These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Yuki Kasumi
Some names are just stupid
#481 - 2014-04-29 11:12:34 UTC
Nicole Hastings wrote:
I think I understand how this is meant to work, but I believe some of the confusion is how the conversion from old ME to new ME was explained in the devblog.

Can someone verify my math?

If I have a blueprint with 3.3% waste at ME3 currently (numbers are made up), I will end up with a ME7 blueprint after the patch? 10% base waste - 3.3% = 6.7% waste reduction = ME7 rounded up.

Am I doing this right? If so I guess this change is alright. I agree with the cries for more data before the patch though; I'm sure we're all going to have a lot of spreadsheet editing to do.


ME3 gives 2.5% waste currently (1 / (1 + 3) = 0.25). Which results in a "New ME" 8 blueprint. See https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1AdDnVTuqXiEqcZF7nb0JXt_dXRYE6lMaJ6Fcnp1qLQU/edit#gid=0
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#482 - 2014-04-29 11:17:45 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Greyscale, I have two major issues of concern with these changes.

The first you have already addressed, in regards to the T2 BPC copy time and further proliferation into T2 Invention markets. If anything, my opinion is T2 BPOs need to be nerfed, and certainly not buffed. It is not fun finding out a lot of markets for certain items are simply out of your reach when it comes to efficient T2 manufacturing if you don't have the T2 BPO.

The second thing, this issue with only 10 levels is far to much of a blanket approach. Did you consider increasing the level count to perhaps 100 instead of 10 as mentioned. This would allow for current BPOs to be much more accurately represented in the new system, which seem to be a source of much pain with this current 10 level blanket approach you are taking. And also, researching thing from level 9 to 10 could mean a BPO and research slot is locked up for years. Making this a 100 level system would massively alleviate this and make a lot more sense.


Yes, we did talk about it, and it does result in a nicer mapping from old to new. We'd generally prefer not to, though, as a) it's also preserving some of the complexity of the old system (not by much, granted, but simpler = better all other things being equal), and b) honestly it looks much cleaner in the UI just showing whole numbers. It's still a pretty easy thing to switch back mechanically, so we might revisit before release.

I see what you mean about things looking cleaner in the AI with only ten levels. Although it would still look pretty good if you were to use a percentage type bar giving a visual indication of the ME research, with the hard data in another tab.

Another benefit of using 100 as your figure, is then people will intuitively relate that to percentage of BPO researched. So I think this would actually be possibly more intuitive and better for the UI that ten levels.

The extra complexity is again something which I am very happy with, and like you say, it is only marginally more complex, and much less complex than the current system.

The only issue I can see, which I see was also mentioned above, is how were you thinking about relating the new levels to time to research? If the BPO ME level is switched to 100 levels instead of 10, then presumably we would still want to keep the gradient in times being much quicker initially and much longer for later levels. I think it would definitely work, but would probably need a new formula for working out skill training times instead of imposing the skill level formula which is currently planned.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#483 - 2014-04-29 11:19:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Medalyn Isis
Cultural Enrichment wrote:
I'm not sure this has been answered yet:
if I start a research job from, say, 0 to 1 ME before the patch hits, will I deliver a 1 ME BPO or a 5 ME BPO?

You would get a 5 ME BPO.

The main issue is with going from 9 to 10. Someone who's BPO is currently 9 will suddenly become far less valuable than someone who has it at 10. And someone who has their BPO at ME 50 to get the current perfect for example, would now be only equivalent to a 10 ME BPO which took 5 times less time to research. Which as many have pointed out is massively penalising those who spent a long time getting their BPOs to perfect.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#484 - 2014-04-29 11:25:16 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Greyscale, I have two major issues of concern with these changes.

The first you have already addressed, in regards to the T2 BPC copy time and further proliferation into T2 Invention markets. If anything, my opinion is T2 BPOs need to be nerfed, and certainly not buffed. It is not fun finding out a lot of markets for certain items are simply out of your reach when it comes to efficient T2 manufacturing if you don't have the T2 BPO.

The second thing, this issue with only 10 levels is far to much of a blanket approach. Did you consider increasing the level count to perhaps 100 instead of 10 as mentioned. This would allow for current BPOs to be much more accurately represented in the new system, which seem to be a source of much pain with this current 10 level blanket approach you are taking. And also, researching thing from level 9 to 10 could mean a BPO and research slot is locked up for years. Making this a 100 level system would massively alleviate this and make a lot more sense.


