These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Building Dreams: Introducing Engineering Complexes

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#501 - 2016-10-14 12:24:08 UTC
These comments aren't about my personal situation. I'm prefectly happy that EC's are underpowered, overvulnerable and largely unsuitable for the little guy, because I'm not that little guy. But I once was and when I was, I'd have thought that these new EC's stink. Fortunately, when I was that little guy, I had the fully functional version of the POS to support me and that was massively empowering compared to what EC's are planned to be.

Bad Bobby wrote:
My main concerns about the EC's are:

They are too expensive to fuel
Their vulnerability windows are too big
There are too many rigs

I think this makes them highly unattractive to smaller industrialists. Those players will be required to use either POS, NPC stations or a public EC/Citadel with the desired combination of services and rigs. Sadly, two of these options are "legacy" features and the remainder is renting from a landlord rather than striking out on your own. For some of the more independently minded industrialists this may be a bit stifling.

I'd either rectify those three issues, by reducing fuel consumption, reducing vulnerability windows and halving the number of rigs, or make a range of S-size personal use industrial structures that allow the small industrialist some small factories and labs of their own. I fully support the idea that the EC and the Citadel should be co-operative structures, but I also believe there should be more structures for the individual industrialist (who can still co-operate with others while using his own facility). An S-size facility could be torn down and moved easily if you relocate or wish to avoid exposure to a war dec, can have simple defence/destruction mechanics like the existing S-size structures, can have zero fuel requirements and a modest initial cost to reflect that only a maximum of 11 jobs could ever be installed in one (because that's the maximum any character can have). They would be everything an EC isn't and thus allow the EC to be what it is without excluding people from their desired industrial gameplay.
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Solis Tenebris
#502 - 2016-10-14 12:43:30 UTC
JTK Fotheringham wrote:
It's been a few days, and I've read a lot... but I still can't get my head around the fundamental game design here.

CCP invested in a mechanic to push industry away from concentrations in single systems, using the System Cost Index introduced in Crius (July 2014).
...wait a year
...wait two years
CCP invest in a (long-awaited) mechanic to replace Starbases with Citadels, with the promise of changes to Industry in Citadel (April 2016).
...wait almost 6 months
CCP introduce Engineering Complexes with a cost profile designed to reward industry concentrating in structures more valuable, arguably more vulnerable, and certainly with just as frustrating (though different) inflexibility than the Starbases they replaced.

You can see why industrialists feel there's no coherent approach to developing this area.

Upwell Consortium promised "industrialists of New Eden - big and small" a new home in the stars. For all the flashy advertising, it's just another empty corporate promise.

/JTK


Or...

for the last part

CCP introduces Engineerig Complexes to correct the imbalanced cost/benefit ratio of the POS which currently provides enormous benefit in a single structure for minimal cost relative to that benefit. Players now have choices to make other than which low index system to drop the stick which include the option to use common structures or go it alone with the corresponding risks.

There is nothing about this that forces anyone to congregate into fewer and fewer systems. All the POS owners in a given system could band together and create a single EC to provide higher bonuses, lower taxes, and not change the system index one bit.

If anything, the current system, with its cheap, easily moved, wardec avoiding and strongly beneficial structures has artificially influenced the spread of industry by not providing any real choice or consequence. By adding a wider risk/reward balance, CCP is adding enough variables into the equation to actually realize the intent of the index system.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#503 - 2016-10-14 12:54:47 UTC
Obil Que wrote:
CCP introduces Engineerig Complexes to correct the imbalanced cost/benefit ratio of the POS which currently provides enormous benefit in a single structure for minimal cost relative to that benefit.

An imbalance that they introduced in Crius. Which I think is kind of his point.

Sure this is a move to fix something that is broken, but it was broken in the previous industrial re-work and at least wasn't as broken before that. Just because they're cleaning up the **** on the floor today, doesn't make it any more disturbing that they dropped it there yesterday.

Obil Que wrote:
Players now have choices to make other than which low index system to drop the stick which include the option to use common structures or go it alone with the corresponding risks.

Once they're up to a certain level, sure. But the smaller industrialist, which includes the much talked about "new player", doesn't actually have access to all of those options without first making major choices about their path in the game that they may not be ready for at the time. The problem is that the new industrial structures are pitched somewhat high and there isn't a similar variety of choice and support for varied playstyles at the lower level.

Obil Que wrote:
There is nothing about this that forces anyone to congregate into fewer and fewer systems.

