These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 better Worlds

First post First post First post
Author
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1821 - 2014-04-28 02:15:49 UTC
Flay Nardieu wrote:
Could someone correct me if I'm wrong, but aside from the mining frigate all ORE ship BPO's originate at ORE stations out in low/null and only available in the high-sec market if someone brings them there.


Yes.

Quote:
Also the biggest ship that can be built in High-sec POS I know for sure is the Orca, I suspect you can build Freighters either Jump or standard at the very least in a station. (I'll admit building Freighters is outside my interest so haven't vest much time on possibility of high-sec fabrication) Even if the anchoring restrictions are lifted there won't be any notable increase in there production or research. Especially if the BP has to be at the POS, it takes around 2 months to increase 1 ME or Copy a 1 run BPC, and roughly 7days to build (of course with better skills it would be less... but not much). The cost to do it at a station would be astronomical.


I really am amazed at how fearful some HS industry types are. Its amazing you even undock. Seriously what is the risk of having the BPO in the POS? A war dec? You have 24 hours to get out there and get it safe.

Yeah, you could be ganked doing that, but geez, undock a few alts and it isn't like somebody is going to bubble the station. A couple of insta docking book marks on the station and you should be fine. Play smarter, not like a wuss.

Quote:
Granted I don't see every small or medium size corp even wanting to build Orcas regularly or even at all especially with BPO's it would be too much isk to tie up in a specific single (or grouped) asset. This is one of the common big cases where risk assessment would limit it to significantly large corporations to have a standing defense to provide the BPC market which smaller corps usually are the main consumers before some venture into the investment to produce their own BPC's for sale fueling competition.


I'm pretty sure you can build a freighter or even a JF in a station at the moment. You really are trying to get your panites in a knot, but some research on what you can and can't do in station might be a good idea. Unless the proposed changes that ships like a freighter must be built in an x-large ship assembly array is part of the changes you are getting worked up about not much.
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1822 - 2014-04-28 02:26:02 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:

Yeah, competition is so awful isn't it.

Oh wait, it usually increases output, lowers prices (and in RL often increases employment).

Roll

Obviously you are all about what is good for the EVE economy and not our own personal wallet.

Competition would involve equal material costs. Because of the nearly 20% refining advantage Null has, that is equivalent to a mineral discount for building in Null, meaning it's not competition, it's blatant advantage.

Null has spent years screaming that a 2% disadvantage at max skills means they can't compete with highsec, now that it's on the other foot but ten times larger it's fair. That clearly says who's eye is actually on the personal wallet.


It wasn't just the 2% advantage that HS had. The ubiquity of slots and stations, even in a single system. The safety for things like a well set up POS. Close proximity to major trade hubs (i.e. HS transportation costs and logistics are stupid easy and safe if you know what you are doing).

And null always had the POS fuel advantage that nullified the mining advantage (the differential between running a large POS in HS vs. NS is at least 100 million isk.

None of this even changes really. You'll still have stations (for which you wont have to pay sov bills), CONCORD, close proximity to trade hubs, and so forth. Now null will have an advantage in refining...big whooop. What are they going to do take over the ship building industries? GMAFB
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#1823 - 2014-04-28 02:54:19 UTC
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
I really am amazed at how fearful some HS industry types are. Its amazing you even undock. Seriously what is the risk of having the BPO in the POS? A war dec? You have 24 hours to get out there and get it safe.

It has nothing to do with fear.

The problem is that, if you cancel a job in progress, you get nothing and end up wasting time/resources. If an ME job was running for the past two weeks, with 2 days left, and you need to cancel it because of a wardec, you lose two weeks worth of effort & fuel. And, if you were doing a manufacturing job, you lose the materials, too.

This is not efficient, esp. since it is likely that every high-sec POS with a couple of labs attached will now become a wardec target, in hopes of popping a BPO-filled pinata.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1824 - 2014-04-28 03:06:07 UTC
Do bpos drop if they're in research? Components don't drop from in-build manufacturing jobs, so I suspect bpos will not either.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#1825 - 2014-04-28 03:08:28 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Do bpos drop if they're in research? Components don't drop from in-build manufacturing jobs, so I suspect bpos will not either.

Good question. But, components are consumed by the jobs, even if cancelled, whereas the BPOs are not.
Flay Nardieu
#1826 - 2014-04-28 03:26:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Flay Nardieu
Hmm... Generalizations and assumptions weaken the merit of an argument.

