These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Starbase changes for Crius

First post First post
Author
Conjaqq
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#61 - 2014-06-16 16:30:17 UTC
Nice changes.

I got one question, where does one aquire the Thukker Component Assembly Array?
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#62 - 2014-06-16 16:30:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tau Cabalander
*deleted*
E6o5
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#63 - 2014-06-16 16:38:45 UTC
I don't like that you killed the mini profession of corp creators. Also it doesn't make sense for a faction to allow you to anchor a POS in their space if you have negative standings towards them.
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#64 - 2014-06-16 16:49:01 UTC
Querns wrote:
Benny Ohu wrote:
it appears easy to work around the 7-day new corp anchoring restriction with an alt wardec contingency corp, allowing players to dissolve their corp to avoid a wardec and immediately put the starbase back up?

is it because you intend for there to be a workaround, that you don't think it's important, or is patching the workaround outside the scope of this set of changes?

Similar workarounds exist today; you can keep one or more alternate corps kicking around with their standings pre-baked. I suspect the change isn't to "fix" this problem, it's to maintain congruence with the way things are now. At least, that's what I was gunning for when I first suggested this idea months ago.

Think of it this way -- every alternate corp you have to evade wardecs requires at least one character to keep the corporation alive. How many plex per month is any given person willing to spend just to safeguard their corporation?


Yeah. I was just excited to hear that changes were being made with wars in mind. But thinking about it more, it's not really time to make them more vulnerable. They should be made more useful, usable, defendable (guns) and interesting to fight around before they're exposed completely to war declarations

That's assuming they should be more exposed to wardecs. It's something I look forwards too, though. A more interesting highsec

You're right about the lost value of an alt character slot, of course. I can't guess at what'd happen vOv

Ereshgikal
Wharf Crusaders
#65 - 2014-06-16 16:53:37 UTC
Qoi wrote:
Quote:
Whole and single items will not be affected by this calculation. This is most relevant for Tech I items required to manufacture Tech II variations. For example, building 10 Paladins will not require 9 Apocalypse if you have a 10% ME.


You just brought extra materials back. Roll

What exactly is a "whole and single" item? (in term of invTypeMaterials and ramTypeRequirements?)

I thought you wanted to simplify the material calculations. What?


My take is that a job consisting of X number of runs will require at least X number of units of each component; but I am not sure. The "whole" part makes me think that if a run requires 2.000000 units (not rounded, but "whole") of stuff then 20 runs need 40 units of stuff regardless of ME, but since that is quite a big difference from 36 units of stuff when running with 10% ME....argh, my head hurts.

Clarification from CCP is certainly needed. :)
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#66 - 2014-06-16 16:57:43 UTC  |  Edited by: TheSmokingHertog
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Querns wrote:
Could I ask for some clarification on one point? I don't think I fully understand the change to Supply Chain Management (SCM) and Scientific Networking. Are you removing the regional restriction for starting RAM jobs remotely? For example, if I had SCM trained to 1, could I start a job in Muvolailen (The Citadel) from Jita (The Forge)?


Yes, regional limits are being removed. The new skills will just check for jump distance between blueprint and yourself.


Ok,

So industrialists can work inter-regional, that is not possible in other professions, pls let other enablers have the same!

- Inter-regional stacking
- Inter-regional accepting contracts.
- Inter-regional price adjusting of orders*

Make a skill if you need for each if need be.

* this way you could maintain a price lvl of all your orders across new eden. Since you cannot lookup local markets remotely, is has a disadvantage to trading while in the same region. I would not vote for inter-regional setting up of orders.



Let me sneak in another thing, a repost btw;

The "Corporation Member Cap Increase" was argued based upon "a growing game"

While having a nice industry revamp, with unlimited slots, traders are still very limited in game, on 305 orders, 21 public contracts, etc... my suggestions;

Contracting gives you 21 contracts to work with. (For each level of this skill the number of outstanding contracts is increased by four (up to a maximum of 21 at level 5). Please make this 42.
Corporate contracts have a limit of 500 (Corporations have a hard limit of 500 outstanding public contracts.), make it 1000.
Trade skills go to 305 orders, I would propose this, 4 to 8 (Trade), 8 to 16 (Retail), 16 to 32 (Wholesale), 32 to 64 (tycoon)

Thx.

