These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: The Price of Change

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Caldari 5
D.I.L.L.I.G.A.F. S.A.S
Affirmative.
#161 - 2014-04-29 14:39:48 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
It will likely be per-run, so a 50-run copy becomes 100%, yes. Research costs scale at higher levels though, so it probably swings back a bit there.

Did invention from Max Run Copies just become Hideously expensive?
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#162 - 2014-04-29 14:40:25 UTC
I think it looks good.
The math looks relatively straightforward and scalable.
It should produce some nice dynamic cost driven relocations.

Looking forward to reading the 'teams blog' I'm really curious as to what that is actually all about.



And I still think a similar process should be put in place for market order taxes and broker fees.
I know, it's not strictly an "Industry Activity" and out of the scope of these changes, but trading imho definitely needs something like this.
Meandering Milieu
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#163 - 2014-04-29 14:42:43 UTC
Steijn wrote:
seems like POS owners are been treated like mushrooms.


You mean CCP is tripping balls right now?

http://i.imgur.com/X3zhxKq.jpg
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#164 - 2014-04-29 14:43:20 UTC
Photon Ceray wrote:
Two things no one seems to be addressing:

What about office renting costs?

What about getting more corp hangar and wallet divisions?


Those suggestions relate more to a total revamp of the Corporation/Alliance Roles & Permissions in conjunction with POS use to enable multiple member with risk of theft of members jobs or the POS infrastructure. My pet subject lest you didn't know. Smile

The things you asked for are not really useful without the security aspect being fixed.

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#165 - 2014-04-29 14:46:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:
As we have all been told the old POS code is a minefield which probably will never be fixed. Best we can hope is that CCP can build a new POS system based on the new deployables, maybe in modular design(In our dreams I hear someone mutter.), and 'slot' it into the client somehow. I'm a born luddite so don't ask me to do it. Big smile

Oh sure, but what we have here is not even something that has anything to do with the POS code.

It's could literally just be a matter of counting relevant arrays at the POS rather than stations in the system.

Instead of “oh, this system has 15 industry stations → 46% price multiplier”, the exact same calculation could just say “oh, this POS has 15 construction arrays → 46% price multiplier”. If the POS code is such a mess that they can't even determine how many arrays are attached to a structure, I would like to know how they even managed to implement the moon goo siphons…

If it's too much to equate a single array with a full station (even though a single array can be filled by one person and a station cannot), just adjust the unit bonus.
Thead Enco
Domheimed
#166 - 2014-04-29 14:47:00 UTC
Dirty Wrench wrote:
Right now I can manufacture an Abaddon for 2332 isk in factory fees. 1000 isk to install + 4*333 (333 isk isk per hour and it takes 4 hours).

So after the wonderful changes it will cost millions of isk to make a single ship in a not so busy system.

In your example you've paid 7,620,000 isk in factory fees.

All this does is jack up the price a manufacturer shoves onto the buyer.

I fail to see any reason to do this. This just drives the price of casual PvP up whilst doing nothing to the actual manufacturers as they are just displacing costs on to the buyer.

Did you really want to see people pay more for stuff they use to actually play the game ?


7mil mark up per unit is not the end of the world. And as for "casuals" if they can't be bothered to login once a month then they are really not playing the game.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#167 - 2014-04-29 14:47:41 UTC
Kitty Bear wrote:
I think it looks good.
The math looks relatively straightforward and scalable.
It should produce some nice dynamic cost driven relocations.

Looking forward to reading the 'teams blog' I'm really curious as to what that is actually all about.



And I still think a similar process should be put in place for market order taxes and broker fees.
I know, it's not strictly an "Industry Activity" and out of the scope of these changes, but trading imho definitely needs something like this.


The 'teams' idea is basically another swathe of taxes

And you are suggesting increasing taxes for market orders and broker fees similar to the taxes being introduced in this blog ShockedQuestion

Someone will have to pay for all these taxes. It's like when the plumber arrives at your house in a shiny SUV. You will be paying for his shiny SUV.

