These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Structure fitting in the EVE: Citadel Expansion

First post
Author
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#221 - 2016-02-14 19:18:13 UTC
Querns wrote:
Albert Spear wrote:
Dear Mr CCP Ytterbium -

I ice mine roughly 50% of my playing time to keep a POS running. I have not sold Stront nor do I use Stront for anything I do. I have been ice mining in High Sec for more than 2 years.

I have roughly 20,000 units of Stront on hand. Based on your current post. I can build 100 batches of Citadel fuel and then if I ice mine for another year I can make 50 more.

I guess I will not be in the market for a Medium Citadel for the next or say....20 years, and then I will have to sell it within a year.

Sorry 200 Stront per 40 blocks of fuel, when it takes roughly 220 units of ice or about 3 hours of boost ice mining to make a single batch of fuel is {sorry about what is to come} NUTS!

Sure Citadels can be used in all types of space, but only the Null Sec folks are going to be able to sustain them.

Please reconsider this requirement. Leave the fuel blocks alone and find something else to do with Stront if you must. Making fuel is already a time consuming chore - please don't make it worse!

Your problem is you're trying to mine for a specific building purpose.

Don't do that.

Mine the most profitable thing, sell it, and buy fuel blocks.


And feed yet more profit into null where you didn't have to before...

If this is some attempt to make null sec more attractive to hisec players it won't work. This will also have a higher impact on WH players as fuel for running modules will become prohibitive.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#222 - 2016-02-14 20:12:52 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

And feed yet more profit into null where you didn't have to before...

If this is some attempt to make null sec more attractive to hisec players it won't work. This will also have a higher impact on WH players as fuel for running modules will become prohibitive.

Principles are often times pretty expensive.

Also, it's not like the barrier to entry to nullsec is very high. You can, for example, join Goonswarm Federation's Section 8 program, either via corporation or individually, and gain access to Pure Blind ice. We don't tax mining at all.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

RainReaper
RRN Industries
#223 - 2016-02-14 20:25:02 UTC  |  Edited by: RainReaper
Querns wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

And feed yet more profit into null where you didn't have to before...

If this is some attempt to make null sec more attractive to hisec players it won't work. This will also have a higher impact on WH players as fuel for running modules will become prohibitive.

Principles are often times pretty expensive.

Also, it's not like the barrier to entry to nullsec is very high. You can, for example, join Goonswarm Federation's Section 8 program, either via corporation or individually, and gain access to Pure Blind ice. We don't tax mining at all.


and become a slave to the goons? id rather quit eve than be FORCED to join anything i dont feel like joining myself
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#224 - 2016-02-14 22:35:43 UTC
Querns wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

And feed yet more profit into null where you didn't have to before...

If this is some attempt to make null sec more attractive to hisec players it won't work. This will also have a higher impact on WH players as fuel for running modules will become prohibitive.

Principles are often times pretty expensive.

Also, it's not like the barrier to entry to nullsec is very high. You can, for example, join Goonswarm Federation's Section 8 program, either via corporation or individually, and gain access to Pure Blind ice. We don't tax mining at all.


Why should anyone give a single cent to CCP to be forced to play in a certain way just because CCP messed up some numbers?
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#225 - 2016-02-14 23:51:25 UTC
Querns wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

And feed yet more profit into null where you didn't have to before...

If this is some attempt to make null sec more attractive to hisec players it won't work. This will also have a higher impact on WH players as fuel for running modules will become prohibitive.

Principles are often times pretty expensive.

Also, it's not like the barrier to entry to nullsec is very high. You can, for example, join Goonswarm Federation's Section 8 program, either via corporation or individually, and gain access to Pure Blind ice. We don't tax mining at all.


There needs to be balance across all areas. Why as a WH player would I have any interest in joining any nullsec alliance? I'm not interested in that gameplay, but this change will damage my gameplay by feeding yours. That is a stupid idea, pushinv people towards only having one viable area to play.

