These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Dev blog: Industry Changes for Phoebe

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#21 - 2014-10-19 00:55:21 UTC
They're not duplications. They're skill requirements for different activities on the same blueprint.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Althalus Stenory
Flying Blacksmiths
#22 - 2014-10-19 09:48:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Althalus Stenory
Steve Ronuken wrote:
They're not duplications. They're skill requirements for different activities on the same blueprint.

Nop, those lines are twice in the file and in your conversion for a single activity :

example for the first one :
Quote:
10632:
activities:
copying:
materials:
- quantity: 1
typeID: 11464
- quantity: 5
typeID: 3812
skills:
- level: 4
typeID: 11451
- level: 4
typeID: 11451
time: 1872

You see here that "copying" has twice the skill id 11451

I only put the line once in my previous post :)

edit: I wish there were a "code" tag on the forum that keep preformated text...

EsiPy - Python 2.7 / 3.3+ Swagger Client based on pyswagger for ESI
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#23 - 2014-10-19 21:50:56 UTC
Althalus Stenory wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
They're not duplications. They're skill requirements for different activities on the same blueprint.

Nop, those lines are twice in the file and in your conversion for a single activity :

example for the first one :
Quote:
10632:
activities:
copying:
materials:
- quantity: 1
typeID: 11464
- quantity: 5
typeID: 3812
skills:
- level: 4
typeID: 11451
- level: 4
typeID: 11451
time: 1872

You see here that "copying" has twice the skill id 11451

I only put the line once in my previous post :)

edit: I wish there were a "code" tag on the forum that keep preformated text...


Thanks, I'll have a look into this.

Also yeah, these forums need a code tag.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#24 - 2014-10-19 21:54:02 UTC
Althalus Stenory wrote:
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Conversions are now up.

I'm not updating the -latest symlinks, as this isn't a release SDE

https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/dump/mysql56-phoebe-0.9-106316.tbz - mysql
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/dump/phoebe-0.9-106316/ - everything else
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/dump/phoebe-0.9-106316/eve.db.bz2 - Sqlite

Postgres - public schema
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/dump/phoebe-0.9-106316/postgres-phoebe-0.9-106316.sql.bz2

postgres eve schema
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/dump/phoebe-0.9-106316/postgres-phoebe-0.9-106316-withschema.sql.bz2


I've undone the change to meaningful names for the activities (ramActivites if you want them) taking it back to numbers.
I've defaulted the consume flag to 1 for everything, so sql doesn't immediately break.

It looks like there is an issue for IndustryActivityMaterials : all materialTypeID are between 0 and 18 (and they are correct in the yaml blueprint file).
edit: it seems to be the same for
- industryActivityProbabilities with productTypeID
- industryActivityProducts with productTypeID
- industryActivitySkills with skillID

(tested for sqlite and mysql conversion)

Another question, what is the "IndustryRaces" table ? :o


The race data will no longer be required as of Phoebe. We only had that column to connect the product output to the correct decryptors, but those are being consolidated so they are not racially specific.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
CCP Nullarbor
C C P
C C P Alliance
#25 - 2014-10-19 21:58:13 UTC
probag Bear wrote:
Echoing the question(s) about Phoebe's "Adding multiple outcomes to Invention"

  • I assume the multiple outcome probabilities will be reflected in the SDE, or will happen according to some general formula somewhere, and you just haven't gotten around to actually talking about this?
  • Sorry, but I don't really see the point of the "successfulRuns" field, on its own, with multiple outcomes being added. If the quality of the successful runs is not also given, the quantity serves very little purpose.


The multiple outcomes feature is being scrapped, CCP Ytterbium will cover more on this in an upcoming dev blog. With this in mind, each invention run is then either successful or not, hence the API only returning a single count.

CCP Nullarbor // Senior Engineer // Team Game of Drones
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#26 - 2014-10-20 06:02:02 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
probag Bear wrote:
Echoing the question(s) about Phoebe's "Adding multiple outcomes to Invention"

  • I assume the multiple outcome probabilities will be reflected in the SDE, or will happen according to some general formula somewhere, and you just haven't gotten around to actually talking about this?
  • Sorry, but I don't really see the point of the "successfulRuns" field, on its own, with multiple outcomes being added. If the quality of the successful runs is not also given, the quantity serves very little purpose.