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .
DEATHB1RD
DU5T
#168 - 2014-04-29 14:48:13 UTC
Babbet Bunny wrote:
Now that all player built items price will increase by 5% after the expansion to compensate all meta 0 module BPO's are worthless. Meta 1-3 items will cost less on the market and are better. Meta 0 will be only good for invention.

Whats that new player? You don't have maxed invention skills to be cost effective in the market?

Better Worlds (tm)



I can't figure why so few people seem to realize that things are getting a lot more expensive for builders, which will directly drive a heftly increase in ISK you have to grind to continue blowing up ships. Of course, the 0.0 pyramids won't care unless new player influx starts to dwindle.

More money sinks are for masochists: more grind, less time for fun.
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#169 - 2014-04-29 14:49:09 UTC  |  Edited by: asteroidjas
I just had a whole post, but the forms ate it...aweseome...

basically, how is this new 'instillation cost' going to effect new items released on patch days? Since at first they will have 'no value' then will shortly have an extremely marked up value.

How will current MAX-RUN copies be dealt with if you are going to increase the MAX-RUN ceiling? Should i make sure i have no extra MAX-RUN copies by the time this hits?

Have you (CCP) even considered this, or is this (again) a new concept for you?

Now to address the POS thing. Your public attitude is terribad toward POS owners atm. How can you justify releasing something that drastically changes how POS's will be used without FIXING the POS system. Your changes will help very acute parts of dealing with a POS, but will multiply and compound the worst parts of it. And your attitude is "suck it up and see"????
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#170 - 2014-04-29 14:50:18 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:
As we have all been told the old POS code is a minefield which probably will never be fixed. Best we can hope is that CCP can build a new POS system based on the new deployables, maybe in modular design(In our dreams I hear someone mutter.), and 'slot' it into the client somehow. I'm a born luddite so don't ask me to do it. Big smile

Oh sure, but what we have here is not even something that has anything to do with the POS code.

It's could literally just be a matter of counting relevant arrays at the POS rather than stations in the system.

Instead of “oh, this system has 15 industry stations → 46% price multiplier”, the exact same calculation could just say “oh, this POS has 15 construction arrays → 46% price multiplier”. If the POS code is such a mess that they can't even determine how many arrays are attached to a structure, I would like to know how they even managed to implement the moon goo siphons…

If it's too much to equate a single array with a full station (even though a single array can be filled by one person and a station cannot), just adjust the unit bonus.


It sounds simple the way you say it but I bet it isn't. It would be nice if it was that simple but I bet it isn't by CCP comments in this blog comments.

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .
Axe Coldon
#171 - 2014-04-29 14:51:51 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
So, basically if I produce in a 1 station system in High sec, I am screwed?

And production in general for a ton of items is going to be unprofitable for a very long time. Wonderful. I sure hope you have plans to keep EVE up for the next couple of years until things have finally normalized at a profitable level again. Roll


You will make a profit if everyone has the same price multiplier. Prices of goods will just go up as industrialist pass along the increases.

What will matter is how many goods can be made in systems with less of a cost to manufacture and if it will have a bearing on the overall price of goods.

I for one don't make anything that doesn't make a profit. That won't change. And any smart industrialist does the same. If its going to lose you money..make something else.

Even if its cheaper in null, there is the cost of getting goods to high sec. Unlike high were you can fly around your freighters for no cost ..we have to use jump freighters, jump freighters use fuel. Lots of it the further out you go. Say you manufacture 4 cyno's out 10k isotopes a jump. And use a Rhea cause it holds more..though Nitrogen Isotopes hover around 1000 isk each. A round trip will take 80,000k nitrogen (40k in, 40k out). That is 80,000,000 isk. Not including the cost for cyno's (some of which will die) While you can move a lot of modules in a JF, not so many battleships for instance. An abbaddon is 50k m3. you can fit 7 in Rhea with proper skilsl. that is 80mil divided by7 = 11.4mil transport cost (plus cyno's) plus time to move them.. I doubt you see a massive influx from null.