A degree of risk adversion is logical, sane, and prudent. To what degree varies person to person and group to group, but any risk that is without appropriate reward lacks enough merit to justify itself. Much in the same vein locations that are more "free" have lower expectations of security due the associated benefit of that freedom.

I form my arguments in line with neutrality to location not centered on my own play style, particularly in this thread.
The argument against removing remote from station POS work stems from how I perceive the mechanics involved. As I've stated before I view blueprints much more akin to DRM items. In that regard an actual interaction with the physical item need not be required. The blueprint original or copy is as described a licensed set of instructs and methodologies. Research improves the methodologies hence making the instruction commands more efficient in either time or waste. Manufacturing as well need not directly need the physical interaction with the data set and instructions just a method of getting the constructs to the apparatus implementing them. Even if we go with the supposition that BPC's decay physically due to consumption of a licensed run it still need not physical interaction at the apparatus level.

Arguments I've made against lifting the restriction on anchoring starbases in high-sec is reflection of basic territorial security concerns. Just as sovereign player territories can dictate who and what can be in their systems it is reasonable and balanced to expect NPC space to act in much the same manner. Groups wanting to use the privileged space of null, low or even high must comply with respect with the sovereign of that territory then to the power bloc groups operating inside the sovereigns territory. It is a fair, logical, and universally applicable premise.

Another of my argument has been against taxes, charges or fees on any player owned structure without clearly defined and applicable reason. The ability of of a NPC corp to scale its facilities with subsequent additional costs need not nor should be forced upon starbase facilities. Additionally player outposts should be able to elect to implement that feature or not. If the owner has chosen to use said ability, the reason for the cost and where it goes and how should be defined.

All in all, a well rounded unbiased set of arguments with no hidden agenda.

In postscript I would like to apologize particularly for the very specific and uncommon terms used especially the to individuals who speak english as a second language. The reason was to reduce ambiguity, I do not feel that I am any better or worse than another nor wish to be seen as an elitist.
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1827 - 2014-04-28 03:58:12 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
I really am amazed at how fearful some HS industry types are. Its amazing you even undock. Seriously what is the risk of having the BPO in the POS? A war dec? You have 24 hours to get out there and get it safe.

It has nothing to do with fear.

The problem is that, if you cancel a job in progress, you get nothing and end up wasting time/resources. If an ME job was running for the past two weeks, with 2 days left, and you need to cancel it because of a wardec, you lose two weeks worth of effort & fuel. And, if you were doing a manufacturing job, you lose the materials, too.

This is not efficient, esp. since it is likely that every high-sec POS with a couple of labs attached will now become a wardec target, in hopes of popping a BPO-filled pinata.


Jesus, do you understand the concept of sunk costs?

FFS....
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#1828 - 2014-04-28 05:02:55 UTC
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
Jesus, do you understand the concept of sunk costs?

FFS....

Probably far better than you do.

But, please, rather than throw out insults, feel free to explain your position more clearly, so that everyone else can understand how this applies to POS-based research and manufacturing in EVE, when under perpetual threat of a wardec.
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1829 - 2014-04-28 05:20:58 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
Jesus, do you understand the concept of sunk costs?

FFS....

Probably far better than you do.

But, please, rather than throw out insults, feel free to explain your position more clearly, so that everyone else can understand how this applies to POS-based research and manufacturing in EVE, when under perpetual threat of a wardec.


Once you start a job, the costs are sunk...i.e. they are unrecoverable.

If you are letting those costs still influence your behavior then you are being irrational. Once costs are sunk they should no longer have any impact on your decisions.

So, forgive, but it seems you don't know anything about sunk costs.

And going forward you don't have to use a POS...for anything. You are assuming that using a station is going to be more expensive than using a POS.
Flay Nardieu
#1830 - 2014-04-28 06:39:17 UTC
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:


Once you start a job, the costs are sunk...i.e. they are unrecoverable.

If you are letting those costs still influence your behavior then you are being irrational. Once costs are sunk they should no longer have any impact on your decisions.

So, forgive, but it seems you don't know anything about sunk costs.

And going forward you don't have to use a POS...for anything. You are assuming that using a station is going to be more expensive than using a POS.


I can't and won't even try to refute economic theory. However only a small percentage of players, likely very small, even care about macro-economics, most are not much more interested in economics other than not taking a loss while being engaged and entertained. At it's foundation Eve is a game, a very diverse, feature rich, quasi simulation of a hypothetical future. The physics engine isn't even remotely close to known laws or theorized possibilities. The simplification is required to make it an enjoyable game. Precision in the simulation of various aspects would make Eve frustrating to the point of death by account attrition. The use of real world parallels only work in aspects to set the game universe in easily understandable framework, otherwise it would be far too alien for the general public. Eve makes you think and diverts a person's attention from issues that daily stress.

