These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Restodruid
wizards never die
#501 - 2014-05-01 00:34:45 UTC
Can someone explain to me why I would bid on teams if I can let other people do it for me and simply move my stuff over to their system once they won the bid?
Olari Vanderfall
Perkone
Caldari State
#502 - 2014-05-01 00:50:54 UTC
Restodruid wrote:
Can someone explain to me why I would bid on teams if I can let other people do it for me and simply move my stuff over to their system once they won the bid?


Nothing, other than the bidders have have been building up stockpiles in an out of the way system in a highsec pocket in anticipation of capitalizing on their teams and have low use stations to crank out products. They also have hired pirates to camp the lowsec systems coming in so they can get products out and keep you away from the system.

Whether this is actually possible or profitable is another question.
Fuzzy Monkei
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#503 - 2014-05-01 00:55:00 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
So, do I get that right: I bet on the Team and I win the Team and then everyone else can use my Team and doesn't need to pay money to me to use my Team. So I pay that others can use it?

Or if you would prefer it the other way, you can be the leach on someone elses purchase.



Or you could do something unheard of in an MMO......collaborate, both bid on the same team to get it at much lower personal cost. However this will require the industrialists to actually TALK to each other!!!!! O The horrors of communicating in a multi-player game. We NEVER see fleets of hundreds or even thousands of ships fighting on each side, communicating with more than 1 or two people just can't be done.

This said I hope that the bids and bid histories will be clear and easy to understand so that you can verify if the bids where made (and you can wardec and murder them if they didn't)
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#504 - 2014-05-01 00:55:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Mara Rinn
Player-driven acquisition of teams?

Gives me a chance to peddle my Resurrection Men Storyboard again :P

I hope someone in CCP or CSM will gain some inspiration from this idea. The "elevator pitch" (what we used to call an "Executive Summary" or these days refer to as "The TL;DR") is as follows:


  • Capsuleer gains intel about certain valuable human resources planet side
  • Capsuleer commissions Dust Bunnies to secure those resources
  • Secured resources can then be "uplifted" to Industry teams, or "processed" to become implants


PS: my drawing skills are pretty disgusting. Sorry for the pain those sketches will cause to your brain.

PPS: "uplifting" involves introducing the resource to the Inferno drug, "processing" involves the process described in the Chronicle "Resurrection Men" where the expertise is physically extracted from the resource's brain. Both could take place in surface, orbital, or capsuleer infrastructure.

PPPS: I'm keen on finding things for Dust Bunnies to do that will tie DUST to EVE more closely. Especially if that involves me hiring Dust Bunnies to blow up other people's infrastructure.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
mkint
#505 - 2014-05-01 00:58:24 UTC
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Adunh Slavy wrote:
350125GO wrote:
This change is very bad for the small industrialist/small corps, and especially bad for new players that may be interested in industry.



Maybe not. Small corps and solo players tend to be rather nimble.


at walking away fromt he game

... and yet the player base continues to grow, year after year... Blink

citation needed.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

New character count is the lowest it's been in 5 years, average TCU is as low as it's been in 7 years. Spikes on the new character graph coincide with $5 sales (which there's a sale on Steam right now, so it'll probably spike again), though with no indication that on average, any new players are ever retained. None of that tells us how many subscribers there actually are, but it's interesting information anyway.

Yeah, EVE has problems. And it's a good point, that some serious people at CCP should question what the summer income nerfs, overlaid with complex and convoluted barriers of entry are going to do to activity numbers.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Octoven
Stellar Production
#506 - 2014-05-01 01:13:09 UTC
This summer release looks pretty pathetic in terms of game development. The moment I require someone else be it NPC/Player to build something is when the game is essentially over. I most likely will not delete my character. However, it sounds like a perfect time as any to take this expansion off in hopes that CCP will wake up to this new "vision" CCP Seagull and team are bringing to the game. EVE is 10 years old, it is on the boundary of continuing to succeed to massively failing. For the moment it would seem it looks like success, but if things keep going the way they are, EVE Online will become EVE Offline...a shame, but inevitable event.

