These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Team Up: Industry Work Teams

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Green Gambit
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#361 - 2014-04-30 17:01:33 UTC
Anabella Rella wrote:

You do remember that this is a video game that many people undertake for entertainment and relaxation, yes? Most people are doing production as a way to make in-game money to purchase ships and modules and not as some sort of exercise in supposed mental superiority.


And like when I play chess, I like to be able to think, analyse, and consider what my best move is to win at the game.

I mean, Eve is a grown-up, thinking-man's game right? If I wanted to play (and lose) at something where it's all about speed-of-reaction, then I'd be playing CoD with all the teenagers.
350125GO
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#362 - 2014-04-30 17:02:07 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:
350125GO wrote:
Not sure if I missed this, but does each region have a set number of teams, or does the entire universe compete for the same fixed number of teams? What's to stop monopolies forming on the better teams, or, just wealthy trolls from trying to disrupt the system?

e.g. wealthy wormhole alliance buys all the best teams (or all the teams for that matter) just to keep others from using them. I know that doesn't make sense from a business standpoint, but from a disruptive gameplay standpoint I can see this being called "creating content".




I yearn to create content


So you think it's open for abuse? Like tanking Concorde was back in the day. Dev's didn't think it was possible, or that someone would want to do it, so they didn't prepare for it.

You're young, you'll adjust. I'm old, I'll get used to it.
Valterra Craven
#363 - 2014-04-30 17:02:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Valterra Craven
War Kitten wrote:


Which system is going to have stronger bidding capability, a Nullsec system with one station, or a highsec system with 4-5 manufacturing stations that's flooded with risk averse industrialists?

The whole point of the teams is to cut costs - saying that nullsec will win all the good teams because they have more isk completely ignores the point of no return where the cost of winning the team outweighs the value.

Spread that break-even point cost out over 100 highsec industrialists and you have a better profit margin than you do if that same cost is bourne by 10-20 nullsec industrialists. The system with more intelligent, participating bidders should win over lesser populated ones.




I feel like you are missing the point that others are making. The 100 highsec industrialists aren't competing with 10-20 nul sec industrialist, they are competing with alliances that have huge disproportionate power compared to their numbers. I know this for a fact, because back in the BoB days I was one of those null sec industrialists and I was part of the second to last stage of t2 production. Our one corp... BNC.E was able to max out 3 stations 24-7 with only a few people running t2 comp jobs. And that was just a small fraction of output that the entire alliance was capable of. Now when you compare the scope of power today, You guys and N3, Russians, Goons, etc, those numbers are likely downright pathetic. This is especially true when you consider the amount of titans on the field today compared to back then. Just think about the raw amount of goods etc that are needed to produce those items...
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#364 - 2014-04-30 17:03:44 UTC
350125GO wrote:


So you think it's open for abuse? Like tanking Concorde was back in the day. Dev's didn't think it was possible, or that someone would want to do it, so they didn't prepare for it.




I think you can hog all the teams if you really want, and that that is not abuse, but definitely intended.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#365 - 2014-04-30 17:04:53 UTC
Green Gambit wrote:
War Kitten wrote:

Which system is going to have stronger bidding capability, a Nullsec system with one station, or a highsec system with 4-5 manufacturing stations that's flooded with risk averse industrialists?


Well on the basis of what I can see so far on this thread we're going to lose out to null-sec. Because an awful lot of the industrialists are too risk averse to bid for a manufacturing discount - and god-forbid they should actually team-up.

Which is a real pity - because if 80% of the player-base, and all the rich industrialists are really based in high-sec we should've been able to kick-ass.


Therein lies the problem.

It's not that nullsec has an advantage - it's that nullsec dwellers are more organized and team-oriented than highsec dwellers.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
350125GO
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#366 - 2014-04-30 17:04:54 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:
350125GO wrote:


So you think it's open for abuse? Like tanking Concorde was back in the day. Dev's didn't think it was possible, or that someone would want to do it, so they didn't prepare for it.




I think you can hog all the teams if you really want, and that that is not abuse, but definitely intended.


And they'll call me the one with the tin-foil hat... :)

You're young, you'll adjust. I'm old, I'll get used to it.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#367 - 2014-04-30 17:05:01 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:
Lena Lazair wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:
Soniclover, I would ask if it's possible to retract bids on teams. If it so possible, then you will hand us an important tool to wage economic warfare.

And isn't that the point of the market? PVP? Twisted


PvP has risk. If you can retract your bid, there's no risk to you, therefore no PvP. Just trolling.




That depends entirely on how the sniper rules work, although I would be also be okay with not being able to retract bids. I just think it'd add an element of chaos and uncertainty to the process - always a plus!

If you'll allow a comparison to the Real World (always a risk doing that), there are usually rather stringent rules against bid retractions in auctions, and frequently rather painful consequences. So, if we allow bid retractions in team auctions it seems reasonable that those retractions might have to pay a rather hefty fine, such as 15% of the bid?

MDD
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#368 - 2014-04-30 17:06:20 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:
Soniclover, I would ask if it's possible to retract bids on teams. If it so possible, then you will hand us an important tool to wage economic warfare.