Hisec players will not move to null, WH players have no interest either. All areas and playstyles need to be viably served by the game for it to remain healthy.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#226 - 2016-02-15 01:03:18 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Querns wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

And feed yet more profit into null where you didn't have to before...

If this is some attempt to make null sec more attractive to hisec players it won't work. This will also have a higher impact on WH players as fuel for running modules will become prohibitive.

Principles are often times pretty expensive.

Also, it's not like the barrier to entry to nullsec is very high. You can, for example, join Goonswarm Federation's Section 8 program, either via corporation or individually, and gain access to Pure Blind ice. We don't tax mining at all.


There needs to be balance across all areas. Why as a WH player would I have any interest in joining any nullsec alliance? I'm not interested in that gameplay, but this change will damage my gameplay by feeding yours. That is a stupid idea, pushinv people towards only having one viable area to play.

Hisec players will not move to null, WH players have no interest either. All areas and playstyles need to be viably served by the game for it to remain healthy.

If you're a wormholer, you have access to ice via shattered wormholes. No nullsec necessary; just pop on in and grub up some Krystallos.

Also, strontium clathrates being more widely accessible in nullsec doesn't "push people towards nullsec." It just means that the best place to get them is nullsec. If you (and by this I mean the plural "you," the people who are reading my post) are mining stuff specifically because you need it to build fuel blocks, just stop. Mine or produce the most profitable thing instead, then sell it and purchase fuel blocks.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#227 - 2016-02-15 01:04:13 UTC
Indahmawar Fazmarai wrote:
Querns wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

And feed yet more profit into null where you didn't have to before...

If this is some attempt to make null sec more attractive to hisec players it won't work. This will also have a higher impact on WH players as fuel for running modules will become prohibitive.

Principles are often times pretty expensive.

Also, it's not like the barrier to entry to nullsec is very high. You can, for example, join Goonswarm Federation's Section 8 program, either via corporation or individually, and gain access to Pure Blind ice. We don't tax mining at all.


Why should anyone give a single cent to CCP to be forced to play in a certain way just because CCP messed up some numbers?

Adding strontium clathrate requirements to fuel blocks doens't force anyone to play a certain way. The only reason you feel that way is because you think that you need to produce fuel blocks from 100% self-sourced materials. This is an idiotic sentiment.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#228 - 2016-02-15 01:07:19 UTC
RainReaper wrote:
Querns wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

And feed yet more profit into null where you didn't have to before...

If this is some attempt to make null sec more attractive to hisec players it won't work. This will also have a higher impact on WH players as fuel for running modules will become prohibitive.

Principles are often times pretty expensive.

Also, it's not like the barrier to entry to nullsec is very high. You can, for example, join Goonswarm Federation's Section 8 program, either via corporation or individually, and gain access to Pure Blind ice. We don't tax mining at all.


and become a slave to the goons? id rather quit eve than be FORCED to join anything i dont feel like joining myself

The Section 8 rental program (and, hell, being in Goonswarm Federation in general) is not a slave relationship. You're free to leave any time, and the only thing we ask is you don't shoot blues, don't sell supercapital ships to anyone outside the coalition, and obey the ratting/mining/exploration rights that apply to you. Section 8 renters even have access to our comms (both jabber and mumble) and are free to, but absolutely not required to, join our fleets.

If the idea of wearing the Goonswarm Federation ticker is still appalling to you, fine -- there are other rental programs out there. Additionally, shattered wormholes contain nullsec-grade ice. A third option is to claim some of your own sov; there's quite a bit of it laying fallow.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#229 - 2016-02-15 03:36:12 UTC
Querns wrote:
Adding strontium clathrate requirements to fuel blocks doens't force anyone to play a certain way. The only reason you feel that way is because you think that you need to produce fuel blocks from 100% self-sourced materials. This is an idiotic sentiment.