EVE has always stood out in terms of other games due to its level of realism, brutalness, and size. In recent months we have seen more and more ways to essentially make everything go at a faster pace...first combat, sov, poses, and now all of industry. You lot may ***** and moan about wastage, inefficiencies and such but by reducing them...they are still there it just takes a way shorter time to do them. In short, EVE has went from a low pop wild west type of game where there are few people fighting irregardless of the law to nothing but a a virtual version of the middle east...fast paced, over populated, and one or two people in power. The sandbox concept died two expansions ago, CCP has made it clear they are going in a new direction. I suppose if they keep going they will eventually be going without me.
Remains silent
Perkone
Caldari State
#507 - 2014-05-01 01:14:42 UTC
mkint wrote:

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

New character count is the lowest it's been in 5 years, average TCU is as low as it's been in 7 years. Spikes on the new character graph coincide with $5 sales (which there's a sale on Steam right now, so it'll probably spike again), though with no indication that on average, any new players are ever retained. None of that tells us how many subscribers there actually are, but it's interesting information anyway.

Yeah, EVE has problems. And it's a good point, that some serious people at CCP should question what the summer income nerfs, overlaid with complex and convoluted barriers of entry are going to do to activity numbers.


Dunno if you noticed or not, but the drops in subscribers logging in coincided with the PLEX market skyrocketing over what it used to be. I say a lot of the drop off is people giving up alt accounts they didn't use much. I know I let my 3 accounts lapse so far, and this one only has a few days on it.
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#508 - 2014-05-01 01:30:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Kusum Fawn
Ibe Van Geel wrote:

Saturday, December 28, 2013
Version 4.1 thoughts and comments
Hey all

Well I have some good but mostly bad news for anyone who liked and followed MMOData.net.

v4.1 will be the final version of MMOData.net, and MMOData.net will close down on June 2014.
That's right I am closing shop.

The biggest reason is that it is getting increasingly difficult to get any useful numbers. Also many of the subscription based MMORPG's went free to play, and their companies tend to not give out useful active accounts numbers.

As for the only growing subscription based MMORPG left, EVE Online, I no longer receive subscription numbers. CCP no longer responds to my requests.
It is a shame really, I doubt that their numbers are declining, but I lost a bit of confidence in CCP, I hope they will give out useful numbers to the public on a consistent basis.

A bit of better news for some of you, because I am closing down the site in 6 months, I will make the complete excel of the MMOData charts available for download. This includes the exact datapoints and their sources or estimate information.

Well that's it, I hope most of you enjoyed the MMOData charts, and perhaps someone will pick up where I left off.


Regards

Ibe Van Geel
MMOData.net


I no longer receive subscription numbers. CCP no longer responds to my requests.

huh. seems like something they would want to give out if it was as good as it was supposed to be no? especially if it was what they were already doing to show they were doing well.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
AFK Hauler
State War Academy
#509 - 2014-05-01 01:38:50 UTC
TEAMS?
Sounds like there is no "simplification" in the industry as promised.

A team is the combination of effort to make the task easier, faster, or result better.

I was assuming (I know) that I could forfeit my skill slot for an activity (research, manufacturing, etc) to another player to boost their ability to complete the job faster, cheaper.

As an example - I have 11 research slots by skill to use on my own items, but I want our corp to complete a BPO copy much faster, so I give one of my skill-based science slots to a job already active and reduce the time needed to complete said job.

There are ways with the new UI system to make this a commodity for the corp to use as manufacturing and research jobs are installed...

That would be MUCH simpler to implement that some auction-based ISK sink that destroys long term profit forecasting.
Hell, if you want it to be an ISK sink, then just add a TEAM tax and be open about it. At least that way we can accurately forecast time, ISK, and profit.


