These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New dev blog: Starbase tweaks: an update

First post First post
Author
Miagen
Fart In The Wind Industries
#221 - 2011-12-03 00:33:27 UTC
So in short, us high sec casual players who made/harvested our own fuel, & bought the small faction towers ( before the prices skyrocketed ) will only get 3 weeks of fuel out of what use to give us 4.
Pfaeron
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#222 - 2011-12-03 02:54:57 UTC
I am very interested in the switchover being delayed until January.

This 2 weeks from when BPO's were seeded to the switchover event is going to land right smack dab in the middle of people's vacations. And since we can only put in 4 weeks (if you have sov bonus) or 3 weeks without it.. and some of the fuel needs to be real fuel.. and some needs to be energon blocks.. that's not enough slop on either side to be comfortable at all.

I do not want to be unable to sleep at night while on vacation because of this.. do you?

Please delay switchover until January.

[unless of course, you switch existing fuel to energon blocks and if you do that.. then there's no problem.. switch 'em over whenever you like]
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#223 - 2011-12-03 03:21:56 UTC
so wait, 40 blocks an hour???? why do i think that is 10 times more then it should be.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#224 - 2011-12-03 04:48:42 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
so wait, 40 blocks an hour???? why do i think that is 10 times more then it should be.


The original dev plan (a month ago?) was that towers would use: 1/2/4 blocks per hour for S/M/L and that a single batch of Fuel Block production would produce 4 blocks (with the ingredients being roughly equivalent to the existing large POS fuel ratio per hour). Block size was 50 m3.

We rightly pointed out that going with values that small would destroy the sov bonus and the faction tower fuel advantage.

So they raised the number by 10x, but also increased the amount made by the batch by 10x and decreased the size by 10x. So now towers will require 10/20/40 per hour, the batch makes 40 and the block size is now 5 m3.

...

Old vs new Consumption (assuming a ME40 BPO of the fuel blocks and Production Efficiency V skill):

Coolant - 2/4/8 to 2/4/8
Enriched Uranium - 1/2/4 to 1/2/4
Mech Parts - 2/3/5 to 1/2/4
Oxygen - 7/13/25 to 5/10/20
Robotics - 1/1/1 to 0.25/0.50/1.00
Heavy Water - 38/75/150 to 38/75/150
Isotopes - 113/225/450 to 100/200/400
Liquid Ozone - 38/75/150 to 38/75/150

(Not all towers burned a full load of HW/LOz. Most towers were all of one and maybe half of the other. Unless they were a hi-sec research tower in which case they probably burned very little LOz.)
Pfaeron
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#225 - 2011-12-03 16:44:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Pfaeron
eveclient wrote:
16:42:11 Notify You cannot place Gallente Fuel Block in this fuel bay


Still can't put blocks into the tower.

When is this going to be fixed? i.e. an eve-date.
Lacking a date for when it will be fixed. When will you know when it will be fixed? i.e. a date for a date.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#226 - 2011-12-03 17:02:12 UTC
Pfaeron wrote:
eveclient wrote:
16:42:11 Notify You cannot place Gallente Fuel Block in this fuel bay


Still can't put blocks into the tower.

When is this going to be fixed? i.e. an eve-date.
Lacking a date for when it will be fixed. When will you know when it will be fixed? i.e. a date for a date.


It requires a full patch day, not just a "client update". So, whenever the next patch day is. Which, given CCP's track history with follow-up patches, means that we might see it this coming Tuesday. (CCP has said already that "it's fixed" in other dev posts.)

In the meantime, keep making new fuel blocks (at least 2 weeks worth), but leave some old-style fuel on hand (probably 3-6 weeks worth) just in case the migration gets pushed out into the Jan 2012 timeframe.
Pfaeron
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#227 - 2011-12-03 18:19:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Pfaeron
o damnit.. I typed this all in once already and the post form left me with an empty freakin' message.. O I hate doing things twice.
---

So building the blocks isn't the problem. We already saw that the schedule was during the holidays and so we bought stacks of blueprints.. not just one set. Then build them in parallel so we got done in a hurry. The speed @ which you can build the blocks is somewhat in your control.. though it does take a LOT of slots to build a months work for me.. I estimate even with 10 blueprints for each race.. and I find some helpful builders to help me build.. it'll be more than just a few days to get the 1st month's stockpile of energon cubes for our corp's usage.

The problem is getting that fuel into the towers. I can't plan for that yet.
I expected to be at least started with that process by now.
And I need to be done with it soon.

Us manager types in EvE are typically managers or a bit more advanced in real life as well. We expect to have things done ahead of time and checked off.. We take vacations. I'm sure I'm not alone in this boat.

If this system is not working within say a week.. its going to be a big problem. People simply are not going to be around. Even if its all working in say 5 days.. and we have all the schedules.. that only gives me a couple days to delegate all the tasks and get my own part handled... working with everyon'es holiday schedules.. verifying it was all completed correctly..

Even now.. I should be no longer worried about the towers if it wasn't for this fuel block problem.. until after New Years.
4 weeks of fuel takes us past New Years.. no problem. But instead.. we need to be putting in some portion of fuel blocks.. to make it past New Years. But how much? Without some solid dates to work with, we can't plan properly. And even if we knew the dates and therefore could calculate how much reall fuel vs energon to put in each tower to make it past new years, we can't actually put it in still 'cause the game is borked. I need to get started on this process.. damned soon.. if it going to be done at all.

All this hassle because CCP considers it a risk to develop either
(a) a sql script or similar to calculate the amount of fuel in the towers .. and replace existing fuel with equivalent fuel blocks. (I have php code to do the calculation part already based upon the posdetails.api.. its not that hard. CCP says they can't afford the testing time.. omg.. )
(b) allow burning of normal fuel ad-infinatum but not allowing new normal fuel to go in. when it runs out.. start burning energon [this would give us the extra advantage of not needing to bring back so much extra old fuel out of the tower after the switchover]

I'm trying to deal with their limitations and restrictions.. but its getting pretty damned difficult with each passing day.

There's a short fuse here.. and its getting shorter all the time.
Shey Danu
CSR Star Command
Citizen's Star Republic
#228 - 2011-12-04 01:31:16 UTC
The fuel pellets are okay. Not sure how the manufacturing will go, but we'll see.

Some of the points we found REALLY disappointing is some of the most basic but useful things that could have been addressed.

1) The ability to name corporate hangers and anything else anchorable. It's a simple string in the database, so how hard can this be?

2) LAG in the POS. It somehow became much much worse. Forgetting fitting from a POS, takes forever. All us null-sec peps are hating this I'm sure.

3) Kudos on the anchor time! :) That is amazingly helpful! (wanted to throw in something good in the list.. )

4) API management - PLEASE!!! Any major null-sec alliance has a better asset tracking system -outside- the game, not to mention the awesome programs like EveHQ and EveMon. Fixing the API to tell us WHICH HANGER or LAB, or hell SILO, would be so damn helpful! This of course could be made easier by being able to NAME the structures.

Please CCP? Change the ability to name a structure!
Lightword
Wish to Dream
#229 - 2011-12-04 01:38:12 UTC
Well this will be awesome, 40 blocks of fuel per hour. Soon most PoS's will be offline since it takes just over 5 hours of ice mining with level 5 skills to make enough fuel blocks for one day. Since this is happening most players that live in WH space will be forced to leave. T3 ships will become a thing of the past. T2 mods and ships will now cost an arm and leg to even build.

So, basically ccp you are losing alot of players when this drops and I do mean alot.
Icarus Helia
State War Academy
Caldari State
#230 - 2011-12-04 09:10:00 UTC
Lightword wrote:
Well this will be awesome, 40 blocks of fuel per hour. Soon most PoS's will be offline since it takes just over 5 hours of ice mining with level 5 skills to make enough fuel blocks for one day. Since this is happening most players that live in WH space will be forced to leave. T3 ships will become a thing of the past. T2 mods and ships will now cost an arm and leg to even build.

