These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Reprocess all the things!

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#961 - 2014-03-21 19:24:40 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Right so we agree, that "safety'" is relative and applies solely to the pilot sitting behind the keyboard. So how is the "safety" of HS at all relative to game balance if it is ultimately as "safe" as null sec

You're the one who brought it up. I don't agree with that assertion, but it's not particularly relevant to the discussion any more.
Quote:

All that Nullsec requires over HS is time and effort in gaining and holding systems. Which is rewarded in the moons, and minerals available to pilots to retrieve. It is rewarded in the superior isk generation of Anoms, and other such sites (exploration).

So maybe it is time to drop the whole risk/reward thing, and focus on the effort/reward thing, which would require CCP to acknowledge that Sov mechanics are crap for the benefits you receive.

Strangely enough, they are improving this by giving us more efficient refines.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#962 - 2014-03-21 19:25:06 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniel Plain wrote:

this is not universally true. there are a few missions where given proper dps and noctis skills, you can make much more total ISK/hour than even blitzing any other hisec lvl4 (low and null missioning is obviously biased towards blitzing).


Wrong. In the time it takes you do all of that you could have done another 5 missions are earned a lot more in LP.

show me the spread sheet. you have a mission spread sheet, don't you?


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvCLlTV8bSxNdEVyU0VndlRMb21ieGx2b2d4eXRWeEE&usp=drive_web#gid=0

Level 3 mission info for blitzing at 50mil/hr. I belive I can improve on that isk/hr.

Level 4 blitzing will easily earn twice as much.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#963 - 2014-03-21 19:25:27 UTC
Mylea Chanlin wrote:
CCP MAKES BIG ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THE SUMMER, CONTAINING:


  • No new ships
  • No new play styles
  • No new content
  • No new reason to play the game


BUT THE INNOVATION DOESN'T STOP THERE!

Oh no. We get to take salvaging and reprocessing--a boring and thankless necessity--and make it 40% more thankless.

Not your brightest move, CCP!

I, too, judge an entire expansion on the first devblog posted about it, months before its release.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Mylea Chanlin
Royal Damsels in Distress
#964 - 2014-03-21 19:28:19 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:
Mylea Chanlin wrote:
CCP MAKES BIG ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THE SUMMER, CONTAINING:


  • No new ships
  • No new play styles
  • No new content
  • No new reason to play the game


BUT THE INNOVATION DOESN'T STOP THERE!

Oh no. We get to take salvaging and reprocessing--a boring and thankless necessity--and make it 40% more thankless.

Not your brightest move, CCP!

surprisingly enough, not everyone is simple-minded enough to get distracted with new shiny toys features.


Simple-minded enough to make a dumb rebuttal, I suppose.

I want development energies spent on enhancing the game, not endless and stupid frobnicating with the mechanics.
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#965 - 2014-03-21 19:28:31 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Daniel Plain wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniel Plain wrote:

this is not universally true. there are a few missions where given proper dps and noctis skills, you can make much more total ISK/hour than even blitzing any other hisec lvl4 (low and null missioning is obviously biased towards blitzing).


Wrong. In the time it takes you do all of that you could have done another 5 missions are earned a lot more in LP.

show me the spread sheet. you have a mission spread sheet, don't you?


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvCLlTV8bSxNdEVyU0VndlRMb21ieGx2b2d4eXRWeEE&usp=drive_web#gid=0

Level 3 mission info for blitzing at 50mil/hr. I belive I can improve on that isk/hr.

Level 4 blitzing will easily earn twice as much.

lvl3 blitzing is irrelevant for lvl4 blitzing. 100m/hr is still well under what you can get from burning and salvaging the blockade or gone berserk. which was my point from the beginning.

I should buy an Ishtar.
Mario Putzo
#966 - 2014-03-21 19:28:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Querns wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Right so we agree, that "safety'" is relative and applies solely to the pilot sitting behind the keyboard. So how is the "safety" of HS at all relative to game balance if it is ultimately as "safe" as null sec

You're the one who brought it up. I don't agree with that assertion, but it's not particularly relevant to the discussion any more.
Quote:

All that Nullsec requires over HS is time and effort in gaining and holding systems. Which is rewarded in the moons, and minerals available to pilots to retrieve. It is rewarded in the superior isk generation of Anoms, and other such sites (exploration).