Yes, we did talk about it, and it does result in a nicer mapping from old to new. We'd generally prefer not to, though, as a) it's also preserving some of the complexity of the old system (not by much, granted, but simpler = better all other things being equal), and b) honestly it looks much cleaner in the UI just showing whole numbers. It's still a pretty easy thing to switch back mechanically, so we might revisit before release.

I see what you mean about things looking cleaner in the AI with only ten levels. Although it would still look pretty good if you were to use a percentage type bar giving a visual indication of the ME research, with the hard data in another tab.

Another benefit of using 100 as your figure, is then people will intuitively relate that to percentage of BPO researched. So I think this would actually be possibly more intuitive and better for the UI that ten levels.

The extra complexity is again something which I am very happy with, and like you say, it is only marginally more complex, and much less complex than the current system.

The only issue I can see, which I see was also mentioned above, is how were you thinking about relating the new levels to time to research? If the BPO ME level is switched to 100 levels instead of 10, then presumably we would still want to keep the gradient in times being much quicker initially and much longer for later levels. I think it would definitely work, but would probably need a new formula for working out skill training times instead of imposing the skill level formula which is currently planned.



Yeah, pretty much. I think mapping 100 points to the current curve should be doable, we've already had to interpolate to get ten steps out of five, in principle extending that to 100 is doable.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#485 - 2014-04-29 11:35:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Medalyn Isis
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
The only issue I can see, which I see was also mentioned above, is how were you thinking about relating the new levels to time to research? If the BPO ME level is switched to 100 levels instead of 10, then presumably we would still want to keep the gradient in times being much quicker initially and much longer for later levels. I think it would definitely work, but would probably need a new formula for working out skill training times instead of imposing the skill level formula which is currently planned.



Yeah, pretty much. I think mapping 100 points to the current curve should be doable, we've already had to interpolate to get ten steps out of five, in principle extending that to 100 is doable.

Ok that is very great to hear. I myself would be very much in favour of this.
Entaran
Assisted Recovery Solutions
#486 - 2014-04-29 11:54:39 UTC
I apologise if this has already been stated but reading 25 (and counting pages) is quite tedious when looking for a single idea.

If I could make a point for BPC's here, a request would be to remove the outdated and antiquated coded limit on production runs per BPC, or reevaluate it with respect to the changes listed here.

Case in point, making industry easier/nicer is still pointless if you're building 6000 capital components (for a titan) from 5 run bpc's. Why do you force players to start 1125+ manufacturing jobs when it's about 28 if you're using BPO's currently?

Appreciate the concept of building from bpo's = risk, but with the changes to production slots in stations there will be no reason whatsoever to risk your component bpo's in a POS when you have infinite station building slots at an increasing scale (0 scaled infinitely is still zero in nullsec where you can set the costs).

tl;dr hardcoded BPC production run limits have had their time in the sun and now need to be relegated to the history books. Two or five run carrier BPC's sound like a great plan, why shouldn't you be able to make 100 run capital armour plate bpc's?
Uncle Shrimpa
Lap Dancers
Brothers of Tangra
#487 - 2014-04-29 11:58:04 UTC
Entaran wrote:
I apologise if this has already been stated but reading 25 (and counting pages) is quite tedious when looking for a single idea.

If I could make a point for BPC's here, a request would be to remove the outdated and antiquated coded limit on production runs per BPC, or reevaluate it with respect to the changes listed here.

Case in point, making industry easier/nicer is still pointless if you're building 6000 capital components (for a titan) from 5 run bpc's. Why do you force players to start 1125+ manufacturing jobs when it's about 28 if you're using BPO's currently?

Appreciate the concept of building from bpo's = risk, but with the changes to production slots in stations there will be no reason whatsoever to risk your component bpo's in a POS when you have infinite station building slots at an increasing scale (0 scaled infinitely is still zero in nullsec where you can set the costs).

tl;dr hardcoded BPC production run limits have had their time in the sun and now need to be relegated to the history books. Two or five run carrier BPC's sound like a great plan, why shouldn't you be able to make 100 run capital armour plate bpc's?



