These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Terminal Insanity
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#461 - 2017-03-25 19:31:14 UTC
mkint wrote:
CCP has made it crystal clear that small groups are no longer welcome in EVE.

not really. citadels are a massive benefit to small groups. Small WH groups for example no longer need to risk having their stuff stolen in shared POS facilities. And the citadels cost zero fuel to provide basic docking/storage capabilities. That right there is a huge buff to small group activities.

EVE has always been an MMO so if youre complaining you cant do everything large groups can, you are correct, you are playing the wrong game. Try Elderscrolls or something singleplayer. But this game has never hurt small groups.

"War declarations are never officially considered griefing and are not a bannable offense, and it has been repeatedly stated by the developers that the possibility for non-consensual PvP is an intended feature." - CCP

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#462 - 2017-03-25 19:42:23 UTC
Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:

Q: Will mining the new moon ores contribute to the industry index and system activity defense multiplier in sov nullsec?
A: Yup

Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced?
A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.

Q: Is there a plan to deal with multiple refineries being spammed on a moon and a race to online the service module when the previous structure dies?
A: We have a plan for dealing with this that involves a first choice and a fallback choice depending on technical limitations. Once we have a better estimate of the code limitations we'll open this up to feedback.

Q: When the new reprocessing bonuses of refineries are introduced, will the refineries give better reprocessing yields than anything available today or will old refining rates get nerfed?
A: We haven't decided on exact number yet, but there's a good chance that it will be a little bit of both.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

SIEGE RED
The Darwin Foundation
#463 - 2017-03-25 20:25:40 UTC
I still kinda want to know if we can blow up the chunk "as is". There's got to be some room for things like sabotage, hit & run, interference, etc. Cry

There really ought to be points or moments of vulnerability independant of structures and their state. If a small gang has to deal with the structure mechanisms to cause problems, that's kinda upping the ante beyond that level. Sure, said small gang could engage miners, but you know how that works - target denial is protocol. After that you get n+1.

If it isnt violent, can I at least hack something? Either via roles abuse, or externally with ship+fitting+hack mechanism? This kind of mechanism seems very complicated to me, from all the math for orbital mechanics to all the gear required to control the process - got to be some way to throw a spanner in the works Cry
Rutane
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#464 - 2017-03-25 21:24:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Rutane
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:

Q: Will mining the new moon ores contribute to the industry index and system activity defense multiplier in sov nullsec?
A: Yup
.....



I wish you would also consider a randomly spawn in Low- Nullsec and even WH Space of let's call them "Micro Moon belts" that would be scanable similar like a e.g. gasclouds.

Advantages:
-Very small amounts of moon material for the flavor of the game without the existance of controlled moons -think of them as super rare wandering asteroids composition according to the System Sec Status as always.
-CCP can introduce that system in WH Space too without touching effectivly the moons there yet.
-New and single players would experience mining moon mats as well and could harvest them, similar as the Gasmining experience ocationally, wenn scanned successfully.

Its over all good to reduce passive income, it just needs a balance for smaller entities corps-alliances that they not left behind even further with the upcoming changes compared to supercap fielding once (alliances) to defend these moon-material incomes and structures (upwell as well as HUMAN power structure) needed. POS action was mostly one man action - now you force it into multipeople. Thats why my idea was indroduce scanable microbelts too.
Vampire Nocturnus
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#465 - 2017-03-25 22:16:57 UTC
Q: Will the distribution of minerals stay as they presently are or will you be able to pick the type of minerals based on the time it takes to tractor the rock. Such as, these moons give all gas, these ones give all R8 etc.
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#466 - 2017-03-25 22:37:45 UTC
SIEGE RED wrote:
Querns wrote:

The idea that we'd follow moon goo like this is fantasy. We'd just stay put and wait for the moongoo to come back, if your vignette was made real.

Moongoo just isn't that important to income any more.


Nah, you wouldn't if CCP ever were to do it properly.

Nah. Moving sucks, and moongoo is too unimportant.

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

ll Kuray ll
Assisted Homicide
#467 - 2017-03-26 00:54:23 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:

Q: Will mining the new moon ores contribute to the industry index and system activity defense multiplier in sov nullsec?
A: Yup

Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced?
A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.

Q: Is there a plan to deal with multiple refineries being spammed on a moon and a race to online the service module when the previous structure dies?
A: We have a plan for dealing with this that involves a first choice and a fallback choice depending on technical limitations. Once we have a better estimate of the code limitations we'll open this up to feedback.