The multiple outcomes feature is being scrapped, CCP Ytterbium will cover more on this in an upcoming dev blog. With this in mind, each invention run is then either successful or not, hence the API only returning a single count.


From one perspective its good. I would have lost remainders of my sanity writing spreadsheet for variable results and trying to prepare package of mats to be purchased to produce the results :)

From the other perspective if sounded really cool

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Zifrian
The Frog Pond
Ribbit.
#27 - 2014-10-20 10:41:21 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
probag Bear wrote:
Echoing the question(s) about Phoebe's "Adding multiple outcomes to Invention"

  • I assume the multiple outcome probabilities will be reflected in the SDE, or will happen according to some general formula somewhere, and you just haven't gotten around to actually talking about this?
  • Sorry, but I don't really see the point of the "successfulRuns" field, on its own, with multiple outcomes being added. If the quality of the successful runs is not also given, the quantity serves very little purpose.


The multiple outcomes feature is being scrapped, CCP Ytterbium will cover more on this in an upcoming dev blog. With this in mind, each invention run is then either successful or not, hence the API only returning a single count.

Awesome. So happy for this decision.

Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!

Import CCP's SDE - EVE SDE Database Builder
Althalus Stenory
Flying Blacksmiths
#28 - 2014-10-20 13:25:52 UTC
oh seriously ? :(

I was waiting for this multiple outcome invention :'(

EsiPy - Python 2.7 / 3.3+ Swagger Client based on pyswagger for ESI
Suzuka A1
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#29 - 2014-10-22 01:55:01 UTC
For the love of God will you just post this stuff to the Features and Ideas forum.

First thread location:
EVE Forums » EVE Information Center » EVE Information Portal » Dev blog: Lighting the invention bulb

Second thread:
EVE Forums » EVE Technology and Research Center » EVE Technology Lab » Dev blog: Industry Changes for Phoebe

Quote from the original dev blog:
"Stay tuned for more and expect threads to appear on the “Features & Ideas Discussion” to discuss specific points mentioned in this blog with time."

This is ridiculous. I found both of these threads by accident and I'm lucky I did.

Never forget the battle of Z9PP-H  What actually happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgcUwTmHY74 Battle Report: http://www.kugutsumen.com/showthread.php?42836-They-Might-Be-Giants-The-Southwest&p=497626&viewfull=1#post497626
Suzuka A1
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#30 - 2014-10-22 01:59:03 UTC
Suzuka A1 wrote:

Still waiting for confirmation that CCP has some strategy to reimburse Data Interface BPCs for those of us who bought large amounts of them off the market...and can't possibly build all of them by Nov 4th due to the 20 hour build times/run.


You going to answer this question anytime soon because it is a legit concern and to my knowledge BPCs have never been removed from the game before.

Never forget the battle of Z9PP-H  What actually happened: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgcUwTmHY74 Battle Report: http://www.kugutsumen.com/showthread.php?42836-They-Might-Be-Giants-The-Southwest&p=497626&viewfull=1#post497626
Madeline Doshu
Royal Damsels in Distress
#31 - 2014-10-23 03:44:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Madeline Doshu
I have a question:

Now that the data interfaces are no longer used in invention--and therefore no longer listed in the blueprints.yaml--how do you determine which set of decryptors are valid for use when inventing from a particular blueprint.

Maybe I was always doing it wrong; I would determine if a blueprint required a, say, an Esoteric Data Interface, and then know that the Esoteric decryptors were valid choices for that blueprint. Is there a better way with the Phoebe data?

Thanks!
Talos Katuma
Helion Production Labs
Independent Operators Consortium
#32 - 2014-10-23 16:57:50 UTC
I think they are just going to drop the data interfaces. So the will be removed.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#33 - 2014-10-23 17:54:40 UTC
Madeline Doshu wrote:
I have a question:

Now that the data interfaces are no longer used in invention--and therefore no longer listed in the blueprints.yaml--how do you determine which set of decryptors are valid for use when inventing from a particular blueprint.

Maybe I was always doing it wrong; I would determine if a blueprint required a, say, an Esoteric Data Interface, and then know that the Esoteric decryptors were valid choices for that blueprint. Is there a better way with the Phoebe data?

