These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: The Price of Change

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sienna Toth
Pulsar Phisics Shipyards
#801 - 2014-07-26 16:22:09 UTC
The new job cost system continues to be problematic. We were not really able to properly test this on SiSi because SiSi simply doesn't have user input on the scale of Tranq. Three days ago I put started jobs to capture the new costs so I could put in place some future estimates. Unfortunately job costs have already risen 9% in the 3 days. Some would say I should change systems however there is no guarantee a system I might survey will still have those costs by the time I move the supporting infrastructure.

I like the new interface except its hard to determine Invention requirements from a BPO without trying to invent the item.

I like the no slot maximum as that has allowed us to reduce infrastructure.

Team CRIUS PLEASE fix this job cost problem. I think if you change the equation from 10% of estimated cost to .1% the problem will be far less of an impact.
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#802 - 2014-07-26 17:24:49 UTC
Sienna Toth wrote:
The new job cost system continues to be problematic. We were not really able to properly test this on SiSi because SiSi simply doesn't have user input on the scale of Tranq. Three days ago I put started jobs to capture the new costs so I could put in place some future estimates. Unfortunately job costs have already risen 9% in the 3 days. Some would say I should change systems however there is no guarantee a system I might survey will still have those costs by the time I move the supporting infrastructure.

I like the new interface except its hard to determine Invention requirements from a BPO without trying to invent the item.

I like the no slot maximum as that has allowed us to reduce infrastructure.

Team CRIUS PLEASE fix this job cost problem. I think if you change the equation from 10% of estimated cost to .1% the problem will be far less of an impact.


Hodor!!

The Tears Must Flow
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#803 - 2014-07-28 13:21:04 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
Yeah, but what's the price for a capital doomsday mount? Or the t2 cap components. The trade volume is pretty close to zero.

It's something you can easily play with and cause weird things.

I think that's a bigger problem than basing the price on inaccurate end product prices. (or at least, it feels like)

That's something that will fix itself over time, component prices probably won't.


Prices should all be in the API feed, you can monitor them yourselves if you want Smile

Sienna Toth wrote:
The new job cost system continues to be problematic. We were not really able to properly test this on SiSi because SiSi simply doesn't have user input on the scale of Tranq. Three days ago I put started jobs to capture the new costs so I could put in place some future estimates. Unfortunately job costs have already risen 9% in the 3 days. Some would say I should change systems however there is no guarantee a system I might survey will still have those costs by the time I move the supporting infrastructure.

I like the new interface except its hard to determine Invention requirements from a BPO without trying to invent the item.

I like the no slot maximum as that has allowed us to reduce infrastructure.

Team CRIUS PLEASE fix this job cost problem. I think if you change the equation from 10% of estimated cost to .1% the problem will be far less of an impact.


Volatility should settle over time as a) the moving average gets a better stock of data to dampen its movements with, and b) people stop moving around and settle down in new spots.
Balder Verdandi
Wormhole Sterilization Crew
#804 - 2014-07-28 13:27:00 UTC
So what happens to the super researched BPO's we have now that we can't go beyond an ME/PE level of 10?

Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"!

POS fix dated back to 2006!
Sienna Toth
Pulsar Phisics Shipyards
#805 - 2014-07-31 00:05:30 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Gilbaron wrote:
Yeah, but what's the price for a capital doomsday mount? Or the t2 cap components. The trade volume is pretty close to zero.

It's something you can easily play with and cause weird things.

I think that's a bigger problem than basing the price on inaccurate end product prices. (or at least, it feels like)

That's something that will fix itself over time, component prices probably won't.


Prices should all be in the API feed, you can monitor them yourselves if you want Smile

Sienna Toth wrote:
The new job cost system continues to be problematic. We were not really able to properly test this on SiSi because SiSi simply doesn't have user input on the scale of Tranq. Three days ago I put started jobs to capture the new costs so I could put in place some future estimates. Unfortunately job costs have already risen 9% in the 3 days. Some would say I should change systems however there is no guarantee a system I might survey will still have those costs by the time I move the supporting infrastructure.

I like the new interface except its hard to determine Invention requirements from a BPO without trying to invent the item.

I like the no slot maximum as that has allowed us to reduce infrastructure.

Team CRIUS PLEASE fix this job cost problem. I think if you change the equation from 10% of estimated cost to .1% the problem will be far less of an impact.


Volatility should settle over time as a) the moving average gets a better stock of data to dampen its movements with, and b) people stop moving around and settle down in new spots.


GRAYSCALE ----- Do you understand how your algorithm actually works??? As I stated if I moved all my infrastructure to a new location and lets say 1% of the daily online users also moved to the same system as they are likely to do because they'll pick the cheapest systems then the number of jobs in that system will dramatically rise in that system vs global jobs and the job prices will go up. The way you've written this it will only take days to punch up to time to move costs.