Bottom line, you will not see mass imports from null killing prices. Most likely null will quit buying as much stuff in high sec and importing it. Null will make more stuff in Null to be used in Null. If high sec is more expensive..that is the cost for safety. You have Concord. Your stations can't be lost and deny you access to your stuff. It's only fair you have pair more for that. Concord has to be paid. We have no concord!

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#172 - 2014-04-29 14:52:19 UTC
If you want to use km value, you NEED to add an API endpoint to give people this value.

I'm also assuming the comments from greyscale about POSes were either a troll or an attempt to get himself shanked at FF. Please make sure the POS stuff is in and thought about for the initial release, or people will be forced to move all their stuff around twice

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#173 - 2014-04-29 14:56:24 UTC
Two step wrote:
If you want to use km value, you NEED to add an API endpoint to give people this value.


I'll talk to some people.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
Sturmwolke
#174 - 2014-04-29 14:58:40 UTC
I just want to mention two things, to get this on the table.

NPC alt exploit - The formula atm does not distinguish player corp and NPC corp*. There's still a few missing pieces, will this be addresed in those?
*NPC corp manufacturing doesn't require a corp office.

Office rental griefing - With current maximum 24 offices per station and no cap to office rental, the possibility of griefing an entire solar system is high. You can either flood the station with multiple alt corps or tap a finishing touch to the last 2-3 office slots. With near unlimited isk, this can be turned into long term harassment tool, rendering a system into scorched earth for manufacturing and research activities. As with MIMAF, there will always be players who won't include the amortized monthly rental into their costs calculations.
DEFANDER
CSV - Like in politics - rules apply differently
#175 - 2014-04-29 14:59:21 UTC
Why not make the tax grow the more jobs of THAT SPECIFIC nature are installed in THAT ONE station, instead of using such a formula.


And by all means if only 1 person installs 1 job into that 1 station they like so much, and nobody else will install ever 1 other job, then make the price STAY at the lvl is it right now to install one job.

So that 1 station will have the initial cost same as now ( for the first job anyone installs in it - no more then 1 job installed ), with the second job installed be at a fixed % more . Say add 1% extra to the price / per job installed.

And don't mix them up manufacturing with research - when it comes to this tax.


So:

1. Tax be PER STATION not system or entire game.

2. Tax be per industry activity and not be calculated from all over.

3. POS's should still have absolutely no tax (in either ISK or "fuel") more then IT HAS NOW. (still trying to find one that is not set by corp/alliance).

4. If you really want to make a tax (don't see a reason why to...) for POS's then make it like this.
- Minimum number of slots inside a lab / man. facility
- The ability to use unlock more of them - with some sort of "Controlled Overheat" option active.
- Have that overheat option impact the structures and the tower:

  • a) Either keep running the same setup you have atm - same number of labs - same pos "configuration"


  • b) Use only say 2 labs that you can "control overheat" on a scale


    • *Overheat 1 = gives you 1 extra slot of you choise out of the ones the lab can do even now. And it would make the tower consume 1% more fuel / month
    *Overheat 2 = gives you 2 extra slots of you choise ( not identical ) with a 2% increase in fuel costs.
    *Overheat 3 = gives you 1 more slot of each type - with a 3% increase in fuel costs.

    - And have the fuel costs increase be per lab / manufacturing facility.
    - So you want to overheat 3 labs and 2 components arays
    - labs: 2 x lvl 2 and 1 x lvl 3
    - arays: bouth at lvl 1

    - Total overheat change to fuel cost will be 9% more fuel needed per month.


