These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Material Efficiency skill changed to Advanced Industry

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#301 - 2014-07-18 11:55:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Medalyn Isis
CCP Greyscale wrote:
- A general percentage reduction to *all* jobs would (perversely) probably actually be less troublesome to push higher; the 1% is somewhat constrained by our desire not to push build times below copy times, so if we did a skill that affected copy and build equally (along with research, which is clearly a pretty valuable bonus for people researching in the new system), we would probably push it up to the 3-5%/level range.

- Adding some new skills with this skill at 5 as a prerequisite is something we could definitely look into; is this something that would make people feel better about having it at 5? They would then likely be "advanced", optional skills targeted at specific niches and very much not required to compete, but we could probably pick a handful such that everyone has at least one they'd want.


I really like both of these options. The first option would be great, and the second option would make an nice addition although not essential.

I do think this would entail a wider change of all the skills though related to industry and science, things already are overlapping with industry being required for material efficiency for example. If industry and science skills as a whole were more linked that would make a lot of sense.

Perhaps something like this:

Industry = 5% reduction to science and manufacture jobs per level

[Pre req Industry IV]

Manufacture (previously material efficiency) = 4% reduction to manufacture jobs per level
Metallurgy = 4% reduction to ME research per level
Research = 4% reduction to PE research per level
Science = 4% reduction to Copy research per level

This would mean all jobs could get a skill based time multiplier of 0.6x, which would hopefully keep everything equal. Skill progression would make a lot more sense also.
Setsune Rin
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#302 - 2014-07-18 11:56:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Setsune Rin
Quote:
- Adding some new skills with this skill at 5 as a prerequisite is something we could definitely look into; is this something that would make people feel better about having it at 5? They would then likely be "advanced", optional skills targeted at specific niches and very much not required to compete, but we could probably pick a handful such that everyone has at least one they'd want.


while i feel the idea behind it isn't bad at all, and it instills a bit more value into the skill i'd still like to see it's standalone value adjusted to more acceptable levels

it will never really match up to it's current tq value, but a less OP skill with some new shinies branching off from it will go a long way to alleviate some of the sting, even if it does requiire some extra training to fully utilize

but to emphasize: it can't be 1% production time
it has to be something that directly saves you isk, like a % per level install cost reduction like was mentioned earlier or something along those lines

otherwise you're just swapping and old skill for a completely new one that doesn't match any of it's old value in the slightest
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#303 - 2014-07-18 11:56:40 UTC
Celor Ma'fer wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
- A general percentage reduction to *all* jobs would (perversely) probably actually be less troublesome to push higher; the 1% is somewhat constrained by our desire not to push build times below copy times, so if we did a skill that affected copy and build equally (along with research, which is clearly a pretty valuable bonus for people researching in the new system), we would probably push it up to the 3-5%/level range.


I would be happy with this. We have suggested 3% already, but obviously if you would be prepared to go to 5% per level then that would be great. As was suggested by someone earlier you could make the bonuses incremental so either 1%/2%/3%/4%/5% for 15% bonus or 1%/3%/5%/7%/9% for 25% bonus. I like the idea of the second as then training from level 4 > 5 will grant a 9% bonus, which is quite substantial.

Quote:
- Adding some new skills with this skill at 5 as a prerequisite is something we could definitely look into; is this something that would make people feel better about having it at 5? They would then likely be "advanced", optional skills targeted at specific niches and very much not required to compete, but we could probably pick a handful such that everyone has at least one they'd want.


Obviously it would depend on what the skills would be. Did you have anything in mind, even if it's just an idea?


We're unlikely to go with a non-linear bonus because it goes completely against how the skill system is (very deliberately) set up to give diminishing returns over time.

As to what skills, the floor's wide open on that. Some more advanced industry skills would probably be a reasonable idea generally, and anything that is a number in the game we can affect with skills without a whole lot of effort.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#304 - 2014-07-18 12:05:59 UTC
Or alternatively:

Industry = 4% reduction to science and manufacture jobs per level

[Pre req Industry IV]

Metallurgy = 4% reduction to ME research per level
Research = 4% reduction to PE research per level
Science = 4% reduction to Copy research per level

[Pre req Industry V]
Advanced Industry = 3% reduction to manufacture and science jobs per level


This would confer a larger advantage to science, which seems in line with your goal of keeping copy times under build times. And also would slightly offset the massive increase in time required to get a perfect BPO under the new system.

Manufacture time reduction would be = 0.68x
Science time reduction would be = 0.544x
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#305 - 2014-07-18 12:58:08 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

We're unlikely to go with a non-linear bonus because it goes completely against how the skill system is (very deliberately) set up to give diminishing returns over time.


Thanks for clarifying that (again). It's amazing how many people don't get that.


That said, the '5%/lvl time reduction on everything' - approach sounds interesting, even though i won't profit too much from it. It's still appealing due to its elegance.

The change would also be very similar to the scanning changes, where the mandatory skill (astrometrics) got 5% of everything scanning related.
Celor Ma'fer
Jouhinen Inc
#306 - 2014-07-18 12:58:39 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Or alternatively:

Industry = 4% reduction to science and manufacture jobs per level

[Pre req Industry IV]

Metallurgy = 4% reduction to ME research per level
Research = 4% reduction to PE research per level
Science = 4% reduction to Copy research per level

[Pre req Industry V]
Advanced Industry = 3% reduction to manufacture and science jobs per level


This would confer a larger advantage to science, which seems in line with your goal of keeping copy times under build times. And also would slightly offset the massive increase in time required to get a perfect BPO under the new system.

Manufacture time reduction would be = 0.68x
Science time reduction would be = 0.544x


Can I just check something out of interest?

Are you saying that Science would have a pre req of Industry IV? and What is the reason for lowering the M,R,S skills from 5% to 4%?
Mardris Fol
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#307 - 2014-07-18 13:20:25 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
- Common spot for all changes is the patchnotes; I don't want to talk about exact times because Community is co-ordinating when they're released, but they're a shade under 6000 words and should cover everything.


Patch notes are too late.

You (collectively) write blogs and make postings telling people what's coming in the next patch. Players start making decisions - switch training plans, switch what they're building/selling in anticipation.

Your ideas change over time, which is fine but what's not fine is you leave the old blogs up there.

CCP has just re-publicised the next patch and point players at the original blogs, for example:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/starbase-changes-for-crius/

This still states:
Quote:
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," when we know this idea has been canned.

I expect ideas to develop over but CCP could do a better job of removing or correcting the misleading information, or caveat it at least - the starbase blog ends:
Quote:
We hope this will shed some light on the various changes coming to Starbases in the Crius release on July 22nd and help you make the right industrial decisions before its goes live.

The Community site is a good place to make players who don't have time to scan the forums or play-test sisi, aware of upcoming changes. But it needs to be kept (reasonably) up to date and include significant changes - like completely changing a skill!
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#308 - 2014-07-18 13:21:54 UTC
Celor Ma'fer wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Or alternatively:

Industry = 4% reduction to science and manufacture jobs per level

[Pre req Industry IV]

Metallurgy = 4% reduction to ME research per level
Research = 4% reduction to PE research per level
Science = 4% reduction to Copy research per level

[Pre req Industry V]
Advanced Industry = 3% reduction to manufacture and science jobs per level


This would confer a larger advantage to science, which seems in line with your goal of keeping copy times under build times. And also would slightly offset the massive increase in time required to get a perfect BPO under the new system.

Manufacture time reduction would be = 0.68x
Science time reduction would be = 0.544x


Can I just check something out of interest?

Are you saying that Science would have a pre req of Industry IV? and What is the reason for lowering the M,R,S skills from 5% to 4%?

Yes, under my suggestion Industry would encompass all of the science and manufacture skills. Right now ME research requires Industry, but the others don't, so it doesn't follow much of a logical progression.

Also the reason I reduced them by 1% in that proposal was because higher level skills should give equal or less benefit than the base skill, and also the cumulative bonus may be too high if they are at 5% reduction per level still.

I guess you could keep them at 5% though, but then you would have a science reduction of 0.51x, so am not sure if that is feasible.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#309 - 2014-07-18 13:27:28 UTC
Mardris Fol wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
- Common spot for all changes is the patchnotes; I don't want to talk about exact times because Community is co-ordinating when they're released, but they're a shade under 6000 words and should cover everything.


Patch notes are too late.

You (collectively) write blogs and make postings telling people what's coming in the next patch. Players start making decisions - switch training plans, switch what they're building/selling in anticipation.

Your ideas change over time, which is fine but what's not fine is you leave the old blogs up there.

