These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Researching, the Future

First post First post First post
Author
Milla Goodpussy
Garoun Investment Bank
#181 - 2014-04-28 18:25:38 UTC
DaOpa wrote:

Remove all T2 BPO's from the game, this is legacy stuff that causes problems for all these new industrial changes.



if you dont remove, then add a way for people to create T2 BPO's during the invention process.


One or the other ... take your pick!

Big smile



they should have done this from the start.. how can you put something into the game. give to a select few, then remove it from the game and leaving the stuff in hands of the select few. that has an effect no matter how pretending its only small effect to run rampant in the game.. i know there's some major alliances out there that has a full stock of T2 BPO's and are willing to fight tooth and nail over their benefit.. but those things should have been limited runs period..

or just open up a new industry of creating T2 BPO's.. to even the playing field.. you want to be fair for everyone right?? right???
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#182 - 2014-04-28 18:26:16 UTC
Covert Ops Cloak II - take ages to copy the prototypes for the inventions. So now it's going to be super-fast the specialism I've given it, particularly with respect to the invention side of things, is looking a little useless? Apart from small cost reductions of course. I mean previously to set up a big run I had to dedicate 10 slots to copying. That's one character just copying the blueprints 24/7. In order to maximise my use of those copies, I trained up all associated science skills for the inventing toon to 5. Same deal with high end mining crystals too. The copies used to take ages for those as well.

Assuming at least part of the price is down to limited supply (not all that many builders will want to dedicate a character to just this one task), we can expect these to fall? I have two questions I suppose:

(1) How big an advantage will highly specialised toons with highly researched BPOs get (invention is always -4 at the moment).
(2) With the previous blog, will it still be advantageous to run a POS?

I'm finding it very hard to see how it'll all work out. If the margin ends up being too low because the bar to market entry is low, I don't think I'll get out of bed for it :p.
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#183 - 2014-04-28 18:29:35 UTC
Weaselior wrote:

1.11(repeating)*.9=1

so you wind up back at the "old base cost" (currently the zero-waste cost)


That does not explain what happened to the original 10%.

We had a 10% wasteage factor and every level of ME halved that so 50% of the 10% for ME 1 75% of the 10% for ME 2 etc...

We are removing the old ME values and adding in this new +11% - 10% thingy

I can make a lot of assumptions here but the wording they chose is very confusing. It sounds like they are removing that 10% so if something required 100 units of trit with 0 ME it would now require 90 and muliplying that 90 by 1.11 repeating to get back to 100 or 99.99... but it makes no sense why you would remove something just to add it in again just to remove it again. I mean why not just say you are converting how ME is figured instead of adding and removing stuff twice?

Please clarify.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli

MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#184 - 2014-04-28 18:30:38 UTC
Vaju Enki wrote:
Wil Jackson wrote:
Will there be more offices in stations? Stations with research capability will clearly be in high demand. Corporations will need to either put their BPOs in a POS or pay hundreds of millions per month in office fees to keep their BPOs in a station.

Wil


And? What's the problem with that?

The problem is that there are a fixed number of offices in the station. Remember how CCP said they were removing slots?

MDD
Irin Fidard
R-P Heavy Industries
#185 - 2014-04-28 18:30:59 UTC
Can we please also get increased max runs on capitals like Orca and Freighters ?

Now I can make jobs for a month with 6 orcas or 2 freighters. (more on pos) It is much more clicking and flying arround if I have to produce from one run BPCs.

Oh and are you saying my ME 12 Charon BPO will be perfect after patch ? saving me the remaining research time ? great!

Seith Kali
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#186 - 2014-04-28 18:35:05 UTC
Irin Fidard wrote:
Can we please also get increased max runs on capitals like Orca and Freighters ?

Now I can make jobs for a month with 6 orcas or 2 freighters. (more on pos) It is much more clicking and flying arround if I have to produce from one run BPCs.

Oh and are you saying my ME 12 Charon BPO will be perfect after patch ? saving me the remaining research time ? great!



I mentioned this problem already. You can't solve that without making T2 BPO production even more convenient than it already is. Take your pick.

Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege. 

Matthew
BloodStar Technologies
#187 - 2014-04-28 18:36:06 UTC
ME/TE Research

I like the principles of these changes, my only concern is that there are some undesirable effects from only partially replicating the skill training model.

What I'm concerned about is what happens when you are trying to get a high rank blueprint to some of the higher research levels - for example, level 10 on a frigate comes out at about 2 months. As far as I can tell from this blog, this can only be achieved by putting the blueprint in a single job for the entire 2 months.

This is a significant difference from both the existing research design, and the skill training design that is being used as a basis.

In the existing design it could take much longer to get to "perfect", but you could get there in small, manageable chunks, realizing incremental benefits along the way. You could quite quickly get to a minimum acceptable level for production, and then work away at the remainder using a series of short jobs as and when you had downtime on that blueprint. Under the new system it sounds like you'd have to commit the blueprint for the entire duration all at once.