    This way everyone that has a tower and uses it for industry will work it out, do i want to only use 2 overheated labs and use the Towers pwg and cpu for other things ( defenses & guns ), or stick with the full complement of labs he is using now.
    DEATHB1RD
    DU5T
    #176 - 2014-04-29 14:59:38 UTC
    Thead Enco wrote:
    Dirty Wrench wrote:
    Right now I can manufacture an Abaddon for 2332 isk in factory fees. 1000 isk to install + 4*333 (333 isk isk per hour and it takes 4 hours).

    So after the wonderful changes it will cost millions of isk to make a single ship in a not so busy system.

    In your example you've paid 7,620,000 isk in factory fees.

    All this does is jack up the price a manufacturer shoves onto the buyer.

    I fail to see any reason to do this. This just drives the price of casual PvP up whilst doing nothing to the actual manufacturers as they are just displacing costs on to the buyer.

    Did you really want to see people pay more for stuff they use to actually play the game ?


    7mil mark up per unit is not the end of the world. And as for "casuals" if they can't be bothered to login once a month then they are really not playing the game.


    wrong on both counts:

    1) manufacturing cost never gets passed down to the buyer 1:1... If CCP makes large changes, they should keep it price neutral until inadvertent effects have been observed.

    2) To CCP, anyone who is subbed is "playing" regardless how little they log in. If CCP makes casual playing too annoying or require too much plex buying, they're cutting their own income and jobs.

    Not to mention that you're vastly exaggerating to make your point. Grinding a decent amount of ISK takes quite a LOT of logging in for casual and new players, as their opportunities and efficiencies are the worst in the game. Dysfunctional jobless people playing 24/7 on the other hand DO have the best efficiency for ISK grinding.
    ElectronHerd Askulf
    Aridia Logistical Misdirection
    #177 - 2014-04-29 15:00:02 UTC
    Weaselior wrote:

    Transport costs are going up 50% (at least), which throws a serious wrench into a lot of the chance for nullsec to compete: imported minerals just got more expensive, importing non-local moon materials likewise, making it make even more sense to import the smaller finished products instead of the raw materials. With no cost advantage over a highsec pos sitting one jump from jita, there's nothing you can do to make up those transport costs.



    The non-local moon materials are a big logistical issue in null-sec production. We did some calculations a couple of weeks ago and discovered that it's more volume efficient to import t2 components than moongoo. Given the ease with which one character can outproduce a local null market, we're right back at 'why build in null at all'.

    Really that supports Greyscales statement regarding the need to address the null ecosystem as a whole - right now there aren't sufficient markets to support manufacture and the logistical overhead is icing on the cake keeping industry in highsec. The game is in a state where there's immense inertia keeping industry largely in high-sec.
    Gabriel Z
    Krabulous
    #178 - 2014-04-29 15:00:49 UTC
    I'm a little confused about something in the dev blog.

    Quote:
    Every station in a system has two facility multipliers -- one for manufacturing and one for research -- and the system's various multipliers are all multiplied together and then multiplied with the price.


    This seems to imply that whether a station has factory or research facilities or not, it's part of the calculation. Is that correct? Also, are they still going to have stations with the research/factory designation? Does "no slots" mean that ANY station can be used and there is no such thing a system that has a station but not industry abilities?
    CCP Greyscale
    C C P
    C C P Alliance
    #179 - 2014-04-29 15:01:32 UTC
    Adaahh Gee wrote:
    For the non-industrial folk, as a rough percentage figure.

    What increase in ship prices are CCP hoping to achieve for general high sec trade hub prices?


    There's no real "hoping for" here, price rises are a necessary side-effect not a goal in and of themselves. I'd expect low single-digits percentage increase.

    Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
    How will the workforce cost be determined for WH's? They are not in any system as such so will they simply have a base worforce cost dependent on the amount of universal work done inside the WH?


    Each J-number is its own system as far as this code is concerned.

    Valterra Craven wrote:
    CCP Greyscale wrote:


    Some people will get lucky on offices; that's just the luck of the draw and we aren't planning on any "compensation" there. Generally though, the systems that are good for building after the change tended to be good for building before the change.




