These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Summer 2014] Starbase tweaks

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lady Aesir
Ghost Recon Inc
#301 - 2014-05-09 09:23:00 UTC
Quadpush wrote:
I've got a question: what will be the difference of different races POSes (eg. Caldari, Gallente etc.)? Currently they differ in the CPU/PWG and it affects the number of labs/arrays you can online. In summer all POSes will be equal or do they get any racial differences?
They would have to be different or everyone would use the one with the cheapest available fuel.
Belinda HwaFang
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#302 - 2014-05-09 09:26:10 UTC
Greetings.

I notice that the Experimental Laboratory is conspicuous in its absence in this thread.

Does this mean that all stats on it are staying the same and that I can run as many concurrent reversing jobs on it as I have skills for (with the removal of slots)?

Thanks,

Fang
Sigras
Conglomo
#303 - 2014-05-09 09:58:27 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Sigras wrote:
I have two questions regarding how the 2% ME discount is calculated.

1. it is 2% and not 2 ME levels right? Just confirming because if not you've just condemned all invention to only ever be done in 0.0 amarr factory stations...

2. is the 2% calculated per job or per run?

I realize that in most cases #2 makes absolutely no difference, but think about manufacturing Small CCCs or even medium CCCs... a 2% discount per run is not going to help either of those products at all, but a 2% discount per job certainly could

TL;DR
is the 2% discount calculated ROUNDUP(RequiredMaterial * 0.98) * NumberOfJobs or is it calculated ROUNDUP(RequiredMaterial * NumberOfJobs * 0.98)?


The bonus is a 2% material discount, not ME level since that's going away in the new system.

The material reduction is applied per run last I checked, but we have plans to apply it to the whole job, so that blueprints with small amount of components also benefit from it. Not sure if we can squeeze this for summer though, going to ask around - thanks for the reminder.



Oh god, can't believe I missed this.

Material discounts at job rather than run level would be a major, major change.

(I like it. But it would require a rework of a whole bunch of tools to take run numbers into account as well. And I'm not /sure/ about how it affects bpc vs bpo. I'm generally in favor.)


Confirming the new Industry will not do any material rounding until AFTER we multiply by the number of runs, meaning material efficiency discounts due to facility / teams / skills / blueprints / whatever may produce slightly better results with multiple runs.

Please tell me that "Blueprints" was in there by accident... Otherwise we could get some sort of crazy rounding issue where you need to research an already "perfect" BPO to get a better yield for a long run.

Im just assuming that there is another CEILING() function on BPs for their base material requirements before teams and facilities are factored in... right?
Korthan Doshu
Doomheim
#304 - 2014-05-09 12:13:59 UTC
Why would it be a bad thing for ME10 to always be the real perfect?
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#305 - 2014-05-09 12:18:58 UTC
Belinda HwaFang wrote:
Greetings.

I notice that the Experimental Laboratory is conspicuous in its absence in this thread.

Does this mean that all stats on it are staying the same and that I can run as many concurrent reversing jobs on it as I have skills for (with the removal of slots)?

Thanks,

Fang


Indeed, the Experimental Lab is not changing at all.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#306 - 2014-05-09 13:03:08 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Belinda HwaFang wrote:
Greetings.

I notice that the Experimental Laboratory is conspicuous in its absence in this thread.

Does this mean that all stats on it are staying the same and that I can run as many concurrent reversing jobs on it as I have skills for (with the removal of slots)?

Thanks,

Fang


Indeed, the Experimental Lab is not changing at all.

All the interesting points in the thread and *that* is the one you choose to respond to? XXXXXXXXX

MDD
Plug in Baby
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#307 - 2014-05-09 13:29:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Plug in Baby
Will there be a lowsec capital component assembly array as mentioned at Fanfest?

Edit oops sorry, thought my first post had been missed. Is there any chance of getting some more information from CCP Greyscale?

This is not a forum alt, this is a forum main.
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#308 - 2014-05-09 15:38:25 UTC
Plug in Baby wrote:
Will there be a lowsec capital component assembly array as mentioned at Fanfest?


MAYBE

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4557072#post4557072

But, if Greyscale is working on it, will take at least 3 balance passes before it doesn't suck
Ranamar
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#309 - 2014-05-09 15:46:12 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Belinda HwaFang wrote:
Greetings.

I notice that the Experimental Laboratory is conspicuous in its absence in this thread.

Does this mean that all stats on it are staying the same and that I can run as many concurrent reversing jobs on it as I have skills for (with the removal of slots)?

Thanks,

Fang


Indeed, the Experimental Lab is not changing at all.

All the interesting points in the thread and *that* is the one you choose to respond to? XXXXXXXXX

MDD


TBF, it's an important clarification.

That said, I'd really like an answer about whether ME is calculated per-run or per-job, because it makes a big difference on low-material-count many-runs-per-day things like small rigs.
Marsan
#310 - 2014-05-09 17:59:06 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Marsan wrote:
Sigras wrote:
Korthan Doshu wrote:
MailDeadDrop wrote:
If Research Labs and Hyasyoda Labs can *only* work on blueprint originals (since they only offer ME and TE services), then having them on a POS is a big flashing "SHOOT ME!" sign. Can I have big flashing "SHOOT ME!" signs on ships carrying BPOs, too, without any sort of effort?


A thousand times this. Please split up invention and research so that both arrays are needed and people can't be sure about BPOs in POS.

It's the difference between no MLs and some MLs.

Guys... both arrays mean that there are potentially BPOs in the POS

Unless you've devised some clever way to copy without a BPO?

Yes but Research Labs and Hyasyoda Labs require BPOs to do anything. You won't be able to tell if they are copying a BPO, but you will know if they are researching a BPO.

This is true, however:

1. Invention requires copies, so it's reasonable to assume that an inventor is copying BPOs to fund his own invention.
2. 3/4 of the research jobs require a BPO meaning there is no way to split the activities up that doesnt guarantee BPOs are in one or the other.


I suspect a lot of people will simply make BPCs in station for safety sake for any BPO of any real value as copying in station appears to still be pretty cheap, and fast for most items. BPOs are unlike most items in Eve. If my ship explodes or gets stolen I can generally just buy a new one. If I lose a BPO it might take months to fully research another. Even if I'm willing to buy one I may have trouble finding one researched to my desired level and for a reasonable price.

Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community.
Proton Power
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#311 - 2014-05-09 18:23:08 UTC
Seems like a lot of change has happend due to this thread, but I have yet to see any updates on the Component Assembly Array numbers.

While the increase is nice, its not enough.... At current numbers you can build about 100 components (10 days worth) and thats it due to its limited size. So for me and many others we ahve to install multiple jobs because it won't allow us to build any decent sized batch, and then on top of this you have to move minreals around for every single job install. With the current increase it does up the build batch to about 15 days or gives more play room for 10 day batches, but I still have to move minerals every job install.

Please Re-Look into this.
Korthan Doshu
Doomheim
#312 - 2014-05-09 19:24:51 UTC
Ranamar wrote:
That said, I'd really like an answer about whether ME is calculated per-run or per-job, because it makes a big difference on low-material-count many-runs-per-day things like small rigs.


RTFT, you would have seen this post:

CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Confirming the new Industry will not do any material rounding until AFTER we multiply by the number of runs, meaning material efficiency discounts due to facility / teams / skills / blueprints / whatever may produce slightly better results with multiple runs.
Ranamar
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#313 - 2014-05-09 19:46:20 UTC
Korthan Doshu wrote:
Ranamar wrote:
That said, I'd really like an answer about whether ME is calculated per-run or per-job, because it makes a big difference on low-material-count many-runs-per-day things like small rigs.


RTFT, you would have seen this post:

CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Confirming the new Industry will not do any material rounding until AFTER we multiply by the number of runs, meaning material efficiency discounts due to facility / teams / skills / blueprints / whatever may produce slightly better results with multiple runs.


I saw that, but, given all the confusion surrounding it, I wasn't certain that he was actually making sure they were all in. I dunno; I remember it being less clear than that statement.

If that really is the case, it's time to research a bunch of T1 small rig blueprints.
Korthan Doshu
Doomheim
#314 - 2014-05-09 21:27:30 UTC
Ranamar wrote:
Korthan Doshu wrote:
Ranamar wrote:
That said, I'd really like an answer about whether ME is calculated per-run or per-job, because it makes a big difference on low-material-count many-runs-per-day things like small rigs.


RTFT, you would have seen this post:

CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Confirming the new Industry will not do any material rounding until AFTER we multiply by the number of runs, meaning material efficiency discounts due to facility / teams / skills / blueprints / whatever may produce slightly better results with multiple runs.


I saw that, but, given all the confusion surrounding it, I wasn't certain that he was actually making sure they were all in. I dunno; I remember it being less clear than that statement.

If that really is the case, it's time to research a bunch of T1 small rig blueprints.


Yes.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#315 - 2014-05-09 22:34:41 UTC
Ranamar wrote:
MailDeadDrop wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Belinda HwaFang wrote:
Greetings.

I notice that the Experimental Laboratory is conspicuous in its absence in this thread.

Does this mean that all stats on it are staying the same and that I can run as many concurrent reversing jobs on it as I have skills for (with the removal of slots)?

