These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Invention updates in Phoebe

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
#21 - 2014-10-30 15:43:19 UTC
Querns wrote:
Lil' Brudder Too wrote:
How many times do we have to tell you....we did NOT train all these skills to level 5 for a mere 1% Build Time bonus. Trust us when we say, if we had an option to train other skills, or a single skill for 20+ days to get a mere 1% bonus....we would leave it at level 4.

Also, you do realize there SHOULD be atleast a small barrier to entry into building T2 items. Unless you want to delete all lvl 5 skills needed to use the same T2 ships/modules? Because that follows the same logic. Or please explain how i'm wrong.

Lastly (i'm just highly disappointed in the whole of that blog), why the smug attitude about how 'great for the game' your idea of multiple outcomes was...even after nearly the entire thread of responses from ppl who actually play the game told you it was bad on every level?

Considering the only use for those skills prior to Phoebe was to enable you to build certain blueprints at all, I'm failing to see why adding a time bonus to the skill at all is a bad thing.

Hell — I know someone who trained Battleship Construction 5, despite the fact that it was useless. He's now moderately enthused about his useless skill training actually doing something.

Okay, so lvl 5 wasn't exactly great, but lvl 4 was very much not useless...in as much as any ship or module skill @ lvl 5 to use certain ships/modules. It also served as a level of check system...okay, you've put in so much time...have likely researched how this thing works...you have now earned the right to build these items smartly to maximize your profit. If every newb in eve starts inventing and building all these T2 items, i guarantee you will see your margins drop significantly or go negative...because they still have the 'what i mine is free' mentality...

My main point is they are NOT worth a very long train for that little 1%. And again, as said by many-a-industrialist, this bonus will only help those that run their lines 23.5 hours every day. This will have absolutely no helpful benefit to the remaining 98% who make their builds over-night or during work hours.

New Icon SiSi feedback thread that got wholly ignored!

An example of that a good ship icon set looks like.
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#22 - 2014-10-30 15:48:38 UTC
I thought the racial decryptors added a nice cultural and sci fi variety rather than needless complexity.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#23 - 2014-10-30 15:48:55 UTC
Psyrelle wrote:
Few things I want to get out.

Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it.
And no as an inventer i would not rather have forced projection fixed than the awesome thing called multi-invention outcome. any realy inveter or industrialist don't use the ingame system for calculation anyway. multi invention would have made my day for this mini expansion/patch.

Also your changes to invention chances. awesome we don't have to use meta items but don't you bullshit us that the invention chances is roughly the same.
Now due to lack of meta items which can be gotten really cheap I go from 71,4% chance of success to 45,05%
And on ammo which i also made a lot of I go from 46,0% to 45,05% Now the ammo is not that bad tbh but when the market is already pretty unstable due to the reprocessing changes its hard to make real iskies.

0,95% less isk means I can barely have above 5isk per unit profit
with the meta lvl decrease I basicly have no profit anymore.

So I urge you to try make it work cause with these changes industry is no longer worth it.


Regarding the invention chances, that was comparing the first blog on invention with that one. It's not comparing current invention chances on TQ with that blog, which are going to drop yes.
Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#24 - 2014-10-30 16:03:33 UTC
Generally a positive change. However, I am concerned with industrial speed power creep, which started with the Advanced Industry change. Could you look at adjusting T2 build times back up to compensate for the ~14.3% reduction you're including here?
Shamus en Divalone
The Clandestine Forge
#25 - 2014-10-30 16:05:00 UTC
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
I thought the racial decryptors added a nice cultural and sci fi variety rather than needless complexity.


This ^

I think 'Minmatar' Instead of 'Cryptic Process' would suffice, it's fun to send teams out to gather from certain locations depending on need.
Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#26 - 2014-10-30 16:08:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarah Flynt
What about skill requirements for building T3 items? Are there any plans for lowering the skill requirements in a similar way as for T2 construction?

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#27 - 2014-10-30 16:11:44 UTC
Komi Toran wrote:
Generally a positive change. However, I am concerned with industrial speed power creep, which started with the Advanced Industry change. Could you look at adjusting T2 build times back up to compensate for the ~14.3% reduction you're including here?


+1

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#28 - 2014-10-30 16:18:42 UTC
Sarah Flynt wrote:
Komi Toran wrote:
Generally a positive change. However, I am concerned with industrial speed power creep, which started with the Advanced Industry change. Could you look at adjusting T2 build times back up to compensate for the ~14.3% reduction you're including here?


+1


We'll keep an eye on build times to make sure this doesn't spin out of control yes.
Kaydar ArX
Sisters of EVE - Origins
The Initiative.
#29 - 2014-10-30 16:20:27 UTC
tldr: We removed the need of decent levels in science skills to invent T2 and gave a useless TE bonus to them.