CCP has just re-publicised the next patch and point players at the original blogs, for example:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/starbase-changes-for-crius/

This still states:
Quote:
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," when we know this idea has been canned.

I expect ideas to develop over but CCP could do a better job of removing or correcting the misleading information, or caveat it at least - the starbase blog ends:
Quote:
We hope this will shed some light on the various changes coming to Starbases in the Crius release on July 22nd and help you make the right industrial decisions before its goes live.

The Community site is a good place to make players who don't have time to scan the forums or play-test sisi, aware of upcoming changes. But it needs to be kept (reasonably) up to date and include significant changes - like completely changing a skill!


Yeah ok, this is a reasonable criticism. I'm making a note to discuss this with the rest of the design department regarding future releases.
Celor Ma'fer
Jouhinen Inc
#310 - 2014-07-18 13:34:51 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Celor Ma'fer wrote:
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Or alternatively:

Industry = 4% reduction to science and manufacture jobs per level

[Pre req Industry IV]

Metallurgy = 4% reduction to ME research per level
Research = 4% reduction to PE research per level
Science = 4% reduction to Copy research per level

[Pre req Industry V]
Advanced Industry = 3% reduction to manufacture and science jobs per level


This would confer a larger advantage to science, which seems in line with your goal of keeping copy times under build times. And also would slightly offset the massive increase in time required to get a perfect BPO under the new system.

Manufacture time reduction would be = 0.68x
Science time reduction would be = 0.544x


Can I just check something out of interest?

Are you saying that Science would have a pre req of Industry IV? and What is the reason for lowering the M,R,S skills from 5% to 4%?

Yes, under my suggestion Industry would encompass all of the science and manufacture skills. Right now ME research requires Industry, but the others don't, so it doesn't follow much of a logical progression.

Also the reason I reduced them by 1% in that proposal was because higher level skills should give equal or less benefit than the base skill, and also the cumulative bonus may be too high if they are at 5% reduction per level still.

I guess you could keep them at 5% though, but then you would have a science reduction of 0.51x, so am not sure if that is feasible.


OK that all makes sense and I could agree with this idea. One thing that strikes me though is what about all of the skills that Science unlocks, particularly in the first 2 and some of level 3? They are not related to Industry and so would not fit in, would you propose to just remove Science as a Pre Req for those skills?
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#311 - 2014-07-18 14:53:08 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Mardris Fol wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
- Common spot for all changes is the patchnotes; I don't want to talk about exact times because Community is co-ordinating when they're released, but they're a shade under 6000 words and should cover everything.


Patch notes are too late.

You (collectively) write blogs and make postings telling people what's coming in the next patch. Players start making decisions - switch training plans, switch what they're building/selling in anticipation.

Your ideas change over time, which is fine but what's not fine is you leave the old blogs up there.

CCP has just re-publicised the next patch and point players at the original blogs, for example:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/starbase-changes-for-crius/

This still states:
Quote:
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," when we know this idea has been canned.

I expect ideas to develop over but CCP could do a better job of removing or correcting the misleading information, or caveat it at least - the starbase blog ends:
Quote:
We hope this will shed some light on the various changes coming to Starbases in the Crius release on July 22nd and help you make the right industrial decisions before its goes live.

The Community site is a good place to make players who don't have time to scan the forums or play-test sisi, aware of upcoming changes. But it needs to be kept (reasonably) up to date and include significant changes - like completely changing a skill!


Yeah ok, this is a reasonable criticism. I'm making a note to discuss this with the rest of the design department regarding future releases.


With higher tempo releases the amount of misinformation will be much higher as it will come faster and faster, although volume will probably be much lower.


That being said it wouldn't be the end of the world to put out patch notes for the next expansion the day after Crius ships and use the one line method to show how things have changed since the beginning. Dev-blogs are nice but more for the general feel of what is coming and specific numbers etc, but the general patch notes should be available a lot sooner. That also allows people to see the progression of the patch notes over time.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#312 - 2014-07-18 14:57:18 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Mardris Fol wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
- Common spot for all changes is the patchnotes; I don't want to talk about exact times because Community is co-ordinating when they're released, but they're a shade under 6000 words and should cover everything.


Patch notes are too late.

You (collectively) write blogs and make postings telling people what's coming in the next patch. Players start making decisions - switch training plans, switch what they're building/selling in anticipation.

Your ideas change over time, which is fine but what's not fine is you leave the old blogs up there.