This will really make market conditions and profit planning that much more complicated and unreliable.


Another thing....
Linear time to research is a halving reduction in construction waste = Current BPO research model
Linear reduction in construction waste is a doubling increase in research time = Proposed BPO research model

Sounds to me like converting from the English measurement system to the Metric system... A pound of crap still weighs 0.45 kg.

No simplification in the new system, just a different way to explain it.

If you were serious about simplifying the system, you would not introduce crazy math to justify a 28 day average recalculation of station costs to make something.

Add in the crazy new TEAM system and the complexity and unreliable profitability just went to scary.

Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#510 - 2014-05-01 02:11:36 UTC
mkint wrote:

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

New character count is the lowest it's been in 5 years, average TCU is as low as it's been in 7 years. Spikes on the new character graph coincide with $5 sales (which there's a sale on Steam right now, so it'll probably spike again), though with no indication that on average, any new players are ever retained. None of that tells us how many subscribers there actually are, but it's interesting information anyway.

Yeah, EVE has problems. And it's a good point, that some serious people at CCP should question what the summer income nerfs, overlaid with complex and convoluted barriers of entry are going to do to activity numbers.




Did you even look at the graph?


http://i.imgur.com/IFZnrhu.png

That's an average of 700-1000 newborn players for 2009.


For the last month we've been getting 2300-2450, more than twice!


Christ you're dense.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#511 - 2014-05-01 02:13:33 UTC
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Kusum Fawn wrote:
Adunh Slavy wrote:
350125GO wrote:
This change is very bad for the small industrialist/small corps, and especially bad for new players that may be interested in industry.



Maybe not. Small corps and solo players tend to be rather nimble.


at walking away fromt he game

... and yet the player base continues to grow, year after year... Blink

citation needed.

Not really, no. Big smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#512 - 2014-05-01 02:16:09 UTC
For some, the rate of plex use has increased considerably. I've dumped MCT on several of my accounts in a desperate bid to shore up their flagging industrial skills because of this expansion.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
mkint
#513 - 2014-05-01 03:07:40 UTC
Loraine Gess wrote:
mkint wrote:

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

New character count is the lowest it's been in 5 years, average TCU is as low as it's been in 7 years. Spikes on the new character graph coincide with $5 sales (which there's a sale on Steam right now, so it'll probably spike again), though with no indication that on average, any new players are ever retained. None of that tells us how many subscribers there actually are, but it's interesting information anyway.

Yeah, EVE has problems. And it's a good point, that some serious people at CCP should question what the summer income nerfs, overlaid with complex and convoluted barriers of entry are going to do to activity numbers.




Did you even look at the graph?


http://i.imgur.com/IFZnrhu.png

That's an average of 700-1000 newborn players for 2009.


For the last month we've been getting 2300-2450, more than twice!


Christ you're dense.

Look at how it averages out. There was a spike 3 months ago, and rapidly dropped to below 3k, and stayed there, for the longest stretch since the Incarna fallout. And if we're really getting thousands upon thousands of new characters, why aren't any of them actually playing? The TCU has not, on average, gone up since 2008, long before your "2009" benchmark. At all. In about 7 years. Even if there wasn't a clear 3 month downward trend of new characters, the stagnant TCU (which is also on a 3-month downward trend) is still a big problem.

I wouldn't be surprised if this expansion was meant to try to win back some of those "industrialists are the fastest to quit" group. I'm not convinced it won't do the opposite of that. (hooray for triple negatives!)

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#514 - 2014-05-01 03:14:49 UTC
mkint wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:
mkint wrote:

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

New character count is the lowest it's been in 5 years, average TCU is as low as it's been in 7 years. Spikes on the new character graph coincide with $5 sales (which there's a sale on Steam right now, so it'll probably spike again), though with no indication that on average, any new players are ever retained. None of that tells us how many subscribers there actually are, but it's interesting information anyway.