Thanks,

Fang


Indeed, the Experimental Lab is not changing at all.

All the interesting points in the thread and *that* is the one you choose to respond to? XXXXXXXXX

MDD


TBF, it's an important clarification.

That said, I'd really like an answer about whether ME is calculated per-run or per-job, because it makes a big difference on low-material-count many-runs-per-day things like small rigs.


This was answered, it may be per run to start with, but they are intent on shifting it to per job, for the 2% savings, anyhow. I think one of the devs said they even have it working for the summer expansion already, to be job.
Sigras
Conglomo
#316 - 2014-05-10 02:37:57 UTC
Marsan wrote:
Sigras wrote:
1. Invention requires copies, so it's reasonable to assume that an inventor is copying BPOs to fund his own invention.
2. 3/4 of the research jobs require a BPO meaning there is no way to split the activities up that doesnt guarantee BPOs are in one or the other.


I suspect a lot of people will simply make BPCs in station for safety sake for any BPO of any real value as copying in station appears to still be pretty cheap, and fast for most items. BPOs are unlike most items in Eve. If my ship explodes or gets stolen I can generally just buy a new one. If I lose a BPO it might take months to fully research another. Even if I'm willing to buy one I may have trouble finding one researched to my desired level and for a reasonable price.

This still doesnt fix the issue that there is no logical way to split up the research operations that doesnt leave one lab with only BPO research.
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#317 - 2014-05-10 03:03:58 UTC
So what incentive is there to use a hyasyoda lab? At the moment it seems to be straight up inferior, which kind of sucks.


Bad Bobby wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • Component Assembly Array: from 1,000,000 m3 to 1,500,000 m3.
    • I don't think this is sufficient.

    Is there any particular issue you are trying to avoid by keeping the storage on these arrays small? Wouldn't it be better just to make them big enough so that they aren't a massive pain to use?

    What they really need to do is just give the tower a corporate hangar and remove the corp hangar from all the other POS modules and instead replace them with a bonus to the tower's capacity. That could help solve the problem of not enough space in any one module while another has too much. Granted it does mean you stop being able to separate stuff by structure and tab, so organization suffers.
    Grigori Annunaki
    #318 - 2014-05-10 05:42:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Grigori Annunaki
    Xindi Kraid wrote:
    What they really need to do is just give the tower a corporate hangar and remove the corp hangar from all the other POS modules and instead replace them with a bonus to the tower's capacity. That could help solve the problem of not enough space in any one module while another has too much. Granted it does mean you stop being able to separate stuff by structure and tab, so organization suffers.

    What they really need to do is make all the anchorable modules into pluggable addons for the POS. Then, they could share storage, support PI-style component routing, etc. A much more elegant design.

    But, that's a dream for another time.
    NEONOVUS
    Mindstar Technology
    Goonswarm Federation
    #319 - 2014-05-10 12:34:49 UTC
    Grigori Annunaki wrote:
    Xindi Kraid wrote:
    What they really need to do is just give the tower a corporate hangar and remove the corp hangar from all the other POS modules and instead replace them with a bonus to the tower's capacity. That could help solve the problem of not enough space in any one module while another has too much. Granted it does mean you stop being able to separate stuff by structure and tab, so organization suffers.

    What they really need to do is make all the anchorable modules into pluggable addons for the POS. Then, they could share storage, support PI-style component routing, etc. A much more elegant design.

    But, that's a dream for another time.

    If its so easy lets see some mock code here
    Me, Im going to go make pong and see if I can control it woth some accelerameters
    Xindi Kraid
    Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
    Arataka Research Consortium
    #320 - 2014-05-10 16:56:24 UTC
    Grigori Annunaki wrote:
    Xindi Kraid wrote:
    What they really need to do is just give the tower a corporate hangar and remove the corp hangar from all the other POS modules and instead replace them with a bonus to the tower's capacity. That could help solve the problem of not enough space in any one module while another has too much. Granted it does mean you stop being able to separate stuff by structure and tab, so organization suffers.

    What they really need to do is make all the anchorable modules into pluggable addons for the POS. Then, they could share storage, support PI-style component routing, etc. A much more elegant design.

    But, that's a dream for another time.

    Indeed, I hope the final outcome for POSes is modular structures we can dock in with the various modules adding geometry to the tower itself rather than just floating in space and all the things they do being centralized.

    I think that's a ways off though, POSes are in a bad place and fixing them will take a lot of time and work, and that change also requires quite a lot of art assets as well as code.

    In the mean time small changes to fix corporate roles and my suggestion to centralize usage improve POSes a little in the mean time.