Q: When the new reprocessing bonuses of refineries are introduced, will the refineries give better reprocessing yields than anything available today or will old refining rates get nerfed?
A: We haven't decided on exact number yet, but there's a good chance that it will be a little bit of both.


Didn't see you answer the question about, have you replaced a relatively dull part of the game with an even duller part of the game?
Yup

Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#468 - 2017-03-26 01:44:06 UTC
ll Kuray ll wrote:
Didn't see you answer the question about, have you replaced a relatively dull part of the game with an even duller part of the game?
Yup



I mean, at least now you'll be able to participate in the T2 game, rather than having your masters do it all off of your backs.

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

ll Kuray ll
Assisted Homicide
#469 - 2017-03-26 03:06:33 UTC
Querns wrote:
ll Kuray ll wrote:
Didn't see you answer the question about, have you replaced a relatively dull part of the game with an even duller part of the game?
Yup



I mean, at least now you'll be able to participate in the T2 game, rather than having your masters do it all off of your backs.


Clever boy you can read my current employment.

Elithiel en Gravonere
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#470 - 2017-03-26 11:33:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Elithiel en Gravonere
I have a question on booster production in particular. Previously, the best way to be involved in Booster production was via wormhole space. You open wormholes to the various nullsec gas constellations or regions and gas huff. It is very much within the Explorer characters' skill set to huff gas and so booster production and T3 production tends to be close on the extraction end as it requires the same skill set.

Will these refineries be used in:

1. Booster production
2. T3 production

So far, from what I've read, Refineries will NOT be available in wormhole space (despite the fact that currently, pos's are).

How are we supposed to work gas clouds and turn them into T3 materials and/or booster gas clouds and turn those into drug manufacturing in wormhole space (after pulling it back out from nullsec) if this is being denied to us to use these structures?
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#471 - 2017-03-26 12:19:07 UTC
Elithiel en Gravonere wrote:
I have a question on booster production in particular. Previously, the best way to be involved in Booster production was via wormhole space. You open wormholes to the various nullsec gas constellations or regions and gas huff. It is very much within the Explorer characters' skill set to huff gas and so booster production and T3 production tends to be close on the extraction end as it requires the same skill set.

Will these refineries be used in:

1. Booster production
2. T3 production

So far, from what I've read, Refineries will NOT be available in wormhole space (despite the fact that currently, pos's are).

How are we supposed to work gas clouds and turn them into T3 materials and/or booster gas clouds and turn those into drug manufacturing in wormhole space (after pulling it back out from nullsec) if this is being denied to us to use these structures?


They'll be available in WH space, and you'll be able to do reprocessing and reactions in them as normal.

The only feature that won't be available in WH space is the bit that mines moons.

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

Eternus8lux8lucis
Duckzer Mining Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
#472 - 2017-03-26 12:24:04 UTC
Rainus Max wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hi again folks. Thanks as always for participating in the thread.
Let's do a bit of a Q&A to answer some of the questions we've been seeing come up repeatedly.

Q: What will happen to Siphons in the new system?
A: We currently plan to phase out siphons since they don't really fit with the new system (there will be much more direct ways to steal moongoo). Siphons were a solid attempt at achieving a worthy goal, but for a number of reasons that particular implementation was doomed to extremely niche status. We think that overall direct spaceship interaction will be a more fun way of engaging in guerilla attacks against moon mining infrastructure.



Could they not be used as a personal moon mining array, bringing up say one asteroid instead of an entire field?

When deployed by any moon mining rig when the asteroid field is deployed they simply spoof the mining ledger making it impossible to tell that anyone is actively mining, stealing or who it is. Another possibility is that it simply just hides any characters names from the ledger along with the times/dates of infractions but not the amounts harvested.

Would allow for them to still be useful in ninja operations much like a cyno inhibitor or scan inhibitor and not simply removed from game.




@OP/Thread I like the no new skills or lasers for the beginning. Any thought to new skills or crystals needs to be rethought in the first 6 months to a year after to ensure that adequate time and player data has been collected. As this will cause a massive restructuring for all T2 and allowing the most influx of miners/mining in the beginning I think is the most prudent starting off. Using deep cores is a definite idea for crystals and then allowing ordinary to mine simply at reduced rates making 3 tiers. Regular miners, T1 deep core and T2 deep core. I also agree it should be the 5 types; gas, R8, R16, R32 and R64 for crystals if implemented.