Yeah, EVE has problems. And it's a good point, that some serious people at CCP should question what the summer income nerfs, overlaid with complex and convoluted barriers of entry are going to do to activity numbers.




Did you even look at the graph?


http://i.imgur.com/IFZnrhu.png

That's an average of 700-1000 newborn players for 2009.


For the last month we've been getting 2300-2450, more than twice!


Christ you're dense.

Look at how it averages out. There was a spike 3 months ago, and rapidly dropped to below 3k, and stayed there, for the longest stretch since the Incarna fallout. And if we're really getting thousands upon thousands of new characters, why aren't any of them actually playing? The TCU has not, on average, gone up since 2008, long before your "2009" benchmark. At all. In about 7 years. Even if there wasn't a clear 3 month downward trend of new characters, the stagnant TCU (which is also on a 3-month downward trend) is still a big problem.

I wouldn't be surprised if this expansion was meant to try to win back some of those "industrialists are the fastest to quit" group. I'm not convinced it won't do the opposite of that. (hooray for triple negatives!)




So your complaint is that activity is at the highest average it's ever been and that because a single battle caused a single spike in the graph, EVE is dying?


Guys! Eve is dying! Burn jita is over and jita has less people for the last 2 days now!


Roll
Babbet Bunny
#515 - 2014-05-01 03:26:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Babbet Bunny
I wanted to wait and see all the blogs before responding completely. This will be a mostly positive and interesting expansion.

1. Reprocess all the things!

This change will affect the income of salvaging mission runners. The UI is awesome and reduces the need of external aps for cost benefit assessment.

I am concerned though that the cost of Meta 0 module production, due to all the changes, will increase too much. These changes will essentially removing Meta 0 items as a new player income option. Meta 1-3 module prices usually trend with reprocessed value. Meta 0 modules production should not cost more than Meta 1 modules.

To reduce the effect on missioners and Meta 0 items I would suggest increasing the base mineral content of Meta 1-3 modules.

2. Building better worlds

Love all the changes. Not sure if the risk vs. reward is effective across all sectors. Highest risk is low sec.

The remote blueprint change does not increase risk, just increases BPO theft risk. I can see small alt corps forming with the sole purpose of producing BPC’s for primary corporation use. Or BPO’s locked down in stations or outposts with copy capacity.

3. Industry UI

Welcome and needed improvement. I hope it helps understanding of the reverse engineering and invention process.

4. Researching, the Future

Love the change, not that the math was complicated, but that others were too lazy to calculate.

Would like to see more gradients in the levels i.e. Small-XL ammo 1-4, T1 Modules start at 5. A change in starting time and step multiplier would make this more palpable. The total time to new ME 5 should be equal to old ME 1. For example new ME 10 freighters should not take 12 years to achieve, but closer to the old ME 10 ~20 months (Unskilled NPC station etc.).

So using a freighter or carrier for example base time 15 minutes, rank 400, multiplier 1.6 will give a result of 65.9 days to new ME 5 and 756.6 days to new ME 10.

Using small ammo at rank one all else the same results in 45 hours to ME 10.

5. Price of Change

I agree the price of production needed to be increased. Why make the math over complicated? Does it need to push and pull the prices so much? Does supply and demand not affect the market enough?

My suggestion is reduce the effect of the nebulous fraction of global job hours.

6. Teams?

I expected this change to be some type of cooperative game play and not a new unnecessary layer of complexity. Teams would also give intel… Hmmm… EVRK bid high on those titan specialists, time to bash some towers…

Would have preferred if this were a system where players could actively assist other players in manufacturing effectively speeding up the process. Similar to contractors and subcontractors in home construction (would have said road construction, but that always takes longer and comes in over budget). A general contractor can do all the jobs, but will take him a long time. Adding a painter, plumber and electrician will accelerate the job, but having several of each is no benefit after a point depending on the size of the job.