Been asked an answered several times

They are going to look at it, nothing specific announced yet though

CCP Greyscale -Yup, we have data on what happens currently, but we're expecting those use patterns to change substantially when this release. There's a degree of "suck it and see" happening here :)

Debir Achen
Makiriemi Holdings
#488 - 2014-04-29 12:21:25 UTC
Have you considered representing the modifier in the other direction? A fully researched BP would be ME -10%; a BPC with a poor ME encryptor would be +100%. Listing a -100% discount is sorta strange.

It would be really helpful if the UI itself could show mineral and time requirements at various levels, either in a table or with a slider. Yes, third party tools can do it, but every level of tool indirection = irritation.

I agree with the post above about researching partial levels. You'll also want to consider the economic impact of jobs that run longer than 30 days: there are stations out there where a 30 day job costs 10k to install and another 1k or so to run.

Removing slots has another side effect: there's no longer a time bottleneck on NPC industry. Yes, it might cost more to do it fast, but you remove the lead time issues that were quite noticeable with shorter jobs.

Finally, please add the ability to click on a resource and "find in assets" (rather than just "find in market")

Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature?

Javani
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#489 - 2014-04-29 12:24:07 UTC
Is it correct that the copy time from an Module BPO like the PDU from 1 minute per run rised to 7-8 minutes per run?

So thats an max run copy take around 35 Hours ?

That looks like a little bit horribly for an inventen's



Redd Dredd
State War Academy
Caldari State
#490 - 2014-04-29 12:29:12 UTC
Two things here, and then a sad sad story.

First, I feel the research time credit idea is a bad one. It will really a pretty big disadvantage for new players when new Ships and BPOs are introduced. Some would be able to immediately produce with a perfectly researched BPO, while those without the credit would be stuck researching.

Second, CCP, poop or get off the pot. Either deprecate the existing T2 BPOs, and move on with the invention direction, OR introduce new T2 BPOs into the system. Personally, I feel they have been around plaguing the system for too long and should be removed. Now is the perfect time. You know since the invention of invention (heh) that they have been slated for removal, so why put it off? Yes, people will be impacted, but it's OK.

Let me tell you a little story. Once upon a time there were these nifty modules called Basic Power Diagnostic Systems. They were a very niche item, but when needed, they were very useful. To get a BPO for this item, it had to drop from running certain missions. I was lucky enough to get one. I began building my BPDS empire around my new BPO. Researched it up and began marketing them at over 1 million isk each (this was a lot of isk back in my day). I made some great isk. I sought out and purchased all the BPDS BPOs I could find. I began to aquire both power and wealth as I cornered the market. I bought a maller (it had spinners and fuzzy dice and everything). Life was grand. Then I woke up one morning and my prized BPOs were gone. Changed even. What had been a Basic Power Diagnostic System BPO one day had turned into a Power Diagnostic Systems I BPO the next. No warning, no explanation, no apology, no nothing. My dreams of becoming a BPDS Mogul vanished. Gone. Taken from me by cruel uncaring task masters. My petitions went unresolved, we all know the status of the logs. But guess what... I got over it. (Yes, even though BPDSs sell at bet ween 3 and 5 mil today, I'm not bitter). So my question is this: Why treat T2 BPOs any different? If T20 had spawned BPDS BPOs back in the day, would they still be around? I can only wonder.

Death to Supercaps, and Death to T2 BPOs.
Rek Seven
Galactic Deep Space Industries
Warped Intentions
#491 - 2014-04-29 13:09:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Rek Seven wrote:
In the industry update, will we be able to select multiple BPC to run several invention jobs at once or will we still have to run each job individually?

If it's going to stay the same as it is now, you are doing it wrong CCP. There is no gameplay benefit to the current system and all it does is induce tedium and repetitive strain injury on the player base.


bumb
Builder AlphaOne
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#492 - 2014-04-29 13:21:36 UTC
I see design issues with the 28 April [first dev blog] version of changes to researching BPs which I will detail in two posts:


firstly, the proposed training time system would require 148300 time units to train from level nine percent to level ten percent. [256000 minus 107700]


this works fine for difficulty level 1 [T1 ammo] bps -- it takes 41.19 hours or 1.7164 days.

It then fails when difficulty level [before consideration of skills and pos/lab training bonuses] exceeds 17.5 [ie, for all T1 destroyer and up BPs] because the required training time exceeds the 30 day maximum.

It becomes ridiculous for the Titan BP mentioned in the blog -- at difficulty level 3134, the BP could not be trained beyond [new] ME 3% because the required training time from 3% to 4% would exceed 30 days.