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-

probag Bear
Xiong Offices
#67 - 2014-06-16 17:00:16 UTC
Theodore Knox wrote:
Interesting...

Quote:
Structure cost scaling

Removing slots from industry jobs discourage players from stacking more than one Starbase structure of the same type at a Control Tower. To counteract this point, we are going to give specific bonuses when Starbase structures of the same type are stacked together at the same control tower.

This bonus is going to be a flat reduction on the whole job cost price, whose amount and total bonus varies depending on the Starbase structure itself.


Let's pretend I'm a small scale T2 croozer manufacturer...

So, to get the full benefit to reduced job costs, I'm going to need a Large Caldari tower, with 50 component assembly arrays, to get a 25% edge on the install cost all my component jobs.

Now, I'm a small scale producer, so I'm not likely to run this sort of set up all month, every month. I'm going to want to throw in some other modules to do other jobs on my shiny new large pos. So there'll be 13 Medium Ship Assembly Arrays too.

When I want to switch back and forth between them, that's a lot of off-lining and on-lining to do, unless I sink more isk into pos costs and get me a second large tower - destroying my margins further. And then my head starts to hurt, because I'm trying to work out, how many jobs at 25% lpwer install cost am I going to need to run to break even on the pos fuel costs.

Have you any idea how cluttered my tower is going to be? I make it 63 assembly arrays alone... This is a profoundly messy game mechanic.


No one is forcing you to take advantage of this mechanic. Especially since this mechanic isn't meant to be for "small scale" manufacturers; it's meant to somewhat preserve the current balance for large-scale manufacturers. If you don't already have multiple POSes up, you are not going to be particularly affected by the install cost changes.
Rekkr Nordgard
Borderland Militia
Zero Hedge Union
#68 - 2014-06-16 17:09:33 UTC
I really like the compression and refining changes and generally like change to the POS modules. However the module stacking bonus is a just plain bad game mechanic, you need to figure out a different way to do that. And removing the standings requirement for highsec POSes makes no sense and is immersion breaking.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#69 - 2014-06-16 17:12:56 UTC
Kenneth Feld wrote:
I think it was Fozzie that mentioned earlier about anchoring and onlining douchebag stuff

If we anchor and online several assy arrays before a job, then offline and unanchor after the job to save isk on install what repercussions will there be.

It was mentioned before in the previous thread and the threats were pretty broad, I just kinda want that updated in this thread before the 5675866758587587 questions get asked.


I pointed that one out in the comments for the original announcement. It didn't seem like this had been thought about and I didn't receive an answer.

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .

Circumstantial Evidence
#70 - 2014-06-16 17:24:36 UTC
Online / Offline array tricks: I also posted an idea in the Starbase thread and haven't noticed a definitive statement on how it will be handled. probag Bear re-stated the question in post #4 in this thread.
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#71 - 2014-06-16 17:25:14 UTC
Wiener Chomper wrote:
Quote:
Newly formed corporations will need to wait 7 days before being able to anchor Starbases. This is to inhibit players from immediately moving Starbase assets to another corporation if under a war declaration.


So basically all we need to do is create a bunch of corporations now using alts so that players can immediately move starbase assets to another corporation so we can avoid war? EZPZ


If the deccing corp has good intel and spies they will find those corps and dec them too.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#72 - 2014-06-16 17:25:14 UTC
I still stand by my opinion that the idea of having multiple arrays of the same type in a POS is a real bodge job method to give additional bonuses.

A far better idea would be to have new skill/s that have to be learnt, maybe at 10x skill time if you like, to give tax bonuses at POSes. A reply from CCP is to why this is not a better idea would be nice too.

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .

Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#73 - 2014-06-16 17:29:16 UTC
Shinzhi Xadi wrote:
So, I spent years grinding empire standings, a big part of the reason why, was so I could put up a POS on my high sec alt.

Whats the point of spending time grinding empire standing now?

CCP please don't make our years worth of standing useless!


Wut. It shouldn't take years. If you run all the Career agents, and the circle agents, and do the Sisters arc and turn in all the pirate tags it takes less than a week!
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
#74 - 2014-06-16 17:29:42 UTC
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:
Wiener Chomper wrote:
Quote:
Newly formed corporations will need to wait 7 days before being able to anchor Starbases. This is to inhibit players from immediately moving Starbase assets to another corporation if under a war declaration.