And isn't that the point of the market? PVP? Twisted


Hm, could work. We'll look into it, thought it might lead to too weird situation. Would have to be worked into the sniper rules, as the most important thing is how things stand in the last minute of the auction.



Are retractable bids typically allowed in the auction world? I mean, I understand trying to bid something up to make another guy pay more, but the concept of being able to pull a bid once made doesn't seem logical.
Drone 16
Holy Horde
#369 - 2014-04-30 17:06:58 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Sigh....

You guys at CCP really don't get it, do you.

What industrialists want, in real life or otherwise:

1. Cost certainty
2. Minimized risk for return (both in capital investment and getting shot at)
3. Minimizing non-productive time (you know, like what you are supposedly addressing with the UI changes)

In all 3 areas, you have managed to create the exact opposite.

Cost certainty is absolutely impossible with all these changes.
Risk of capital because of #1 just shot through the roof, and that does not even begin to deal with the real chances of getting shot at all the high choke systems that exist in the game.
And as for minimizing non-productive time, well, just like bad industrialists think that minerals they mine are free, you guys at CCP must think that all the time is free that is involved in guessing the profitability of a job, and then hauling materials, blueprints, finished products, and now, ultimately POS's, all over the universe.

A dynamic landscape for industrialists, expecting them to pull up stakes every now and then and move operations is one of the most stupid things to ever come out of CCP. Of course, given that the null sec cartels can establish and strictly control who builds, what they build, and when they build at every single null sec station under their control, this whole industry overhaul works perfectly for them. Gee, it is almost like they handed you the whole industrial blueprint and said "Here, implement this."

You seriously think this all these changes actually make industry MORE enjoyable for players?
You guys are so far out in left field, you can't even see home plate.


Optimizing towards boredom is not a good design direction, no matter how much you want it.


Because nothing says "fun" to an industrialist like moving your manufacturing base (material, Bpo's etc.) based on completely unpredictable variables. Roll

I feel for you industrial types.

It puts the peanutbutter on itself or it leaves the bonus round... - E1's greatest Hits
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#370 - 2014-04-30 17:07:38 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:

If you'll allow a comparison to the Real World (always a risk doing that), there are usually rather stringent rules against bid retractions in auctions, and frequently rather painful consequences. So, if we allow bid retractions in team auctions it seems reasonable that those retractions might have to pay a rather hefty fine, such as 15% of the bid?

MDD



First thank you for signing your post - It's very difficult for me to simply read your name. So reading your signature saved a lot of trouble.


Secondly that's irrelevant, because with bid retractions I can always force you to pay an equivalent or higher price, either for the team, or for bidding (and then retracting).
Ludacrys
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#371 - 2014-04-30 17:08:10 UTC
This update looks more ******** with each new dev blog, do these devs even play the game or were just told "WE NEED MORE ISK SINKS"
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#372 - 2014-04-30 17:08:40 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:

BNC.E was able to max out 3 stations 24-7 with only a few people running t2 comp jobs. And that was just a small fraction of output that the entire alliance was capable of.


Those 3 stations were in 3 different systems right?

It's relatively easy to find 3 stations in one system in highsec. That's 3x the bidding power if it is organized because all 3 stations can benefit from and focus on one team. The nullsec people have to bid on 3 teams to get all 3 stations producing with team bonuses.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#373 - 2014-04-30 17:09:40 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Riela Tanal wrote:
So why are the teams NPCs instead of composed of players? Seems more like focusing more on solo work then a combined effort for industrial operations. I was envisioning more of the team aspect function in industry but I suppose I can wait and see.


Cooperative gameplay in industry requires complete rewrite of the corp role system. Hopefully that will happen soon (you didn't read this here).


Is that a troll, as in soon (tm)? Or its an actual possibility that you're going to rewrite the corp role system, someday (tm)?
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#374 - 2014-04-30 17:11:21 UTC
Green Gambit wrote:

And like when I play chess, I like to be able to think, analyse, and consider what my best move is to win at the game.

I mean, Eve is a grown-up, thinking-man's game right? If I wanted to play (and lose) at something where it's all about speed-of-reaction, then I'd be playing CoD with all the teenagers.


Not that you will of course. Because there's not all that much thought involved even with the changes. Just a more complicated spreadsheet. If you have to think about it, you haven't prepared properly.
Kadl
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#375 - 2014-04-30 17:11:22 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
We implemented the basic bid system in a very rudimentary form as first iteration, to make sure it was functional. We have several follow-up iterations on it to make it more robust and interesting, not sure if and when we'll get to them. This would then be one of the things we'd look into.


Have you already considered alternate auction systems?

You discussed snipping as a problem. It is a technical problem of certain bidding systems, and can be significantly reduced by choosing a good auction system. Sealing bids during the auction means that you cannot effectively play one isk games. Suddenly that strategy becomes stupid, and other more interesting strategies are formed. You want to know the total bid? Look at past history, get some spys, the meta game becomes more interesting, and does not involve alarm clocks and out waiting your opponent. After the auction you can reveal all the sealed bids since one isk games are not worth it at that point.

The Vickrey system may seem odd in design, but when you game it out it works well. Imagine the common auction done right. Each bidder yells out their current bid. The numbers rise until the final bidder goes 0.01 isk above his last competitor. Everyone is satisfied since they have made the highest bid they were willing to, and were over bid by the winner. The winner pays 0.01 isk more than the highest bid of their closest competitor. Instead of a bunch of shooting everyone can give their highest bid to the auctioneer who looks at them and announces the winner and the price - that is Vickrey. Same results, better strategies, no snipping, no timing issues.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#376 - 2014-04-30 17:11:28 UTC
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:
Soniclover, I would ask if it's possible to retract bids on teams. If it so possible, then you will hand us an important tool to wage economic warfare.



And isn't that the point of the market? PVP? Twisted


Hm, could work. We'll look into it, thought it might lead to too weird situation. Would have to be worked into the sniper rules, as the most important thing is how things stand in the last minute of the auction.



Are retractable bids typically allowed in the auction world? I mean, I understand trying to bid something up to make another guy pay more, but the concept of being able to pull a bid once made doesn't seem logical.

It may as well be a silent auction if bids can be retracted. You bid what you think is fair and walk away.
Liner Xiandra
Sparks Inc
#377 - 2014-04-30 17:13:02 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Seith Kali wrote:
Will there be any spawn weighting? I.e will lower bonused ones be more likely to spawn than high bonused ones? Will there be any caps? IE only 1 Passive Armour Broad in game at a time?


Level 5 efficiency is less likely than level 1 efficiency, so there is a weight yes. There are no spawn rules on min or max number of specialties. This means that at any given time, there could 10 teams with a given narrow specialty and two months later there could be only 1, or vice versa.



I have a gut feeling that all this designed unpredictability of the system is not going to increase players moving around to get the most isk-efficiency, but will rather just stop producing item X falls out of favour with the production cost gods.

If a player for some reason has a manufacturing POS, it won't be taken down for item X because it's probably also producing Y and Z as well. That and it takes a good afternoon of waiting on anchoring/onlining timers to move a POS about; along with freighting your goods across New Eden to the new system.

All this intended moving-about-time is eating hugely into isk-per-hour; so I'll just stay in my current system, and suck up the inflated prices or just stop producing.
Nantwig Mutbrecht
Perkone
Caldari State
#378 - 2014-04-30 17:14:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Nantwig Mutbrecht
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:
I'm afraid I lost the post but someone made a good point in that the winning bidder should be able to access the team at base cost. This seems fair, but with bids piling up I would suggest the highest bidder among the system take the cake - Although then you might have to make a system to determine who's bidding what in what system, which has its own potential problems. To solve this you could make the "base" labor/build cost available to anyone who contributed at least a certain % of the pot (i.e. 5%). This would prevent people from "0.01isking" in order to get access to the lower (lower) build cost, but without contributing anything.



Of course, it remains to be seen how, if at all, players will need to be incentivized regarding bidding on teams. Personally I plan on bidding on day 1, but I have no idea how my price point compares to others - and would rather not share that information.


This is one of things we'll be monitoring very close after this goes live, as it is one of the biggest uncertainties. We did look into options to reward the bidder (after the CSM raised this issue). Unfortunately, there is no clean, elegant way to do it that either doesn't complicate the system a bunch or allows for weird exploits. So any good suggestions on this are welcome Smile

Of course, if freeloading turns out to be stifling the system too much, we will have to bite the bullet on complicating the system to counter it, but we want to avoid it if possible.


i pretty much like all of the industry changes so far, i'll hold off on judging them until the patch goes live, though, as always. Adapt and change.

The only big issue i foresee so far is exactly the Freeloading. You asked for suggestions, so here we go:
Handle teams in a similar way to POCO. That is, the highest bidder receives x % of the installation cost paid by anybody using his team. This way bidding for teams in high-activity systems can be a profitable business, but very risky, as you don't know WHAT is being mostly produced in the system. In low activity systems, let's say a 10 man corp in a wormhole, since x% of the money spent on using this team paid for by everybody in the system always goes back into the corp-wallet (indirectly) keeps the system compatible for small guys.

EDIT: I admit that, I, too, thought at first that TEAMS would be a way i can sell / trade my personal research slots to other industrialist / my corp.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#379 - 2014-04-30 17:14:30 UTC
mkint wrote:
Your analogy doesn't answer the question asked, but it does bring up an interesting point...

there's a reason all cars in the US are made in detroit. (except saturns, but does anybody really care about saturn? do they even still exist?)

I stopped reading right there. You have false starting conditions. Toyotas are assembled in Mississippi, Kentucky, Texas, and Indiana. Hondas are assembled in Alabama, Ohio, and Indiana. Fords are assembled in Michigan, Illinois, Missouri, Kentucky, and Texas. Et cetera.

(Cite: various Wikipedia pages. Look for "List of (manufacturer) facilities")

MDD
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#380 - 2014-04-30 17:17:59 UTC
i can't praise your efforts enough, ccp. it's clear just how much thought has gone into each aspect this overhaul. it's gratifying to see the result and makes me hopeful for possible future overhauls of mechanics that are just as tired as industry is