A possible work around for this is to keep the actual BP level trained in the same fashion as skills [add as many training points, up to one month's worth, as you wish at any time] but ME quality only changes when you reach the next full level.

I point out that the required precision in the calculation is 256,000 [maximum training units] times 3134 [Titan difficulty level] or 802 million parts. [about 14.75 years training to get that new Titan BP up to ME 10%].


As others have pointed out, this gives anyone who possesses a Titan BP with ME [old] 10 level, under the proposed translation scheme, a virtually unassailable position in the game -- they'll have a 'near perfect' BPO which, effectively, no one who starts after the patch will ever be able to duplicate.

The advantage is similar but of lesser scale for other capital and even battleship BPs.

Thus, those with such a PB when the change goes live will have a continuing advantage in production of the ship and BP copies over everyone else virtually 'forever' -- which is the exact same situation as the current legacy T2 BP originals enjoy and which I thought CCP had said they wanted to erase.



next -- fixing the unfair translation scheme from old ME level to new ME % level.
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
SE7EN-SINS
#493 - 2014-04-29 13:29:29 UTC
I have no specific concerns or commentary on the contents of this devblog, as it's generally well thought-out, informative and understandable. However, I would like to draw attention to one specific thing:

CCP Greyscale wrote:
We're very aware that some of you will feel that you've lost your previous advantages gained by researching blueprints for a really long time, and this is one of the areas we're preparing to focus the most on in terms of receiving feedback and making adjustments or additions to smooth the transition. Everything is on the table in terms of finding a reasonable solution that meets everyone's legitimate concerns, so please approach the feedback in terms of telling us what you'd like to see rather than simply expressing frustration with the changes as described here. We're not done with this yet!

This is basically the most promising thing I've seen from CCP this year. This is the kind of attitude that makes me happy to be a part of this game.

Thanks, Greyscale.

... Threyscale.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#494 - 2014-04-29 13:30:59 UTC
Builder AlphaOne wrote:
I see design issues with the 28 April [first dev blog] version of changes to researching BPs which I will detail in two posts:


firstly, the proposed training time system would require 148300 time units to train from level nine percent to level ten percent. [256000 minus 107700]


this works fine for difficulty level 1 [T1 ammo] bps -- it takes 41.19 hours or 1.7164 days.

It then fails when difficulty level [before consideration of skills and pos/lab training bonuses] exceeds 17.5 [ie, for all T1 destroyer and up BPs] because the required training time exceeds the 30 day maximum.

It becomes ridiculous for the Titan BP mentioned in the blog -- at difficulty level 3134, the BP could not be trained beyond [new] ME 3% because the required training time from 3% to 4% would exceed 30 days.


A possible work around for this is to keep the actual BP level trained in the same fashion as skills [add as many training points, up to one month's worth, as you wish at any time] but ME quality only changes when you reach the next full level.

I point out that the required precision in the calculation is 256,000 [maximum training units] times 3134 [Titan difficulty level] or 802 million parts. [about 14.75 years training to get that new Titan BP up to ME 10%].


As others have pointed out, this gives anyone who possesses a Titan BP with ME [old] 10 level, under the proposed translation scheme, a virtually unassailable position in the game -- they'll have a 'near perfect' BPO which, effectively, no one who starts after the patch will ever be able to duplicate.

The advantage is similar but of lesser scale for other capital and even battleship BPs.

Thus, those with such a PB when the change goes live will have a continuing advantage in production of the ship and BP copies over everyone else virtually 'forever' -- which is the exact same situation as the current legacy T2 BP originals enjoy and which I thought CCP had said they wanted to erase.



next -- fixing the unfair translation scheme from old ME level to new ME % level.


I thiiiiiink that jobs lasting more than 30 days are fine provided they're single-run. Certainly that works for manufacturing, otherwise it'd be impossible to build titans already. In any case, we're going to make sure that long single-run jobs work fine :)

As to people with ME10 Titan BPOs, that's ~4 years of research time under the current system. I'll go check if any exist, but I doubt it.
Elric Darkmoor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#495 - 2014-04-29 13:38:42 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


I thiiiiiink that jobs lasting more than 30 days are fine provided they're single-run. Certainly that works for manufacturing, otherwise it'd be impossible to build titans already. In any case, we're going to make sure that long single-run jobs work fine :)

As to people with ME10 Titan BPOs, that's ~4 years of research time under the current system. I'll go check if any exist, but I doubt it.