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.

Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
#473 - 2017-03-26 13:08:59 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:

Q: Will mining the new moon ores contribute to the industry index and system activity defense multiplier in sov nullsec?
A: Yup

Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced?
A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.

Q: Is there a plan to deal with multiple refineries being spammed on a moon and a race to online the service module when the previous structure dies?
A: We have a plan for dealing with this that involves a first choice and a fallback choice depending on technical limitations. Once we have a better estimate of the code limitations we'll open this up to feedback.

Q: When the new reprocessing bonuses of refineries are introduced, will the refineries give better reprocessing yields than anything available today or will old refining rates get nerfed?
A: We haven't decided on exact number yet, but there's a good chance that it will be a little bit of both.


Can you relay to the Art Department that a 20km for the Medium and a 30km for the Large would be perfect sizes...

I'm also going to assume more info and possible models will be revealed at Fanfest?
Soleil Fournier
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#474 - 2017-03-26 13:20:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Soleil Fournier
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced?
A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.


Strongly urge you to reconsider. The game desperately needs content. Pausing on1st reinforcement job will generate tons of content. 2nd reinforcement will not.

Go with the content, it'll be well worth making this module behave differently than the others. You can always revert it back later.
Eternus8lux8lucis
Duckzer Mining Corporation
RAZOR Alliance
#475 - 2017-03-26 14:21:14 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey again everyone. Got another round of Q&A ready to go for you today:



Q: What will happen to the moon chunk progress when the structure is reinforced?
A: This is definitely subject to change as needed, but the current plan is that this service module will work much like other service modules in reinforcement situations. That would mean the first reinforce wouldn't impact the progress of the extraction but that a 2nd reinforce would offline the service module and either pause the chunk or cause it to slowly descend back towards the surface of the moon. Uninstalling the service module or destroying the refinery would cause the moon chunk to disintegrate without forming a minable belt.





As an addendum to this point. How long will the asteroid field last once popped? Atm current belts are permanent, anoms and such are 4 day cycles. Will these have a despawn rate if not mined out or simply last and therefore clog up the moon until mined out? Will destruction of the refinery reset the belt as well or cause a despawn timer to commence to gain a new harvestable chunk on a delay?

As it stands from destruction to new goo cycle would be 7 days for the RF cycles, 24 hours to anchor + any despawn timer, and one week for a new moon pull.

Have you heard anything I've said?

You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?

That's right.

Had to end sometime.

Aeon Veritas
Black OP - Mining and Research
UNITATO SQUAD
#476 - 2017-03-26 14:43:38 UTC
I have a few thoughts about the distribution of the moon goo per moon and the start of the fracking process.
Please have for the whole proposal the planetary mode overview in mind, I think it would be great if this could be reused.

First about the distribution of moon goo per moon:
The moons should be grouped like the planets are (read as ice moons, barren moons and lava moons) and those groups have, like the planets, each a set of recouces which can be found on the moon.
And just like the planets each moon gets a individual layout of the richness of the recouces which can be found on it.
At this point it could be possible to implement the standard, 5% and 10% ore layout depending on how rich the recource depot of the moon is.
As example, I would suggest, if the recource depot bar is on the lower side (50% or less) the moon can only spawn the standard ore, if the bar is between 50% and 75% the moon spawns standard and 5% ore of the recource and a rich depot (above 75%) also spawns the 10% ore.
And like at planets a hotspot can deplete and after some time respawn.

Now to the start of the fracking process:
In order to use already existing mechanics in the process, it should start with a survey probe scan of the moon.
The scan generates a unique token in the cargo of the scanning ship which is needed and consumed by the refinery in order to access a "view in planet mode" like overview of the moon (view in moon mode? P ).
In this overview the scan resuls of the survey probe can be seen, with the hotspots of the recources.
Further the fracking area can be chosen there, much like setting an extractor in the planet mode.
As already announced, the duration of the fracking process is variable.
A longer cycle means a bigger chunk, which results in a bigger area which could then include multiply hotspots if placed correctly.
And befor the fracking process is started it would be good to have a percentage distribution for the recources given, which can be found in the belt.
Each fracking process starts with a scan, the scan results used to start the process can't be older than a week.

I think this would allow for some min/maxing with shorter cycle times for smaller areas which then could be only a hotspot, or longer cycle times for bigger areas to get a recource diverse belt.
Also, since you don't just choose one recource to harvest like at PI, overlapping hotspots could be a thing...
Knitram Relik
Atomic Amish
#477 - 2017-03-26 15:15:12 UTC
Here's my 1/50 of a dollar.

Reactions should be able to be done in Hi-Sec. This won't increase the amount of raw moon goo mined but it would give an opportunity to set up Hi-sec reaction farms. Maybe offer reaction bonuses similar to refining bonuses to Lo-Sec and Null to give an incentive to react in those areas but give the players a choice.

Also, I know this will NEVER happen, but it would be fun to set up a mining platform near a asteroid belt and just **** that belt every day. Could create some good conflict if miners get sick of their "home system" being taken over by corp structures. Never happen, but fun to think about.

"The problem with quotes on the internet is that it's really hard to verify their authenticity." - Abraham Lincoln

Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#478 - 2017-03-26 17:33:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabriel Karade
I'm not sure opening up the limits to 'per character' basis is the best move. The neat thing about reactions today, is the depth of planning and complexity you can chose to go to, not simply a case of smashing in N+1 alts.

Also still not sure how the flow of 'crap' materials (R8's, Gases) into the reaction chain is going to be maintained. Presuming the moon distribution is unchanged, are enough people going to want to mine these sorts of moons if there's an R64 or R32's nearby?

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Pestilen Ratte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#479 - 2017-03-26 18:51:49 UTC
It is worth thinking about the foreseeable economic consequences of this proposal.

What do we know?

We know that the same tech II input materials are going to require significantly more player effort. So the price will rise for these inputs, as players make choices about how to spend their available time.

NOT EVERYONE HAS MORE TIME TO GIVE TO CCP. Important point, hence the caps. I think this point escapes many CCP directors, but it is a fundamental fact of the real world outside CCP.

So, given the same amount of player time spent mining, moon goo will increase in price. Thewrefore all tech II things will increase in price.

What else do we know?

We know that tech II ships and modules compete with navy and faction counterparts. we also know that the tech II line wont be getting any buffs to reflect their increased price with increased value. Therefore the choice for the consumer will be bigly moved towards the relative value of navy and faction ships.

Navy and faction ships are supplied in the same way, so their input costs stay the same. Their capabilities are not nerfed. Their value for money skyrockets, relative to the tech II ships.

And then what happens?

It is an interesting fact of the former USSR, that great planned economy, that it was never illegal to purchase imported cigars from Cuba or fine coffee from bolivia. You couldnt buy these luxuries in the shops of moscow during the soviet era, but they were never banned.

You couldn't buy them in Moscow, a vast city, because nobody was willing to pay party members the two months salary of bribes that it cost to get a small packet of coffee and ten cigars.

The cost was so great, and the value so relatively small, that the market simply collapsed. There became no market at all, for simple luxuries, in the glorious planned economy.

If CCP do not begin to understand that their customers have choice in the market, and that they cannot impose their plans upon the player base, they run a very real risk of watching as all the industrialists simple stop logging on, and go to invest their time in a more vibrant choice of entertainment.

This change effectively destroys the value, the value for money, of a popular line of ships and modules. It offers nothing to replace what has been made less attractive.

CCP staff look at the numbers and talk about price, as if price and value are the same thing.

The price of coffee and cigars was huge in Moscow in 1988. The market value was about zero.

You will not grow the eve economy by forcing people with choice to adhere to your simplistic little plans. People will simply leave.
Marcus Tedric
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#480 - 2017-03-26 20:53:02 UTC
Pestilen Ratte wrote:
........................... People will simply leave.


Only when there is a viable, genuinely competing, alternative.

EVE is the only deeply absorbing MMORPG that I have ever found that was worth playing seriously.

I have played it when I had limited time to play and I play it now when I have a lot more time to play.

EVE has a place for casual game-play and it has a place for someone who plays it for 'real' - but more casual play, just like Alpha-play, comes with restrictions because of the ability of the near-simulation to cater for both ends of the spectrum.

And therefore it probably does have to be accepted that, if EVE/CCP are to remain true to their design, then the loner, the casual and the small will indeed have to accept limitations on what they can do.

I hope EVE remains for many years - but it will continue to tread a reasonably fine line between being what it is, a niche game that is like no other, but does remain commercially viable; and a game that appeals more to the mass market, but will then still die when it gets old and the bored and impatient move on.

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