    I really really wish you guys would stop doing things like this. It makes literally zero sense for a station to have infinite production capabilities and have limited corp office space.

    Seriously, apply this new fee structure to corp offices as well and make them infinite.


    Sure, we'd like to revisit this at some point. We don't have time right now, though.

    asteroidjas wrote:
    I just had a whole post, but the forms ate it...aweseome...

    basically, how is this new 'instillation cost' going to effect new items released on patch days? Since at first they will have 'no value' then will shortly have an extremely marked up value.

    How will current MAX-RUN copies be dealt with if you are going to increase the MAX-RUN ceiling? Should i make sure i have no extra MAX-RUN copies by the time this hits?

    Have you (CCP) even considered this, or is this (again) a new concept for you?

    Now to address the POS thing. Your public attitude is terribad toward POS owners atm. How can you justify releasing something that drastically changes how POS's will be used without FIXING the POS system. Your changes will help very acute parts of dealing with a POS, but will multiply and compound the worst parts of it. And your attitude is "suck it up and see"????


    New items can have a price assigned prior to release, we should be able to handle that.

    Max-run BPCs stockpiled for invention I will have a think about.
    Matthew
    BloodStar Technologies
    #180 - 2014-04-29 15:01:34 UTC
    Well, this is very interesting. I like the idea of facility costs no longer being a rounding error, and that there are a number of factors that you can influence to varying degrees. It is significantly more complex, but as this complexity supports a number of decisions about competing priorities, I think this is good complexity.

    Third Party Tools

    My primary concern is the ability to replicate the cost calculation within 3rd party tools, which is essential if these tools are to remain useful.

    From what I can tell from the formula, we need two new API endpoints:


    S&I System Information Endpoint

    This endpoint would work similarly to the current /map/Jumps.xml.aspx, returning a list of systems with the relevant values of:


    • Square Root of Fraction of Global Job Hours
    • Facility Reduction
    • FW Reduction



    Item Price Endpoint

    This endpoint would accept a typeID (or a list of typeIDs), and return the current price according to the server's costing engine.


    The base impact of a given Team cost and starbase/outpost reduction will presumably be available from the SDE, with the 3rd party tool user specifying the team/facility that applied.

    Hours already run can be calculated from the SDE + facility modifiers, the main change here is that it introduces an iterative element to the calculation. To get this part right we presumably have to calculate the cost of each run of the job separately and then sum them all together, rather than calculating a one-run cost and then just multiplying it by the number of runs.


    Player-controlled taxes

    These are currently marked as an "if we have time" feature. I would like to emphasize that these are very important to being able to run and fund player-owned facilities - without this feature in place an external accounting process is required to transfer the funds required to run the facilities from the manufacturing/research division back to the starbase division.

    I'm also unsure about what the best method for setting these taxes will be. One of the big differences with the new formula is that it is now proportional to the cost of the output, not the amount of time the output takes to run. The proposed NPC tax is implemented as a percentage on top of the already-modified install cost - I can see that being an attractive option for outpost owners, but it might be a bit of a mismatch for starbase operators.

    This is because the cost of running the starbase scales with time, not with the value of the output of its jobs, and is not affected by all the other variables surrounding the new installation cost. For these purposes, the ability to continue setting a fixed "x isk per unit time" tax would be very useful.

    So maybe we can be greedy and have the option to apply both sorts of tax?


    Bonuses for multiple starbase structures

    There should definitely be some sort of benefit to having multiple structures present, and I would push as hard as possible for this to make it into the initial release.

    However, I can live with this being pushed back to the point release if it comes alongside some wider rationalisation of the structures themselves, so that the structures and bonus work together more sensibly. They are currently a mess of different slot counts, slot abilities, time and mineral modifiers that don't really fit into the new system very well at all. The Hyasyoda lab is merely the most obvious symptom of this.