So maybe it is time to drop the whole risk/reward thing, and focus on the effort/reward thing, which would require CCP to acknowledge that Sov mechanics are crap for the benefits you receive.

Strangely enough, they are improving this by giving us more efficient refines.


Right but why do they need to change the mechanics of HS as well.

Minerals in NS are not readily available in HS so there is no apparent competition in that regard. NS would provide the higher end stuff (more effort, more profit), while HS supplies the baseline stuff (less effort, less profit)

The only reason to change HS is out of some ill placed false belief that one is more safe then the other. Since we have established that HS and NS are effectively as safe as each other, then what is the reasoning behind the nerf to HS, other than pushing more people in NS for "arbitrary" reason.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#967 - 2014-03-21 19:29:53 UTC
Mylea Chanlin wrote:
CCP MAKES BIG ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THE SUMMER, CONTAINING:


  • No new ships
  • No new play styles
  • No new content
  • No new reason to play the game


BUT THE INNOVATION DOESN'T STOP THERE!

Oh no. We get to take salvaging and reprocessing--a boring and thankless necessity--and make it 40% more thankless.

Not your brightest move, CCP!


This is not the only thing coming this summer.
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#968 - 2014-03-21 19:30:02 UTC
Mylea Chanlin wrote:
Daniel Plain wrote:
Mylea Chanlin wrote:
CCP MAKES BIG ANNOUNCEMENT FOR THE SUMMER, CONTAINING:


  • No new ships
  • No new play styles
  • No new content
  • No new reason to play the game


BUT THE INNOVATION DOESN'T STOP THERE!

Oh no. We get to take salvaging and reprocessing--a boring and thankless necessity--and make it 40% more thankless.

Not your brightest move, CCP!

surprisingly enough, not everyone is simple-minded enough to get distracted with new shiny toys features.


Simple-minded enough to make a dumb rebuttal, I suppose.

I want development energies spent on enhancing the game, not endless and stupid frobnicating with the mechanics.

because improving outdated mechanics cannot ever make the game as a whole better...?

I should buy an Ishtar.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#969 - 2014-03-21 19:32:26 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:


Right but why do they need to change the mechanics of HS as well.

Minerals in NS are not readily available in HS so there is no apparent competition in that regard. NS would provide the higher end stuff, while HS supplies the baseline stuff.

The only reason to change HS is out of some ill placed false belief that one is more safe then the other. Since we have established that HS and NS are effectively as safe as each other, then what is the reasoning behind the nerf to HS?


The light nerf to reprocessing amounts from space garbage wasn't the stated focus of the nerf. Scrap metal refines were nerfed to kick module compression in the ass, a technique used by people living in all securities of system to compress minerals for transport.

The proposed maximum highsec reprocessing yield for ore and ice is congruent with today's maximum reprocessing yield. Lowsec and nullsec were simply given more efficient methods by which to reprocess.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#970 - 2014-03-21 19:32:41 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:

lvl3 blitzing is irrelevant for lvl4 blitzing. 100m/hr is still well under what you can get from burning and salvaging the blockade or gone berserk. which was my point from the beginning.


It is the exact same process. You will not be earning 100 mil/hr from the blocade because there is not 100 mil in there.
Mylea Chanlin
Royal Damsels in Distress
#971 - 2014-03-21 19:34:49 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniel Plain wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniel Plain wrote:

this is not universally true. there are a few missions where given proper dps and noctis skills, you can make much more total ISK/hour than even blitzing any other hisec lvl4 (low and null missioning is obviously biased towards blitzing).


Wrong. In the time it takes you do all of that you could have done another 5 missions are earned a lot more in LP.

show me the spread sheet. you have a mission spread sheet, don't you?


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvCLlTV8bSxNdEVyU0VndlRMb21ieGx2b2d4eXRWeEE&usp=drive_web#gid=0

Level 3 mission info for blitzing at 50mil/hr. I belive I can improve on that isk/hr.

Level 4 blitzing will easily earn twice as much.

lvl3 blitzing is irrelevant for lvl4 blitzing. 100m/hr is still well under what you can get from burning and salvaging the blockade or gone berserk. which was my point from the beginning.