Status of the 15 pages of feedbacks following the "lighting the invention bulb": [X] Ignored.
Cristl
#30 - 2014-10-30 16:23:05 UTC
Quote:
To compensate for this change, all those skills will now give a 1% Time Efficiency bonus for the Tech II manufacturing job they are required for, which is still going to give an incentive for players to train those up, or give an edge for players that already trained them.


1% TE as adequate compensation? Shocked

For shame CCP, for shame. You insult us to be honest.
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#31 - 2014-10-30 16:26:26 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Sarah Flynt wrote:
Komi Toran wrote:
Generally a positive change. However, I am concerned with industrial speed power creep, which started with the Advanced Industry change. Could you look at adjusting T2 build times back up to compensate for the ~14.3% reduction you're including here?


+1


We'll keep an eye on build times to make sure this doesn't spin out of control yes.

Do you also keep an eye on incidents of market saturation and price collapses?

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Psyrelle
Perimeter Provisions
#32 - 2014-10-30 16:30:24 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Psyrelle wrote:
Few things I want to get out.

Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it.
And no as an inventer i would not rather have forced projection fixed than the awesome thing called multi-invention outcome. any realy inveter or industrialist don't use the ingame system for calculation anyway. multi invention would have made my day for this mini expansion/patch.

Also your changes to invention chances. awesome we don't have to use meta items but don't you bullshit us that the invention chances is roughly the same.
Now due to lack of meta items which can be gotten really cheap I go from 71,4% chance of success to 45,05%
And on ammo which i also made a lot of I go from 46,0% to 45,05% Now the ammo is not that bad tbh but when the market is already pretty unstable due to the reprocessing changes its hard to make real iskies.

0,95% less isk means I can barely have above 5isk per unit profit
with the meta lvl decrease I basicly have no profit anymore.

So I urge you to try make it work cause with these changes industry is no longer worth it.


Regarding the invention chances, that was comparing the first blog on invention with that one. It's not comparing current invention chances on TQ with that blog, which are going to drop yes.


so what are you gonna do about it?

Cause this is a significant loss.

And as mentioned before margins will only continue to decrease due to idiots(sorry for lack of better words).

Its already hard to make massive amount of isk on invention as it is.
Jo TwoTimes
Just Like Home
#33 - 2014-10-30 16:32:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Jo TwoTimes
Hello, i've made the suggestion a while back but i'll redo it, you never know:

To ease the first steps of new players, i really believe that the science skill tree should be split in 2 :
- science should only contain whats needed for T 1 manufacturing
new skill folder 'Invention' with the gazillion of various skills needed for invention/T2 manufacturing (ie the encryption process skills + all that needs science V)
That would make it much easier for new players to start training just what is needed for a bit of T1 manufacturing without having to sort through 30 + skills


otherwise, love the changes, will try it, I am skilling up for it
Gordon Gecco
Bluestar Airlines
#34 - 2014-10-30 16:34:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Gordon Gecco
Quote:
Since the Crius release in July, invention only consumes one blueprint copy run at a time. As such we are adding the possibility for Phoebe to queue those runs on a similar manner with Manufacturing runs.

We will keep a close eye on the effect of this change on the game, and we may tweak blueprint job times if the need arises.



I believe this nice change should be exactly the same as manufacturing and I would expect the market to compensate. Please don't ever think about changing this back. I really don't see it saturating the t2 market.
Vesan Terakol
Trollgrin Sadface
Dark Taboo
#35 - 2014-10-30 16:35:12 UTC
The decrease in invention probability seems like a way to limit the amount of available t2 commodities on the market. It likely is there to compensate for the influx of those as industry became a lot more desirable with the update of the interface. I see it as a positive change.
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2014-10-30 16:36:42 UTC
i must admit i'm a bit disappointed by the fact that the variable outcomes have been removed.

i't a bit sad that predictability has a higher value for you than the occasional "ohhhh, nice, i got a really good BPC for something really expensive here" moment.

oh, and a 1% te bonus is nothing but a joke. a bad one.
Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#37 - 2014-10-30 16:51:04 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
i't a bit sad that predictability has a higher value for you than the occasional "ohhhh, nice, i got a really good BPC for something really expensive here" moment.

The original idea was still predictable, only over a population rather than a single invention job. That made it needless complexity, and the only people saying "ohhhh, nice" would be those that didn't understand probability and hadn't already factored it into the equation for determining profitability. In other words, the "idiots" other people in this thread complain about.
Gordon Gecco
Bluestar Airlines
#38 - 2014-10-30 16:53:22 UTC
Ok guys. Lets just take the shot in the nuts that is the TE bonus and move on. We are men, not null sec cry babies here!
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2014-10-30 16:53:27 UTC
even if you know something cool happens every now and then, it's still nice to see it actually happen.
Nalha Saldana
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2014-10-30 16:53:36 UTC
What you need to fix with teams is sniping, the only reason that i never use them is because i never managed to get a team to my station.