In the skill training design, you have to put the full time in before you see any benefit, but again you can make progress towards that in increments - if you choose to switch to training another skill, you keep the skill points accumulated so far and can resume training towards the next level from where you left off. Similarly if you have to temporarily interrupt training (e.g. to plug in implants). This level of flexibility is lost in the translation to blueprint research, as you either have to let the job run for the full duration or lose any progress made towards the next level.

This loss of flexibility becomes even more relevant in the new design because of the removal of using blueprints stored in a station at a starbase. One of the ways of mitigating exposure around this is to run shorter jobs (so you don't lose as much if they get interrupted) at the cost of having to attend to them more often. Yes, you can just sit them nice and safe in an NPC station instead, but I get the impression that's not really the direction the Rubicon concept is pushing us towards.

I would prefer to see blueprints being given an equivalent to skill points (ME points and TE points), which build up to the ME and TE levels. While slightly more complex than the proposed changes, it is identical to the skill training system that everyone is already familiar with, and still meets the goals of making the benefits at each level more obvious. While it is potentially more complex to specify a number of ME points when placing the job, the UI could default to specifying the research in terms of Levels (automatically translating to the number of points for you), but allow you to manually edit the specific number of points if desired to get to the desired run-time.

In terms of the translation of old blueprints into new ones, I don't personally see any need to deviate from the proposals as given. Yes, it flattens out the differences between current ME10 and above, and yes, technically I lose out from that. But I'd personally prefer development time being put into the main feature set that all players will be living with for years, rather than into an overly complicated transitional arrangement.


Copying Times

In order to meet the stated goal of "build from copies", it sounds like you are wanting the BPO to yield greater throughput when copied from than when manufactured from directly. These proposed changes achieve that for the base stats of the blueprint, but don't appear to take TE research into account. If copying only has a 6.25% advantage at TE0, then manufacturing overtakes it again from TE8% and above (i.e. Level 4, which is not particularly hard to get).

While the improvements currently on the table are still a big step forward towards the copy-centric model, if you want to keep the carrot of greater throughput working, then one of two things needs to happen:

1) Make TE affect copying time as well as manufacturing time

2) Set the new copying time equal to the TE20% manufacturing time

Personally I would prefer the first option as it adds extra value to TE research, which has traditionally been less valued relative to ME research.


Also, can you confirm what is going to happen to blueprints where copying time is already significantly below the manufacturing time (e.g. it takes me 4 minutes to manufacture 1 run of Antimatter Charge S (TE0), but only 6 seconds per run to copy. Will the copy times on these blueprints be increasing? This seems to be common for T1 ammunition and drones and could have a particular effect on invention if the copy times are increased to match manufacture times, due to the high max-runs on these blueprints. (e.g. max-run copy of Antimatter Charge S would go from 2.5 hours to around 4 days).
Irin Fidard
R-P Heavy Industries
#188 - 2014-04-28 18:37:17 UTC
Seith Kali wrote:
Irin Fidard wrote:
Can we please also get increased max runs on capitals like Orca and Freighters ?

Now I can make jobs for a month with 6 orcas or 2 freighters. (more on pos) It is much more clicking and flying arround if I have to produce from one run BPCs.

Oh and are you saying my ME 12 Charon BPO will be perfect after patch ? saving me the remaining research time ? great!



I mentioned this problem already. You can't solve that without making T2 BPO production even more convenient than it already is. Take your pick.


What has that todo with T2 BPO production ?
Myxx
Incredible.
#189 - 2014-04-28 18:39:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Myxx
OK, upon running through EVERYTHING once again, it does actually work out at ME10 as Weasle pointed out.

You said a lot for very little reason beyond simplifying the maths and here I went chasing ghosts for a little bit so thats my bad.

What in the actual ****, greyscale?

But... just note that you really only had to change copy times and could've left it as it was. The change you made was totally and completely pointless.
tiewan
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#190 - 2014-04-28 18:44:04 UTC
Any chance of making adjustments to the large list of items that are not worth doing invention on because the stats are not better than cheap and plentiful T1 named variants?

I feel like there should be a general assumption that if someone is going to do the work to invent an item they will be rewarded with an item that is worth the effort.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#191 - 2014-04-28 18:46:47 UTC
tiewan wrote:
Any chance of making adjustments to the large list of items that are not worth doing invention on because the stats are not better than cheap and plentiful T1 named variants?

I feel like there should be a general assumption that if someone is going to do the work to invent an item they will be rewarded with an item that is worth the effort.

Those are balance changes. CCP will eventually get around to module balance changes, but they're outside the scope of a Science and Industry-focused release.

MDD
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#192 - 2014-04-28 18:50:09 UTC
Matthew wrote:
Copying Times

In order to meet the stated goal of "build from copies", it sounds like you are wanting the BPO to yield greater throughput when copied from than when manufactured from directly. These proposed changes achieve that for the base stats of the blueprint, but don't appear to take TE research into account. If copying only has a 6.25% advantage at TE0, then manufacturing overtakes it again from TE8% and above (i.e. Level 4, which is not particularly hard to get).

While the improvements currently on the table are still a big step forward towards the copy-centric model, if you want to keep the carrot of greater throughput working, then one of two things needs to happen:

1) Make TE affect copying time as well as manufacturing time

2) Set the new copying time equal to the TE20% manufacturing time

Personally I would prefer the first option as it adds extra value to TE research, which has traditionally been less valued relative to ME research.