Other than typical player behaviour. This is where these changes often fall down, they leave open a bunch of options at release day, but don't have the design foresight to keep those options open long term once a player created meta is established around them.
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Solis Tenebris
#504 - 2016-10-14 13:09:06 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:

Obil Que wrote:
Players now have choices to make other than which low index system to drop the stick which include the option to use common structures or go it alone with the corresponding risks.

Once they're up to a certain level, sure. But the smaller industrialist, which includes the much talked about "new player", doesn't actually have access to all of those options without first making major choices about their path in the game that they may not be ready for at the time. The problem is that the new industrial structures are pitched somewhat high and there isn't a similar variety of choice and support for varied playstyles at the lower level.


Structures are not for "new" players. Even the cost of the current POS stick isn't something that a typical "new player" is implementing. A progression system provides goals and milestones for people to reach :

- Start building in an NPC station by finding affordable, profitable products (these DO exist, despite outcries that they do not)
- Move your industry to a public EC when you want to start taking advantage of the larger bonuses but feel you can absorb some of that risk
- Take the corporation branch and join up with other industrialists to share their private EC
- Move up the solo branch and decide to drop your own structure, possibly opening it up to others as a public or semi-public EC

And these are only really showing options in the high-sec industry use case. The middle two are not available today in most cases because of the POS system. Today you either have the money to put down your own POS (and the requirement to make your own corp to do it) or you do your work in an NPC station with a few exceptions for industrial corps that deal with the shitshow of POS security. The "new player" has distinct advantages in the EC system by having accessible structures with bonuses unavailable to them now.
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
#505 - 2016-10-14 13:22:51 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey folks, thanks for all the replies so far. I'm going through everything and I'll be making a big Q&A post with answers at some point soon.

I'm hoping for some feedback sometime in the near future...

Hopefully with a reduction to Vulnerability Timers...
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#506 - 2016-10-14 13:25:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Bad Bobby
Obil Que wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
But the smaller industrialist, which includes the much talked about "new player", doesn't actually have access to all of those options without first making major choices about their path in the game that they may not be ready for at the time. The problem is that the new industrial structures are pitched somewhat high and there isn't a similar variety of choice and support for varied playstyles at the lower level.

Structures are not for "new" players. Even the cost of the current POS stick isn't something that a typical "new player" is implementing.
So we just want to ignore the smaller industrialist then?

For new players: It's clear that these structures are not for "new" players, that's my point, there aren't a whole lot of options for new players.

Obil Que wrote:
A progression system provides goals and milestones for people to reach :

- Start building in an NPC station by finding affordable, profitable products (these DO exist, despite outcries that they do not)
- Move your industry to a public EC when you want to start taking advantage of the larger bonuses but feel you can absorb some of that risk
- Take the corporation branch and join up with other industrialists to share their private EC
- Move up the solo branch and decide to drop your own structure, possibly opening it up to others as a public or semi-public EC
A single or limited path progression system like that may be great in a game that wants to avoid detail and control the breadth of player choice in order to keep implementation costs to a minimum, I'd hate to see EVE become one of those games.

Obil Que wrote:
And these are only really showing options in the high-sec industry use case. The middle two are not available today in most cases because of the POS system.
Those options used to exist in POSes, but were removed in Crius.

Obil Que wrote:
Today you either have the money to put down your own POS (and the requirement to make your own corp to do it) or you do your work in an NPC station with a few exceptions for industrial corps that deal with the shitshow of POS security. The "new player" has distinct advantages in the EC system by having accessible structures with bonuses unavailable to them now.
And yesterday we had a lot more options, which were removed, but now they are going to be returned in a more expensive, exclusive and less flexible format.

I'm sure it's not that difficult to understand a veteran industrialist watching the direction of industry thrashing around like a drunken calf and having little confidence.
embrel
BamBam Inc.
#507 - 2016-10-14 14:31:16 UTC
A POS is something most can drop relatively quickly after joining Eve. So it was a possibility to leave a kinda physical mark in space, even for young solo players.
I believe the desire to leave kinda physical mark is quite human.
This possibility will be negated soon.
Therefore, to me, there will be less potential in Eve and not more.
I see that this might be a bit off topic, however, this is my biggest objection to the new structure system.
Lord Ra
Sicarius.
#508 - 2016-10-14 14:49:21 UTC
Love the new changes,


Regards Your Only Happy Customer Big smile
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#509 - 2016-10-14 15:10:54 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
These comments aren't about my personal situation. I'm prefectly happy that EC's are underpowered, overvulnerable and largely unsuitable for the little guy, because I'm not that little guy. But I once was and when I was, I'd have thought that these new EC's stink. Fortunately, when I was that little guy, I had the fully functional version of the POS to support me and that was massively empowering compared to what EC's are planned to be.