The simple fact is player's shouldn't and don't need to micromanage everything, so if a player runs their jobs at a POS, Station, Outpost or by some weird alignment of space time the laundry service of their ship the cost in material and time is already understood and accepted. If a single player corp has the the individual go offline for that annoying experience called the real world, they have their jobs set, POS fueled for a reasonable duration and the corp gets a war-declaration and subsequent burning of the POS to a cinder, the associated loss of structures, product, and materials pale in comparison to the emotional impact of a player who had spent significant time and isk to acquire blueprints especially hard to get originals or faction copies.

Playing Eve is not more important than real life concerns, a job, or relationships. Anyone who would think that really needs to seek some mental health help (I'm not being specific to any one person). Additionally in a game, perception is reality, no matter unfounded it may seem.

Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#1831 - 2014-04-28 07:21:52 UTC
If you're not willing to fight for what you have in EvE, you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.

The Tears Must Flow

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#1832 - 2014-04-28 09:27:34 UTC
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
Once you start a job, the costs are sunk...i.e. they are unrecoverable.

If you are letting those costs still influence your behavior then you are being irrational. Once costs are sunk they should no longer have any impact on your decisions.

So, forgive, but it seems you don't know anything about sunk costs.

lol... right from the Business 101 freshman course on Microeconomics. No point in arguing why you are wrong - you'll need a few years of actual business experience to understand how, and why, people actually decide to make such decisions.

Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
And going forward you don't have to use a POS...for anything. You are assuming that using a station is going to be more expensive than using a POS.

You are arguing against yourself.

Your accusation was that HS industry folks are too fearful to put a BPO in a POS. I stated that this behavior isn't motivated by fear, but by simple risk/cost analysis against using a POS, in a situation where you can be wardec'ced.

You are now arguing that HS industry folks don't need to use a POS.

And, I made no assumption about whether it is more expensive to use a POS or a NPC station.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Singularity Expedition Services
Singularity Syndicate
#1833 - 2014-04-28 09:32:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Corraidhin Farsaidh
There shouldn't only be consideration for risk reward balance, game balance is equally important in terms of all playstyles being catered for. Saying that casual playstyles are catered for in hisec industry will become akin to saying casual players can only aspire to be 2nd class industrialists if hisec is nerfed in this area and nullsec continually buffed. We have yet to see exactly what these changes will mean but disenfranchising a large group of the playing community can only be bad.

Hisec is already low risk/reward with regards to industry, those who make large sums are either importing large amounts of high value goods from losec thus creating the market, or investing large sums of isk on low % return projects. So what if some players make large sum from trading or any other hisec means. This gives other hisec players something to aspire to and is the ultimate low entry skill career. Anyone can buy and sell goods, and those buying and selling in bulk are risking huge sums of isk to gain a return.

If people want the benefits of hisec industry stability they should use a hisec alt (as many have already said they do). The logistics problem of moving stuff to and from null is just that, a problem to be solved (which already must have been for null sector folks to be making isk from moongoo and returning hisec stuff back. Why then should this be made easier by moving S&I benefits to losec? I thought the point was that people should move across areas, run different career paths in and through different regions?

Hisec needs something that casual and/or constructive players can excel in, losec needs some attention to give it more allure, null already has the opportunity to carve out your own chunk of space along with all of the best resources except for a few of the low end goods that need importing from hisec (which is a good thing).

Game balance in my opinion is more important than the risk/reward balance. The latter can be tweaked by amending resource amounts produced, loot drops, exploration drops etc. The former is far more difficult to fix if you break it.
Maki Nomiya
ACME HARDWARE
Exxitium
#1834 - 2014-04-28 14:15:16 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
(edit)

We're not removing the ability to lock down blueprints in your station. You can still lock down as before and build, research and copy using the infinite slots in the station.



As long as it's the right already overly congested station Oops

Presently we can have them in an Office in a station that doesn't have slots and do all this with our POS ... lower cost (well used to be till POS fuel went up in price !) and a bit faster.

Now if we still want to use the POS we have to risk additional Billions of investment in the BPOs and stick them out there in space.

Sounds just like something corporates that invest time and money in risk mitigation would go and doRoll

Maybe you should first revisit POS setups and give us a little more of a chance to even try and protect assets in so called "High Sec" against the usual 20 to 1 battles that usually come with war-decs when POSes are concerned first.

It's not a case of no risk as we still have to move the BPCs about and if it's manufacturing or researching stuff can be lost in a POS attack already.

Other changes I think you all have done a lot more thinking on and will be eagerly awaited.
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1835 - 2014-04-28 15:22:00 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
Once you start a job, the costs are sunk...i.e. they are unrecoverable.

If you are letting those costs still influence your behavior then you are being irrational. Once costs are sunk they should no longer have any impact on your decisions.

So, forgive, but it seems you don't know anything about sunk costs.

lol... right from the Business 101 freshman course on Microeconomics. No point in arguing why you are wrong - you'll need a few years of actual business experience to understand how, and why, people actually decide to make such decisions.


Making a decision on whether or not to "sink" those costs is different than once the costs are sunk. If you think leaving the BPO in there is a good idea (i.e. when there is a good chance of losing the POS and the BPO) so you can "recover" the costs, that is foolish.

Further, people have been complaining that the new changes means that their BPOs are at risk. They are, but the risk can be managed.

Right now, all those losses you note are still risks people take when they put up POS, start doing S&I stuff and then get decced. Even if the BPO is locked down. People still do that stuff though. Or is it different when you lock down a BPO and work remotely?

Sizeof Void wrote:
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
And going forward you don't have to use a POS...for anything. You are assuming that using a station is going to be more expensive than using a POS.

You are arguing against yourself.

Your accusation was that HS industry folks are too fearful to put a BPO in a POS. I stated that this behavior isn't motivated by fear, but by simple risk/cost analysis against using a POS, in a situation where you can be wardec'ced.

You are now arguing that HS industry folks don't need to use a POS.

And, I made no assumption about whether it is more expensive to use a POS or a NPC station.


It is also a solution to the war dec problem if the risk is perceived to be too great.
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1836 - 2014-04-28 15:23:30 UTC
Maki Nomiya wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
(edit)

We're not removing the ability to lock down blueprints in your station. You can still lock down as before and build, research and copy using the infinite slots in the station.



As long as it's the right already overly congested station Oops


Yeah moving your operations is not an option. Roll
Minnie Layser
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1837 - 2014-04-28 15:37:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Minnie Layser
Reactivated my two accounts a couple months basically because I thought the ORE frigate was cool, and specialized cargo holds were cool.

Such utter stupidity here... It's like changing the art on ships that already look cool, but not ships that are ugly (brought to you by the same cleverness of the loot spew mechanic, perhaps?). Look - you might as well do whatever you want devs, (or whatever you convinced your manager was worth doing and that it would require so many)

because I'm not re-upping, even if you don't implement these changes, which for the most part won't matter to me,

they are indicative of the sort of mindset that tells me where this game is not going (your 3 directives about industry look to be from someone's 'clever' powerpoint in a meeting of developers and managers rather than indicative of any insight into the enjoyment of the game by players who engage in these activities primarily.) Fixing bad ideas with bad ideas is, well... I mean I think it's a bad idea. It smells of committees.

and to the Goons - grats - woulda joined back in the day but didn't want to pay money to join the somethingawful forum (free plug).
Kun'ii Zenya
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1838 - 2014-04-28 16:02:48 UTC
Flay Nardieu wrote:
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:


Once you start a job, the costs are sunk...i.e. they are unrecoverable.

If you are letting those costs still influence your behavior then you are being irrational. Once costs are sunk they should no longer have any impact on your decisions.

So, forgive, but it seems you don't know anything about sunk costs.

And going forward you don't have to use a POS...for anything. You are assuming that using a station is going to be more expensive than using a POS.


I can't and won't even try to refute economic theory. However only a small percentage of players, likely very small, even care about macro-economics, most are not much more interested in economics other than not taking a loss while being engaged and entertained. At it's foundation Eve is a game, a very diverse, feature rich, quasi simulation of a hypothetical future. The physics engine isn't even remotely close to known laws or theorized possibilities. The simplification is required to make it an enjoyable game. Precision in the simulation of various aspects would make Eve frustrating to the point of death by account attrition. The use of real world parallels only work in aspects to set the game universe in easily understandable framework, otherwise it would be far too alien for the general public. Eve makes you think and diverts a person's attention from issues that daily stress.

The simple fact is player's shouldn't and don't need to micromanage everything, so if a player runs their jobs at a POS, Station, Outpost or by some weird alignment of space time the laundry service of their ship the cost in material and time is already understood and accepted. If a single player corp has the the individual go offline for that annoying experience called the real world, they have their jobs set, POS fueled for a reasonable duration and the corp gets a war-declaration and subsequent burning of the POS to a cinder, the associated loss of structures, product, and materials pale in comparison to the emotional impact of a player who had spent significant time and isk to acquire blueprints especially hard to get originals or faction copies.

Playing Eve is not more important than real life concerns, a job, or relationships. Anyone who would think that really needs to seek some mental health help (I'm not being specific to any one person). Additionally in a game, perception is reality, no matter unfounded it may seem.



This is exactly the kind of thing that economists do when setting up lab experiments. Yes, they are simplifications, but they still provide lots of potentially useful information on how markets work. And the great thing is in the MMOs with very developed economies...the participants pay to play. EVE is perhaps the best one in this regard and frankly I'm surprised more economists are not looking at it to test theories. If I were a young grad student I'd be trying to find a way to use such data.

My point is, that the theories of economics do not stop just because EVE is a game. In fact, EVE may be one place to study them in detail because of the simplifications.

For example, Price convergence in an online virtual world. One of the predictions of neoclassical economics is that when you have a market with a homogeneous good and many buyers and sellers there will be "one price" even in different locations. Some key assumptions are no transportation costs and no economic barriers between locations. The researchers used WoW where ganking is not really a factor. It would be interesting to see what the research would say when applied to the New Eden economy.

One thing is that ganking freighters may actually be what helps create the price differences that many players take advantage of and make isk.

So if you are making isk by doing arbitrage (buying low in one region and selling high in another) don't complain about those gank squads...they may be the very reason you have a profit. Just play smart and find ways to avoid them and enjoy your isk. Smile

Amusingly making ganking harder could actually reduce the profitability of this in game profession...careful what you ask for. Big smile
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#1839 - 2014-04-28 19:14:32 UTC
Kun'ii Zenya wrote:
Right now, all those losses you note are still risks people take when they put up POS, start doing S&I stuff and then get decced. Even if the BPO is locked down. People still do that stuff though. Or is it different when you lock down a BPO and work remotely?

Yes, it is very different when you work remotely, for two reasons:

1) The BPOs are not at risk. If you lose the POS, you lose a couple hundred million ISK in labs, not billions.

And, yes, there are cases where risking the POS is acceptable. If you are researching capital BPOs, for example, which requires 2-3 months to grind a single ME level, taking the risk on losing the POS is sometimes reasonable, depending on the likelihood of your attackers to kill the POS. But, this is certainly not the case if you need to put the BPOs in the POS.

2) Potential attackers know that the BPOs are NOT in the POS, so the risk of a random wardec is actually much lower.

POS bashing is high-sec is *very* tedious and has to be worth the tears (not to mention the wardec fee).
Flay Nardieu
#1840 - 2014-04-28 20:34:50 UTC
The argument that I make against blueprints being force into starbase structures to be used relies more on logistical and unneeded complexity issues with a dash of lore supportable real life parallels to reinforce the concept.

Individuals who contributed other reasons for the same only add to the points why it is undesirable, just as mine reinforces theirs. Blanket statements to refute the arguments combined invalidate themselves.

Other statements about fears and loss avoidance crippling individuals or groups from pursuing opportunities fail to take into account the context of mine and similar arguments. To propose a change to copy production location would be the only valid instance to support such claims in regards to the blueprint location. However in this thread on this specific topic it hasn't been suggested. Space borne assets are at risk irregardless, POCO and starbases are attacked and destroyed even in high-sec on regular basis and their contents are subject to loss. This is a natural and proper process as it serves the true purpose of war especially in regards to attrition, retaliation, and expansion.

Losing materials, structures, and product is a risk that all but the under informed or naive know and accept and would fall under the pretext of if you can't defend it you lose it, the act of deserving something is irrelevant.

Equating freighter ganking in the same context isn't valid, also I would like to point out that the threat could be mitigated with combat escorts and scouts if desired to truly reduce losses from acts of piracy. (note I didn't say end piracy)

Forming your point or counter point in a discussion/debate solely on either an over intellectualized of economic modeling or over simplified "Kill or Die" stance both ignore the fact to be able to play in your particular style or observe and interact with a reactive market model for study and analysis requires all the varied and individual shades and styles between. Doing so makes the model static and moot also predator without prey turn upon themselves ultimately leaving on a few left that in life would starve and in game would so grow bored.

As an after thought, anyone who has ever used the locking mechanics would know using it is not a quick on and off process it requires a vote to lock and unlock.