These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Crius] Manufacturing and general UI feedback

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nydoathram
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#321 - 2014-07-15 07:33:24 UTC
Blueprints that previously ONLY had Extra Materials, appear to be effected by ME research.
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#322 - 2014-07-15 07:48:49 UTC
Nydoathram wrote:
Blueprints that previously ONLY had Extra Materials, appear to be effected by ME research.


Working as intended :)
Nydoathram
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#323 - 2014-07-15 12:09:41 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
Nydoathram wrote:
Blueprints that previously ONLY had Extra Materials, appear to be effected by ME research.


Working as intended :)



Unfortunate, I was hoping it to be covered under the "if it was perfect before ..."
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#324 - 2014-07-15 12:23:29 UTC
Nydoathram wrote:
Gilbaron wrote:
Nydoathram wrote:
Blueprints that previously ONLY had Extra Materials, appear to be effected by ME research.


Working as intended :)



Unfortunate, I was hoping it to be covered under the "if it was perfect before ..."



Dude. that was squashed like the day after fanfest

Perfect before and perfect after didn't apply to the extra materials that were going to be added in

Most of us started researching BPO's immediately
asteroidjas
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#325 - 2014-07-15 13:28:58 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


Dev blog explaining this will be out later in the week, they will not be useless.

Could you please try to define "not useless" more than 3 days before said patch will change them into whatever you (CCP) are so desiring.

Specifically, how is an increase in T2 Component parts (in many cases 20-50% more) going to be anything but effectively useless? So far you have dodged any real numbers on the conversion of these base -4/-4 T2 BPC's with just mere, "Trust us, we know what we are doing" speak. We want numbers. Before the patch hits.
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#326 - 2014-07-15 14:17:28 UTC
An increase in t2 components only means that t2 stuff is gonna get a bit more expensive. It's not gonna break anything, alchemy will help supplying moongoo, people will make money (hint: buy popular t2 stuff). That's it.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#327 - 2014-07-15 14:38:16 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
An increase in t2 components only means that t2 stuff is gonna get a bit more expensive. It's not gonna break anything, alchemy will help supplying moongoo, people will make money (hint: buy popular t2 stuff). That's it.


A bit more?

All existing -4, -4 BPC's are currently facing a 50% increase in T2 and PI material inputs, and in most cases that rounds up to 60% (5 becomes 8), on Sisi RIGHT NOW.

I don't how many small cost T2 BPC's are out there on TQ right now (Hob II's, DC II's, Nano II's spring to mind as ones with no decryptors used by many), but they will become hopelessly inefficient in 7 days if the numbers on Singularity hold.

They will either become a total loss for the manufacturer, or T2 costs are going to go WAY up, not just "a bit more expensive".
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#328 - 2014-07-15 15:12:25 UTC
When there is demand, prices will simply go up as well. Inefficient compared to the old way only means that. Inefficient compared to the old way.

We will see some chaos during the adjustment phase. That's a nice opportunity to make money, but it's absolutely not going to break the game. T2 modules will be used until fozzie rebalances modules as a whole. And t2 ships are specialised enough that there is no real alternative (exceptions are ahacs and to some degree, assault frigs)
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#329 - 2014-07-15 18:45:54 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Gilbaron wrote:
An increase in t2 components only means that t2 stuff is gonna get a bit more expensive. It's not gonna break anything, alchemy will help supplying moongoo, people will make money (hint: buy popular t2 stuff). That's it.


A bit more?

All existing -4, -4 BPC's are currently facing a 50% increase in T2 and PI material inputs, and in most cases that rounds up to 60% (5 becomes 8), on Sisi RIGHT NOW.

I don't how many small cost T2 BPC's are out there on TQ right now (Hob II's, DC II's, Nano II's spring to mind as ones with no decryptors used by many), but they will become hopelessly inefficient in 7 days if the numbers on Singularity hold.

They will either become a total loss for the manufacturer, or T2 costs are going to go WAY up, not just "a bit more expensive".


They will not become "hopelessly inefficient". But manufacturers of T2 goods will need to be aware that existing stocks may be more efficient than what they will be making in the future. They should also closely examine how decryptors and BPO research can change that math.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#330 - 2014-07-16 04:12:28 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Gilbaron wrote:
An increase in t2 components only means that t2 stuff is gonna get a bit more expensive. It's not gonna break anything, alchemy will help supplying moongoo, people will make money (hint: buy popular t2 stuff). That's it.


A bit more?

All existing -4, -4 BPC's are currently facing a 50% increase in T2 and PI material inputs, and in most cases that rounds up to 60% (5 becomes 8), on Sisi RIGHT NOW.

I don't how many small cost T2 BPC's are out there on TQ right now (Hob II's, DC II's, Nano II's spring to mind as ones with no decryptors used by many), but they will become hopelessly inefficient in 7 days if the numbers on Singularity hold.

They will either become a total loss for the manufacturer, or T2 costs are going to go WAY up, not just "a bit more expensive".


They will not become "hopelessly inefficient". But manufacturers of T2 goods will need to be aware that existing stocks may be more efficient than what they will be making in the future. They should also closely examine how decryptors and BPO research can change that math.


I think you have this backwards.

Existing stocks of T2 BPC's are not magically getting better.
The majority of them, at least the ones without decryptors or access to the ridiculous null sec material bonuses, will be far more expensive to build the same product, in about 6 days.
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#331 - 2014-07-16 07:23:13 UTC
Which is no problem at all. The underlying systems are not fundamentally broken, it's gonna take some time for prices to adjust, but they eventually will.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#332 - 2014-07-16 14:10:10 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
Which is no problem at all. The underlying systems are not fundamentally broken, it's gonna take some time for prices to adjust, but they eventually will.


Yup, no problem at all, unless you happen to be a industry guy holding a bunch of these now useless BPC's, and have no idea what is coming in 6 days. So when some guy who does not read this blog suddenly finds he has a hangar full of now utterly uncompetitive BPC's, I am sure he will react with "wow, this is cool, I will go out and buy another account so I can build all these BPC's at a huge loss", as opposed to "screw you CCP, I am outta here."
Shiloh Templeton
Cheyenne HET Co
#333 - 2014-07-16 14:58:09 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
So when some guy who does not read this blog suddenly finds he has a hangar full of now utterly uncompetitive BPC's, I am sure he will react with "wow, this is cool,


If the pre-crius invented T2 BPC's that are converted have the same stats as the post crius invented T2 BPC's, then how will they be utterly uncompetitive?
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#334 - 2014-07-16 15:34:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Dinsdale Pirannha
Shiloh Templeton wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
So when some guy who does not read this blog suddenly finds he has a hangar full of now utterly uncompetitive BPC's, I am sure he will react with "wow, this is cool,


If the pre-crius invented T2 BPC's that are converted have the same stats as the post crius invented T2 BPC's, then how will they be utterly uncompetitive?




Because they don't.
I am talking about T2 BPC's that were made with no decryptors, which quite a number of "low cost" items have been made with in the past.

Have a look at one of the T2 BPC's in your hangar today on TQ, then compare that same BPC in your hangar as it is today on Singularity. You will not be happy if it is a -4 -4 on TQ.

I am building out as many of my BPC's as I can manage before next Tuesday.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#335 - 2014-07-16 16:19:35 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Shiloh Templeton wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
So when some guy who does not read this blog suddenly finds he has a hangar full of now utterly uncompetitive BPC's, I am sure he will react with "wow, this is cool,


If the pre-crius invented T2 BPC's that are converted have the same stats as the post crius invented T2 BPC's, then how will they be utterly uncompetitive?




Because they don't.
I am talking about T2 BPC's that were made with no decryptors, which quite a number of "low cost" items have been made with in the past.

Have a look at one of the T2 BPC's in your hangar today on TQ, then compare that same BPC in your hangar as it is today on Singularity. You will not be happy if it is a -4 -4 on TQ.

I am building out as many of my BPC's as I can manage before next Tuesday.


Yeah I think everyone else did this a month ago.
Mackenzie Nolen
Doomheim
#336 - 2014-07-16 16:43:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Mackenzie Nolen
EDIT: Seriously, too many tabs in my browser :)
Chichax
Thor's Hammer Incorporated
#337 - 2014-07-16 18:52:52 UTC
Two things I would like to see in the new UI.

The ability to collapse the top part of the Industry panel similar to character sheet. This would enable to keep an eye out of your jobs while doing other things.

A column in the blueprint tabs to state if it is a copy or original. With the ability to sort based on this stat of course.
Marc Rene
Doomheim
#338 - 2014-07-16 23:38:06 UTC
Not sure if this has been covered earlier, but the install cost popup is not really helpful.

The original dev post gave a mockup that was nice and clear and easy to read

http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66057/1/tooltip_for_pricing_blog.png

But the current tool-tip


  • Doesn't give you the baseline job cost


  • Presents the system cost index as a sliding scale and does not show the value numerically so it's really quite hard to discern what it actually is


  • Doesn't show, or isn't applying, the discount for multiple stations providing that service in the same system


  • Tax in a station is not taking standings into account and/or is not displaying the standings discount.
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#339 - 2014-07-16 23:45:46 UTC
Marc Rene wrote:
Doesn't give you the baseline job cost
Presents the system cost index as a sliding scale and does not show the value numerically


Will try to ninja this in tomorrow.

Marc Rene wrote:
Doesn't show, or isn't applying, the discount for multiple stations providing that service in the same system


We consider this part of the base cost, since you cannot really affect it. That's just the cost for installing in that system.

Marc Rene wrote:
Tax in a station is not taking standings into account and/or is not displaying the standings discount.


Do you mean in nullsec outposts? Player owner outposts are the only place that standings will effect the tax rate, as configured by the station owner. All NPC stations have a flat 10% tax and standings do not change it.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
Marc Rene
Doomheim
#340 - 2014-07-17 00:15:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Marc Rene
Thanks for the reply!

CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Marc Rene wrote:
Doesn't show, or isn't applying, the discount for multiple stations providing that service in the same system


We consider this part of the base cost, since you cannot really affect it. That's just the cost for installing in that system.


I don't think doing it this way helps to compare costs between systems, and doesn't show to a new player that systems with more stations of a given type discounts the install cost.

If you gave the base install cost as just the unmodified starting number for the job then showed the discount given for having multiple facilities of that type in the system I think it would make it much more intuitive and informative when deciding where to install the job.

CCP Nullarbor wrote:
Marc Rene wrote:
Tax in a station is not taking standings into account and/or is not displaying the standings discount.


Do you mean in nullsec outposts? Player owner outposts are the only place that standings will effect the tax rate, as configured by the station owner. All NPC stations have a flat 10% tax and standings do not change it.


I meant in NPC stations, not applying a standings discount doesn't seem consistent with the way the market fees work or the lore, and I think further devalues mission running.