Umm Should you not KNOW that Big smile

But yes if doing a single production Run or a single ME?PE run is more than 30 days, the system allows it to continue.

It only if there are multiple runs that exceed 30 days that it is denied by the system
1Robert McNamara1
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#496 - 2014-04-29 13:41:05 UTC
There's lots of talk about T2 BPO holders having an unfair 6.25% boost in production due to copy speed increase...

Doesn't that speed increase improve all of the inventors as well as they copy T1 BPOs? And since you can have many T1 BPOs on infinity copy slots (provided its worth paying the premiums detailed in the costs dev-blog) inventors enjoy vast production capacity expansion over T2 BPO holders by many factors of 6.25%

is the copy time involved with invention so insignificant that the gains in copy time are net-zero because of other factors? I doubt it.
Builder AlphaOne
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#497 - 2014-04-29 13:52:18 UTC
part two of foreseen issues related to the 28 April dev blog post about revisions to researching BPs:


the proposed translation scheme unfairly removes the advantage that many players [myself included, but less than many others] have spent thousands of hours, or hundreds of millions of isk, acquiring -- and without compensation.

When all BPs with [old] ME level 10 or higher are arbitrarily translated into new ME 10% BPs, the entire amount of training invested beyond [old] ME 10 will evaporate.


This penalizes players and corporations that have invested what may be billions of isk in their BP portfolios. It will also remove their incremental cost advantage in producing the end product, and thus the value of the BP copies that some of them make and sell in the contracts market as their source of income in EVE.

{Aside: since "everyone" knows of the upcoming changes, there is no ability to sell the soon to be over researched BPs for anything like their prior value and thus escape the penalty.}

[Disclosure: some of my alts have focused their entire existence for the past several years in exactly this activity. I've paid ccp for the right to struggle toward this advantage in production.]


I suggest that a fairer translation scheme would be to calculate from the [old] ME/PE level of a BP the total time invested in training and set the replacement BP to the percent level that this would make under the new scheme.

Example: a T1 cruiser BP {difficulty level 40} at ME 60 would have been trained for 240,000 minutes {14.4 million seconds] or 2400 training points which falls between [new] ME 4% and ME 5%.


YES, this would nerf the owner's production quality from its previous level -- so what!

It preserves the relative advantage the owner/investor in these BPs has over those owner/investors who never researched their BPs beyond level ten.


ccp has nerfed production of many items ingame before [most T1 ships, for example, in the various changes in the past two years].

If the EVE economy needs to be re-balanced to account for this increase in average production cost, the material requirement of all BPs could be reduced to compensate [preserving the relative advantage] by N% {I haven't the global EVE data required to calculate this N figure.}


With this adjustment, the billions that some production corporations have invested in their BP portfolios will not have gone for naught -- they'll still have an advantage and their BP copies will still command premium prices in the contracts market.

And, the long run price of ships, etc. will not be pushed down by a flood of "near perfect" BPs trained up in the next few months to [old] ME/PE 10.



older than dirt. older than EVE, too.
Cyrillian Voth
Nova Haven
#498 - 2014-04-29 14:05:43 UTC
CCP_Greyscale wrote:

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.


TL;DR: Do you agree with the principle that the expansion should not make it harder for new industrialists to compete with those who established themselves before the expansion?

I'm concerned that you appear to have your priorities backwards here. Some owners of well-researched BPOs (especially those with high ranks) and tech II BPOs will gain an even greater advantage over newcomers from this change. Industry should be designed to allow newer players to make a profit if they're smart; instead you risk further entrenching the dominance of rich older players. The fact that they will squeal should not be a distraction from what's best for the game.

An example: Peter Plutocrat has a Raven BPO researched to ME 14, which took him under two months, cost next to nothing, and translates to a perfect ME10% under the new system. Along comes Natalia Newbie wanting to break into the Raven market, and decides to start by researching her BPO to ME10%. Not only does this cost her a fair chunk of ISK, it takes her nearly six months to achieve the same result. Meanwhile Peter is laughing all the way to the bank.

A solution: calculate the time invested in research, and re-apply it under the new system. Some BPOs will get worse as a result; too bad. They may squeal, but those owners still have the advantage of having done all that research at a lower cost under the old system, and there's still a level playing field for them to research further if that's what's required.

Similarly, the copying changes give an increase of several percentage points in the throughput (and hence profitability) of tech II BPOs; you're right that it's not a disaster for invention, but that's beside the point: it makes the gerontocrats' advantage greater when you should be working to reduce it.

A solution: find a way to increase the cost of copying tech II BPOs. You could require additional materials for copying (e.g. datacores as well as data sheets), require the use of expensive expert teams for tech II copy jobs, change the copy duration on tech II BPOs, etc. The aim should be to ensure that tech II BPO profitability either stays the same as it is now, or goes down.
Builder AlphaOne
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#499 - 2014-04-29 14:06:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Builder AlphaOne
Greyscale: I point out that having the training job run for excessive lengths of time [148k training units from level nine to ten] is so long for some BPs that virtually no BPs bought after the change will ever be trained to ME 10%. Example, that training time for a T1 cruiser would exceed 68 days and for a battleship would exceed 135 days. At some point [capital BPs??] the training length required to reach ME 10% is so long that virtually no new BPs will be researched to that level, thus cementing the cost advantage of those already at that level when the proposed change occurs.

It is already too late to buy and train any BPO with new difficulty level beyond that of a battleship to [old] ME 10 before the potential patch date. [T1 battleship would require 55.6 days]. Thus, the advantage of everyone who already owns a capital BPO and has at least ME 10 by "summer" is now virtually permanent.


The workaround for this is to adapt the skill point training scheme to BP research. Keep the records in very small units but only allow translation to production [of items or copies] at the ME percent level the cumulative underlying time indicates,

AND allow research times to be added in less than full percent level increments.


Thus, that hypothetical Titan BPO could be reasonably researched to ME 3% in a few months, and then researched piecemeal [in multiple separate smaller than 30 day steps] to ME 4% or higher off and on over the next months. A copy made in between the small steps would have ME 3% until the cumulative training time required for higher ME % is reached.





***


CCP Greyscale wrote:
Builder AlphaOne wrote:
I see design issues with the 28 April [first dev blog] version of changes to researching BPs which I will detail in two posts:


firstly, the proposed training time system would require 148300 time units to train from level nine percent to level ten percent. [256000 minus 107700]


this works fine for difficulty level 1 [T1 ammo] bps -- it takes 41.19 hours or 1.7164 days.

It then fails when difficulty level [before consideration of skills and pos/lab training bonuses] exceeds 17.5 [ie, for all T1 destroyer and up BPs] because the required training time exceeds the 30 day maximum.

It becomes ridiculous for the Titan BP mentioned in the blog -- at difficulty level 3134, the BP could not be trained beyond [new] ME 3% because the required training time from 3% to 4% would exceed 30 days.


A possible work around for this is to keep the actual BP level trained in the same fashion as skills [add as many training points, up to one month's worth, as you wish at any time] but ME quality only changes when you reach the next full level.

I point out that the required precision in the calculation is 256,000 [maximum training units] times 3134 [Titan difficulty level] or 802 million parts. [about 14.75 years training to get that new Titan BP up to ME 10%].


As others have pointed out, this gives anyone who possesses a Titan BP with ME [old] 10 level, under the proposed translation scheme, a virtually unassailable position in the game -- they'll have a 'near perfect' BPO which, effectively, no one who starts after the patch will ever be able to duplicate.

The advantage is similar but of lesser scale for other capital and even battleship BPs.

Thus, those with such a PB when the change goes live will have a continuing advantage in production of the ship and BP copies over everyone else virtually 'forever' -- which is the exact same situation as the current legacy T2 BP originals enjoy and which I thought CCP had said they wanted to erase.



next -- fixing the unfair translation scheme from old ME level to new ME % level.


I thiiiiiink that jobs lasting more than 30 days are fine provided they're single-run. Certainly that works for manufacturing, otherwise it'd be impossible to build titans already. In any case, we're going to make sure that long single-run jobs work fine :)

As to people with ME10 Titan BPOs, that's ~4 years of research time under the current system. I'll go check if any exist, but I doubt it.



older than dirt. older than EVE, too.
Banko Mato
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#500 - 2014-04-29 14:16:25 UTC
Hm, somehow i must have missed this thread or maybe i focused too much on the industry UI..
Anyways, after having only skimmed the first few pages, i need one question answered:

Is the fact, that current ME/TE 10 (or 11+) results in future perfect value, set in stone already?