These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: EVE Industry - All you want to know

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Malachi Venturian
My Alt Lab
#141 - 2014-07-19 00:59:14 UTC
"After *considerable* discussion, both internally and on the forums, we have decided that we are not going to award any additional compensation for blueprints currently researched past ME/PE 10. There are a lot of things feeding into this decision, including the strong precedent it sets, the fact that no functional value is lost, and the work involved in a one-time compensation deal that could be spent on polishing up the features we're shipping. We understand that some people will be unhappy about this, and we empathize with that, but we have to weigh everyone's interests equally and we believe in this case that the best thing for the game as a whole is to convert blueprints to the new system as previously described but not make any additional changes in this area.

---"

So the years I spent getting my T1 ship BPOs to over 100 ME are now wasted?!?!??!

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!
DeODokktor
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
#142 - 2014-07-19 01:51:39 UTC
Sir HyperChrist wrote:


I second this.
right now a Prorator bpo builds 51 units per month in a station, after patch only 18
a small T2 drone bpo builds 4125 units in a station, over 5500 at a pos (remotely), after patch only 2960
a medium T2 drone bpo is now at 2800 unites at a pos, which will drop to1480 in station (slightly more by using bpc's)
a large T2 drone now gives 1880 units at a pos. Only986 will remain after patch

A T2 BPO nerf has been long in the coming, but this patch they get nerfed twice: 50% more materials and 2 to 3 times less units produced for the examples above. And no transparency about all this before the patchnotes. Is this truly what you want?



Some t2 bpo's had output raised quite a bit.
My 10mn MWD II has gone from 4.5 hours build to 1.3 hours. That's a huge increase.
Ammo too went through a similar change.
DCII output has doubled.
I guess it all depends on where your prints fall into this "Ranking" system.
I too feel the pain with ships.
Basilisk and Hawk have had output basically halved.

The cost increase shouldn't be considered a big deal as we can pass that on, not only that but t2 bpo holders will not be harmed as much as those people inventing.

It's a lot of changes to just to make ME Linear...
But now we made research times NonLinear...
So a lot of work to swap two equasions and sneak in a few nerfs and isk sinks.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#143 - 2014-07-19 03:03:38 UTC
i too can oversimplify the entire patch into a one liner about the things i don't like about the patch and claim incompetence
Throwaway Sam Atild
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#144 - 2014-07-19 04:37:43 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


The bottom line though is that we have attempted, hopefully with a decent degree of success, to ensure that throughput for invented items per character is roughly the same before and after, once you build in all the various bonuses available (see starbase bonuses, for example). If there's any significant mismatches post-release, let us know and we'll make adjustments!


I'm sure you've noticed me harping about this across practically every dev post your involved with, but there are significant mismatches that I would be happy to point out right now, having had a chance to math them out and try them out for semi-realisies on SISI.

Doing a lot of T2 module invention I'll off the cuff some numbers, and if you're interested, I'd be more than happy to work them all out in detail.

Covert ops cloaking devices used to be built on a 5-6 day cycle from bpo to final product. They're down to around 48 hours.

Modules are dropping from 1d15hrs cycles to 4,6,12 and so on cycles.

Ship times are clearly extended, though its not my specialty.

Throughput is clearly changing across the board here, and very significantly. I was under the impression that it was intentional and all part of the master plan. Its possible but unlikely I'm missing some huge variable here, but I've been pretty thorough, and run my numbers past some other quite capable inventors.

I really hope you guys don't intend to stop here with industry changes and that we see some more significant alterations in the future. Forcing production into space is absolutely essential to making the game more interesting. With the time adjustments that we've seen, everything built is 100% safe due to war-dec mechanics. Anything with a longer cycle time just gets built in a station in one of the new unlimited slots.

