These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Science & Industry

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Blueprint data adjustments thread

First post First post
Author
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#161 - 2014-05-28 15:51:08 UTC
the 400mm reinforced steel plate I seems to have been forgotten/fallen out of its group
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#162 - 2014-05-28 15:54:16 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Greyscale
I've got it sized as a cruiser module right now I think, if that's what you mean?

(The 50mm is out of alignment because it only draws 1PG; I'm going to shift all the 0/1PG items so they're sized by slot, which should fix this along the way.)

[Edit] And by "cruiser" I mean "frigate", whoops.
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#163 - 2014-05-28 16:06:25 UTC
I assumed DEVs knew you could only broker deals in EVE with free beers. You forgot or something? ;)

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-

Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#164 - 2014-05-28 16:12:10 UTC
no, it's just the only one with an invention time of 84300. all the other medium ones have 97500. not that i don't like variety. it just feels weird at this place so i figured that there may be something wrong :)
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#165 - 2014-05-28 16:12:16 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I've got it sized as a cruiser module right now I think, if that's what you mean?

(The 50mm is out of alignment because it only draws 1PG; I'm going to shift all the 0/1PG items so they're sized by slot, which should fix this along the way.)

[Edit] And by "cruiser" I mean "frigate", whoops.


you'd be better off just deleting 100mm plate down ... also micro shield extenders..they are also useless

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#166 - 2014-05-28 16:24:41 UTC
Ah, yeah. 400s are getting bumped up because the T2 version just squeaks across the boundary I set up (35PG), so it's being treated as a cruiser module, which affects its build time and thus the invention time of the T1 version. Moved the boundary to 36, problem solved. Good catch :)


More generally, looking at mynnna's sheet, I'm inclined to make the following changes to T2 ranks:

- Double ranks for all ships
- Divide mod ranks by 4
- Divide ammo ranks by 6
- Divide drone ranks by 3
- Divide rig ranks by 2

Given that total time is a function of invention time, T1 copy time and T2 copy time, and that invention time is itself a function of T1 copy time and T2 build time (with the build time being the stronger force I believe?), this should bring us back to a place that's much closer to current balance without a whole lot of work (it'll take three minutes). There'll be some spread up/down with small/large modules, but I believe that's desirable and should balance out in terms of total output.
Sales Alt negrodamus
Sanctuary of Shadows
#167 - 2014-05-28 16:26:07 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I've got it sized as a cruiser module right now I think, if that's what you mean?

(The 50mm is out of alignment because it only draws 1PG; I'm going to shift all the 0/1PG items so they're sized by slot, which should fix this along the way.)

[Edit] And by "cruiser" I mean "frigate", whoops.


Just as an aside, what role do you imagine the 50mm plate to serve?

Same thing with small shield extenders, and such.
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#168 - 2014-05-28 16:27:37 UTC
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I've got it sized as a cruiser module right now I think, if that's what you mean?

(The 50mm is out of alignment because it only draws 1PG; I'm going to shift all the 0/1PG items so they're sized by slot, which should fix this along the way.)

[Edit] And by "cruiser" I mean "frigate", whoops.


Just as an aside, what role do you imagine the 50mm plate to serve?

Same thing with small shield extenders, and such.


that's a question for module rebalancing, not for industry
Sales Alt negrodamus
Sanctuary of Shadows
#169 - 2014-05-28 16:28:30 UTC
Also, those changes look good. Except for maybe how it relates jump freighters.

Right now JF manu is in a bad place due to only in-station production. The pos module to build them being unfucked is a significant step forward, please don't undo that beautiful long time coming fix! :)

I do see you mentioned it earlier so I'm glad they won't fall by the wayside. The market is "annoying" enough as it is.
Sales Alt negrodamus
Sanctuary of Shadows
#170 - 2014-05-28 16:29:28 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I've got it sized as a cruiser module right now I think, if that's what you mean?

(The 50mm is out of alignment because it only draws 1PG; I'm going to shift all the 0/1PG items so they're sized by slot, which should fix this along the way.)

[Edit] And by "cruiser" I mean "frigate", whoops.


Just as an aside, what role do you imagine the 50mm plate to serve?

Same thing with small shield extenders, and such.


that's a question for module rebalancing, not for industry


I know, I can't help myself. But that's a long standing question I've had that I have had a hard time getting an answer to.

Note that I'm not saying "please fix this", just his opinion because I am genuinely curious.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#171 - 2014-05-28 16:33:19 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
T2 copy ratio of 3x is almost certainly way too high, I agree - I'm leaving it there for now because I want to keep it in a "safe" place until I can properly look at it. It may be that the way we deal with the Gallente outpost is just to nerf its copy speed bonus a bit :)

If you adjust this downwards, don't forget to also adjust the copy speed of a T3 caldari outpost as well -- they can get 50% copy speed bonus at T3 along with their ME/PE bonus. Otherwise, you're just making gallente outposts the red-headed stepchild of outposts while not seriously affecting "maximum" copy speed.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#172 - 2014-05-28 17:01:47 UTC
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:
Also, those changes look good. Except for maybe how it relates jump freighters.

Right now JF manu is in a bad place due to only in-station production. The pos module to build them being unfucked is a significant step forward, please don't undo that beautiful long time coming fix! :)

I do see you mentioned it earlier so I'm glad they won't fall by the wayside. The market is "annoying" enough as it is.


JFs I brought the "capital penalty" on build time down from 25x to 5x, which means build drops to 3,000,000 seconds and invention to 1,155,000 seconds.

Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:
Gilbaron wrote:
Sales Alt negrodamus wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I've got it sized as a cruiser module right now I think, if that's what you mean?

(The 50mm is out of alignment because it only draws 1PG; I'm going to shift all the 0/1PG items so they're sized by slot, which should fix this along the way.)

[Edit] And by "cruiser" I mean "frigate", whoops.


Just as an aside, what role do you imagine the 50mm plate to serve?

Same thing with small shield extenders, and such.


that's a question for module rebalancing, not for industry


I know, I can't help myself. But that's a long standing question I've had that I have had a hard time getting an answer to.

Note that I'm not saying "please fix this", just his opinion because I am genuinely curious.


vOv

Querns wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
T2 copy ratio of 3x is almost certainly way too high, I agree - I'm leaving it there for now because I want to keep it in a "safe" place until I can properly look at it. It may be that the way we deal with the Gallente outpost is just to nerf its copy speed bonus a bit :)

If you adjust this downwards, don't forget to also adjust the copy speed of a T3 caldari outpost as well -- they can get 50% copy speed bonus at T3 along with their ME/PE bonus. Otherwise, you're just making gallente outposts the red-headed stepchild of outposts while not seriously affecting "maximum" copy speed.


Noted, thanks :)
Phoenix Czech
AZ Solutions CZ
#173 - 2014-05-28 17:04:06 UTC
If you are doing this big change to EVE industry, I thing that it is the right time to do something with T2 BPO and invention.

There is no way for player inventing T2 BPC and than manufacturing from it to be cheeper on the market than player who is manufacturing from T2 BPO. For long time I was trying to check market prices of needed materiáls compared to product prices. There was no possibility to make some profit on it. So why should I loose time with something like this?

So I decided to check which T2 BPO was available before CCP changed it. Than I just choosed modules and ships which has no T2 BPO existing, because they came to the game after the T2 BPO change. I again tryed to check market prices of needed materials compared to product prices and now I saw, that there is some possibility for a little profit. So I started to invent and manufacture these modules / ships.

I guess 99% of players do this the same way I did.

Players who has T2 BPO rules market prices and nobody can manufacture even at the same cost as they do. So there is pointless to invent and manufacture anything for which T2 BPO exists in the game.

Mostly all the changes you make to the T2 instrustry will be pointless without removing balancing this issue.

So I suggest remove from the game all existing T2 BPOs. So there could be only one possibility to go through invention for T2 modules and ships. OR give to T2 BPC some boost - so Invention and manufacturing costs will be and same level as T2 BPO manufacturing costs.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#174 - 2014-05-28 17:12:52 UTC
Phoenix Czech wrote:
If you are doing this big change to EVE industry, I thing that it is the right time to do something with T2 BPO and invention.

There is no way for player inventing T2 BPC and than manufacturing from it to be cheeper on the market than player who is manufacturing from T2 BPO. For long time I was trying to check market prices of needed materiáls compared to product prices. There was no possibility to make some profit on it. So why should I loose time with something like this?

So I decided to check which T2 BPO was available before CCP changed it. Than I just choosed modules and ships which has no T2 BPO existing, because they came to the game after the T2 BPO change. I again tryed to check market prices of needed materials compared to product prices and now I saw, that there is some possibility for a little profit. So I started to invent and manufacture these modules / ships.

I guess 99% of players do this the same way I did.

Players who has T2 BPO rules market prices and nobody can manufacture even at the same cost as they do. So there is pointless to invent and manufacture anything for which T2 BPO exists in the game.

Mostly all the changes you make to the T2 instrustry will be pointless without removing balancing this issue.

So I suggest remove from the game all existing T2 BPOs. So there could be only one possibility to go through invention for T2 modules and ships. OR give to T2 BPC some boost - so Invention and manufacturing costs will be and same level as T2 BPO manufacturing costs.


mm... the simple solution is usually best.. just remove T2 bpo's as the exploit they are.. don't even bother re-compensating them for it .. i bet there rich enough already ...some much needed fairness is required here clearly..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#175 - 2014-05-28 17:15:18 UTC
Let's please not get sidetracked into T2 BPO future right now :) We're not touching it in Crius (or Kronos!) unless something unavoidable comes up, but we are (as you'll see by reading this thread) significantly improving T2 BPCs in relation to BPOs. That is the final word on the issue for now and I'd appreciate it if we saved further discussion for another thread :)
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#176 - 2014-05-28 17:18:23 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Let's please not get sidetracked into T2 BPO future right now :) We're not touching it in Crius (or Kronos!) unless something unavoidable comes up, but we are (as you'll see by reading this thread) significantly improving T2 BPCs in relation to BPOs. That is the final word on the issue for now and I'd appreciate it if we saved further discussion for another thread :)



BOO!!!!!! Evil

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

HeXxploiT
Doomheim
#177 - 2014-05-28 17:53:11 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Let's please not get sidetracked into T2 BPO future right now :) We're not touching it in Crius (or Kronos!)...


Good to know.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#178 - 2014-05-28 18:00:12 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Greyscale
OK, here's the latest round.

http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/forums/EVE/blueprints_public_draft_3.csv

Changes:
- Jump freighters made more sane
- Adjusted ranks on most T2 items in the hope it'll put throughput back more or less where it is currently; so long as everything's a multiple of 0.2 it should play nicely with the research times (which are based around multiples of 105; this may actually be a lie I need to check it on Friday)
- Fixed T2 400mm plates being wierd
- Readjusted ranks on "unsized" modules (ie PG use of 1 or 0) so lowslot = small, medslot = medium, hislot = large

I thiiiiink that's everything I've touched.

Still to do:
- Mining crystals need to be sensible
- More special-casing of "cool" modules
- Look at how we can structure around common play times
- Probably adjust ranks some more so it's not so completely bound to the current balance, I want to get in the ballpark of current numbers first but I'd also like to make sure the numbers make sense when taken alone

This is kinda still in-progress and I haven't double-checked much of the work, I just wanted to put out an update this evening with latest numbers. Tomorrow's a national holiday so there may be no updates before Friday!

(Please let me know of further anomalies, and if we're back in the right ballpark for end-to-end times.)
Jehan Athonille
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#179 - 2014-05-28 18:37:31 UTC
Feedback to Greyscale’s blueprints_public_draft_2.csv

I felt it was necessary to create an alt to write this post. I’ll explain why in the end of my post, so that we can get started with the actual suggestions.

The Exhumers rank is set to the same as T2 cruisers to rank 400. This has a large impact on the Skiff and Mackinaw BPO’s production output. The Skiff BPO’s production output is cut in half. My suggestion is to set the ranks to

Ship – rank – old build time – new build time
Hulk – rank 400 – 120000 – 120000
Mackinaw – rank 300 – 80000 – 90000
Skiff – rank 200 – 60000 – 60000

This will almost preserve the current build times. That way the Skiff and Mackinaw BPO’s are not getting a large nerf on top of the huge nerf coming from the invention buff.

If you don’t want them to have different ranks, I suggest that all 3 exhumers get rank 300, to achieve a middle ground around the current build times.

Wow, just noticed that you doubled all the ranks for T2 ships in draft_3. That certainly do not give the same throughput as it does today. I hope that is a mistake.

CCP Greyscale wrote:

- We would like to make copy times consistently lower than build times, so building from copies is the optimal play (dovetails with our starbase changes, for example)


In the blueprints_public_draft_2.csv file all T2 BPO copy times are set to 3 times the build time and max-run of 1. I do not understand why T2 BPO’s should be exempted from the general rule of a copy time that equals the build time, so that it is feasible to build from copies in a POS. Since it will no longer be possible to remote build from BPO in a POS it seems fair that you instead can make a copy in roughly the same time frame and build from the copy instead in the POS. The max-run of 1 also makes it very difficult to produce from copies. Why is this new limit necessary?

The player that bought an expensive high-end T1 BPO can produce copies from the BPO in roughly the same time it takes to build the items and use the copies in a pos and that way keep the BPO safe in a station. On the other hand a player that decided to buy a T2 BPO can not use that method in practice because of the high copy time and max-run limit of 1. Why this discrimination? My suggestion is simple: Keep the copy times consistently lower than build times on all blueprints and restore the max-run values for T2 blueprint . If the outpost bonuses has something to do with this then my suggestion is to make the outpost research/copy bonuses apply to T1 blueprints only.

CCP Greyscale wrote:

- We are erring on the side of preserving the status quo in invention over preserving the status quo for T2 BPOs; note that, as previous point, we are not specifically targeting T2 BPOs in any particular way


The invention buff where invented BPC’s get ME 0 - 4 is a massive nerf to all T2 BPO’s. You write that this change is not intentionally targeted at nerfing T2 BPO’s. To counter balance this just a little bit, I suggest that the new blueprint data for T2 BPO’s are chosen friendly towards the player base that owns these kinds of blueprints. 

I am hoping to get a reply from Greyscale on these points.

I wrote:

I felt it was necessary to create an alt to write this post. I’ll explain why in the end of my post...


As one or two of you might have guessed by now (except, I hope not, that you jumped right to the end of my post to read this) I own some T2 BPO’s myself. I have played eveonline for several years, and I always found that the T2 blueprint originals were the most interesting aspect of this game. I would probably have stopped playing eve long ago without this game content. It is not very interesting to right click in the market browser and select buy on a blueprint. The task of getting a good T2 BPO is a hunt in competition with other players that often got my heart pumping faster. It is also a large achievement because you need to invest a large sum of ISK in a T2 BPO. It makes a purpose for grinding. Many players goal is to get into a super capital. That is not for me.

Alright, back to the alt thing. Reading these devblog threads, it feels like manufacturer using T2 BPO’s are subject to a witch hunt and the balancing team is playing along. My request is simply that you take a balanced view on both professions and consider both inventors and T2 BPO manufacturers instead of nerfing the value of T2 BPO’s that has taken years to achieve.

Hmm, didn’t I forget something.
Aluka 7th
#180 - 2014-05-28 18:45:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Aluka 7th
Could some one please explain me what is the problem with T2 BPO and Galente/Caldari outpost copy time bonus?
Not sure I get it Sad

On the other note, lets get serious. People cry about Marauder and JF BPOs (that don't exist) and based on CCP stats this:
http://k162space.com/2012/07/17/percentage-of-items-from-invention-vs-tech-2-bpo/
This was 2 years ago, and BPOs get destroyed, stuck on banned account ... IMHO people not counting their invention cost right undermine the market or they just get raw mat "free" or "cheaper from other region".

I had 1400mm II BPO but still invented same gun for the sheer benefit of volume that comes from invention and from that experience I really don't get the T2 BPO issue people raise on forums. Inventors will get good boost of end product with ME -4 becoming ME0 not sure whats the dillio with T2 BPO still/again/over and over again. I got more ISK/day doing nothing and owning ONE moon (large POS getting free R32 moon goo) then from T2 BPO. Think about that.