Also, can you confirm what is going to happen to blueprints where copying time is already significantly below the manufacturing time (e.g. it takes me 4 minutes to manufacture 1 run of Antimatter Charge S (TE0), but only 6 seconds per run to copy. Will the copy times on these blueprints be increasing? This seems to be common for T1 ammunition and drones and could have a particular effect on invention if the copy times are increased to match manufacture times, due to the high max-runs on these blueprints. (e.g. max-run copy of Antimatter Charge S would go from 2.5 hours to around 4 days).

I agree with your option #2 (above). Buffing the impact of TE seems like a good idea. I also wonder about the low-copy-time blueprints.

MDD
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#193 - 2014-04-28 18:53:24 UTC
Myxx wrote:
OK, upon running through EVERYTHING once again, it does actually work out at ME10 as Weasle pointed out.

You said a lot for very little reason beyond simplifying the maths and here I went chasing ghosts for a little bit so thats my bad.

What in the actual ****, greyscale?

But... just note that you really only had to change copy times and could've left it as it was. The change you made was totally and completely pointless.

All the hard math is converting from this system to the new system. Once in the new system, everything is really easy math-wise.

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

Jackie Fisher
Syrkos Technologies
Joint Venture Conglomerate
#194 - 2014-04-28 18:55:53 UTC
So if I have a cap ship BPO I'll be able to make c. 3 times as many copies from it as I do now in a similar time frame? If so a massive crash in higher end BPCs coming.

Fear God and Thread Nought

Myxx
Incredible.
#195 - 2014-04-28 19:00:04 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Myxx wrote:
OK, upon running through EVERYTHING once again, it does actually work out at ME10 as Weasle pointed out.

You said a lot for very little reason beyond simplifying the maths and here I went chasing ghosts for a little bit so thats my bad.

What in the actual ****, greyscale?

But... just note that you really only had to change copy times and could've left it as it was. The change you made was totally and completely pointless.

All the hard math is converting from this system to the new system. Once in the new system, everything is really easy math-wise.

Yeah, it took me a moment to see that.

He really could've just said that he was simplifying it and nothing was actually changing. I can't ******* believe I'm agreeing with a goon, but there you go.
Eregorn81
Black Fox Marauders
Pen Is Out
#196 - 2014-04-28 19:02:14 UTC
An API, or at least a data dump, giving information on all blueprints would be wonderful for all us analysts out there (PRE patch); that way there may be less of a production drop from everyone's supply lines being suddenly changed...

And by API I mean like the one for Fuzzwork (plug in itemID, ML and PL and get out all the information you want). Example, the drake:
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/blueprints/xml2/24698/0/0/0/1
dark lollipop
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#197 - 2014-04-28 19:04:34 UTC
Can you please make it so manufacturing/copying from T2 BPO can only be done from a POS?

Looks like the right time to start "removing" those from the game by letting them get blown up in POS. T2 BPO shouldnt be in game anymore, we have invention now.
Evelgrivion
Origin.
Fraternity.
#198 - 2014-04-28 19:05:50 UTC
Since T3 blueprint efficiency can't be modified and there is currently no waste, the material requirements for Tech 3s shouldn't be changing, right?
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#199 - 2014-04-28 19:05:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
Quote:
Negative ME and TE levels work pretty much as you'd expect in this sort of system, being converted into direct percentage values. TE -4 will thus now be shown as TE -100%, and all the various decryptors (and related code) will be updated to match.


As an inventor, I'm curious how you will handle the negative ME levels.

Currently, at ME -4, and a 10% Waste Factor, there is a 50% material waste.
Likewise, ME -3, -2, -1, 0 represent a 40%, 30%, 20%, & 10% increase in material wastes.

I assume the new levels will be ME 0 represents 111% of current, with ME -1 an additional 10%, likewise ME -4 an additional 40%?

1.11111 * 1.4 = 1.55555, so ME -4 will have an additional 5% waste on top of current production quantities.


Overall, I suspect that most T2 modules will see a 30% increase in prices with the changes so far.

For example, a Light Neutron cannon II will now require an extra robotics and 3 extra particle accelerators. That's an extra 120k isk in materials to the current production cost of ~600k isk. Add in the increased "line costs", and the net result is a fairly hefty 20-30% increase in the production prices of most T2 modules.

Are POS arrays, lowsec stations, and nullsec outposts perhaps going to have "ME Benefits" that make producing in those "riskier" locations?
mkint
#200 - 2014-04-28 19:06:15 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


In 1), this is only true if the market size is absolutely fixed, which seems implausible.

In 2), it doesn't matter any time soon at least because most of those markets are not going to significantly expand any time soon



*facepalm*

In all fairness, I'm a believer that T2 BPOs need to be removed altogether. They were a bad decision to put in the game all those years ago, and every year they've been allowed to persist has been a mistake. With CCP's apparent attitude about them, they'll only end up getting removed after some inevitable scandal. And inevitable it will be.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.