CCP has just re-publicised the next patch and point players at the original blogs, for example:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/starbase-changes-for-crius/

This still states:
Quote:
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," when we know this idea has been canned.

I expect ideas to develop over but CCP could do a better job of removing or correcting the misleading information, or caveat it at least - the starbase blog ends:
Quote:
We hope this will shed some light on the various changes coming to Starbases in the Crius release on July 22nd and help you make the right industrial decisions before its goes live.

The Community site is a good place to make players who don't have time to scan the forums or play-test sisi, aware of upcoming changes. But it needs to be kept (reasonably) up to date and include significant changes - like completely changing a skill!


Yeah ok, this is a reasonable criticism. I'm making a note to discuss this with the rest of the design department regarding future releases.


With higher tempo releases the amount of misinformation will be much higher as it will come faster and faster, although volume will probably be much lower.


That being said it wouldn't be the end of the world to put out patch notes for the next expansion the day after Crius ships and use the one line method to show how things have changed since the beginning. Dev-blogs are nice but more for the general feel of what is coming and specific numbers etc, but the general patch notes should be available a lot sooner. That also allows people to see the progression of the patch notes over time.


Interesting suggestion, thanks :)
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#313 - 2014-07-18 15:05:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Medalyn Isis
Celor Ma'fer wrote:
OK that all makes sense and I could agree with this idea. One thing that strikes me though is what about all of the skills that Science unlocks, particularly in the first 2 and some of level 3? They are not related to Industry and so would not fit in, would you propose to just remove Science as a Pre Req for those skills?

I don't think that would be a problem, as industry is a low ranking skill, and so it would be neglible to get it to level IV, it takes around 20 hours only . And also due to nested skill requirements those who for whatever reason don't have industry to IV, would still have the science skills.

Also science skills aren't related to there pre reqs in most circumstances already. Mechanics, elecontrics, engineering are all not related but still pre reqs.
Denidil
Cascades Mountain Operatives
#314 - 2014-07-18 15:12:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Denidil
Medalyn Isis wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
- A general percentage reduction to *all* jobs would (perversely) probably actually be less troublesome to push higher; the 1% is somewhat constrained by our desire not to push build times below copy times, so if we did a skill that affected copy and build equally (along with research, which is clearly a pretty valuable bonus for people researching in the new system), we would probably push it up to the 3-5%/level range.

- Adding some new skills with this skill at 5 as a prerequisite is something we could definitely look into; is this something that would make people feel better about having it at 5? They would then likely be "advanced", optional skills targeted at specific niches and very much not required to compete, but we could probably pick a handful such that everyone has at least one they'd want.


I really like both of these options. The first option would be great, and the second option would make an nice addition although not essential.

I do think this would entail a wider change of all the skills though related to industry and science, things already are overlapping with industry being required for material efficiency for example. If industry and science skills as a whole were more linked that would make a lot of sense.

Perhaps something like this:

Industry = 5% reduction to science and manufacture jobs per level

[Pre req Industry IV]

Manufacture (previously material efficiency) = 4% reduction to manufacture jobs per level
Metallurgy = 4% reduction to ME research per level
Research = 4% reduction to PE research per level
Science = 4% reduction to Copy research per level

This would mean all jobs could get a skill based time multiplier of 0.6x, which would hopefully keep everything equal. Skill progression would make a lot more sense also.


I would add two more to this list

Facility Efficiency, Pre Requisite Industry V, 5% Reduction in Research and Manufacturing Installation Costs per level
Industrial Relations, Pre Requisite Industry, 5% Reduction in NPC Facility taxes on Research and Manufacturing Installation Costs per level.

i would also keep the existing skills at 5%

Science, because of hw it is used elsewhere for pre-requisites should not be made to require Industry IV though. Maybe the copy speed bonus needs to be split from it, and Science given a different bonus.

Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#315 - 2014-07-18 15:18:17 UTC
If we had to choose one solution, which are people favoring more - 3-5% all jobs time reduction, or additional skills with this skill at 5 as a prereq?
Denidil
Cascades Mountain Operatives
#316 - 2014-07-18 15:22:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Denidil
CCP Greyscale wrote:
If we had to choose one solution, which are people favoring more - 3-5% all jobs time reduction, or additional skills with this skill at 5 as a prereq?


I'm dead set against time bonuses being the ONLY bonuses.

I'd be definitely cool with what Medalyn Isis' proposal with the two skills I added to it, and Facility Efficiency being the replacement for Material Efficiency.

*edit*

oh.. and just for the record.. this actually financially harms me because I would have to buy 3 PLEX to do Dual Character training on three accounts to bring all the characters up to snuff. I still think it would probably be the right thing to do.

Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.
Celor Ma'fer
Jouhinen Inc
#317 - 2014-07-18 15:22:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Celor Ma'fer
CCP Greyscale wrote:
If we had to choose one solution, which are people favoring more - 3-5% all jobs time reduction, or additional skills with this skill at 5 as a prereq?


3-5% reduction across all Industry jobs, for now. Then a proper solution can be worked out for the next patch
Celor Ma'fer
Jouhinen Inc
#318 - 2014-07-18 15:23:44 UTC
Medalyn Isis wrote:
Celor Ma'fer wrote:
OK that all makes sense and I could agree with this idea. One thing that strikes me though is what about all of the skills that Science unlocks, particularly in the first 2 and some of level 3? They are not related to Industry and so would not fit in, would you propose to just remove Science as a Pre Req for those skills?

I don't think that would be a problem, as industry is a low ranking skill, and so it would be neglible to get it to level IV, it takes around 20 hours only . And also due to nested skill requirements those who for whatever reason don't have industry to IV, would still have the science skills.

Also science skills aren't related to there pre reqs in most circumstances already. Mechanics, elecontrics, engineering are all not related but still pre reqs.


Yep fair enough, gets a +1 from me.
Maduin Shi
MAGA Inc
#319 - 2014-07-18 15:26:34 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

- A big part of the reason why we're pushing back on a reimbursement here is that it's a thing that is becoming a habit and we want to push back against it being the default option. There's a lot of things feeding into this, but a major part of it is the model of the value of skill training that considers skills as an ongoing cycle of anticipation and accomplishment, and the way that (for many people, we understand how skill plans work) future training goals more more defined as longer-term skills get close to finishing. By giving people windfalls of skillpoints, we a) suddenly cut short the anticipation, which is expected to also reduce the feeling of accomplishment, and b) break the natural cycle of goal-setting by completing goals unexpectedly early and without the lead-in time to consider and select new ones. We understand that the psychological value that this sets up is not considered relevant by some of our players, but we have to also consider the ones who do derive satisfaction from this sort of system, and skillpoint windfalls can be self-defeating for them.


OK dude, but you gotta reconcile this philosophy with paying customers who spent money for the SP that you're re-purposing into something they may not want. For example, I can't use a time efficiency bonus like what is being suggested in this thread because I don't run jobs continuously. I certainly wouldn't take such a skill to V. I skilled ME to get into booster manufacturing. The manufacturing stage already runs faster than the POS reaction upstream from it, so this time bonus idea is completely useless to me. Job install cost bonus would be better but still not something I would take to V for a Rank 3 skill.

Eve is about choice but that's also the problem: i.e. you want a new bonus for this skill that you want everyone to be happy with but everyone has made different choices in the game leading up to the decison to skill ME V and so it is Mission Impossible to please everyone with this or that "other" bonus to replace it.

If an SP refund is off the table for philosophical reasons fine. Let me suggest an alternative option. You know the Cerebral Accelerator that you have available for new pilots? You guys should design one to distribute as compensation to customers who are negatively impacted by major skill changes. Not exactly the same as the Cerebral Accelerator, but lets say this implant will allow you to train SP at the maximum rate that TQ allows currently if you were perfectly mapped for the skill in the queue and with 5% attribute implants. This would be highly valuable because everyone needs to train skills quite often that are outside their current neural map. The implant would last for a set amount of time or a set amount of SP, say the difference between your prior SP gain rate and the max rate would drain the SP value loaded on the implant. The item could also perhaps be transferred to alts on the same account, but otherwise could not be traded or sold

This form of compensation for skill changes fits better with your philosophy of not "devaluing" the satisfaction of progressing your character by a flat SP refund. It also keeps players subscribing so they can benefit from this form of compensation, which is good for your company's bottom line.
Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#320 - 2014-07-18 15:28:13 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
If we had to choose one solution, which are people favoring more - 3-5% all jobs time reduction, or additional skills with this skill at 5 as a prereq?


The second solution again sounds like it only benefits hardcore industrialists.

Since time reduction translates into cost reduction with the new system, it would be closer to what people originally intended with training that skill, no?