These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: EVE Industry - All you want to know

First post First post First post
Author
Mistah Ewedynao
Ice Axe Psycho Killers
#161 - 2014-07-19 16:12:06 UTC
Hey he's still tweakin his .csv...ya know for the one he needs for this "simplification" of industry.

Yeah, real simple.....Roll

Nerf Goons

Nuke em from orbit....it's the only way to be sure.

El Zylcho
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#162 - 2014-07-19 16:15:05 UTC
Regarding costs used to calculate the system activity index, where the cost of inputs is used to determine the index, e.g., manufacturing, are the costs take from the specific system, constellation or Jita pricing? And, are the costs buy or sell or a median or ??? Are input costs averaged from the previous month or based on current, "real time" prices?

If the input costs are based on local system values for inputs, what if such inputs do not exist?

It also sounds like there will be an API call which can report the % that a given system has of overall global production hours. Is this so? And, it seems like a bit of self-defeating detail - i.e., can it show which system has cap production going on and so forth?

I know some of this was addressed in early posts but I cannot find the threads now.
Attivol
#163 - 2014-07-19 16:18:11 UTC
1 unit of Compressed Scordite, Compressed Massive Scordite and Compressed Condensed Scordite now has a volume of 0.19m3
1 unit of Compressed Veldspar, Compressed Concentrated Veldspar and Compressed Dense Veldspar now has a volume of 0.15m3


So, Veldspar(0.10 ->0.15) and Scordite(0.15->0.19) will increase in size by compressing it?
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
#164 - 2014-07-19 16:49:35 UTC
Attivol wrote:
1 unit of Compressed Scordite, Compressed Massive Scordite and Compressed Condensed Scordite now has a volume of 0.19m3
1 unit of Compressed Veldspar, Compressed Concentrated Veldspar and Compressed Dense Veldspar now has a volume of 0.15m3


So, Veldspar(0.10 ->0.15) and Scordite(0.15->0.19) will increase in size by compressing it?

each compressed ore takes 100 uncompressed ore to make

uncompressed veldspar is 0.1 m^3 per unit

0.1 * 100 = 10

10 m^3 compresses to 0.19
DeODokktor
Dark Templars
The Fonz Presidium
#165 - 2014-07-19 17:15:11 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Ummm...are you kidding me?
Yesterday you explicitly state that T2 small drones will need double their materials.
Of course, singularity was down most of the week, and yesterday in VIP mode.
So I , among others, actually BELIEVE you and go nuts trying to get as many T2 small drones cranked out before Tuesday.
Now, today, you say, oops, I screwed up...oh well.

How many other things have you stated in your dev blog will be proven to be utterly false on Tuesday and have cost people time and money?



Mistakes can happen :P....
The last mirror some things were converted differently too... I think they have changed conversion formula on a few things.


Looking across my list of tech2 bpo's I dont think any were converted by "Roundup(1.5x)" because nearly every one of them has a odd value.

Damage control II for instance.
Mechanical parts went from 3 to 3 (expected 5)
Construction blocks went from 2 to 3

So it looks like there was some general rebalance work done as well as the conversion.
Attivol
#166 - 2014-07-19 17:44:27 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
Attivol wrote:
1 unit of Compressed Scordite, Compressed Massive Scordite and Compressed Condensed Scordite now has a volume of 0.19m3
1 unit of Compressed Veldspar, Compressed Concentrated Veldspar and Compressed Dense Veldspar now has a volume of 0.15m3


So, Veldspar(0.10 ->0.15) and Scordite(0.15->0.19) will increase in size by compressing it?

each compressed ore takes 100 uncompressed ore to make

uncompressed veldspar is 0.1 m^3 per unit

0.1 * 100 = 10

10 m^3 compresses to 0.19


Thanks for explaining that...thought I had to be missing something.
Kiona Caldera
Legion of the Scarlett Phoenix
#167 - 2014-07-19 18:26:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Kiona Caldera
CCP RubberBAND wrote:
Two step wrote:
I don't think I missed it, but it would be good to mention what happens to jobs that are running when the patch happens


You are correct. This information will be in the patch notes, but for your convenience here it is:

Jobs installed or active during Crius deployment are dealt in the following manner:

  • Jobs that were installed before the patch still use the old pricing and time until delivered
  • Blueprints that are using Starbases remotely will be delivered to the station they were installed into, not the Starbase. This is a one-time only move, blueprints inserted after Crius will need to be moved to Starbases



Blueprints inserted after Crius will need to be moved to Starbases....this isn't in the dev blog. I thought changes previously discussed but not in the dev blog weren't happening. To quote the blog "If something relating to cost or research is not listed here, then it isn't happening, even if it was mentioned in a previous blog or post."
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#168 - 2014-07-19 18:42:31 UTC
A personal attack post has been removed.