When you were a little guy, did you have a vision of progression? Did you know, that you will build more towers, better faction ones, closer to Jita. Maybe something a little different, but you see my point.

Now, what line of progression do they have atm? Get in the farthest corner of the galaxy, away from high index and wardecs, but still with the same small tower which provides them with infinite industrial power. Well this is what I call "stink".
Lightning Q
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#510 - 2016-10-14 15:25:25 UTC
Ellowah

While I was initially thrilled about the Complex's once I went over the numbers and rigs .... that quickly subsided.
Fuel costs are way to high to afford on a stable long term.
Not even counting the "double" ammount of fuel that will be used to run pos's & EC's during transition ...

If you want a pos equivalent you need like 4-5 large EC's just to get all the rig bonuses, which is kinda sad. (Especially since you can't anchor them next to eachother)
And I don't even wanne know howmany small ones you would need lol.
If you have a very specific market you only focus on then it's great.

But I prefer to be flexable and follow the markets in what to build, generates a more stable incomme.
And also lets you expand into new area's were you can still make calculations mistakes, every % helps.

Why not make it when you create a public industry que on an EC that the fuel cost increases
And when it's a private EC it gets reduced, generate a mission to "maintain / clean your citadel" to reduce consumption? :p
Or search for better operators who use the arrays more efficiently :p
Or create faction service modules which consume less fuel.

And there are truly way to many rigs :p

On another note while I love security in citadels But I do wonder if it's not a bit to "safe" destroying a citadel seems a lot harder then a pos used to be, maybe a bit to much
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#511 - 2016-10-14 15:29:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Skia Aumer
Bad Bobby wrote:
Obil Que wrote:
A progression system provides goals and milestones for people to reach :

- Start building in an NPC station by finding affordable, profitable products (these DO exist, despite outcries that they do not)
- Move your industry to a public EC when you want to start taking advantage of the larger bonuses but feel you can absorb some of that risk
- Take the corporation branch and join up with other industrialists to share their private EC
- Move up the solo branch and decide to drop your own structure, possibly opening it up to others as a public or semi-public EC
A single or limited path progression system like that may be great in a game that wants to avoid detail and control the breadth of player choice in order to keep implementation costs to a minimum, I'd hate to see EVE become one of those games.

Of course this is not a single progression line, what are you talking about? It's just an example.
Here's the other one.
- Start at NPC station.
- Take a loan to build EC and use that EC as collateral.
Mortgage! In my EVE! Isn't it exciting?
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#512 - 2016-10-14 15:34:40 UTC
Lightning Q wrote:
[rigs]
If you have a very specific market you only focus on then it's great.
But I prefer to be flexable and follow the markets in what to build, generates a more stable incomme.

Then sell it.
You cannot sell a POS, but you can sell an EC.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#513 - 2016-10-14 15:51:56 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
Obil Que wrote:
A progression system provides goals and milestones for people to reach :

- Start building in an NPC station by finding affordable, profitable products (these DO exist, despite outcries that they do not)
- Move your industry to a public EC when you want to start taking advantage of the larger bonuses but feel you can absorb some of that risk
- Take the corporation branch and join up with other industrialists to share their private EC
- Move up the solo branch and decide to drop your own structure, possibly opening it up to others as a public or semi-public EC
A single or limited path progression system like that may be great in a game that wants to avoid detail and control the breadth of player choice in order to keep implementation costs to a minimum, I'd hate to see EVE become one of those games.

Of course this is not a single progression line, what are you talking about? It's just an example.
Here's the other one.
- Start at NPC station.
- Take a loan to build EC and use that EC as collateral.
Mortgage! In my EVE! Isn't it exciting?

That's the exact same progression with a different funding option, an unrelated and non-novel player generated funding option at that.

It supports my point very well, but doesn't really help your case.

The whole point of EVE is that CCP hand over the tools (that's their job) and we, the players, create the fun and the content with those tools (that's our job). In this way the players often create content that is entirely outside of CCP's design intentions. Open, accessible and flexible tools, albeit often with a malformed UI and obtuse, fragmented or absent documentation is what has promoted this so far. The ECs are overly restrictive and there is no need for them to be, no-ones needs are served by them being out of the reach of the little guy or inflexible and underpowered in the hands of the veteran. High costs limit viable playstyles, high baseline defensive workload limits viable playstyles, lack of flexibility limits viable playstyles. Some of those limits are good and give us a reason to build more complicated player created systems, but some of them are simply an unjustified embuggerance.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#514 - 2016-10-14 15:53:03 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Lightning Q wrote:

If you have a very specific market you only focus on then it's great.
But I prefer to be flexable and follow the markets in what to build, generates a more stable incomme.

Then sell it.
You cannot sell a POS, but you can sell an EC.

People sell POSes all the time, both anchored and packaged, what are you talking about?
DiDDleR
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#515 - 2016-10-14 15:53:47 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Lightning Q wrote:
[rigs]
If you have a very specific market you only focus on then it's great.
But I prefer to be flexable and follow the markets in what to build, generates a more stable incomme.

Then sell it.
You cannot sell a POS, but you can sell an EC.


Really I see plenty on the market at Jita, and you can take down and repackage your existing POS if you want to sell it.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#516 - 2016-10-14 16:00:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Bad Bobby
Skia Aumer wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
These comments aren't about my personal situation. I'm prefectly happy that EC's are underpowered, overvulnerable and largely unsuitable for the little guy, because I'm not that little guy. But I once was and when I was, I'd have thought that these new EC's stink. Fortunately, when I was that little guy, I had the fully functional version of the POS to support me and that was massively empowering compared to what EC's are planned to be.

When you were a little guy, did you have a vision of progression? Did you know, that you will build more towers, better faction ones, closer to Jita. Maybe something a little different, but you see my point.

Now, what line of progression do they have atm? Get in the farthest corner of the galaxy, away from high index and wardecs, but still with the same small tower which provides them with infinite industrial power. Well this is what I call "stink".

I fully agree that the post Crius POS situation is quite disgusting, but that was my opinion when this was being discussed in the pre and post Crius feedback threads too... the one that lead to that stink you refer too. Before then, POS were actually pretty damn good for industry and people such as myself had massive networks of POSes spanning systems and sprawling across multiple regions, renting research and industry facilities to the public for a fee. My particular operation was even funded by public player investment and through a player made stock market!

Nice to see we're going to have some of that functionality back after so long, but it would also be nice if it was more inclusive and flexible.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#517 - 2016-10-14 16:05:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Skia Aumer
Bad Bobby wrote:
People sell POSes all the time, both anchored and packaged, what are you talking about?

Honest question - how?

Bad Bobby wrote:
I fully agree that the post Crius POS situation is quite disgusting

Good that we agree on that.
But ye olde days are never coming back. Either we figure out how to work with ECs or we stay in a current, disgusting, situation. I chose to move on. You?
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#518 - 2016-10-14 16:11:19 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
People sell POSes all the time, both anchored and packaged, what are you talking about?

Honest question - how?

You sell them inside the corp or use a third party to secure the deal. You should probably see more of the EVE sandbox, it's not as restrictive as you seem to think.
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine
In Tea We Trust
#519 - 2016-10-14 16:19:34 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
I fully agree that the post Crius POS situation is quite disgusting

Good that we agree on that.
But ye olde days are never coming back. Either we figure out how to work with ECs or we stay in a current, disgusting, situation. I chose to move on. You?

As I said, the current system is terrible and it needs to be changed. It has needed to be changed since it was last changed.

That doesn't mean I will jump blindly into whatever alternative CCP first give me. That doesn't mean I will not give them the feedback they need to make beneficial iterations on the system.

I'll make use of whatever CCP ends up giving me, I will adapt and overcome as always. That acceptance of reality doesn't prevent me from desiring further improvement. Given that this feature is still in development I don't see why we should have to wait years for that improvement, rather than iterating this feature to a better state now.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#520 - 2016-10-14 16:21:26 UTC
Bad Bobby wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:
Bad Bobby wrote:
People sell POSes all the time, both anchored and packaged, what are you talking about?

Honest question - how?

You sell them inside the corp or use a third party to secure the deal. You should probably see more of the EVE sandbox, it's not as restrictive as you seem to think.

Yes, but when I leave the corp - the POS will not follow me. Or should I stick to some random corp for the rest of it?