Burning and salvaging the blockade doesn't get anywhere near 100m/hr, and it's the best of many far lesser missions. 30m in loot, after processing and sale, and an hour to shoot up and salvage.

Making up fake numbers to justify a bad mechanic is a little disingenuous.
Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#972 - 2014-03-21 19:36:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniel Plain
baltec1 wrote:
Daniel Plain wrote:

lvl3 blitzing is irrelevant for lvl4 blitzing. 100m/hr is still well under what you can get from burning and salvaging the blockade or gone berserk. which was my point from the beginning.


It is the exact same process. You will not be earning 100 mil/hr from the blocade because there is not 100 mil in there.

fortunately, you can finish it up to three times per hour.

edit: my personal best time for the blockade is 18:54 undock to dock. i dimly remember hearing of sub 18m times. if you need an hour to complete it, you are doing it terribly wrong.

I should buy an Ishtar.
Mylea Chanlin
Royal Damsels in Distress
#973 - 2014-03-21 19:40:19 UTC
Querns wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Right but why do they need to change the mechanics of HS as well.

Minerals in NS are not readily available in HS so there is no apparent competition in that regard. NS would provide the higher end stuff, while HS supplies the baseline stuff.

The only reason to change HS is out of some ill placed false belief that one is more safe then the other. Since we have established that HS and NS are effectively as safe as each other, then what is the reasoning behind the nerf to HS?


The light nerf to reprocessing amounts from space garbage wasn't the stated focus of the nerf. Scrap metal refines were nerfed to kick module compression in the ass, a technique used by people living in all securities of system to compress minerals for transport.

The proposed maximum highsec reprocessing yield for ore and ice is congruent with today's maximum reprocessing yield. Lowsec and nullsec were simply given more efficient methods by which to reprocess.


Light nerf?! Did you even read the article. In high sec, module reprocessing returns drop 30-40% at any skill level. That's not a light nerf. That's a heavy kick in the groin nerf.

I'm generally ok with reprocessing being better in low/null. But 40% better? That's a bad mechanic. Low and null already have better minerals, better rats, better missions, and PvP T2 salvage. We don't need to make high sec yet another 40% disadvantaged. It's overkill and unnecessary.
Mario Putzo
#974 - 2014-03-21 19:41:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Querns wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


Right but why do they need to change the mechanics of HS as well.

Minerals in NS are not readily available in HS so there is no apparent competition in that regard. NS would provide the higher end stuff, while HS supplies the baseline stuff.

The only reason to change HS is out of some ill placed false belief that one is more safe then the other. Since we have established that HS and NS are effectively as safe as each other, then what is the reasoning behind the nerf to HS?


The light nerf to reprocessing amounts from space garbage wasn't the stated focus of the nerf. Scrap metal refines were nerfed to kick module compression in the ass, a technique used by people living in all securities of system to compress minerals for transport.

The proposed maximum highsec reprocessing yield for ore and ice is congruent with today's maximum reprocessing yield. Lowsec and nullsec were simply given more efficient methods by which to reprocess.


But it is in the nerf (nearly one third of resources procurement), and ultimately it doesn't change the capacity for people to bring ore in the form of modules. All the change does is encourages people to ship to NS compress or make more trips with with modules for the same effect.

I am sure you see how this change ultimately accomplishes nothing but reduce further the capacity of LS space to generate meaningful income. You either move to HS and benefit from the changes there, or move to NS and benefit from the changes there. Mining in LS and Mission running in LS both take a hit to the overall comparable capacity, while taking all the risk same risks of NS (and HS) with none of the defensive capability that NS and HS provide.

Ultimately the cost increase and skill requirements of LS production is increasing while HS is staying relatively the same, and NS is getting even cheaper. This becomes a big detractor for a region of space that has already been shat on numerous time in the past by CCPs forever war with balancing NS and HS.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#975 - 2014-03-21 19:41:31 UTC
Mylea Chanlin wrote:

I'm generally ok with reprocessing being better in low/null. But 40% better? That's a bad mechanic. Low and null already have better minerals, better rats, better missions, and PvP T2 salvage. We don't need to make high sec yet another 40% disadvantaged. It's overkill and unnecessary.