So basically all we need to do is create a bunch of corporations now using alts so that players can immediately move starbase assets to another corporation so we can avoid war? EZPZ


If the deccing corp has good intel and spies they will find those corps and dec them too.


This is extremely easy to do now with little intel and no spies required. You just look at the employment record of the member/s. You can then see where they move to and immediately wardec the next corp they will move to.
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#75 - 2014-06-16 17:35:34 UTC
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:
Online / Offline array tricks: I also posted an idea in the Starbase thread and haven't noticed a definitive statement on how it will be handled. probag Bear re-stated the question in post #4 in this thread.


CCP Grayscale said offlining 'shouldn't be too much of a problem'. I personally disagree and think that all the arrays used to attain the bonus should have to be online until the job is finished.

In addition I asked what would happen if the additional arrays were unanchored as well as being offlined. As of yet an answer has not been given as to whether this would be possible to do and if so then would the tax bonus be refused.

Basically it's a massive loophole and an unsatisfactory and messy way of attaining a tax bonus.

" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. " Rick. " Find out what ? " Abraham. " They're screwing with the wrong people. " Rick. Season four.   ' The Walking Dead. ' .

Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
#76 - 2014-06-16 17:35:49 UTC
Why does it cost to build things at a POS? I built the POS, I'm paying for fuel for it, why am I getting charged again to manufacture things?
Letto Atreides
Still Water Intergalactic Holdings
#77 - 2014-06-16 17:45:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Letto Atreides
Stacking Multiple Arrays in the POS is going to be such a clickfest.

Example: if i want max boost for research that's 13 labs.
1. 13 times to anchor
2. 13 times to online/offline if i want to change to other types of arrays
3. 13x7 (corp hanger divisions) = 91 divisions, which are unsearchable from assets tab, where my that bpc copy that was just delivered may be hiding, etc etc

It would be much better if we could just anchor one array and then upgrade it using some mix of isk and materials like we do with POCOs or in PI command centers. It could still take up the same power/cpu as 13 individual arrays but it wouldn't be a management nightmare.
Myxx
The Scope
#78 - 2014-06-16 17:46:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Myxx
Quote:
Timed restriction to anchor Control Towers

Newly formed corporations will need to wait 7 days before being able to anchor Starbases. This is to inhibit players from immediately moving Starbase assets to another corporation if under a war declaration.


The clever among us have pre-formed alt corporations. All this will do is make it so that alt corporations are formed far ahead of time for this specific purpose of avoiding the timer. Its mildly idiotic to have that restriction with that in mind. All you're doing is being an annoyance.

Edit: Also, dickstars. oh gods the dickstars...
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#79 - 2014-06-16 17:50:49 UTC
Ereshgikal wrote:
Qoi wrote:
Quote:
Whole and single items will not be affected by this calculation. This is most relevant for Tech I items required to manufacture Tech II variations. For example, building 10 Paladins will not require 9 Apocalypse if you have a 10% ME.


You just brought extra materials back. Roll

What exactly is a "whole and single" item? (in term of invTypeMaterials and ramTypeRequirements?)

I thought you wanted to simplify the material calculations. What?


My take is that a job consisting of X number of runs will require at least X number of units of each component; but I am not sure. The "whole" part makes me think that if a run requires 2.000000 units (not rounded, but "whole") of stuff then 20 runs need 40 units of stuff regardless of ME, but since that is quite a big difference from 36 units of stuff when running with 10% ME....argh, my head hurts.

Clarification from CCP is certainly needed. :)


the example given right in the same paragraph is very clear -- for tech II items the tech I component needed will alway match in number to the number of final items.

How could "For example, building 10 Paladins will not require 9 Apocalypse if you have a 10% ME." be any less than clear? You will alway need the 10 Apocalypses - one ship won't materialize out of thin air without a base item.

A module example: "For example, building 10 Damage Control IIs will not require 9 Damage Control Is if you have a 10% ME."
Mila Joevovich
Pheonix Rising Corp
#80 - 2014-06-16 17:54:37 UTC
Looking foward to having reprocessing nerfed to the point of making loot not worth the effort to pick upShockedRoll