Science & Industry

CCP Grayscale with invention result not linked to the runs of the BPC invented from will you allow us to run inventions in the same manner as manufacturing or copying?

Say i have 10 run BPC for and i want to invent 10 times from it with single instalation, provided ofc that all required invention materials for 10 runs are present. In such case it will be easyer for us to time manage our invention, as with the current state of module invention it is in few hours cycle and a lot of invention time is wasted due to IRL activities like sleep and work :D

Thank you I will w8 and see how things turn out and will follow with the invention changes after Crius release and if need be will voice my opinions for the next invention update.

How reliable are the SiSi numbers?

Comparing some blueprints between SiSI and TQ showed some unexpected changes and an increase in cost.

One ( I did not check more) BC and one BS were about 10% more expensive on SiSi.
One Marauder was 23% more expensive.
One carrier was around 10% more expensive.
One JF was 28% more expensive to build.

Intentional?

I actually never like when prices increase. Believe it or not, noobies still start with empty pockets. Increasing prices with every second release feels a bit unfair.

Building a marauder suddenly required additional minerals. Why?
The JF needed new capital parts...

Problem

I am concerned about the effect of the adjustments on capital ship ME research. Specifically, I have looked at Carriers, Dreads and the Rorqual.

The problem is the "chunkiness" of the Bill of Materials, due to small numbers of each type of cap component. The problem is very strongly exacerbated by the love of the number 10 in the Bill of Materials.

The "chunkiness" means most of the improvement from ME comes at ME10. For instance, researching an Archon BPO from ME0 to ME9 reduces the cost of materials by only 2.2%. ME10 increases this to 7.3%.

The behavior that would correspond to what is targeted with BPOs in general would be that the material costs were reduced by ~1% for each level of ME. This is not even remotely achieved here - the first 9 levels give on average 0.25% improvement - the last level gives >5% improvement. Similar, but not identical, results obtain for the other ships.

The consequency is that you simply have to go to perfect ME if you want to build these caps at competitive costs. A 5% cost disadvantage does not work in this line of business.

ME10 for a capital ship BPO will take almost a year and a half to research, so cap BPO research here becomes a stupid and boring waiting game for that BPO to come out with perfect ME. There are no trade-offs, no decisions, no gameplay - just waiting.


Solutions

Suggested solution: Tweak the Bill of Materials of each ship to have a more even distribution of numbers, so that there is not a big predominance of round numbers such as 10, 20 and 25

Alternative solutions:

One "hacky" solution would be to let ME10 be 0.00001% waste, not perfect. However, this would only devalue cap BPO research, as ME10 would only be a few percent better than ME0.

Another solution would be to make cap components smaller, cheaper and faster to build, and require more of them per capital ship (for instance, divide materials and build times by 10, and multiply the BOMs in cap ship BPOs by 10). However, this also feel unsatisfactory (if nothing else, it removes the very realistic and appropriate problem of handling those huge components).


Note: I base this on info from: http://bp.kiwi.frubar.net/calc/

Please explain.

Is your point that one can get around the "chunkiness" issue by running batches of multiple Archons (in this case) in one production run?

I am sorry, I must be really bad, because I don't even understand whether you are agreeing with me, disagreeing with me or making an alternative proposal.

I thought I'd clarify my example - maybe that will help us along:

Archon Bill of Materials:
Capital Drone Bay......................... 44
Capital Armor Plates.................... 11
Capital Capacitor Battery............. 11
Capital Power Generator............. 11
Capital Jump Drive....................... 11
Capital Ship Maintenance Bay.... 11
Capital Corporate Hangar Bay.....11
all other components....................<10

First of all, note that any items that occur on the Bill of Materials with less than 10 units will be unaffected even by ME10 (unless running batches let's you recover partial gains - but the batch size of Archon BPCs is 1).

Second, the only item on the entire Bill of Materials that is affected before ME10 are the Capital Drone Bays. So you save one of those when reaching ME3, another at ME5 and another at ME7. This is the only effect you get from ME research at all before reacing ME10, At ME10, however, you get enormous savings, because you save one of each of Drone Bay, Armor Plates, Capacitor Battery, Power Generator, Jump Drive, Maintenance Bay and Hangar Bay.

So, to summarize, ME0-9 saves you a total of 3 Drone Bays (the cheapest components), whereas ME10 alone saves 7 different components. This is the "chunkiness effect".

you no longer need maxrun BPCs for invention, each invention only consumes a single run from the bpc

you should be able to switch to BPOs without any issues, they are cheap, need little research and, come crius, have a bunch of advantages

We dont need the BPCs for invention but for regular mass production.

Why we should buy and research additional 9 BPOs for each ammunition type because CCP changes the attributes for no reason at all? In particular the research in the POS needs additional money.

A few time ago CCP said that the copy time would be shorter because it will no longer be possible to remote procudtion at POS so you can use BPCs instead of BPOs to lower the risk of destroying. Why now this massive change in the complete other direction?

I am also interested in what will happen with Cap BPOs. Currently having them at me 2 for many of them you can competively produce but will it now be neccessary to have them at 10 if this gives a >5% Material reduction?