It's not 40% better.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#976 - 2014-03-21 19:43:16 UTC
Mylea Chanlin wrote:
Querns wrote:

The light nerf to reprocessing amounts from space garbage wasn't the stated focus of the nerf. Scrap metal refines were nerfed to kick module compression in the ass, a technique used by people living in all securities of system to compress minerals for transport.

The proposed maximum highsec reprocessing yield for ore and ice is congruent with today's maximum reprocessing yield. Lowsec and nullsec were simply given more efficient methods by which to reprocess.


Light nerf?! Did you even read the article. In high sec, module reprocessing returns drop 30-40% at any skill level. That's not a light nerf. That's a heavy kick in the groin nerf.

I'm generally ok with reprocessing being better in low/null. But 40% better? That's a bad mechanic. Low and null already have better minerals, better rats, better missions, and PvP T2 salvage. We don't need to make high sec yet another 40% disadvantaged. It's overkill and unnecessary.

Relatively speaking, sure; 40% is a large amount. But, compared to the small absolute value that it's modifying, it's a rounding error. Space garbage simply isn't valuable enough to warrant being a sacred cow on this matter. Alchemy is being adjusted to be unaffected, and the other use case for scrap metal reprocessing (425mm railguns) is specifically being targeted for the nerf.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Mylea Chanlin
Royal Damsels in Distress
#977 - 2014-03-21 19:45:44 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Mylea Chanlin wrote:

I'm generally ok with reprocessing being better in low/null. But 40% better? That's a bad mechanic. Low and null already have better minerals, better rats, better missions, and PvP T2 salvage. We don't need to make high sec yet another 40% disadvantaged. It's overkill and unnecessary.

It's not 40% better.


Tell that to the developers
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#978 - 2014-03-21 19:46:10 UTC
Again, something I've posted many times before: everyone refines scrap metal exactly the same. Outpost upgrades do not increase scrap metal refining rates.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#979 - 2014-03-21 19:47:02 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Querns wrote:

The light nerf to reprocessing amounts from space garbage wasn't the stated focus of the nerf. Scrap metal refines were nerfed to kick module compression in the ass, a technique used by people living in all securities of system to compress minerals for transport.

The proposed maximum highsec reprocessing yield for ore and ice is congruent with today's maximum reprocessing yield. Lowsec and nullsec were simply given more efficient methods by which to reprocess.


But it is in the nerf (nearly one third of resources procurement), and ultimately it doesn't change the capacity for people to bring ore in the form of modules. All the change does is encourages people to ship to NS compress or make more trips with with modules for the same effect.

I am sure you see how this change ultimately accomplishes nothing but reduce further the capacity of LS space to generate meaningful income. You either move to HS and benefit from the changes there, or move to NS and benefit from the changes there. Mining in LS and Mission running in LS both take a hit to the overall comparable capacity, while taking all the risk same risks of NS (and HS) with none of the defensive capability that NS and HS provide.

Ultimately the cost increase of LS production is increasing while HS is staying relatively the same, and NS is getting even cheaper. This becomes a big detractor for a region of space that has already been shat on numerous time in the past by CCPs forever war with balancing NS and HS.

Man, you sure are bouncing around a lot. Do you have a personal stake in all of these disparate pies you keep bringing up, or are you simply trying to manufacture the one angle that will turn the tables on the conversation forever?

Nevertheless:

Lowsec has a massive, massive money maker in FW. If you want to live in lowsec, you've got the tools to keep yourself funded. Additionally, you can put up a pos anywhere in lowsec and refine better than highsec.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#980 - 2014-03-21 19:47:06 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniel Plain wrote:

lvl3 blitzing is irrelevant for lvl4 blitzing. 100m/hr is still well under what you can get from burning and salvaging the blockade or gone berserk. which was my point from the beginning.


It is the exact same process. You will not be earning 100 mil/hr from the blocade because there is not 100 mil in there.

fortunately, you can finish it up to three times per hour.

edit: my personal best time for the blockade is 18:54 undock to dock. i dimly remember hearing of sub 18m times. if you need an hour to complete it, you are doing it terribly wrong.


You do not get back to back blocades, missions are randomised so no, what you are suggesting cannot happen.