BTW now that I have real metrics I "WAS" developing a product that had 500M margin. Now the costs to build are 700M. I'm not buying the goo or minerals that supported that. I hope you planned on removing 30B per month from the economy.
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#806 - 2014-07-31 17:53:33 UTC
T3 component bpos which previously did not need research to be perfect now require research to be perfect.
Some POS item bpos are the same way

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Balder Verdandi
Wormhole Sterilization Crew
#807 - 2014-08-05 13:36:38 UTC
Sadly, the indy guys messed over again and no word from CCP.



Working As Intended ™




Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"!

POS fix dated back to 2006!
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
#808 - 2014-08-22 06:18:46 UTC
Balder Verdandi wrote:
Sadly, the indy guys messed over again and no word from CCP.



Working As Intended ™






Ya, my profit rate on industry is such I'm debating dropping my alt account to cut costs. 20 invention slots can't keep 8 manufacturing slots running with a 46% invent chance.
Balder Verdandi
Wormhole Sterilization Crew
#809 - 2014-08-29 07:11:27 UTC
Ah, yes ..... the price of change.

As I'm doing some research I noticed something weird ........



I'm paying to have the research done. Cool, no problem.


I'm doing this in labs owned by the corp, anchored to a tower owned by the corp.

And the ISK that I'm being charged isn't even going to my own bloody corp????


I swear CCP ...... your heads are so far up your collective rectum someone skipped using a snorkel and went straight to using a rebreather.


Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"!

POS fix dated back to 2006!
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#810 - 2014-09-02 05:32:51 UTC
Balder Verdandi wrote:
Ah, yes ..... the price of change.

As I'm doing some research I noticed something weird ........



I'm paying to have the research done. Cool, no problem.


I'm doing this in labs owned by the corp, anchored to a tower owned by the corp.

And the ISK that I'm being charged isn't even going to my own bloody corp????


I swear CCP ...... your heads are so far up your collective rectum someone skipped using a snorkel and went straight to using a rebreather.




I believe this was stated pretty early on that the costs for installing jobs would not be going into any wallet anywhere and would be a cost sink. The idea here is to keep people from building everything in Jita or as close as possible in a POS. After all, if these costs were going to your corp, they could--in theory--redistribute those costs to you and thus negate the costs entirely. By being a pure isk sink, moving to a more out of the way system might make sense.

Reading...might want to inject that skill.
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#811 - 2014-09-02 05:34:27 UTC
Mhari Dson wrote:
Balder Verdandi wrote:
Sadly, the indy guys messed over again and no word from CCP.



Working As Intended ™






Ya, my profit rate on industry is such I'm debating dropping my alt account to cut costs. 20 invention slots can't keep 8 manufacturing slots running with a 46% invent chance.


Improve your skills, find a cheaper location in which to build, and find better markets. Roll
Balder Verdandi
Wormhole Sterilization Crew
#812 - 2014-09-02 13:21:52 UTC
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:


I believe this was stated pretty early on that the costs for installing jobs would not be going into any wallet anywhere and would be a cost sink. The idea here is to keep people from building everything in Jita or as close as possible in a POS. After all, if these costs were going to your corp, they could--in theory--redistribute those costs to you and thus negate the costs entirely. By being a pure isk sink, moving to a more out of the way system might make sense.



Nice try with trying to start a flame, but its neither helpful or becoming. Sorry.


I don't make this game my life, so I don't read all the dev posts since CCP seems hell bent on screwing things up to try and make it better, and then failing miserably.

I've seen enough profit loss that even if I built en masse, I might make 5% profit and that's the problem. I don't mine; I used to and not only does it burn you out but it's not fun for me so I buy the minerals/ores I need and go from there. Even with the market influx where stuff is increasing 50% to 150% or more, I still don't make anything because I need to research a BPO.

This is going to screw up the entire market, and I wouldn't be surprised to see PLEX going over 1b per in the near future.

Long live the failure of "Unified Inventory"!

POS fix dated back to 2006!
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#813 - 2014-09-02 14:35:20 UTC
Interestingly, over the last 7 days, Plex have dropped 25-40 million in price.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Flay Nardieu
#814 - 2014-09-02 19:34:37 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Interestingly, over the last 7 days, Plex have dropped 25-40 million in price.


Since there is/was a sale to purchase PLEX from CCP that it increased the amount on the market, the whole supply and demand thing.
Ergentii Juhar
Veria Ltd.
#815 - 2014-09-03 11:01:45 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


Update on this (which I should've posted last week, but forgot about): after a lot of further consideration and discussion, we've decided that the arguments here about certainty are stronger than I was giving them credit for, and that the downsides to input-driven pricing are sufficiently small that it is worth the (fairly straightforward) work of switching over to that model. We will therefore be pricing jobs based on the combined values of the inputs, rather than the value of the outputs. Thanks for all the feedback on this issue :)


First of all, excuse me for not reading all 40 pages on the thread before posting - too much.