Thanks for the read!
Aineko Macx
#145 - 2014-07-19 06:11:19 UTC
Too bad CCP missed a chance to reduce complexity by making all ore variants compress to one single type and just vary either required input amount of ore or output quantity to differentiate.

iveeCore 3.0: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
Sir HyperChrist
Persnickety Pilots
#146 - 2014-07-19 08:17:49 UTC
DeODokktor wrote:
Sir HyperChrist wrote:


I second this.
*snip*



Some t2 bpo's had output raised quite a bit.
My 10mn MWD II has gone from 4.5 hours build to 1.3 hours. That's a huge increase.
Ammo too went through a similar change.
DCII output has doubled.
I guess it all depends on where your prints fall into this "Ranking" system.
I too feel the pain with ships.
Basilisk and Hawk have had output basically halved.

The cost increase shouldn't be considered a big deal as we can pass that on, not only that but t2 bpo holders will not be harmed as much as those people inventing.

It's a lot of changes to just to make ME Linear...
But now we made research times NonLinear...
So a lot of work to swap two equasions and sneak in a few nerfs and isk sinks.


people inventing used to have a lot more waste on their jobs than T2 BPO owners. Putting those 2 on equal ground is a very big, but imo just, positive change for invention. Afaik now, people inventing are slightly better off now, for being able to use multi-run bpc's. The rest of it is pretty much the same, save for the new cost structure and teams that've been added to everything.

This patch was meant to make industry simpler, but the end result is a lot more complex. Current perfect BPO owners will always be better off than new players without. It looks more and more like the end goal of this patch won't be met :(
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#147 - 2014-07-19 08:19:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Sizeof Void
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Doug Dannger wrote:

"We're very aware that some of you will feel that you've lost your previous advantages gained by researching blueprints for a really long time, and this is one of the areas we're preparing to focus the most on in terms of receiving feedback and making adjustments or additions to smooth the transition."

So while yes, I over spoke when I said promise, but there was also no discussion. Once again they took the easy way out.

There was pretty extensive discussion in the blog feedback thread, to be fair.

Hmm... actually, there was no participation in the discussion on this topic, by any CCP dev.

Most of the affected players were waiting for CCP devs to make a comment, rather than waste time endlessly responding to the same old forum trolls. And, just for the record, I posted several times about this particular issue and never saw any response from a CCP dev.

If I am in error, then I apologize. Please direct me to the post, in which you, or another dev, did indeed participate in the discussion.
Sir HyperChrist
Persnickety Pilots
#148 - 2014-07-19 08:47:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Sir HyperChrist
T2 frigs now build at around 150 per month. Depending on which kind T2 frig (inty, covops)
after patch that's gonna be only 37 per month (both inside a normal station) so only 1/4th the production before the patch.

T2 mining crystals are now all of different productionspeed: veldspar and scordite are fast with 30k units per month. Mercoxit mining crystals are slowest with only 1500 units per month (in an ammo array, remotely). After patch I come at over 9000 units built per month of all types of chrystals. For most types that will cause the markets to collapse and be dominated by the few bpo owners, but veldspar chrystals might become a lot more expensive, depending on existing unused capacity on T2 bpo's.

Could you at least put some more time in fine tuning the ranks you put on the bpo's? Try to keep all new production times within 75%-133% of the current times. There are enough ranklevels for that, so it wouldn't need extensive re-programming
Kahawa Oban
New Groton Industrial Works
#149 - 2014-07-19 11:07:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahawa Oban
I just want to be clear on this. A T2 BPC that was invented using a decryptor yeilding a -1/-1 ME/TE BPC will now require more components then previously? That is a big change for T2 battleships.

My understanding was that BP's were not going to get worse.

Edit:

Just re-read the forum. The answer is yes to the first question and the statement that BP's would not get worse is wrong.

I'm going to get my morning cup of coffee, maybe that will help.
DeODokktor
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
#150 - 2014-07-19 12:07:18 UTC  |  Edited by: DeODokktor
Kahawa Oban wrote:
I just want to be clear on this. A T2 BPC that was invented using a decryptor yeilding a -1/-1 ME/TE BPC will now require more components then previously? That is a big change for T2 battleships.