It's probably "cheaper" if they mined it themselves, but apparently not so since they feel annoyed about it

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#230 - 2016-02-15 08:21:29 UTC
Alexander121 Schipor wrote:
Hey all

Few questions:

1. What will happen with existing BPOs for Control Towers or POS Modules. Will they be changed citadel BPOs and modules, respectively? Or will be reimbursed and taken out of the game? Or will remain in everybody's hangars as historical collectibles?

2. Will that be faction citadels? What will happen with existing faction towers BPCs still in game? Previous questions apply.

3. Will that be faction citadel modules? Will the existing faction POS modules BPC taken out of the game or will be changed to new corresponding modules. Previous questions apply.

4. What will happen with inactive towers (some with lots of modules) spread all over the empire? Will be taken out from space and moved in their respective owners hangars and reimbursed? If not, will cease to exist after intermediary period ends? Will be transformed in citadels on their existing locations?

Fly safe

Alex.

Nothing for now it's to early... ask it maby after a year again.
They will be slowly phased out
At certain point thay will first remove all BPOs and possibility of production all stuff for old POSes
Active players will probably start taking down there old towers to a point when only the inactive remain.
And so on... but thats how i see it

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#231 - 2016-02-15 09:58:53 UTC
A'Tolkar wrote:
CCP: If you are going to seed Light Fighters and Support Fighters skill books in the February release in preparation for the Citadels spring expansion, would it also not make sense to have also seeded the BPOs for the following:


  1. Structure Advertisement Nexus
  2. Structure Telescope Lens
  3. Structure Acceleration Coils


Honestly I think this has slipped through the cracks, because in the DevBlog (Building your Citadel....) a December release was being considered for the BPOs. Now we're in February.


Structure skills and the component changes are listed to be introduced for March. Disregard our previous reply, we will also have the fuel block changes in March to see how consumption evolves before Citadel release so we can quickly iterate on it should we need to.
Oxide Ammar
#232 - 2016-02-15 10:02:38 UTC
Can someone explain to me why Citadels became one pack to go structure for marketing, researching and advertisement and may be drilling platform (?) while the original idea was to have every one of these in separate structure. Did I miss something ?

Lady Areola Fappington:  Solo PVP isn't dead!  You just need to make sure you have your booster, remote rep, cyno, and emergency Falcon alts logged in and ready before you do any solo PVPing.

Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#233 - 2016-02-15 10:14:49 UTC
Oxide Ammar wrote:
Can someone explain to me why Citadels became one pack to go structure for marketing, researching and advertisement and may be drilling platform (?) while the original idea was to have every one of these in separate structure. Did I miss something ?


Not as far as I know...

The Citadel is supposed to be the 'Base' - hence having the majoring on defence - but therefore also Market, Clones, etc. However, it will also be able to fit some of the other modules that are, otherwise, intended mainly for other, later, structures.

If you have only a single structure in a system it will most likely be a Citadel. Therefore it is only reasonable that you can compress at it, for example; but also refine (but not as well as in a Drilling Platform, perhaps, just like a Minmatar Outpost would be better than the others for this); and, ditto, for even manufacture (Assembly Arrays née Amarr Outposts); and then Research/Labs, etc

Don't soil your panties, you guys made a good point, we'll look at the numbers again. - CCP Ytterbium

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#234 - 2016-02-15 10:39:56 UTC
Querns wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Querns wrote:
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:

And feed yet more profit into null where you didn't have to before...

If this is some attempt to make null sec more attractive to hisec players it won't work. This will also have a higher impact on WH players as fuel for running modules will become prohibitive.

Principles are often times pretty expensive.

Also, it's not like the barrier to entry to nullsec is very high. You can, for example, join Goonswarm Federation's Section 8 program, either via corporation or individually, and gain access to Pure Blind ice. We don't tax mining at all.


There needs to be balance across all areas. Why as a WH player would I have any interest in joining any nullsec alliance? I'm not interested in that gameplay, but this change will damage my gameplay by feeding yours. That is a stupid idea, pushinv people towards only having one viable area to play.