Thanks,

BB
Ming The Merciless
Orbital Reclamation Services
#516 - 2014-05-01 03:28:36 UTC
Perhaps I'm the only one that hoped that Teams would be something we could make in a corporation with corp mates. The quality of the team could have been skill based from the science/production skills averaged across the team, the better the training the better the team.

Give us another reason besides invention and research agents to train those science skills.

Just seems like we created a system that takes that content creation away from teams of people and puts it in some NPC isk sink that new players will likely treat as just that much more information overload. In my opinion it would have been better that interested Indy players looking to form teams would/could find people interested in Indy stuff and collectively learned and formed teams/corps/alliances based on mutual advantage(of being that team).

Indy folks will continue to find other Indy folk without that kind of help or bonus but man that would have been cool.

Seems between making POS's less useful(remote copy and research not a thing, new costs, redundant labs/slots, new higher fuel prices from isotope change), Blueprint changes(often corp or group researched researched blueprints having been extensively researched being a waste of time), and all the fun new Isk sinks we aren't making much easier to understand other then the ME/PE of new folks buying blueprints and maybe the UI.

T2 BPO's still exist, there isn't a useful market for invented T2 BPC's, their are all sorts of new calculations and fee's to wrap you head around, their is a new NPC team thing that you'll want to keep an eye on somehow(they work like decryptors but for manufacturing jobs but you can't buy them, you have to win an auction, and then they only come to that system...) [nevermind that we didn't actually have the renamed/new decryptors defined for bonuses in the Evelopedia till Feb 2014 - they came out summer 2013-#offtopicgripe)

Just all seems a bit of a hot mess. I'll be willing to admit I was wrong if it all turns out flowers and sunshine but at this point it feels like somebody who thought they knew how a lot of players did Industry but didn't do it themselves asked a few "Indy" folks who did Indy solo for big alliances... I feel like a dad who knows he's going to get an ugly tie for Christmas, gotta practice my "Wow, what a pretty box!"

"Wow, what a pretty box!"
The Box
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#517 - 2014-05-01 03:34:39 UTC
Ming The Merciless wrote:
Perhaps I'm the only one that hoped that Teams would be something we could make in a corporation with corp mates. The quality of the team could have been skill based from the science/production skills averaged across the team, the better the training the better the team.

Give us another reason besides invention and research agents to train those science skills.

Just seems like we created a system that takes that content creation away from teams of people and puts it in some NPC isk sink that new players will likely treat as just that much more information overload. In my opinion it would have been better that interested Indy players looking to form teams would/could find people interested in Indy stuff and collectively learned and formed teams/corps/alliances based on mutual advantage(of being that team).

Indy folks will continue to find other Indy folk without that kind of help or bonus but man that would have been cool.

Seems between making POS's less useful(remote copy and research not a thing, new costs, redundant labs/slots, new higher fuel prices from isotope change), Blueprint changes(often corp or group researched researched blueprints having been extensively researched being a waste of time), and all the fun new Isk sinks we aren't making much easier to understand other then the ME/PE of new folks buying blueprints and maybe the UI.

T2 BPO's still exist, there isn't a useful market for invented T2 BPC's, their are all sorts of new calculations and fee's to wrap you head around, their is a new NPC team thing that you'll want to keep an eye on somehow(they work like decryptors but for manufacturing jobs but you can't buy them, you have to win an auction, and then they only come to that system...) [nevermind that we didn't actually have the renamed/new decryptors defined for bonuses in the Evelopedia till Feb 2014 - they came out summer 2013-#offtopicgripe)

Just all seems a bit of a hot mess. I'll be willing to admit I was wrong if it all turns out flowers and sunshine but at this point it feels like somebody who thought they knew how a lot of players did Industry but didn't do it themselves asked a few "Indy" folks who did Indy solo for big alliances... I feel like a dad who knows he's going to get an ugly tie for Christmas, gotta practice my "Wow, what a pretty box!"