I decided to check the fees for jobs. I checked on all the T2 components, all perfect ME/PE, checking with 1.000 job runs. I found that the fees vary wildly: from 1.02% to 4.58% of the materials cost.
This fluctuation is completely independent of the duration of the job. There seems to be a consistency on most types of components (e.g. reactor units have from 1.04% to 1.10%), but there are exceptions.

From what the blog says and everything I managed to read here, there should be no variation at all: fees are based on materials prices, the BP's have the same research, the station is the same, the type of product is the same (T2 component), and all the checks were made within minutes. I believe that the job fees should be the same percentage on the materials.

Why are they not? Why the component type is important?

The only reason I can think of, is that the materials cost is calculated using different prices than these used for the calculation of the fees. For example, Ferrogel valued for 25k on the materials cost (because that's its price index now), but when used for the calculation of the fees, it is valued for 21k (perhaps because that price is the average of the last month or whatever). Is this thing happening? But I don't think it could be making that much of a difference.


Finally, on the dev blog there was mentioned a multi-run discount. I can't find any sign of it, has it been abandoned?
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#816 - 2014-09-03 11:19:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Steve Ronuken
Ergentii Juhar wrote:

From what the blog says and everything I managed to read here, there should be no variation at all: fees are based on materials prices, the BP's have the same research, the station is the same, the type of product is the same (T2 component), and all the checks were made within minutes. I believe that the job fees should be the same percentage on the materials.

Why are they not? Why the component type is important?

The only reason I can think of, is that the materials cost is calculated using different prices than these used for the calculation of the fees. For example, Ferrogel valued for 25k on the materials cost (because that's its price index now), but when used for the calculation of the fees, it is valued for 21k (perhaps because that price is the average of the last month or whatever). Is this thing happening? But I don't think it could be making that much of a difference.


Finally, on the dev blog there was mentioned a multi-run discount. I can't find any sign of it, has it been abandoned?



The fee to install a job is based off the materials used to make it (at ME 0), using an 'adjusted' price (to make it harder to game, and fill in values when something isn't really traded)

Ferrogel adjusted price is currently 5,138


There's a multirun discount in that the rounding happens at the job level. So 10 runs is more likely to have a reduction in materials than 1 run. (all materials are rounded up to the next highest integer. so 1.1 becomes 2. but 11 is still 11)

There were thoughts about a discount based off how long a job has run for, but that led to oddness, and was abandoned (TE research making things more expensive per run, for example)

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Ergentii Juhar
Veria Ltd.
#817 - 2014-09-03 12:07:11 UTC
For calculating the fees on my spreadsheets, after reading the patch notes, I had decided to use one number only, a percentage of the materials cost. Ok, fine.

Then it seemed that this factor would not remain constant.
Ok, once in a while, one check on a certain item would update this factor.

Instead, I am now learning that not only each different item has a different factor, but also it is varying extremely wildly.

I don't like this money sink. Find the money from elsewhere.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#818 - 2014-09-03 21:27:51 UTC
Even after being accused of being stupid and not knowing anything and always being wrong about things I found that tiny issue that seemes to have been overlooked by the 'cost of things'.

RP (= research points)


What are those??

There are agents in EVE that do not offer 'missions' of any kind and find themselves in the R&D (Research and Development) category.

To talk to those agents, you need to train up some scince skills and have the appropiate standing to do any interaction with them.


Why are them important?? I wanna shoot stuff not stuff some useless stuff into my head !!

Those agents do various reasearch for you, if you ask them to do so. They do not stop to research for you until you tell them to.
Usually it's a one-time interaction, asking the agent to start reachsearch for you.

They give you RP per day.

You start collecing those RP and you can 'buy' datacores for them.


Why I need datacores, I still only wanna shoot stuff, go away already!!

Those datacores you collect over time are a crucial ingredient for invention (makes tech2 stuff - aaaah, now that's important, I wanna shoot stuff only with thech2 guns and ammo!!!)

That detail that has been overlooked by all that new industry fancy is that with rapid decreased time to make blueprint copies, you insanely increased the price for datacores!

Before the industry revamp, you could collect your datacores for months, then collect and have your copies ready to invent. Everything was fine until 'Crius'.

You may not have noticed that yet but datacores will run scares in the next months and the maximum amount of RP you can collect in one day is the amount you pay for 2 datacores.

Two datacores is a special snowflake case because you need to do 'tasks' for your research agent that might involve hauling stuff to lowsec and or mining.

While I am not against that EVE has much to offer to stay occupied to many years, there are things you prefer to do over others.
So if you do not perform the 'tasks' your agent asks you for your total amount of RP is the amount you need to get one datacore per day per agent (you can have up to six agents doing research for you at the same time).

So unless you plan to increase the RP pay per day, we might run into a problem very, very soon™.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever