These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Introducing Upwell Refineries

First post First post First post
Author
RainReaper
Bras-Tek Industries
Nefatari Union
#341 - 2017-03-23 23:00:49 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
Rowells wrote:
I'm too scared to read it. Plz tell me everything is gonna be ok. PLEASE TELL ME ITS OK.


Just pointing out ...

[img]http://content.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/71988/1/UpwellMoonmining_550.jpg[/img]

...oh...OHHHH!!! USG ISHIMURA BABY #necromorph-infestation #stomp-everything
Sky Marshal
Core Industry.
Blades of Grass
#342 - 2017-03-23 23:07:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Sky Marshal
Querns wrote:
zluq zabaa wrote:

First, as I've shown you and you fail to find any counter-argument: Moon mining is not passive.

Today's moon mining is extremely passive. You do a thing once a month. Putting up buy orders and sell orders is not strenuous.

I really wonder how you make it work for a month, because even with a Gallente tower, I don't manage to get this number. Depending of the reaction, it can go between 11 days to a month (if you are happy with *Carbide reactions)... But it will be inefficient because it means more towers for each reaction, so more fuel and so less profit.

And as you are in a big alliance, you can afford to fill the import silos fully. A small alliance or an individual would take too much risk to do that, fill more than a week of raw products could be really dangerous because any attack would mean a big amount of ISK lost.

With a standard Caldari duo, you get more money because less fuel. But you need to go back each 4 days to retrieve the final reaction, as the silos can't store more than that. And if you don't want to take too much risks, one week of raws maximum.

So it is not so passive that you claim. It is passive for goons (and other big alliances).

Rowells wrote:
zluq zabaa wrote:
Moon mining is not passive.

So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts?

If we follow this logic, market orders are passive income. CCP should nerf them.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#343 - 2017-03-23 23:14:05 UTC
Sky Marshal wrote:
Querns wrote:
zluq zabaa wrote:

First, as I've shown you and you fail to find any counter-argument: Moon mining is not passive.

Today's moon mining is extremely passive. You do a thing once a month. Putting up buy orders and sell orders is not strenuous.

I really wonder how you make it work for a month, because even with a Gallente tower, I don't manage to get this number. Depending of the reaction, it can go between 11 days to a month (if you are happy with *Carbide reactions)... But it will be inefficient because it means more towers for each reaction, so more fuel and so less profit.

And as you are in a big alliance, you can afford to fill the import silos fully. A small alliance or an individual would take too much risk to do that, fill more than a week of raw products could be really dangerous because any attack would mean a big amount of ISK lost.

With a standard Caldari duo, you get more money because less fuel. But you need to go back each 4 days to retrieve the final reaction, as the silos can't store more than that. And if you don't want to take too much risks, one week of raws maximum.

So it is not so passive that you claim. It is passive for goons (and other big alliances).

Rowells wrote:
zluq zabaa wrote:
Moon mining is not passive.

So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts?

If we follow this logic, market orders are passive income. CCP should nerf them.


Reactions are not the same thing as moon mining.

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

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#344 - 2017-03-23 23:23:57 UTC
Obsidian Blacke wrote:

The rocks don't belong to their corp. You can't own a rock....man.

And nowhere have I said that they 'own' the rocks.
The problem is without people going suspect they take a standings penalty for shooting someone to protect something they made.
Because at the end of the day the asteroids for moon mining are actually player made. They put up a structure, keep it fueled & defended in order to get the field.

So they should be able to defend it without being penalised with standing losses in low sec for shooting ships.
All the suspect status does is eliminate the standing penalty, well, and stop people fleeing into high sec and suddenly becoming immune 2 seconds later.
RainReaper
Bras-Tek Industries
Nefatari Union
#345 - 2017-03-23 23:27:06 UTC
...Hmmm after reading the dev blog. I have to say that I like the fact that you are making moon mining active mining with spawnable asteroids.

HOWEVER!

As far as I could see this structure... is prety much WORTHLESS in highsec and wormhole space other than it having... Slightly better refining when it's using refining rigs?

Unless it get some kind of use other than refining in high/WH space I dont think ANYONE is gonna use them there.

Which makes me IMMENSLY sad cause the drilling platform was the structure I looked forward to the most with its... Enriched material harvesting gameplay??? Sadly highsec wont be seing ANY of that gameplay... If only it was possible to have it spawn (Rare) ores in areas like highsec/WH space... Guess not... Gonna have to pass on this one...
ISD Max Trix
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#346 - 2017-03-23 23:30:02 UTC
Quote:
32. Rumor mongering is prohibited.

Rumor threads and posts which are based off no actual solid information and are designed to either troll or annoy other users will be locked and removed. These kinds of threads and posts are detrimental to the wellbeing and spirit of the EVE Online Community, and can create undue panic among forum users, as well as adding to the workload of our moderators.


Removed a post and those quoting it for the above reason.

If you have any Reasonable belief a CSM, ISD, GM, and or a DEV is abusing their position, please file a support ticket Game Play support -> Rules and Policies -> Game Masters and ISD or you can email security directly.

ISD Max Trix

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

I do not respond to EVE mails about forum moderation.

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#347 - 2017-03-23 23:30:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Querns
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Obsidian Blacke wrote:

The rocks don't belong to their corp. You can't own a rock....man.

And nowhere have I said that they 'own' the rocks.
The problem is without people going suspect they take a standings penalty for shooting someone to protect something they made.
Because at the end of the day the asteroids for moon mining are actually player made. They put up a structure, keep it fueled & defended in order to get the field.

So they should be able to defend it without being penalised with standing losses in low sec for shooting ships.
All the suspect status does is eliminate the standing penalty, well, and stop people fleeing into high sec and suddenly becoming immune 2 seconds later.


You know, you finally had an idea that I agree with. I think that CCP should allow lowsec refinery havers to shoot thieves without a security status penalty. Keying it to the ACL works great.

I fear that it won't happen, though; it's a tall order, technically speaking.

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

Hilti Enaka
Assisted Homicide
#348 - 2017-03-24 00:14:22 UTC
Slept on it read more and still a no for me. This is the gayest change ever to Eve. How anyone can be happy at needing to mine is beyond me. I personally manage reaction towers and i don't think this change is going to make the game exciting if anything it just made a dull activity even duller apart from a cool GIF showing a piece of moon being tractor beemed out of a planet. I mean WTF is that really the best Fozzie and the devs can come up with?
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis
LowSechnaya Sholupen
#349 - 2017-03-24 00:18:46 UTC
Rowells wrote:
zluq zabaa wrote:
Moon mining is not passive.

So when you warp away or log off for the night, the moon harvester turns off? Income generation halts?


So would you say taking a dump is active or passive? You press really hard and then relax and let gravity work for you... passive?
Once you hit and release the flush and then the water and suction will do the rest... passive?

What about AFK Mining, AFK Ratting?

If you give me - in my R16 example - 200M for warping a few systems, getting fuel, warping back, fueling pos, waiting 10 minutes, taking goo, hauling goo to market, selling goo. Is it less passive then in your eyes if the Goo would be created once a month in 10 minutes when I am actually there?

There are things that require more or less activity, different kinds of activity, but they all do. There is no passive income. If in your personal view hauling, selling and caring about infrastructure is less active than flying a ship to (x,y,z) in space and start your auto-targeting something, well it might just be that you judge to your own preferences.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#350 - 2017-03-24 00:21:46 UTC
zluq zabaa wrote:

There is no passive income.

Today's moon miners work while you're logged out. It's passive income.

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

Sky Marshal
Core Industry.
Blades of Grass
#351 - 2017-03-24 00:39:33 UTC
Querns wrote:
Reactions are not the same thing as moon mining.

Oups sorry you are right, I thought I read reactions, my bad. Last time I check forums this late...



In an another note, I don't understand why the devblog mentions that some ice products will be required for reactions in the future. If it is really to compensate for the lower global fuel consumption, why not simply make the refinery modules use a big amount of fuel per hour ? If it remains like this, this requirement can help to reduce the impact on the price of ice products, but not for PI products who will go down.
zluq zabaa
Inhumanum Legionis
LowSechnaya Sholupen
#352 - 2017-03-24 00:44:27 UTC
Querns wrote:
zluq zabaa wrote:

There is no passive income.

Today's moon miners work while you're logged out. It's passive income.


If you qoute me be fair enough to quote my entire text in which I explain why it is not passive.

Again: If you shoot a rat and it does not die immediately while you press your button, but you have to wait for your guns to cycle a few times - in your logic that would be passive income. Same for market orders, as someone else said: you would consider them passive income as well. As soon as you need to do something in order to get something, you are not passive.

But I understand that you neither can or want to follow up on that logic, because you just repeat the very same thing over and over again without being able to counter argue. You've made your point often enough, you're not interested in discussion. Please stop spamming, thanks.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#353 - 2017-03-24 00:48:22 UTC
zluq zabaa wrote:
Querns wrote:
zluq zabaa wrote:

There is no passive income.

Today's moon miners work while you're logged out. It's passive income.


If you qoute me be fair enough to quote my entire text in which I explain why it is not passive.

Again: If you shoot a rat and it does not die immediately while you press your button, but you have to wait for your guns to cycle a few times - in your logic that would be passive income. Same for market orders, as someone else said: you would consider them passive income as well. As soon as you need to do something in order to get something, you are not passive.

But I understand that you neither can or want to follow up on that logic, because you just repeat the very same thing over and over again without being able to counter argue. You've made your point often enough, you're not interested in discussion. Please stop spamming, thanks.


You're splitting hairs for no gain. Moon mining is passive income. It just is.

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

Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#354 - 2017-03-24 00:49:16 UTC
zluq zabaa wrote:
Querns wrote:
zluq zabaa wrote:

There is no passive income.

Today's moon miners work while you're logged out. It's passive income.


If you qoute me be fair enough to quote my entire text in which I explain why it is not passive.

Again: If you shoot a rat and it does not die immediately while you press your button, but you have to wait for your guns to cycle a few times - in your logic that would be passive income. Same for market orders, as someone else said: you would consider them passive income as well. As soon as you need to do something in order to get something, you are not passive.

But I understand that you neither can or want to follow up on that logic, because you just repeat the very same thing over and over again without being able to counter argue. You've made your point often enough, you're not interested in discussion. Please stop spamming, thanks.


If I shoot a rat and it does not die and then I log off, it will not die alter. Your moon mining will still gather resources until it is full even if you get in a coma for a full week and can't log back in.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#355 - 2017-03-24 00:49:45 UTC
Sky Marshal wrote:
Querns wrote:
Reactions are not the same thing as moon mining.

In an another note, I don't understand why the devblog mentions that some ice products will be required for reactions in the future. If it is really to compensate for the lower global fuel consumption, why not simply make the refinery modules use a big amount of fuel per hour ? If it remains like this, this requirement can help to reduce the impact on the price of ice products, but not for PI products who will go down.


A single refinery will be able to host an arbitrarily large number of reaction RAM jobs for a static fuel cost. If there isn't a small amount of ice cost in a reaction, ice will slide further down the toilet as the massive usage from reaction POS evaporates.

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

Leo Augustus
Rolex Classic
#356 - 2017-03-24 01:11:44 UTC


A single refinery will be able to host an arbitrarily large number of reaction RAM jobs for a static fuel cost. If there isn't a small amount of ice cost in a reaction, ice will slide further down the toilet as the massive usage from reaction POS evaporates.[/quote]


That's what I'm not getting.. Why not just limit the refineries to 1-3 reactions depending on fit, rigs, etc very much like small medium and large POS's are now

and require them to be the only one anchored in vicinity to a moon (blank or harvestable) with similar fuel requirements.

That would at least keep the reaction market largely as is, which I've really not heard anyone complaining about. It also might prevent massive distruption to t2 industry.

I surrender on physically mining the moon goo. I don't agree, but I surrender.

Call me CCP, we can shake on it
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#357 - 2017-03-24 01:24:30 UTC
Leo Augustus wrote:

That's what I'm not getting.. Why not just limit the refineries to 1-3 reactions depending on fit, rigs, etc very much like small medium and large POS's are now

and require them to be the only one anchored in vicinity to a moon (blank or harvestable) with similar fuel requirements.

That would at least keep the reaction market largely as is, which I've really not heard anyone complaining about. It also might prevent massive distruption to t2 industry.

I surrender on physically mining the moon goo. I don't agree, but I surrender.

Call me CCP, we can shake on it


Refineries are significantly more expensive than POS. Do you really want to be on the hook for a structure several times the cost of a POS, that need to be rigged to be able to do things with any efficacy, for every reaction you want to do?

Including ice in the reaction blueprint maintains the ice use without requiring a hideous amount of outlay (and the majority of that outlay being non-recoverable.) It also adds a PLEX cost to reactions in the form of the PLEX needed to keep reaction alts alive. Today's reactor farms can be serviced by two accounts for a (theoretically) arbitrarily large farm. (Effort limits and system moon count notwithstanding.)

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

Brigadine Ferathine
506 Irregulars
#358 - 2017-03-24 01:38:18 UTC
Querns wrote:
Leo Augustus wrote:

That's what I'm not getting.. Why not just limit the refineries to 1-3 reactions depending on fit, rigs, etc very much like small medium and large POS's are now

and require them to be the only one anchored in vicinity to a moon (blank or harvestable) with similar fuel requirements.

That would at least keep the reaction market largely as is, which I've really not heard anyone complaining about. It also might prevent massive distruption to t2 industry.

I surrender on physically mining the moon goo. I don't agree, but I surrender.

Call me CCP, we can shake on it


Refineries are significantly more expensive than POS. Do you really want to be on the hook for a structure several times the cost of a POS, that need to be rigged to be able to do things with any efficacy, for every reaction you want to do?

Including ice in the reaction blueprint maintains the ice use without requiring a hideous amount of outlay (and the majority of that outlay being non-recoverable.) It also adds a PLEX cost to reactions in the form of the PLEX needed to keep reaction alts alive. Today's reactor farms can be serviced by two accounts for a (theoretically) arbitrarily large farm. (Effort limits and system moon count notwithstanding.)

Where does the plex get inserted into the refinery? I am confused.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#359 - 2017-03-24 01:39:40 UTC
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
Querns wrote:
Leo Augustus wrote:

That's what I'm not getting.. Why not just limit the refineries to 1-3 reactions depending on fit, rigs, etc very much like small medium and large POS's are now

and require them to be the only one anchored in vicinity to a moon (blank or harvestable) with similar fuel requirements.

That would at least keep the reaction market largely as is, which I've really not heard anyone complaining about. It also might prevent massive distruption to t2 industry.

I surrender on physically mining the moon goo. I don't agree, but I surrender.

Call me CCP, we can shake on it


Refineries are significantly more expensive than POS. Do you really want to be on the hook for a structure several times the cost of a POS, that need to be rigged to be able to do things with any efficacy, for every reaction you want to do?

Including ice in the reaction blueprint maintains the ice use without requiring a hideous amount of outlay (and the majority of that outlay being non-recoverable.) It also adds a PLEX cost to reactions in the form of the PLEX needed to keep reaction alts alive. Today's reactor farms can be serviced by two accounts for a (theoretically) arbitrarily large farm. (Effort limits and system moon count notwithstanding.)

Where does the plex get inserted into the refinery? I am confused.

It doesn't go into the refinery, it goes into the subscriptions of the alts you use to start reaction industry jobs.

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

Lugues Slive
Diamond Light Industries
#360 - 2017-03-24 01:43:50 UTC
This design is fairly similar to the idea I had for the Drilling Rig when it was first mentioned.

My idea was to have a structure that was not linked to a moon, but would capture dwarf planets from beyond the solar system it is linked to. It would still take days to draw the dwarf planet to the structure, and it would still be broken down over time into mine-able asteroids. The resulting asteroids would contain ore/ice/moon goo that would normally be found in that systems security range, with the possibility of better.

If the product was closer to what I was thinking, then this could be used in WH and HS, it would just create asteroids of ore/ice in HS and ore and maybe ice/gas in WH.

It could introduce some interesting issues in HS where the miner density is greater and there is no easy way to defend your ore.