My understanding was that BP's were not going to get worse.

Someone please respond.


Your 10% decryptors will now be 29.54% more expensive to build from than before.

100*1.5 = 150 (new base)
150*.95 = 142.5 (new build cost using 10% chance decryptor, +3 ME +6 TE, 2/4 base, 5/10 after invent)
100*1.1 = 110 (Old build cost using invention with 10% -1/-1 output bpc)
142.5/110 = 1.2954

The flip side is that using worse decryptors results in cheaper runs. Most people didnt use the -1/-1 from what I seen anyhow (I did).
The worst decryptor is 6.25% cheaper.
100*1.5 = 150 (new base)
150*1 = 150 (new build cost using 60% chance decryptor, -2 ME +2 TE, 2/4 base, 0/6 after invent +9r)
100*1.6 = 160 (old base cost using .60 with -6/+3)
150/160 = .9375

*Edit, removed some 40%/60% errors on my part.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#151 - 2014-07-19 12:58:06 UTC
Walked to work in the rain to answer a bunch of questions :P

El Zylcho wrote:
Are adjustments being made to costs to buy ships with LP so LP is essentially taxed in the same way built items are? Using LP, especially FW LP, seems like it automatically enjoys a greater purchase power for the same amount of effort because everything built (ships etc) is becoming more expensive to produce.


I don't believe the change in value is enough for us to care deeply about, but we'll see how things settle post-patch.

DeODokktor wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

1) Yes.
2) Upwards, per unit. Acolyte II now requires 2 of most things (not the T1 drone obviously)


Yay test server up.

Acolyte II requires 1 of most things, not 2..
On test server that is.


Well, huh. Lemme look into this.

Bessa Miros wrote:
On the test server every system seems to have completely red (maxed) fees on manufacturing, with the exception of a few lo sec systems (still they are at 40-60% maxed).

Is this intentional? If everywhere is maxed then we'll all build in hubs; Jita, Amarr. Won't we?


Costs on the test server are unlikely to bear much relation to anything that'll happen on TQ, as they're dependent on server-wide activity which isn't going to populate well on SiSi.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Quote:
This index is then used in conjunction with job value to create a base cost....

For copying and ME/TE research, this is fairly straightforward: it's 2% of the inputs for a job using that blueprint.


Each level of ME research reduces the materials required (the cost) to build the end product

So the base cost per level for ME research can (in the right circumstances) reduce with each level ?

Or; Are base costs for research based on a 0 ME / 0 TE BPO?

- - - -
If there is only a small amount (less than 100) of people researching a specialized / low demand item, the costs will be higher per item than they would be if 1000's of people are building the same item?

EG;
If 2 players are researching the same (limited demand) item in the same location, the costs will be extremely high as they could make up 100% of the index for that item.

- - - -
How will the price index work?

Where will "job value" be drawn from to create, job value base cost?
Anything related to market price can't be used as it can (and would be) be easily manipulated. So what will define "job value".

- - - -
Quote:
I.e., where:

system_activity_job_hours is the total duration of all jobs of that activity type in that system over the last 28 days, and:

global_activity_job_hours is the total duration of all jobs of that activity type in the universe over the last 28 day, and:

system_activity_index is the index we’re creating, the formula is:

Isn't this a nerf to Nulsec Manufacturing?
Those manufacturing in Nulsec for an alliance will incur higher charges because they are building in volume and have additional hauling charges (50% more fuel for JF) for materials they (due to location) are unable to produce.

Building 10 Ishtars in highsec is going to be cheaper than building them in nul.
In highsec you can find all materials you will need in 1 place.
To build them in nul, you need to import materials you're unable to produce, yet your base price is set in part by the global index which includes the highsec manufacturers.