Thanks!



With difficulty, I think, is the answer.

The encryption skill is the primary way to determine the race for the decryptors.

I'll probably be adding in a table to handle that.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Madeline Doshu
Royal Damsels in Distress
#34 - 2014-10-23 18:15:57 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Madeline Doshu wrote:
I have a question:

Now that the data interfaces are no longer used in invention--and therefore no longer listed in the blueprints.yaml--how do you determine which set of decryptors are valid for use when inventing from a particular blueprint.

Maybe I was always doing it wrong; I would determine if a blueprint required a, say, an Esoteric Data Interface, and then know that the Esoteric decryptors were valid choices for that blueprint. Is there a better way with the Phoebe data?

Thanks!



With difficulty, I think, is the answer.

The encryption skill is the primary way to determine the race for the decryptors.

I'll probably be adding in a table to handle that.


That would be terrific, Steve, if you would.

As an alternative, if this is possible, an attribute could be added to the blueprints.yaml providing the groupID of the set of allowed decryptors.

As yet another alternative, a new dgmAttributeType record and dgmTypeAttribute records on each blueprint providing the groupID would facilitate SQL joins nicely.

In the meantime, I'll do as you suggest and use decryptors matching the race of the associated encryption method skill.

As a follow-up question, I see a new set of "Generic" decryptors, but haven't seen any dev blogs on the subject. Are we to expect new decryptor mechanics coming up?

Cheers!
salacious necrosis
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2014-10-23 20:28:25 UTC
Are the XML API changes already up on SiSi?

Thanks!

Use EveKit ! - Tools for EVE Online 3rd party development
Ydnari
Estrale Frontiers
#36 - 2014-10-29 11:29:26 UTC
Madeline Doshu wrote:
I have a question:

Now that the data interfaces are no longer used in invention--and therefore no longer listed in the blueprints.yaml--how do you determine which set of decryptors are valid for use when inventing from a particular blueprint.

Maybe I was always doing it wrong; I would determine if a blueprint required a, say, an Esoteric Data Interface, and then know that the Esoteric decryptors were valid choices for that blueprint. Is there a better way with the Phoebe data?

Thanks!


They're removing racial decryptors.

--
Agnahr
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#37 - 2014-10-29 12:37:54 UTC
CCP, reads your original thread that you started a couple of month ago and is now 15 pages long! Why start a new one and ignoring all the feedback in your first post????

Get back to us on our feedbacks there. You've get a big bunch of frustrated people by the incoming changes and CCP lack of interest including me:

Post 1

Post 2
Aluka 7th
#38 - 2014-10-29 13:51:25 UTC
Will racial descriptors be converted and how?
If I have 10 Esoteric process and 20 Incognito process in my hangar, how will that be converted with new patch?
CCP FoxFour
C C P
C C P Alliance
#39 - 2014-10-29 14:12:48 UTC
Agnahr wrote:
CCP, reads your original thread that you started a couple of month ago and is now 15 pages long! Why start a new one and ignoring all the feedback in your first post????

Get back to us on our feedbacks there. You've get a big bunch of frustrated people by the incoming changes and CCP lack of interest including me:

Post 1

Post 2


This thread is specifically for third party developers and what they need to know.

@CCP_FoxFour // Technical Designer // Team Tech Co

Third-party developer? Check out the official developers site for dev blogs, resources, and more.
Lateralus
War Supplies Inc
#40 - 2014-10-29 15:31:16 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
probag Bear wrote:
Echoing the question(s) about Phoebe's "Adding multiple outcomes to Invention"

  • I assume the multiple outcome probabilities will be reflected in the SDE, or will happen according to some general formula somewhere, and you just haven't gotten around to actually talking about this?
  • Sorry, but I don't really see the point of the "successfulRuns" field, on its own, with multiple outcomes being added. If the quality of the successful runs is not also given, the quantity serves very little purpose.


The multiple outcomes feature is being scrapped, CCP Ytterbium will cover more on this in an upcoming dev blog. With this in mind, each invention run is then either successful or not, hence the API only returning a single count.



oh thank goodness, this would have put any spreadsheet user out of business. the complexity to build this in a spreadsheet is ridonculous.
Previous page123Next page