Hisec players will not move to null, WH players have no interest either. All areas and playstyles need to be viably served by the game for it to remain healthy.

If you're a wormholer, you have access to ice via shattered wormholes. No nullsec necessary; just pop on in and grub up some Krystallos.

Also, strontium clathrates being more widely accessible in nullsec doesn't "push people towards nullsec." It just means that the best place to get them is nullsec. If you (and by this I mean the plural "you," the people who are reading my post) are mining stuff specifically because you need it to build fuel blocks, just stop. Mine or produce the most profitable thing instead, then sell it and purchase fuel blocks.


My point still stands that this will push more isk into nullsec from all other areas of space. Nullsec will be the only area of space where it will be possible to be self sufficient for fuel too. Both of these things will serve to push players towards nullsec with its politics etc rather than the decreasingly profitable areas of space. This is a bad idea in my mind as I believe there needs to be a reasonable balance between all areas of space and this will skew things further in nullsec's favour.

Nice subtle recruitment advert in that post a few back by the way :D
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#235 - 2016-02-15 11:41:31 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
My point still stands that this will push more isk into nullsec from all other areas of space. Nullsec will be the only area of space where it will be possible to be self sufficient for fuel too. Both of these things will serve to push players towards nullsec with its politics etc rather than the decreasingly profitable areas of space. This is a bad idea in my mind as I believe there needs to be a reasonable balance between all areas of space and this will skew things further in nullsec's favour.

Nice subtle recruitment advert in that post a few back by the way :D

Frankly, this is not a bad thing. These "decreasingly profitable areas of space" you mention are home to things like capital escalations, L5 missions, burner blitzing, highsec incursions, and FW, all of which are ludicrously more profitable than nullsec. (Okay, you can technically blitz burners in nullsec too, but not the kind of nullsec that you have to own to exploit properly.) Nullsec needs a shot in the arm, especially with the death of the basal line activity of carrier ratting on the horizon.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Scotsman Howard
S0utherN Comfort
#236 - 2016-02-15 13:56:03 UTC
Querns wrote:

Frankly, this is not a bad thing. These "decreasingly profitable areas of space" you mention are home to things like capital escalations, L5 missions, burner blitzing, highsec incursions, and FW, all of which are ludicrously more profitable than nullsec. (Okay, you can technically blitz burners in nullsec too, but not the kind of nullsec that you have to own to exploit properly.) Nullsec needs a shot in the arm, especially with the death of the basal line activity of carrier ratting on the horizon.


Just food for thought here, but:

- Capital Escalations may be severaly hit depending on how the dread gun changes affect the ability to run sleeper sites. If the low angle guns do not do enough DPS, the capital sized guns do not sound like they will be able to hit anything smaller than a cap.

Carrier Ratting (and L5 missions to a small extent) - We do not know how this will really affect ratting. It could be the new squadrons are better at taking down rats than now. While the changes will eliminate sentry drone ratting for carriers, it is quiet possible carrier ratting becomes safe since it appears squadrons can go anywhere on grid.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#237 - 2016-02-15 14:10:41 UTC
Scotsman Howard wrote:

Carrier Ratting (and L5 missions to a small extent) - We do not know how this will really affect ratting. It could be the new squadrons are better at taking down rats than now. While the changes will eliminate sentry drone ratting for carriers, it is quiet possible carrier ratting becomes safe since it appears squadrons can go anywhere on grid.

This is not at all how carrier ratting works. With no heavy drones, there is no carrier ratting. FAX will be able to field them (to the best of our knowledge) but with five max drones and no drone damage bonus, you'd be daft to do so.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Edward Olmops
Gunboat Commando
#238 - 2016-02-15 15:50:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Edward Olmops
I have another question about Citadels:

In a previous blog "Building your citadel..." there were some tables regarding the material composition of the new Citadels.
I am stuck there.