- Based on an ME0 blueprint, I believe.
- It's tracked per-activity (eg ME, TE, copying), not per-activity-per-type.
- We've got systems in place to generate values that approximate market values without being manipulable in any substantial fashion.
- Hauling and logistics have always been the achilles' heel of nullsec manufacturing, that's a big part of why we're not expecting Crius to "fix" it in any substantial way.

Pandorium9 wrote:
CCP RubberBAND wrote:
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
CCP RubberBAND wrote:
Patch notes and details on downtime now live:

http://community.eveonline.com/news/patch-notes/patch-notes-for-crius/
http://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/eve-online-news/crius-release-to-be-deployed-on-july-22nd-during-extended-downtime/


Some of the patch notes are in black text and thus need highlighting to read.


Just bad formatting, people have been poked.


You may want to get them to fix the Skills section too.

  • Supply Chain Management and Scientific Networking skills have been overhauledThe Material Efficiency skill is being renamed Advanced Industry, and now reduces manufacturing time by 1% per levelThe Refining skill has been renamed Reprocessing. This skill bonus has been increased from 2% to 3% per level

    • Should be:

  • Supply Chain Management and Scientific Networking skills have been overhauled.

  • The Material Efficiency skill is being renamed Advanced Industry, and now reduces manufacturing time by 1% per level.

  • The Refining skill has been renamed Reprocessing. This skill bonus has been increased from 2% to 3% per level.



    • I'll have a look at this too.

    [quote=Sir HyperChrist][quote=CCP Greyscale][quote=Aresti]"Build times are generally rank * 300 seconds."

    The effect this appears it will have upon the T2 industry as a whole (BPO/BPC) concerns me, and I don't recall any previous discussion on it (granted, I might have missed it).

    Currently some levels of frigates/cruisers take longer to build than others. HACs vs Logistics and AFs vs Intys for example. This change removes that distinction.

    More importantly, the time to build T2 hulls from BPCs or BPOs on a whole appears to be vastly increasing due to the rank basis, while module build time appears to be vastly reduced. Focusing just on hulls here, can do another post for ammo/modules if needed. If I've made an error in the calculations somewhere let me know.

    This is what it appears the calculation would be post patch, with extraFactor being a multiplier for ammo/capital...
    CCP Greyscale
    C C P
    C C P Alliance
    #152 - 2014-07-19 13:13:52 UTC
    Throwaway Sam Atild wrote:
    CCP Greyscale wrote:


    The bottom line though is that we have attempted, hopefully with a decent degree of success, to ensure that throughput for invented items per character is roughly the same before and after, once you build in all the various bonuses available (see starbase bonuses, for example). If there's any significant mismatches post-release, let us know and we'll make adjustments!


    I'm sure you've noticed me harping about this across practically every dev post your involved with, but there are significant mismatches that I would be happy to point out right now, having had a chance to math them out and try them out for semi-realisies on SISI.

    Doing a lot of T2 module invention I'll off the cuff some numbers, and if you're interested, I'd be more than happy to work them all out in detail.

    Covert ops cloaking devices used to be built on a 5-6 day cycle from bpo to final product. They're down to around 48 hours.

    Modules are dropping from 1d15hrs cycles to 4,6,12 and so on cycles.

    Ship times are clearly extended, though its not my specialty.

    Throughput is clearly changing across the board here, and very significantly. I was under the impression that it was intentional and all part of the master plan. Its possible but unlikely I'm missing some huge variable here, but I've been pretty thorough, and run my numbers past some other quite capable inventors.

    I really hope you guys don't intend to stop here with industry changes and that we see some more significant alterations in the future. Forcing production into space is absolutely essential to making the game more interesting. With the time adjustments that we've seen, everything built is 100% safe due to war-dec mechanics. Anything with a longer cycle time just gets built in a station in one of the new unlimited slots.

    Thanks for the read!


    Let me go have another look at the numbers here, but I can say that no, we're not intending to stop here, we want to see how things shake out on TQ and make further tweaks from there.