"Wow, what a pretty box!"
The Box




Train skill to 5, **** out perfect team is NOT an example of content


Bidding wars, intel, counterintel, market manipulation, and BURN TEAMS 2015 are.
AFK Hauler
State War Academy
#518 - 2014-05-01 03:59:39 UTC  |  Edited by: AFK Hauler
Loraine Gess wrote:


Train skill to 5, **** out perfect team is NOT an example of content


Bidding wars, intel, counterintel, market manipulation, and BURN TEAMS 2015 are.




But what you really mean...



Bidding wars (You just 0.01 ISKed me - Jerk),
intel (You watched me 0.01 ISK you back),
counterintel, (You just countered my 0.01 ISK with another 0.01 ISK)
market manipulation, (You just introduced several 0.01 ISK bids to counter my 0.01 ISK bid war)

and BURN TEAMS 2015 are - NOT content!
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#519 - 2014-05-01 04:14:33 UTC
AFK Hauler wrote:
Loraine Gess wrote:


Train skill to 5, **** out perfect team is NOT an example of content


Bidding wars, intel, counterintel, market manipulation, and BURN TEAMS 2015 are.




But what you really mean...



Bidding wars (You just 0.01 ISKed me - Jerk),
intel (You watched me 0.01 ISK you back),
counterintel, (You just countered my 0.01 ISK with another 0.01 ISK)
market manipulation, (You just introduced several 0.01 ISK bids to counter my 0.01 ISK bid war)

and BURN TEAMS 2015 are - NOT content!




Clearly you've never conspired to dump a whole market, just because you didn't like the other guy's name.


Nor do you understand the intel gained from watching the flow of teams.

Or maybe you just lost your freighter. Should've read the 800 warnings - You wouldn't have gone ignorant if you interacted with other players. Thankfully, goons brought the interaction to you.
Debir Achen
Makiriemi Holdings
#520 - 2014-05-01 04:21:16 UTC
Overall, I'm liking the "teams" mechanic. I get that players wish "teams" were a PC mechanic, but the game is already full of somewhat random NPC mechanics: rat spawns, loot drops, PI concentration changes, even resource distribution. Having small but uncontrollable random factors that can be subsequently manipulated is good for the game.

I think it's only the name "team" that is bringing this "Not more NPCs!" response.

Team bonuses subtly help "little guys". They can migrate more easily to acquire short-term bonuses, and they can piggy-back on bonuses drawn. In contrast, larger cartels should have sufficient bidding power to reliably acquire the bonuses that they care about for their system. I do have a slight concern that cartels in "inaccessible" space (e.g. null outposts, WHs) might have sufficient pull to starve the rest of the universe of bonuses, but I'm not sure that's likely.


One concern about the overall changes is that we've traded logistical restrictions on production for financial ones. Notably, there are no more slots, and no more charging based on how many slot resources you're taking up. Unless I've missed something, a single industrial facility can produce the same amount of output as 10, but at a higher cost (though for outposts, etc, the cost saving might come back because you're only maintaining a single facility). I don't have the skills to run the models on this one, but it feels "wrong" to me. You can solve industrial bottlenecks simply by throwing ISK at the problem, not by moving large in-game resources around to create new openings.


As for simplification, the mechanics themselves are simplified. Especially the rather opaque ME/TE levels. The transition is from fewer obscure inputs to more obvious inputs - there's not less working, but it's now more visible. There are more options for getting a cost reduction, but what those options are and how to access them is more obvious.

Overall, I think this is a good thing. A game with six easy to use dials provides a lot more flexibility than a game with three that require a lot of effort to set them correctly. The optimisers can fiddle with how to get the right balance of those six dials, while the casuals are not stuck going "ugh - how do I work this thing again?". It's part of the "active gameplay" vs "learning something hard once and then not touching it".

Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature?