These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Starbase changes for Crius

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#161 - 2014-06-17 06:18:24 UTC
MaverickG wrote:
Theodore Knox wrote:
Chris Winter wrote:
Why does it cost to build things at a POS? I built the POS, I'm paying for fuel for it, why am I getting charged again to manufacture things?


There needs to be an ISK sink in every game activity, to spread the sinking of ISK evenly. Wouldn't want one category of player complaining about how other's get off scot-free, would we?

Or are you asking for a "back story" reason? Ugh


The sink is fuel and risk of loosing pos and arrays. Why pos manufacturing at starbase need more than one sink?




That is NOT an isk sink, besides the marginal one of market taxes. Losing **** is certainly not a sink.
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#162 - 2014-06-17 06:19:35 UTC
FaeVerite wrote:
CCP Phantom wrote:
With Crius, the next EVE Online release to be published on July 22nd, major changes will come to Industry and with that you will also see tweaks and changes related to player-owned starbases (POS).

A brief overview of the most important changes:
  • Reprocessing POS Arrays will change and be more efficient
  • Compression Arrays will be introduced
  • Other industry related Arrays (eg. for research, invention and manufacturing) will receive a bonus for each additionally similar structure anchored at the same POS
  • Faction standing requirements to anchor POS are removed
  • Starbase Defense Management skill requires only Anchoring 4 instead of Anchoring 5

Much more information and all the details are available in CCP Ytterbium's latest dev blog Starbase changes for Crius.


So despite many pages from a large group of industrial players informing CCP this was a bad idea and players canceling subscriptions,
CCP intends to ignore a large group of players to placate a small group that the industrial players actually enable.

Bad Business Plan. Good Luck with maintaining a game or company when your customers leave.



He says, for the tenth expansion in the row. EVE online sure has been dying for a while, with the subscription base going up, up, up...
Logicycle
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#163 - 2014-06-17 06:20:05 UTC
I assume anchoring a POS in the 4 big trade hubs will not be allowed?
Circumstantial Evidence
#164 - 2014-06-17 06:52:12 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
defenseless tower in a 0.9 packed with arrays is the new thing. the result should be obvious
Not necessarily... pending any developer clarification of questions raised in post #4 on the first page: you may not need to have all those arrays online. You might be able to have a deathstar fully online, packed with arrays that are mostly offline.
Ian Stanley
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#165 - 2014-06-17 07:01:28 UTC
"Structure cost scaling

Removing slots from industry jobs discourage players from stacking more than one Starbase structure of the same type at a Control Tower. To counteract this point, we are going to give specific bonuses when Starbase structures of the same type are stacked together at the same control tower.

This bonus is going to be a flat reduction on the whole job cost price, whose amount and total bonus varies depending on the Starbase structure itself."

i dont agree with this changes.

putting in multiple starbase structures so we uses POS size larger than a small is a poor design

its like me buying multiple factories to build a car but actually using one of them to actually build a car - the others are just there for cost reduction.

how about this , create a stabases structures that can be asign to a player so that

a) multiple starbases can exist for each player
b) no need to share items in a structure - players can safeguard their mats in that structure
c) encourages more pos for a corp which in turn encorages more usage of POS fuels

might have more to add - but im at work . will edit this again later but this is my 2 cents. thanks
Oxide Ammar
#166 - 2014-06-17 07:13:40 UTC
Quote:
Structure cost scaling

Removing slots from industry jobs discourage players from stacking more than one Starbase structure of the same type at a Control Tower. To counteract this point, we are going to give specific bonuses when Starbase structures of the same type are stacked together at the same control tower.


Worst statement I have ever seen, you don't see infinite CPU/PG on POS towers to stack specific arrays, In addition anyone has big pile of BPO/BPC he will be only manufacturing the highest IPH item he can produce so I don't see us stacking 10 drones assembly and 20 small ship arrays and we keep anchoring and onlining and offlining these every time we have something new on the menu.

This is bad design and I don't know why you insisting to keep going through that way ?!

Lady Areola Fappington:  Solo PVP isn't dead!  You just need to make sure you have your booster, remote rep, cyno, and emergency Falcon alts logged in and ready before you do any solo PVPing.
JanSVK
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#167 - 2014-06-17 07:24:28 UTC
Hello everyone

I want to adress a few issues

Meytal wrote:

Will it be possible to run, say, 5 simultaneous job queues of two 12-hour jobs per queue instead of 10 simultaneous jobs at 12 hours each? This means 5 jobs would complete in 12 hours and the other 5 jobs would complete in 24 hours instead of the 10 simultaneous jobs that all complete in 12 hours for (theoretically) twice the cost? It can be important for many of us to time the completion of jobs to correspond with our gaming times.


Please give us clarification and the future plans on this. There are many situations where queueing jobs is a desired mechanic.

- Asset security in the POS: How can I protect my blueprints and produced materials in the POS from corp thieves? Anyone with the roles to use the POS arrays/laboratories can access all the jobs of the entire corp. This is a big security issue.

- Material managing in the POS between arrays: It is a pain to move the materials between the arrays within the POS. Solution would be if the arrays could acces the same hangar and move the required materials from and to this hangar.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#168 - 2014-06-17 07:46:58 UTC
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
defenseless tower in a 0.9 packed with arrays is the new thing. the result should be obvious
Not necessarily... pending any developer clarification of questions raised in post #4 on the first page: you may not need to have all those arrays online. You might be able to have a deathstar fully online, packed with arrays that are mostly offline.

i could see that being a day 0 bug. do you see it working that way intentionally?

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#169 - 2014-06-17 08:39:27 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Theodore Knox wrote:
Does the Assembly Array stacking bonus apply to arrays of only one type, or can you mix and match in each category? e.g. will i need 13 Medium Ship Assembly Arrays, or can I have 12 MSAAs and 1 Advanced to get the same bonus to jobs in the advanced array?


They stack within the same category.


A while ago when discounts were first discussed, you wanted to address online/offline shenanigans at some point.

I don't see WHERE you do that?
With the information available right now, onlining the max. number of arrays, starting a 30 day production run and offlining them again seems a perfectly valid strategy?
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
#170 - 2014-06-17 09:12:58 UTC
Oxide Ammar wrote:
Quote:
Structure cost scaling

Removing slots from industry jobs discourage players from stacking more than one Starbase structure of the same type at a Control Tower. To counteract this point, we are going to give specific bonuses when Starbase structures of the same type are stacked together at the same control tower.


Worst statement I have ever seen, you don't see infinite CPU/PG on POS towers to stack specific arrays, In addition anyone has big pile of BPO/BPC he will be only manufacturing the highest IPH item he can produce so I don't see us stacking 10 drones assembly and 20 small ship arrays and we keep anchoring and onlining and offlining these every time we have something new on the menu.


Somebody has obviously never flooded an entire market so badly that they couldn't produce in it at a profit for a while.

Again, you aren't forced to do this. Every single bit of Crius keeps on emphasizing and re-emphasizing that you can do things cheaper by being smart (about where/how/what/when you build) than by tossing massive capital around. The industrial landscape will be varied enough that not taking advantage of stacking structures is not going to make one non-competitive. This entire mechanic is being implemented with large-scale manufacturers in mind, those who already have multiple POSes and dozens upon dozens of arrays.
Alphea Abbra
Project Promethion
#171 - 2014-06-17 09:31:45 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Oh god, just made me remember writing and properly explaining all the industry changes in the Crius patch notes is going to make my head hurt Evil I'll have CCP Greyscale do it instead, somehow. Twisted
Industry changes confirmed for expansion after Crius?
As to give you time for patch notes!

(Good man btw: Always make sure someone else does the bookkeeping.)

And thanks for the collection. I'm not a POS owner, but it does make it much easier to get an accurate overview of the changes. I gather they are quite substantial!
Phoenix Czech
AZ Solutions CZ
#172 - 2014-06-17 10:03:33 UTC
First of all you decide, that you will remove all the slots to improve industry mechanics. Than you realize, that doing this will probably significantly demage ICE / POS fuel market, so you come up with stupidity idea like stacking industry structures. I understand, that developing something is not easy. But developing something in short time gives you more problems than advancements. I am realy periodicaly rading your DEV blogs and most of the DEV forums responces. I am more and more convinced, that only one thing you have for new industry relese finished is graphical interface. But the mechanics are still not completly figured out. Yes new graphical interface is nice, it will reduce clicfest and people will more understand how it works. But I thing that the working mechanics is something the most important.

I thought you want to make eve more user friendly and less complicated for players. Stacking industry structures on POSes is step back.

Suggestion:
OK - you want to give players variability in manufacture costs. This step will force players to start manufacturing on POSes. Instead of stacking structures, give the players possibility to change CPU and PG requirements for the structure. So onlined structure with minimal requirements has (for example) 50K PG / 100 CPU and gives 0% manufacturing cost bonus. Player decide to manufacture the most eficiently, so he change the requirements of this structure to 500K PG / 1000 CPU and receives 25% bonus in manufacturing. Here is only one structure to handle with. Much less click fest with structure management. Easy to change settings (no anchoring, moving, etc with structures) / more time to do somethnig else. Wardec corporations still will be able to figure out who is manufacturing at low costs and wardec him (they will see how many structures on the POS is online and will be able to count PG / CPU consuption). I know that POSes code is not optimized and you are working on rebuilding it, but this could not be so big change to base program code.........
Oxide Ammar
#173 - 2014-06-17 10:19:51 UTC
probag Bear wrote:
Oxide Ammar wrote:
Quote:
Structure cost scaling

Removing slots from industry jobs discourage players from stacking more than one Starbase structure of the same type at a Control Tower. To counteract this point, we are going to give specific bonuses when Starbase structures of the same type are stacked together at the same control tower.


Worst statement I have ever seen, you don't see infinite CPU/PG on POS towers to stack specific arrays, In addition anyone has big pile of BPO/BPC he will be only manufacturing the highest IPH item he can produce so I don't see us stacking 10 drones assembly and 20 small ship arrays and we keep anchoring and onlining and offlining these every time we have something new on the menu.


Somebody has obviously never flooded an entire market so badly that they couldn't produce in it at a profit for a while.

Again, you aren't forced to do this. Every single bit of Crius keeps on emphasizing and re-emphasizing that you can do things cheaper by being smart (about where/how/what/when you build) than by tossing massive capital around. The industrial landscape will be varied enough that not taking advantage of stacking structures is not going to make one non-competitive. This entire mechanic is being implemented with large-scale manufacturers in mind, those who already have multiple POSes and dozens upon dozens of arrays.


Infinite slots + stacking multiple arrays of same type to lower manufacturing fees = poor design judgment and lazy solution.

If you tell me it takes into consideration all types of online arrays, I'll accept it...more types of different arrays means bigger POS tower means your industry business is capital, which should reduce the manufacture fees. Stacking same array when you are going to use only one...sorry this dumb.

Lady Areola Fappington:  Solo PVP isn't dead!  You just need to make sure you have your booster, remote rep, cyno, and emergency Falcon alts logged in and ready before you do any solo PVPing.
Centurax
CSR Engineering Solutions
Citizen's Star Republic
#174 - 2014-06-17 10:37:52 UTC
Reprocessing at a Starbase could use more information, as it looks at the moment just right click an select reprocess and you get a load of minerals, good start. However in a station you get this cool window that shows you exactly what you are getting before you decide to reprocess it all. Is there a reason we cant have this level of information on the Starbase reprocessing arrays?

Also if you can use BPOs from containers to build, how about being access containers in a corp hanger array, factory array, open and repackage them, this would be a huge help to Starbase industry and storage management.
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
#175 - 2014-06-17 10:54:16 UTC
Oxide Ammar wrote:
[quotes snipped]

Infinite slots + stacking multiple arrays of same type to lower manufacturing fees = poor design judgment and lazy solution.

If you tell me it takes into consideration all types of online arrays, I'll accept it...more types of different arrays means bigger POS tower means your industry business is capital, which should reduce the manufacture fees. Stacking same array when you are going to use only one...sorry this dumb.


It does take into consideration all types of online arrays. If you are only going to stack one kind of array, it's most likely not worth it to stack in the first place.

To try to clarify again: remember when they talked about global usage numbers in the Price of Change devblog? Specifically, the part about a single player, based out of a single system, being the source of ~35% of all Reverse Engineering jobs? That's who this blog is targeted towards.

If you are not the source of a significant percentage of New Eden's S&I jobs, the installation fees aren't going to hit you particularly hard. But when you have several dozen arrays spread out over several POSes, you will single-handedly be starting a significant fraction of total S&I jobs, and you will get hit very hard by the installation fee crowding penalty. Giving POS arrays some kind of stacking bonus is the developers' way of balancing that out to some degree.
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#176 - 2014-06-17 11:00:15 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Deacon Ix wrote:
I may be being useless but I can't find out what is planned (if anything) with Slots in Outposts, if you get rid of the slots what will the upgrades do?


After talking with CCP Greyscale, we'd like to redirect you to this blog.

Specifically:

Quote:
For each previously-slot-improving outpost research upgrade, you'll similarly get a 0.9x multiplier to research job prices.

For each previously slot-improving manufacturing-related Outpost Improvement, you'll get a 1% bonus to ME instead (we can do that now). This is different because the manufacturing slot upgrades in particular are pretty substantial right now, and installation costs are assumed to be a sufficiently small fraction of final item costs in nullsec that a cost multiplier here seemed underwhelming. We're still looking at the exact bonus here, and the relationship between Amarr and Minmatar outposts in particular, so this may change before it's released.



Oh god, just made me remember writing and properly explaining all the industry changes in the Crius patch notes is going to make my head hurt Evil I'll have CCP Greyscale do it instead, somehow. Twisted


I am not worried about the patch notes per se, I am more worried about what you guys "Forget" to put in the patch notes and we wind all by ourselves.

Then we petition to determine if it is a bug, which we get NO reply after even WEEKS, so we petition again and file another bug report, which again go unanswered.

Then, maybe....hell, lets be honest, we just assume it is supposed to be like this and go with it....


Case in point....cyno changes were NEVER posted in any patch notes, several bug reports and petitions later over 6+ months, one petition reply I got said "If you think it is a bug, file a bug report" but no answer, no clarification, NOTHING
Flay Nardieu
#177 - 2014-06-17 12:14:05 UTC
In regards to POS S&I these things would have made more sense:


  • Relaxing not removal of empire standing
  • Leaving hard caps in place for arrays/labs, but make the non-specific lab's slots universal but keeping modifiers per lab
  • Adding centralized material silos for arrays to draw from
  • Secure link surcharge for using BPs from a corporate hangar


POS changes that make at least some sense:


  • Compression arrays
  • Changes to Refining Arrays including removal of sec requirements


POS S&I changes that are counter intuitive or plain stupid


  • Adding superfluous job charges
  • Scaling of jobs ran disconnected from a set capacity of a structure
  • Making labs bonus modifiers instead of actually being what their intended application
  • Additional nuisance changes.


If the POS changes are related to general S&I and the unified interface and station changes I say too bad. As programmers and game designers it is YOUR job to make it work logically and reasonably in both iterations, not pass on complications and poor design to us the consumer. Excessive cost volatility in aspects of S&I dependent on what a corporation in game deploys and maintains is unacceptable.

The whole S&I system is getting a complete make over I fail to see why it is acceptable for it to be done in a less than optimal manner taking into the account of differing dynamics of station and POS based operations, not to mention future possibilities considering the flexibility inherent to the mobile structure model.
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#178 - 2014-06-17 12:23:20 UTC
CCP Ytterbium:

i) Have you considered adding a time required to reprocess or compress material and putting all these arrays outside the POS forcefield and attackable / siphon-able?

It might have made a very nice small gang target.

ii) Have you looked into the possibility of perhaps adding a POS array to do some PI (attackable) similar to the above suggestion?

Other than that query. Changes look good.
Dracnys
#179 - 2014-06-17 12:26:35 UTC
Please let up upgrade arrays like command centers! If you have an array online and one of the same type in your cargo present an upgrade button in the right click menu. Apply upgrade, array in cargo disappears and the online array gets the bonus and higher powergrid and CPU needs. No need for downgrading. It also forces people to keep all arrays (commit the CPU and PG) online for the whole duration of the job.

Offlining and onlining dozens of arrays is just like the clickfest we have now (maybe worse).
JetCord
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#180 - 2014-06-17 12:48:33 UTC
can someone remind me again why are we removing slots from stations and pos structures? what are the reasons?

can CCP increase the slots numbers instead by a certain factor and also scaling the isk cost in a busy system?

if they do this we wont have this problem of stacking arrays and doubling jump fuel just to make sure ice prices stay competitive

as of when crius when live we will see POS stacked with structures just for isk reduction which IMHO is a bad mechanic.

i mean if they can create infinite slots in a single station im sure they can up the slots numbers and we wont be in this mess in the first place.


and why on earth on a pos that i pay for the fuel and bought array i still have to pay for cost for job started in a POS that I OWN and PAY for the fuels?

its like me buying a car and pay for the fuel for it operation but i have to pay so i can drive it around