    Aineko Macx wrote:
    Too bad CCP missed a chance to reduce complexity by making all ore variants compress to one single type and just vary either required input amount of ore or output quantity to differentiate.


    I was talking with Ytterbium about this yesterday, it's a thing we are considering.

    Sizeof Void wrote:
    CCP Greyscale wrote:
    Doug Dannger wrote:

    "We're very aware that some of you will feel that you've lost your previous advantages gained by researching blueprints for a really long time, and this is one of the areas we're preparing to focus the most on in terms of receiving feedback and making adjustments or additions to smooth the transition."

    So while yes, I over spoke when I said promise, but there was also no discussion. Once again they took the easy way out.

    There was pretty extensive discussion in the blog feedback thread, to be fair.

    Hmm... actually, there was no participation in the discussion on this topic, by any CCP dev.

    Most of the affected players were waiting for CCP devs to make a comment, rather than waste time endlessly responding to the same old forum trolls. And, just for the record, I posted several times about this particular issue and never saw any response from a CCP dev.

    If I am in error, then I apologize. Please direct me to the post, in which you, or another dev, did indeed participate in the discussion.


    Here's the posts I made relating to 10+ research (I believe they're all applicable, I'm skim-reading):
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4522597#post4522597
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4522633#post4522633
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4522740#post4522740
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4525863#post4525876
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4525876#post4525876
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4527163#post4527163
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4590046#post4590046
    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4802192#post4802192

    Creepin wrote:
    Quote:
    Old ME New ME
    1 -5%
    2 -7%
    3, 4 -8%
    5, 6, 7, 8, 9 -9%
    10 -10%

    What? Are you out of the last remnants of your freaking mind? Are you seriously telling me that you've just destroyed my time investments in getting motherships from ME6 to ME8 and titans from ME3 to ME4? That you've just degraded my ME6712 citadel torpedoes, my ME1975 drones and ME125 battleships down to the level of beggarly, lame ME10 excuses for blueprints? That's 2 years I've invested into being close to perfection you're telling me I've invested for nothing? I believe you should put a bullet between the eyes of the one who come up with this idea if only out of mercy: the poor guy is clearly tortured by his life of anencephal.

    Seriously, how hard was it to device the formulas that will carefully transfer the time invested in ME research into new system? Hard? Impossible? Then don't bloody start what you're obviously unable to do right!


    Time invested ends up making a lot of blueprints actually worse rather than merely comparatively worse, which we felt was the more problematic of the two potential outcomes.

    [quote=Sir HyperChrist]T2 frigs now build at around 150 per month. Depending on which kind T2 frig (inty, covops)
    after patch that's gonna be only 37 per month (both inside a normal station) so only 1/4th the production before the patch.

    T2 mining crystals are now all of different productionspeed: veldspar and scordite are fast with 30k units per month. Mercoxit mining crystals are slowest with only 1500 units per month (in an ammo array, remotely). After patch I come at over 9000 units built per month of all types of chrystals. For most types that will cause the markets to collapse and be dominated by the few bpo owners, but veldspar...
    CCP Greyscale
    C C P
    C C P Alliance
    #153 - 2014-07-19 13:50:05 UTC
    CCP Greyscale wrote:
    El Zylcho wrote:
    Are adjustments being made to costs to buy ships with LP so LP is essentially taxed in the same way built items are? Using LP, especially FW LP, seems like it automatically enjoys a greater purchase power for the same amount of effort because everything built (ships etc) is becoming more expensive to produce.


    I don't believe the change in value is enough for us to care deeply about, but we'll see how things settle post-patch.

    DeODokktor wrote:
    CCP Greyscale wrote:

    1) Yes.
    2) Upwards, per unit. Acolyte II now requires 2 of most things (not the T1 drone obviously)


    Yay test server up.

    Acolyte II requires 1 of most things, not 2..
    On test server that is.


    Well, huh. Lemme look into this.