So, basically ccp you are losing alot of players when this drops and I do mean alot.


the costs are actually going down, this has been covered. or at least they would have gone down if the tax rates weren't so absurd at customs offices atm. I'm sure that will settle down though.

Why you no care?

Tiberious Sutherland
Federation Manufacturing Conglomerate
#231 - 2011-12-04 20:12:54 UTC
I'm just wondering if, along with these nifty, new fuel blocks, is CCP planning on increasing the available supply of Heavy Water and Liquid Ozone? I know one of the main benefits of fuel blocks is you no longer have to do all the math you used to. Especially since large towers now use exactly 150 HW and 150 LO regardless of how much PG and/or CPU your tower is actually using. But I'd bet that most towers weren't using 100% of the HW and/or LO that they could have because most towers couldn't setup enough arrays to run exactly 100% of the towers PG and/or CPU capacity. So, let's assume that every tower used to average about 60% CPU/PG (no clue what the actual average would be... I'm guessing CCP could figure that out). That would mean your average large tower used to use only 90 HW/LO per hour. So what the fuel blocks are effectively going to do is increase the demand on Heavy Water and Liquid Ozone by about 67% (assuming the 60% average usage in my example).

Even if the average was higher then 60%, the result is still going to be an increased demand on Heavy Water and Liquid Ozone. The actual increase will simply depend on what the average usage used to be. And if there is going to be no new sources of supply for these items, that's going to drive those costs up. Maybe one of the Dev's intentions was to drive up costs, but I was under the impression that since those commodities are basically only supply through mining, their costs would be controlled solely by players. Not by CCP messing with the market, even in an indirect fashion.

I'm absolutely NOT saying that I don't like the idea of the fuel blocks. I'm actually looking forward to them. I just don't want to see my fuel costs sky rocketting because no new Liquid Ozone or Heavy Water are being supplied to the market.
Seleia O'Sinnor
Drop of Honey
#232 - 2011-12-04 21:43:22 UTC
Tiberious Sutherland wrote:
Even if the average was higher then 60%, the result is still going to be an increased demand on Heavy Water and Liquid Ozone. The actual increase will simply depend on what the average usage used to be. And if there is going to be no new sources of supply for these items, that's going to drive those costs up. Maybe one of the Dev's intentions was to drive up costs, but I was under the impression that since those commodities are basically only supply through mining, their costs would be controlled solely by players. Not by CCP messing with the market, even in an indirect fashion.

I'm absolutely NOT saying that I don't like the idea of the fuel blocks. I'm actually looking forward to them. I just don't want to see my fuel costs sky rocketting because no new Liquid Ozone or Heavy Water are being supplied to the market.


Oh btw CCP was considering moving Ice to lowsec/nullsec only.

Odyssey: Repacking in POS hangars for modules +1,  but please for other stuff too, especially containers. Make containers openable in POS hangars.

Beran Panasper
Persnickety Pilots
#233 - 2011-12-04 23:59:50 UTC
I did some numbers on fuel usage by a normal Caldari and a DG large control tower, using current Jita prices, and 100% grid and cpu usage:

current fuels total 575k isks per hour for a normal tower
current fuels total 466k isks per hour for a DG tower

The DG tower uses 75% of the ICE fuels, but inconsistent lower numbers of PI-based fuels, but the total is 19% lower than that of a normal tower.

current fuel block cost at zero waste: 540k isks (per hour)
at 80% a DG tower will use 432k isks (per hour)

So this patch will lower the cost of running a tower, especially by lowering PI-fuel usage. Tower controllers should stop whining about increased cost of running towers always at 100% grid and cpu :)

CCP Greyscale: is the lower PI-fuel usage intentional?

-my two cents :)

Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association
#234 - 2011-12-05 03:24:58 UTC
Seleia O'Sinnor wrote:

Oh btw CCP was considering moving Ice to lowsec/nullsec only.


Yes, because major alliances need more isk, and more power over the in game economy and small corps need to just gtfo of their alliance only sandbox.
Tazmikella
MicroCon Enterprises
#235 - 2011-12-05 04:33:24 UTC
Sorry Beran and Icarus but you are wrong that it will not cost more ISK - but has nothing to do with the amount of fuel that goes into each block. The price is based on current Jita price and you can already see the price fuels going up because of the horribad Interbus taxes on PI. What used to cost 2 mil to pull from 5 planets now costs over 30 mil in taxes. That is going to be passed along and it will not settle. Let's see if we all remember when PI was introduced. Remember how much POS fuel components were and what they were 2 weeks later after PI introduction. And guess what? They did not go down and will not go down - just look at the market price history.

After much yammering about the fuel pods, SOV usage, research, and faction tower usage, the amount of fuel used is fairly equivalent, in fact, mech parts and oxygen are a couple points less. However, what fact that everyone is missing is that it will cost more because the fuel prices are continually going up because 1) people doing PI stopped doing PI and 2) the fighting over the gantries will limit the large groups for control.

Lightword is correct. CCP please look at what you are doing with the fuel prices. There is nothing wrong with the amounts of fuel pods or how this is done. What is wrong is PI, the taxes, and making gantries destructible/one per planet. And don't even get me started on Ice mining, please do put Ice fields only out in null sec and 0.0 (in a sarcastic tone of voice). You really think smaller corps are going to be able to afford 180+ mil a week for Custom Gantry (already they were 150+ mil a week ago) because other corps having nothing better to do then go blow up custom gantries. Cygnet is right on - thanks for making this unplayable for solo, small groups who can't compete with the big alliances sitting out in 0.0. Might as well stop inventing/building/selling and go scam in Jita, seems to be more money in that endeavor What?.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#236 - 2011-12-05 05:05:40 UTC
Well, let's look at some current prices:

Coolant: 13000 ISK
http://www.evemarketeer.com/item/info/coolant

Enriched Uranium: 13750 ISK
http://www.evemarketeer.com/item/info/enriched_uranium

Mechanical Parts: 12000 ISK
http://www.evemarketeer.com/item/info/mechanical_parts

Oxygen: 430 ISK
http://www.evemarketeer.com/item/info/oxygen

Robotics: 80000 ISK
http://www.evemarketeer.com/item/info/robotics

Heavy Water: 160 ISK
http://www.evemarketeer.com/item/info/heavy_water

Isotopes: ~450 ISK

Liquid Ozone: 440 ISK
http://www.evemarketeer.com/item/info/liquid_ozone

Which gives prices per 30-days of:

S: 104M ISK
M: 206M ISK
L: 409M ISK

Which is about what we were paying back in Oct 2011 prior to the PI tariffs being installed due to the higher fuel demands under the old system combined with the higher price of isotopes at the time. The new fuel blocks have less product in them, which offsets the PI tariff increase. And smart providers will figure out how to make their PI outputs cheaper so that they can get a higher premium while charging the same rate as those using less efficient setups.

The P1 products from PI have actually gone *down* this week in price, which is reducing the strain on the price of the upper tier products.
Kaotixs
Enlightened Industries
Goonswarm Federation
#237 - 2011-12-05 11:17:38 UTC
Brunaburh wrote:
Although I am glad you listened to the concerns about block size and faction towers, there still remains one significant issue, which is the fuel consumption.

Riptard Teg covered it in a blog post, if you aren't running a full grid/full cpu tower (as in probably 90% of towers out there) there are significant changes to cost since you aren't allowing for fuel variance in the ice products.

I want to say this again, I love the idea of fuel blocks.

I don't love the idea that fuel isn't variable based on CPU/Grid usage.

I mean really, you think after all these years it would be so hard to make a fuel block of all the static fuels and just have to measure Ozone and Heavy Water?

Fuel blocks should combine the PI materials and the Isotopes (all static measured fuels today), and then the ozone and heavy water should be variable (as it is today) based on usage.

It's not that complicated. It's also not 75-IQ stupid, which means it requires thought and planning, things that EVE is known for (in a good way).

Fuel blocks would still be racial due to the isotope inclusion.

Please?

EDIT WTF? I can't link the damn url. BBCODE failure??



I'm sorry but i disagree. wait i'm not sorry.70% of towers?? cheak your math hommie. most towers run at 65% of the avalible rid on CPU and power one if not both. this new fuel block is a god send for most. the few that dont use there grid can just utalize the tower better
Beran Panasper
Persnickety Pilots
#238 - 2011-12-05 13:23:46 UTC
I didn't mean to evaluate PI-material increase. I was just comparing the change in pos-running per hour between normal and faction (DG) before and after fuel blocks. On that change POSses got cheaper and fuel volume on 100% grid and cpu also drops a bit in volume. So this change is only positive for pos runners on those accounts. It might even help on decreasing the influence of PI price increases.

PI is a totally different beast. Robotics, especially got 10 times more expensive, if not more. I know, I build T2 drones. But on the other hand, there's still NPC-bought PI stuff in the hangars as well, the guidance systems for example, at the same complexity level of robotics, still cost only 20k isks. CCP can only make an honest evaluation when all NPC influence is gone and the PI economy is normalised to the current setup.

I guess that the DUST dwellers will take over the PI industrial tasks, maybe they get better equipment, or mining efficiency skills to train for just that. PI would be their income to get money from the capsuleers. I never bought the idea that DUST dwellers are only hirelings to capsuleers: DUST biters will want their own economy and powerblock bulding capability. PI will be their economical means. PI materials are only needed for T2 modules and ships, so if we, capsuleers, want to fly those shiny ships, we'll have to pay for it, either through our own badly-done planet mining, or by paying the Zandhazen (Dutch terminology for land-bound soldiers, "Sand Hares" lit.)
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association
#239 - 2011-12-05 14:45:16 UTC
Scrapyard Bob wrote:


S: 104M ISK
M: 206M ISK
L: 409M ISK

Which is about what we were paying back in Oct 2011 prior to the PI tariffs being installed due to the higher fuel demands under the old system combined with the higher price of isotopes at the time. The new fuel blocks have less product in them, which offsets the PI tariff increase. And smart providers will figure out how to make their PI outputs cheaper so that they can get a higher premium while charging the same rate as those using less efficient setups.

The P1 products from PI have actually gone *down* this week in price, which is reducing the strain on the price of the upper tier products.



Bob, maybe I'm using magic, but on a small tower that's a 300% increase over what I paid to maintain my small through smart shopping and doing my own PI, according to my wallet for the last four months.


Again, I'm not seeing this as a good thing for T2.
Tiberious Sutherland
Federation Manufacturing Conglomerate
#240 - 2011-12-05 16:48:36 UTC
Nothing in my post was meant to complain about the high current cost of PI fuel or even ice related fuel. I realize that the new ice block system will result in marginally reduced fuel costs compared to "pre-block" fuel costs but ONLY if prices remain exactly where they are. And prices will only remain stable if supply and demand don't change. Let's pretend there are 10,000 large towers out there and before blocks, those 10k towers all ran at an average of 65% CPU/PG. That means those 10k towers are using up 975k units of Heavy Water and Liquid Ozone per hour with the current "non-fuel block" system. Once fuel blocks take effect, those same 10k towers still running at an average 65% CPU/PG are going to be using 1.5mil units of Heavy Water and Liquid Ozone per hour. That's a 54% increase in the amount of Heavy Water and Liquid Ozone that is currently being used. Unless the supply of HW and LO (which primarily comes from ice harvesting) ALSO increases by 54%, the costs for those is going to jump which means fuel costs WILL NOT be lower. They'll actually be significantly higher. And that ignores factors like the nutty Interbus tax rate on PI work outside of high sec and the possibility of all ice fields being restricted to low and null sec.

It just seems to me like there are two groups at CCP working at cross purposes. One group is working to make tower fueling easier to manage, potentially opening the game for more people to setup towers. But another group is destroying the supply of tower fuel, driving fuel costs through the roof, making it pretty well impossible for small corps to maintain a tower.

Again, fuel blocks are good. But CCP needs to work on INCREASING supply of tower fuel materials, not leaving supply where it is and certainly NOT reducing that supply.