"Structure hull composition (by raw materials)"
That one does not fit with the component bill of materials.

Example:
the chart says "a Large citadel hull will contain a total of 452 Broadcast Nodes".
But the bill of materials for the hull lists 40 Station Market Networks which - according to the first table - need 15 Broadcas Nodes each!
That's 40*15=600 Broadcast Nodes from the market networks alone. Definitely more than 452.

I checked a few more and got totally different numbers (~3700 vs ~4900 P4 things total for a large hull, that's a significant difference).


Am I missing something?
Someone please clarify.
Jinrai Tremaine
Cheese It Inc
#239 - 2016-02-15 16:09:56 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Structure skills and the component changes are listed to be introduced for March. Disregard our previous reply, we will also have the fuel block changes in March to see how consumption evolves before Citadel release so we can quickly iterate on it should we need to.


Hi CCP Ytterbium, I'm hoping you'll be willing to go into a bit more detail on the fuel block changes. I've already posted a google sheet with my own analysis (which I'll repost: here) but the highlights are these:

First off, this is going to completely gut the ability for hisec to produce fuelblocks - with perfect skills/implant and a POS array, each hisec anomaly only produces about 1,900 Stront. Even with a maxed out Keepstar citadel, that only goes up to 2,170. That's enough for a grand total of nearly 11 runs of fuel blocks, per anomaly. Present day production caps at 436 runs per anomaly, so that's a drop of over 97% production.

Second, it doesn't exactly do good things to nullsec production either - the maximum fuel block runs per anomaly will drop from over 3000 to under 350 for truesec above -0.5 or under 800 for truesec below -0.5. That's a reduction of more than 88% for 0.0 to -0.5 or more than 78% for -0.5 and lower.

Third, it's going to gut the value of most types of ice, especially the only varieties available in hisec. The only way to increase ice production is to completely mine out anomalies, causing them to respawn after 4 hours. That means that all the production for isotopes, heavy water and liquid ozone is going to continue as it was before this change, just that 90% of it will be useless because there won't be enough Stront to turn it into fuel. Over-production will flood the market making prices for everything except Stront and Fuel Blocks themselves plummet. Hisec ice mining will drop from a max of 30-40 mil ISK/hr to maybe 3-4mil, and that's assuming that fuel blocks quadruple in value. I don't know what nullsec will cap out at, but they already find it hard to effectively utilize their ice because it pays less than alternatives like ore mining or ratting.

Fourth, the price of fuel blocks is going to rise dramatically - most fuel ingredients were produced in hisec, which will no longer be possible, and most of Null isn't interested in large-scale ice mining unless the price rises above ore mining or ratting. That will only happen if the value of ice products rises, which only happens if the price of fuel blocks rises. Which it will do, because until nullsec does go all-in on ice mining there's going to be a distinct lack of supply for fuel blocks. I'm honestly not even sure if 100% utilization of null ice would allow it to produce enough fuel to meet present day demand for moon mining/reaction/manufacturing POSes, let alone increased demand from Citadel construction/operation.

All of which brings me to this: The stated reasoning for this change is simply to preserve existing demand for Strontium in an era where it's no longer being consumed by reinforced POSes, not to turn it into Technetium 2.0 or completely re-shuffle the economics of ice production. Given that, are all of these follow-on effects of specifically going for 200 Stront/40 Fuel Blocks intended consequences?
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#240 - 2016-02-15 16:18:25 UTC
Jinrai Tremaine wrote:

I'm honestly not even sure if 100% utilization of null ice would allow it to produce enough fuel to meet present day demand


Here's the main point where this line of reasoning breaks down. You're assuming that present-day demand will be maintained. An increase in the build requirements and cost of fuel blocks will cause demand to go down. Folks won't soldier on with their current POS inventory when prices go up; they'll scuttle POS instead.

There's no extinction-level scenario here.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.