    Uff OK, yeah, you're right. My spreadsheet is in a bit of a wonky state right now as I'm trying to sort it out to manage recycled properly so some of the numbers are off. It's 2 in the sheet but the sheet's wrong, it's 1 in the game and that's the correct value.
    Niko Lorenzio
    United Eve Directorate
    #154 - 2014-07-19 14:11:27 UTC
    CCP Greyscale wrote:
    Walked to work in the rain to answer a bunch of questions :P

    El Zylcho wrote:
    Are adjustments being made to costs to buy ships with LP so LP is essentially taxed in the same way built items are? Using LP, especially FW LP, seems like it automatically enjoys a greater purchase power for the same amount of effort because everything built (ships etc) is becoming more expensive to produce.


    I don't believe the change in value is enough for us to care deeply about, but we'll see how things settle post-patch.


    But you need the T1 hull to get the ship from the LP store, and you do get taxed for building the T1 ship. Unless you're getting a BPC. I believe faction ships will still take time and ISK to build, only custom skins & special edition ships are excluded right?

    P.S. I'm sure you could answer them from home, don't make us feel guilty for getting you wet P

    The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

    CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
    DeODokktor
    Dark Templars
    The Fonz Presidium
    #155 - 2014-07-19 14:36:59 UTC
    Large Sheild Extender II still requires Nocx
    Explosive Dampening Amp II still requires Isogen
    Damage Control II still requires Nocx.
    I am sure there's more out there.

    All 3 of the items I list have "Base Part" requirements.
    I haven't been through all of my blueprints, but I am sure a quick script could check this.
    Promiscuous Female
    GBS Logistics and Fives Support
    #156 - 2014-07-19 14:52:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Promiscuous Female
    okay so I thought about this a little more because it tickled my funny bone

    i am assuming the ME1975 drones are sentries because they have a perfect ME of 1787 according to chruker

    so you only spent 22 days researching your drones above what is the absolute maximum

    according to chruker the difference between an ME0 garde and a perfect garde is a whopping 1 megacyte, 900 pyerite, and 50 trit (approximately)

    this is a cost advantage of 11,537.55 isk from ME0

    now let's look at eveiph because i cannot be arsed to actually calculate ME savings manually

    if we set the ME to 500 in eveiph we can see that the total savings over perfect is a staggering 2 pyerite, or 22 isk

    so you spent 3 months researching a blueprint to save 22 isk per run

    did it just not occur to you how hilariously bad of a use of your time that was

    e: did the battleship, the savings of (e.g.) a dominix at ME10 over ME125 is 642,204.70 isk and 1y4m of research time jesus christ
    CCP Greyscale
    C C P
    C C P Alliance
    #157 - 2014-07-19 15:01:18 UTC
    Niko Lorenzio wrote:
    CCP Greyscale wrote:
    Walked to work in the rain to answer a bunch of questions :P

    El Zylcho wrote:
    Are adjustments being made to costs to buy ships with LP so LP is essentially taxed in the same way built items are? Using LP, especially FW LP, seems like it automatically enjoys a greater purchase power for the same amount of effort because everything built (ships etc) is becoming more expensive to produce.


    I don't believe the change in value is enough for us to care deeply about, but we'll see how things settle post-patch.


    But you need the T1 hull to get the ship from the LP store, and you do get taxed for building the T1 ship. Unless you're getting a BPC. I believe faction ships will still take time and ISK to build, only custom skins & special edition ships are excluded right?

    P.S. I'm sure you could answer them from home, don't make us feel guilty for getting you wet P


    Yup, faction ships still take time and money currently. Either way, I'm not expecting a low percentage of T1 cost to have a significant impact on the value of faction gear.

    (I needed spreadsheets and test servers to answer some of the questions.)

    DeODokktor wrote:
    Large Sheild Extender II still requires Nocx
    Explosive Dampening Amp II still requires Isogen
    Damage Control II still requires Nocx.
    I am sure there's more out there.

