These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Scarlett LaBlanc
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#381 - 2014-04-30 17:18:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Scarlett LaBlanc
Seems like a lot of teeth gnashing over nothing. So much what-if's and hand wringing over guesses and speculation.

If you don't want to deal with the teams them don't. The team bonuses are not going to create a new floor on market prices. They wont because the people who bid on and hire teams will not think TIHAF (Teams I Hire Are Free).

People using teams will simply make more ISK, you wont make less.

And the non-sense about some null sec power block out bidding all of New Eden and locking up all 4,000 teams in some outpost somewhere? PLEASE. With a spawn rate of 6 an hour how long could that last. If it made it 30 days we could all laugh at the huge amount of sunk ISK and move on.

It's new and It's different. If it works, great, if it does not then oh well. I can not at all see why people are talking about un-subbing over this......
Seith Kali
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#382 - 2014-04-30 17:20:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Seith Kali
Freeloading is not a problem as there will be no reasonable ROI on the best ones as individuals, so individuals will struggle to buy them. You will need co-operation. The Chribba's, Grendells etc of the world will be able to provide highsec donation services for anything highsec may need - skimming however much or little they want off the top.

There will be countless lower tier ones up for grabs, and freeloading for them ones will be less of an issue anyway.

Glorious...

Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege. 
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#383 - 2014-04-30 17:22:39 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
MailDeadDrop wrote:
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).

Holy cow. This almost (*almost*) makes up for the complete shafting POS owners seem to be getting in the S&I blogs.

MDD


They didn't say they were doing it. It was just a "hope". On past performance you'd be justified in assuming it isn't going to happen.

Killjoy. Big smile

MDD
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#384 - 2014-04-30 17:24:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirk MacGirk
The idea that winning bids allow public access to these teams seems odd. Why should the random player who didn't help bring a team to a particular solar system be allowed the derive any benefit at all? Bids should be placed on behalf of a corporation, maybe an alliance. Or, if you want to allow for random players to work together to win a bid, then allow for both public and private ownership. If a single player/corp/alliance wants to lure a team to their location, let them bid to do so. Otherwise this is just going to lead to other players riding the coattails of the players willing to put in the cost and effort to win a bid.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#385 - 2014-04-30 17:27:07 UTC
Seith Kali wrote:
The Chribba's, Grendells etc of the world will be able to provide highsec donation services

Someday, and that day may never come, I'll call upon you to do a service for me.
ImYourMom
Retribution Holdings Corp
Retribution.
#386 - 2014-04-30 17:30:01 UTC
big dogs are claiming the best teams - theres your problem right there
Green Gambit
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#387 - 2014-04-30 17:31:07 UTC
Kadl wrote:
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.


You don't need an alternative system, you just do what a real-auctioneer does in a real auction house. If somebody comes in with a bid at the last second, he allows a little more time in case somebody else wants to come in with a counter-bid.

So all the auction system needs is a short extension if a bid is made at the end. I've found that "if the auction is within 10 mins of close, end ten mins from now" works reasonably nicely.
ImYourMom
Retribution Holdings Corp
Retribution.
#388 - 2014-04-30 17:31:59 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.



You can retract a bid on ebay. However i think this could be abused, you should only be able to retract so many bids per day/week/month whatever
Scarlett LaBlanc
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#389 - 2014-04-30 17:32:26 UTC
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
The idea that winning bids allow public access to these teams seems odd. Why should the random player who didn't help bring a team to a particular solar system be allowed the derive any benefit at all? Bids should be placed on behalf of a corporation, maybe an alliance. Or, if you want to allow for random players to work together to win a bid, then allow for both public and private ownership. If a single player/corp/alliance wants to lure a team to their location, let them bid to do so. Otherwise this is just going to lead to other players riding the coattails of the players willing to put in the cost and effort to win a bid.



The idea is that the star system is bidding to bring this team to the system. Once the Team arrives they put them selves out for hire at a set price. The team would want as many jobs as they could get.

This IS cooperative industry, just not they way most of us expected. You get to cooperate with the rest of the star system to get the team, then everyone gets the benefit. I love the fact it forces you to cooperate with your competition!
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#390 - 2014-04-30 17:33:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Weaselior
the solution to bid sniping is ebay-style bids where you give it a max and it .01 isks for you up to that max

you put in your max bid, if it's sniped then your max bid was exceeded, if you're unhappy about that you should have put in your actual max bid

edit: oh wait this works poorly with bid pooling, nevermind

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#391 - 2014-04-30 17:34:02 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:
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




Yeah wow. Holy 1985 frame of reference. Saturns aren't even a thing anymore, let alone Detroit.
ElectronHerd Askulf
Aridia Logistical Misdirection
#392 - 2014-04-30 17:35:05 UTC
350125GO wrote:
The team idea seems to encourage industrialists settling in the same system while the scaled manufacturing costs is supposed to discourage the hubs. This doesn't make sense, unless all you want is people to put up POS to do all industry. This change is very bad for the small industrialist/small corps, and especially bad for new players that may be interested in industry.


The two mechanics provide opposing forces, making your decisions trade-offs between those forces. Small industrialists may be better off 'leaching' or hiding in a very low activity system and ignoring the team mechanic. That will depend on what risks they prefer.
Ludacrys
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#393 - 2014-04-30 17:36:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Ludacrys
People will just "test" price systems X number of jumps from jita and use the cheapest one, this system promotes nothing but isk sinks. Worst expansion in a while and that is saying a lot for eve online.

Also you are rendering ever spreadsheet unusable since the costs asociated with manufacturing and invention are hidden behind a thick layer of nonsense, was this intended?
Nyjil Lizaru
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#394 - 2014-04-30 17:37:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Nyjil Lizaru
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
The idea that winning bids allow public access to these teams seems odd. Why should the random player who didn't help bring a team to a particular solar system be allowed the derive any benefit at all? Bids should be placed on behalf of a corporation, maybe an alliance. Or, if you want to allow for random players to work together to win a bid, then allow for both public and private ownership. If a single player/corp/alliance wants to lure a team to their location, let them bid to do so. Otherwise this is just going to lead to other players riding the coattails of the players willing to put in the cost and effort to win a bid.


Well, as a very small volume, solo manufacturer I can:
A) use a non-trivial amount of my relatively small wallet to try to bring a team with the 'correct' bonuses to my system, and/or
B) move all my stuff occasionally to a system that has the 'correct' bonuses, and/or
C) just ignore teams entirely until someone brings a team to my build system with the 'correct' bonuses, and/or
D) diversify my production so that I can benefit from many teams.

Locking folks like me out of the benefits of teams would be a net buff to large groups that already have economies of scale. I'm already inefficient, I don't need your help to shrink my margins Big smile

Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law:   "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity."
Dirk MacGirk
Specter Syndicate
#395 - 2014-04-30 17:38:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Dirk MacGirk
Scarlett LaBlanc wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
The idea that winning bids allow public access to these teams seems odd. Why should the random player who didn't help bring a team to a particular solar system be allowed the derive any benefit at all? Bids should be placed on behalf of a corporation, maybe an alliance. Or, if you want to allow for random players to work together to win a bid, then allow for both public and private ownership. If a single player/corp/alliance wants to lure a team to their location, let them bid to do so. Otherwise this is just going to lead to other players riding the coattails of the players willing to put in the cost and effort to win a bid.



The idea is that the star system is bidding to bring this team to the system. Once the Team arrives they put them selves out for hire at a set price. The team would want as many jobs as they could get.

This IS cooperative industry, just not they way most of us expected. You get to cooperate with the rest of the star system to get the team, then everyone gets the benefit. I love the fact it forces you to cooperate with your competition!



The idea may be that the solar system is bidding, but the reality is probably more that just a few players coordinated to make that happen. Then after the fact, outsiders can move in and reap the benefits. I'm just saying that its OK to provide a public option, but it is equally OK to allow players/corps/alliance to make private bids as well.

Cooperation should be a choice. Allowing freeloaders should be a choice. But the option should always be available to bid high enough to gain the benefit for you and you alone as a form of advantage.
Kadl
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#396 - 2014-04-30 17:41:08 UTC
Green Gambit wrote:
Kadl wrote:
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.


You don't need an alternative system, you just do what a real-auctioneer does in a real auction house. If somebody comes in with a bid at the last second, he allows a little more time in case somebody else wants to come in with a counter-bid.

So all the auction system needs is a short extension if a bid is made at the end. I've found that "if the auction is within 10 mins of close, end ten mins from now" works reasonably nicely.


Your solution works in a bad sort of way but only for the snipping issue. It does nothing for the 2 am auction. It does not stop someone from 0.01 isking you for hours. Basically they are falling back on alarm clock and boredom as methods to gain advantages in EVE. Those are no fun.

Vickrey's auctions result in the same outcome without alarm clocks and boredom. You tell the trusted auctioneer your highest price and he ends the auction with a winner and a price. The price is exactly the same as the one you would reach if two rational people both set their alarm clocks and 0.01 isked each other for a month. Remove the bad game play of alarm clocks and boredom.
Seith Kali
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#397 - 2014-04-30 17:42:53 UTC
Ludacrys wrote:

Also you are rendering ever spreadsheet unusable since the costs asociated with manufacturing and invention are hidden behind a thick layer of nonsense, was this intended?


Are you seriously trying to tell me you consider purist spreadsheets online preferable to having more mechanics that allow intelligent, aggressive decisions to undermine your competitors?

Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege. 
Kadl
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#398 - 2014-04-30 17:43:41 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
the solution to bid sniping is ebay-style bids where you give it a max and it .01 isks for you up to that max

you put in your max bid, if it's sniped then your max bid was exceeded, if you're unhappy about that you should have put in your actual max bid

edit: oh wait this works poorly with bid pooling, nevermind


You described Vickrey's auction and it works fine with bid pooling (in this situation).

You pool by system already. The winning system pays and returns a proper ratio to each bidder (oh intel on how much of a percent you put into the pool).
Green Gambit
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#399 - 2014-04-30 17:46:57 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
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.


If I don't have to think about it, then we've got a newer version of "press button, receive bacon"... which you still seem to be in love with despite denials otherwise.

In my real job, the business generates ideas of how we can create more money in the markets that we work in.

Yes then spreadsheets come into the equation, analysis is done. We put in some estimates about what costs may be involved, what income / extra profit may result. We have to think about the analysis here - make sure that we're considering all impacts and accounting for any variables. Any risks needs to be factored into the equation.

Some of the ideas immediately get thrown out because the risk is too high, or the returns don't justify the costs. The ideas that are left in the pot are prioritised and put into place in-line with the general business objectives.

This is how real business works, and how real entrepreneurs work.

And yes, there are parallels with playing chess, you need to consider all your moves, and make decisions based on risk and possible return analysis.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#400 - 2014-04-30 17:47:56 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:
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.

Are you trying to make me play the forums the way you play them? What is it with you guys...Roll

Loraine Gess wrote:
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).

How is it irrelevant to attach a cost to the ability to force your opponent to pay an equivalent or higher price? It sounds like you want the ability to force your opponent's behavior for free.

But Kadl had an interesting contribution ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4532219#post4532219 ). Vickrey auctions would allow retractions and would also negate their manipulative aspects.

MDD