Forum rule 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.


ISD Tyrozan

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

@ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL

Pirate's Bunny
Restyled.
#169 - 2014-07-19 19:04:07 UTC
There it poofs your complex universe. Now we got a flat one. Complexity was what eve's tradmark was. Just for the sake of simplicity you just ruin all older players experience. We researched BPO since years and now a slap in the face of the paying customers. You listen more to ranting people who never understood that business. I mentioned before in another thread that ME150 on a BS bpo still makes sense. But ok seems even the devs did not fully understand how their own stuff works.

Considerable discussion you said? I don't see any. And I think the discussion is like always an alibi function just to hear some people but in the end you just push the changes through like you did with others before.

Reimbursement for years of work? No hehe why do you want that. - Flame removed -

I will suggest in my corp to stop all industrial activity and also payment for eve.
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#170 - 2014-07-19 19:08:41 UTC
Kiona Caldera wrote:


Blueprints inserted after Crius will need to be moved to Starbases....this isn't in the dev blog. I thought changes previously discussed but not in the dev blog weren't happening. To quote the blog "If something relating to cost or research is not listed here, then it isn't happening, even if it was mentioned in a previous blog or post."


They specifically mentioned cost or research. BPO Location is an overall industry change, not specifically restricted to cost or research.

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!

Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#171 - 2014-07-19 19:13:26 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Sizeof Void wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Doug Dannger wrote:

"We're very aware that some of you will feel that you've lost your previous advantages gained by researching blueprints for a really long time, and this is one of the areas we're preparing to focus the most on in terms of receiving feedback and making adjustments or additions to smooth the transition."

So while yes, I over spoke when I said promise, but there was also no discussion. Once again they took the easy way out.

There was pretty extensive discussion in the blog feedback thread, to be fair.

Hmm... actually, there was no participation in the discussion on this topic, by any CCP dev.

Most of the affected players were waiting for CCP devs to make a comment, rather than waste time endlessly responding to the same old forum trolls. And, just for the record, I posted several times about this particular issue and never saw any response from a CCP dev.

If I am in error, then I apologize. Please direct me to the post, in which you, or another dev, did indeed participate in the discussion.

Here's the posts I made relating to 10+ research (I believe they're all applicable, I'm skim-reading):
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4522597#post4522597
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4522633#post4522633
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4522740#post4522740
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4525863#post4525876
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4525876#post4525876
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4527163#post4527163
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4590046#post4590046
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4802192#post4802192

To be fair, I re-read these posts. Unfortunately, up to the last post, you merely said things like this:

"Considering it, not 100% committed to it, still soliciting feedback on what exactly people would find reasonable so we can figure out if there's a good balance to be struck."

And, then on 7-14 (which was only 3 days before this devblog was released), you jumped right to a decision:

"... we are not going to be enacting any form of compensation. There's a lot of things feeding into this decision, including the strong precedent it sets, the fact that no functional value is lost, and the work involved in a one-time compensation deal that could be spent on polishing up the features we're shipping."

This wasn't a discussion. At no time previous to your final post, did you post any constructive feedback on the suggestions that had been made, nor on the concerns that were raised. If you had, I'm pretty sure that you would have received much more feedback from the affected players.

Note that you were much more interactive and specific on what you were planning, in the posts regarding tweaking rank numbers, and other minutiae, for the upcoming changes. Those were discussions.

In any case, "the work involved in a one-time compensation deal" was never a deal-breaker. You could - and still can - do a simple conversion rather than building an elaborate time reimbursement system. For example, convert BPOs with higher than ME/TE 10 into mulitple BPOs -> ie. if someone has a BPO with ME 50, convert it into 5 BPOs with ME-10%. A fairly simple database operation. Even a partial compensation would go a long ways towards smoothing unsettled waters, ex. a flat 2-for-1 conversion on all BPOs with ME/PE > 10. This also sets a positve precedent ("we're not going to change the game, wiping out months/years of player investment in time/effort, without some sort of token compensation") and admits that even if there is "no functional value lost", CCP recognizes that players did perceive some value - apparent or not - being lost.

And, no, you can't make everyone perfectly happy, but you can do the small things to avoid making a number of your customers unreasonably unhappy.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
#172 - 2014-07-19 19:30:32 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Sizeof Void wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Doug Dannger wrote:

"We're very aware that some of you will feel that you've lost your previous advantages gained by researching blueprints for a really long time, and this is one of the areas we're preparing to focus the most on in terms of receiving feedback and making adjustments or additions to smooth the transition."

So while yes, I over spoke when I said promise, but there was also no discussion. Once again they took the easy way out.

There was pretty extensive discussion in the blog feedback thread, to be fair.

Hmm... actually, there was no participation in the discussion on this topic, by any CCP dev.

Most of the affected players were waiting for CCP devs to make a comment, rather than waste time endlessly responding to the same old forum trolls. And, just for the record, I posted several times about this particular issue and never saw any response from a CCP dev.

If I am in error, then I apologize. Please direct me to the post, in which you, or another dev, did indeed participate in the discussion.

Here's the posts I made relating to 10+ research (I believe they're all applicable, I'm skim-reading):
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4522597#post4522597
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4522633#post4522633
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4522740#post4522740
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4525863#post4525876
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4525876#post4525876
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4527163#post4527163
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4590046#post4590046
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4802192#post4802192

To be fair, I re-read these posts. Unfortunately, up to the last post, you merely said things like this:

"Considering it, not 100% committed to it, still soliciting feedback on what exactly people would find reasonable so we can figure out if there's a good balance to be struck."

And, then on 7-14 (which was only 3 days before this devblog was released), you jumped right to a decision:

"... we are not going to be enacting any form of compensation. There's a lot of things feeding into this decision, including the strong precedent it sets, the fact that no functional value is lost, and the work involved in a one-time compensation deal that could be spent on polishing up the features we're shipping."

This wasn't a discussion. At no time previous to your final post, did you post any constructive feedback on the suggestions that had been made, nor on the concerns that were raised. If you had, I'm pretty sure that you would have received much more feedback from the affected players.

Note that you were much more interactive and specific on what you were planning, in the posts regarding tweaking rank numbers, and other minutiae, for the upcoming changes. Those were discussions.

In any case, "the work involved in a one-time compensation deal" was never a deal-breaker. You could - and still can - do a simple conversion rather than building an elaborate time reimbursement system. For example, convert BPOs with higher than ME/TE 10 into mulitple BPOs -> ie. if someone has a BPO with ME 50, convert it into 5 BPOs with ME-10%. A fairly simple database operation. Even a partial compensation would go a long ways towards smoothing unsettled waters, ex. a flat 2-for-1 conversion on all BPOs with ME/PE > 10. This also sets a positve precedent ("we're not going to change the game, wiping out months/years of player investment in time/effort, without some sort of token compensation") and admits that even if there is "no functional value lost", CCP recognizes that players did perceive some value - apparent or not - being lost.

And, no, you can't make everyone perfectly happy, but you can do the small things to avoid making a number of your customers unreasonably unhappy.

actually your suggestion for compensation for bpo plumage was both discussed at length in the original threads and soundly debunked as a terrible idea
Aineko Macx
#173 - 2014-07-19 19:37:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Aineko Macx
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Rank data is fairly trivially reverse-engineerable from ME/TE research times, and it should also be authored as an attribute on all blueprints.

As there are a few exceptions there's no clean way to reverse rank from the research times. I now found the new dgmAttributeType id=1955, however the description is confusing: "This is a bookkeeping attribute for blueprints, which will hopefully be deprecated by the end of 2014". Why would you remove that?

Another question: You are keeping the invTypeMaterials table so reprocessing values can be calculated for items which have no Blueprint data like ores, yes?

CCP Greyscale wrote:
Aineko Macx wrote:
Too bad CCP missed a chance to reduce complexity by making all ore variants compress to one single type and just vary either required input amount of ore or output quantity to differentiate.

I was talking with Ytterbium about this yesterday, it's a thing we are considering.

Please do it, it will remove unneeded complexity from the decision which compressed ores to acquire.
Jackie Cane
Chaos Gate
#174 - 2014-07-20 01:16:33 UTC
Big things are happening.
Mistah Ewedynao
Ice Axe Psycho Killers
#175 - 2014-07-20 01:44:35 UTC
Jackie Cane wrote:
Big things are happening.


Full of insight and chock full of your obvious unlimited knowledge of how industry works.

Thanks for the fish.

Nerf Goons

Nuke em from orbit....it's the only way to be sure.

MissPrissy
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#176 - 2014-07-20 02:19:22 UTC  |  Edited by: MissPrissy
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Aresti wrote:
"Build times are generally rank * 300 seconds."

The effect this appears it will have upon the T2 industry as a whole (BPO/BPC) concerns me, and I don't recall any previous discussion on it (granted, I might have missed it).

Currently some levels of frigates/cruisers take longer to build than others. HACs vs Logistics and AFs vs Intys for example. This change removes that distinction.

More importantly, the time to build T2 hulls from BPCs or BPOs on a whole appears to be vastly increasing due to the rank basis, while module build time appears to be vastly reduced. Focusing just on hulls here, can do another post for ammo/modules if needed. If I've made an error in the calculations somewhere let me know.

