posted it

Could you please allow batching (or some kind of stacking at BPC level) of invented BPC, or at least increse the minimum number of some classes of BPC (rigs for example, small ones especially)?

Having to log multiple times in the day to restart production of some T2 items even when you use the max run decriptor is imho a flawed mechanic.....

And this may even relate to some research jobs, i would really like the batching system used in the actual copy sistem to be estended to production and invention, at least for the shorter run items, as long as i frontload the components....


Blueprint stats are easy to adjust. You want longer max runs on T1 rigs?

Querns wrote:
edit: I should read the entire reply post before asking; apparently this information can be back-calculated from existing info

CCP Greyscale wrote:
Yuki Kasumi wrote:
The devblog states that battleships will be rank 60. Does this mean that researching a battleship blueprint to rank 10 on the new system would take 3d * 60 = 180d?


In the current plan, yes. We're actively looking for feedback on the ship numbers in this thread!

I don't suppose you guys have an internal spreadsheet detailing the "blueprint rank" of all types of blueprints that you'd be willing to publish, do you? It might help inform some of the feedback you're soliciting.[/s]


I have one but it's a bit of a mess as it's got all kinds of misc math scattered all over it :/ With the info in the data dump it's pretty easy to calculate it though, I'm sure someone will be along shortly with a complete reference.

(Can someone be along shortly with a complete reference?)

Weaselior wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Can you explain more clearly what a bad change would be here? I think I understand the situation you're describing but I'm not sure what the thing you're worried about is. Would kicking the maxruns number up be a bad thing?

he basically wants to make sure if he's building off bpcs that he can install reasonable numbers

the issue you're going to have with "max-run" bpcs is invention: module invention needs max-run bpcs. If you make that too high, you're going to effectively nerf invention

i.e. if you make an armor explosive hardener I max-run bpc whatever lets you install 30d worth of armor explosive hardener Is, anyone inventing them either doesn't get 10 run bpcs from a successful invention cause they use one-run copies, or they have to copy for nearly an entire month to get a max run bpc. both are not ideal and will significantly raise the price of invention.

this is not a problem with capital components so you can go hog wild raising the bpc cap there - it's only module bpos that are used in invention where you have to be careful about increasing max run size


Yeah ok, gotcha. We'll keep an eye on this.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#80 - 2014-04-28 16:40:49 UTC
I would love for someone to go through and give the intersection of high sec systems that offer the complete package of ME, TE, copying, and invention services.

The high sec industrialist will have the choices of:

a. Setting up shop in the tiny amount of systems that meet that criteria, which will be hugely expensive.
b. Setting up shop in multiple systems simultaneously, each that provide a subset of those services, which means incurring huge risk moving very expensive BPO's around, until your BPO collection reaches a quality level you are good with.
c. Becoming a nomad, where you go to a system that provides a service, staying there for an extended period of time, and say, apply ME research to all your BPC's, then moving onto another system to do TE. This is of course, completely impractical, and you still have huge risks moving your BPO collection.
d. You set up a POS somewhere and keep your BPO's in your POS, and apply research to them from your POS. This is, of course, a beacon for war dec griefers, and demands you are online every day, forever, or at least someone from your corp with take rights is available every day.

Bye bye small high sec industrialist corps.