    All 3 of the items I list have "Base Part" requirements.
    I haven't been through all of my blueprints, but I am sure a quick script could check this.



    UFF. Anyone who says old industry was simple never worked with the recycle flag Evil

    It's non-trivial to detect from the base data because you need to include the materials from the T1 item on the T2 item so that they can then be subtracted again by the T1 item being "recycled" during the build. I can probably rig up a thing to check for it in the compiled data next week, but this will probably not be fixed for Tuesday.

    (This is the thing that I'm trying to rework my master spreadsheet to handle more robustly, but it's complicated by the fact that eg a Mobile Large Warp Disruptor II requires a Mobile Large Warp Disruptor I which in turn requires nine Warp Disruptor Is [iirc], so you need to add the T1 materials from the WDI to the MLWDII, which means you need to recursively check through all the relationships.)
    Valterra Craven
    #158 - 2014-07-19 15:32:59 UTC
    CCP Greyscale wrote:


    (This is the thing that I'm trying to rework my master spreadsheet to handle more robustly, but it's complicated by the fact that eg a Mobile Large Warp Disruptor II requires a Mobile Large Warp Disruptor I which in turn requires nine Warp Disruptor Is [iirc], so you need to add the T1 materials from the WDI to the MLWDII, which means you need to recursively check through all the relationships.)


    Meh, sounds like someone should try powershell. Have a master csv of items and their properties and then use powershell code to go through it making the changes you want and output a excel file that has the final product. Think of it as programming to program :)
    CCP Greyscale
    C C P
    C C P Alliance
    #159 - 2014-07-19 15:35:13 UTC
    Valterra Craven wrote:
    CCP Greyscale wrote:


    (This is the thing that I'm trying to rework my master spreadsheet to handle more robustly, but it's complicated by the fact that eg a Mobile Large Warp Disruptor II requires a Mobile Large Warp Disruptor I which in turn requires nine Warp Disruptor Is [iirc], so you need to add the T1 materials from the WDI to the MLWDII, which means you need to recursively check through all the relationships.)


    Meh, sounds like someone should try powershell. Have a master csv of items and their properties and then use powershell code to go through it making the changes you want and output a excel file that has the final product. Think of it as programming to program :)


    I'm doing something similar for input/output using a python<->excel library, but so far all the actual math is inside the sheet and I'd rather not have certain things require a separate script to be run to update them because it increases the chances of mistakes being made.
    Dinsdale Pirannha
    Pirannha Corp
    #160 - 2014-07-19 16:03:06 UTC
    CCP Greyscale wrote:
    CCP Greyscale wrote:
    El Zylcho wrote:
    Are adjustments being made to costs to buy ships with LP so LP is essentially taxed in the same way built items are? Using LP, especially FW LP, seems like it automatically enjoys a greater purchase power for the same amount of effort because everything built (ships etc) is becoming more expensive to produce.


    I don't believe the change in value is enough for us to care deeply about, but we'll see how things settle post-patch.

    DeODokktor wrote:
    CCP Greyscale wrote:

    1) Yes.
    2) Upwards, per unit. Acolyte II now requires 2 of most things (not the T1 drone obviously)


    Yay test server up.

    Acolyte II requires 1 of most things, not 2..
    On test server that is.


    Well, huh. Lemme look into this.


    Uff OK, yeah, you're right. My spreadsheet is in a bit of a wonky state right now as I'm trying to sort it out to manage recycled properly so some of the numbers are off. It's 2 in the sheet but the sheet's wrong, it's 1 in the game and that's the correct value.



    Ummm...are you kidding me?
    Yesterday you explicitly state that T2 small drones will need double their materials.
    Of course, singularity was down most of the week, and yesterday in VIP mode.
    So I , among others, actually BELIEVE you and go nuts trying to get as many T2 small drones cranked out before Tuesday.
    Now, today, you say, oops, I screwed up...oh well.

    How many other things have you stated in your dev blog will be proven to be utterly false on Tuesday and have cost people time and money?