This is what it appears the calculation would be post patch, with extraFactor being a multiplier for ammo/capital builds. For the sake of simplicity, all builds are assumed to be in a station, TE at 20%, Industry 5, Adv Indy 5 and 4% implant with no team.

Formula: (rank*300*extraFactor)TE%*Industry Skill*Adv Indy skill*implant = prod time in seconds per run

New Numbers
Frigate: (400*300*1)0.8*0.8*0.95*0.94=70041.6 (1167.36m/19.46h/0.81d, or 37.01 within 30 days)
Destroyer: (600*300*1)0.8*0.8*0.95*0.94=105062.4 (1751.04m/29.18h/1.22d, or 24.67 within 30 days)
Cruiser: (800*300*1)0.8*0.8*0.95*0.94=140083.2 (2334.72m/38.91h/1.62d, or 18.5 within 30 days)
BC: (1000*300*1)0.8*0.8*0.95*0.94=175104 (2918.4m/48.64h/2.03/d or 14.8 within 30 days)
BS: (1200*300*1)0.8*0.8*0.95*0.94=210124.8 (3502.08m/58.37h/2.43d)
JFs: (4000*300*4)0.8*0.8*0.95*0.94=2801664 (46694.4m/778.24h/32.43d)

For simple comparison's sake, currently a player can build approximately 165 Intys, 102 AFs, 68 Interdictors, 52 Logistics, 25 HACs, 34 Recons or 25 Command ships in 30 days time. Blops are less than 1d16hr.

This is a pretty serious nerf to player productivity for hulls and will require individuals to use 2-3 characters to produce the same as 1 does now, assuming invention and BPC building. A quick look at module production looks like it has been increased by a factor of around 1.8 (1029 light ions before, 1897 after, 275 425mm IIs before, 632 after). Could we have some elaboration on the thoughts and intentions behind this please CCP?



There's *extensive* discussion with what's going on with the data here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=345753&find=unread

The bottom line though is that we have attempted, hopefully with a decent degree of success, to ensure that throughput for invented items per character is roughly the same before and after, once you build in all the various bonuses available (see starbase bonuses, for example). If there's any significant mismatches post-release, let us know and we'll make adjustments!


Wow those reductions in T2 build numbers are really going to hurt. Also why have T2 Frigs got the same rank as Supercarriers and T2 Destroyers the same as Titans? Really? Shocked Found here: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/eve-industry-all-you-want-to-know/
Mistah Ewedynao
Ice Axe Psycho Killers
#177 - 2014-07-20 02:30:08 UTC
Also why have T2 Frigs got the same rank as Supercarriers and T2 Destroyers the same as Titans? Really?

Damn good question that legitimizes some of Dinsdales conspiracy stuff.

Greyscale, I'll ask it....Are you a Goon???

Nerf Goons

Nuke em from orbit....it's the only way to be sure.

Guttripper
State War Academy
Caldari State
#178 - 2014-07-20 05:00:54 UTC
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:
Also why have T2 Frigs got the same rank as Supercarriers and T2 Destroyers the same as Titans? Really?

Damn good question that legitimizes some of Dinsdales conspiracy stuff.

Greyscale, I'll ask it....Are you a Goon???

CCP Greyscale admitted a long while back that he does not play the game.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
Goonswarm Federation
#179 - 2014-07-20 06:09:51 UTC
Guttripper wrote:
Mistah Ewedynao wrote:
Also why have T2 Frigs got the same rank as Supercarriers and T2 Destroyers the same as Titans? Really?

Damn good question that legitimizes some of Dinsdales conspiracy stuff.

Greyscale, I'll ask it....Are you a Goon???

CCP Greyscale admitted a long while back that he does not play the game.

to be fair, someone who spends 18 months researching a bpo does not actually play the game either
Guttripper
State War Academy
Caldari State
#180 - 2014-07-20 06:31:11 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
to be fair, someone who spends 18 months researching a bpo does not actually play the game either

So safe to assume you are subtly saying that the open end sandbox game actually has walls?

If someone wants to research a blue print from here until the game ceases to be, then who has the right to tell that person what to do in an open-ended game? It is their money, research slot, and time being wasted, not your's.

But apparently CCP feels a more linear approach to the game is now in order.

Want to fly this particular higher end ship? We decided that the old way of skipping some of the lesser tier ships was not appropriate so now you have to train them.

Learning skills gave people an advantage later in their gaming over those that dived head first? Nope, everyone is on even grounds now. "We're taking the grind away." - all skills eventually are a grind.

And now, it seems all industry will basically be simplified into a convoluted mess. For ten plus years players were able to determine different levels of material and time research and worked through it. But now CCP wants to simple ten scale so everyone eventually will appear as a winner once they reach that magical ten number.

I guess CCP feels the new crop of players that will magically appear were too friggin' stupid beforehand to work out the game. But now they are saved!