These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

Blueprint adjustments hopefully coming to SiSi this weekend

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2014-07-25 12:48:22 UTC
As a heads-up for some adjustments we're just rolling through:
- Types with build requirements defined in the back end as "recycle" (eg the T1 ship in T2 ships) should now have more accurate numbers. This shouldn't affect build requirements at all, but means that when you reprocess it the base reprocess amounts accurately reflect what went into it.
- Max runs on blueprints are now rounded to 1 significant figure, as I've now figured out how to make Excel do that
- For T2 things that previously only had one of a given item required, but were being multiplied by 1.5 and then rounding up to 2, I've put in a special case to pull them back down to 1, as the .5 that in principle you'd get because of -ve ME was I believe ignored in most situations.
- T3 build costs were increased because they were being treated as if they'd previously had waste, which they didn't, so we fixed this

A new SDE will be generated at some point, and we're hoping to get this on SiSi soonish.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2 - 2014-07-25 16:04:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
Will t3 corection will only touch material requirments or maybe also time?

Right now bulding one t3 takes more than 48 hours
before Crius I was able to produce 2 t3 every 3 days now it takes 4 days and 3+ hours, so in effect it takes 5 days (if i start a job at say 22:00 next one will be in the midle of the night)

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#3 - 2014-07-25 16:57:29 UTC
Max Kolonko wrote:
Will t3 corection will only touch material requirments or maybe also time?

Right now bulding one t3 takes more than 48 hours
before Crius I was able to produce 2 t3 every 3 days now it takes 4 days and 3+ hours, so in effect it takes 5 days (if i start a job at say 22:00 next one will be in the midle of the night)


Just materials.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4 - 2014-07-25 17:23:57 UTC
So bug fixing aside are you willing to introduce way to put t3 production in line players game time? I havent yet calculated if increase of advanced industry time effect will do this. If not are you willing to change thw vluprint stats itself? As the "just above 1 day" is very bad timing for any gameplay element

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#5 - 2014-07-26 11:23:15 UTC
Max Kolonko wrote:
So bug fixing aside are you willing to introduce way to put t3 production in line players game time? I havent yet calculated if increase of advanced industry time effect will do this. If not are you willing to change thw vluprint stats itself? As the "just above 1 day" is very bad timing for any gameplay element


I'll have a look at it on Monday. The situation is probably complicated by the range of build time bonuses available - if there's as many options as I suspect, it'll quickly turn into "one day for who?", which complicates the operation.
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2014-07-26 14:27:00 UTC
Are all of the "now not perfect- perfect ME bpo and bpc" issues because of the skill removal you did?
and if so why did you remove the skill without factoring the skills effect into the material requirements?
Will you take a look into that?
as "functional difference" for a manufacturer is not just in comparison to everyone else but their own shipping and material gathering requirements. If by functional difference you meant that the bpo/c would still build the same item as before then you have not honestly represented the changes to materials.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#7 - 2014-07-26 14:29:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Max Kolonko wrote:
So bug fixing aside are you willing to introduce way to put t3 production in line players game time? I havent yet calculated if increase of advanced industry time effect will do this. If not are you willing to change thw vluprint stats itself? As the "just above 1 day" is very bad timing for any gameplay element


I'll have a look at it on Monday. The situation is probably complicated by the range of build time bonuses available - if there's as many options as I suspect, it'll quickly turn into "one day for who?", which complicates the operation.


Thx. Ofc its a case of "one day for who?" as someone who runs 10 jobs from one blueprint (20 days 23ish hours) can bypass the problem of progressing timewindow. However t3 are expensive and running 10 run jobs * 11 slots thats a huge fortune to make it possible. Also this is not available to anyone doing reverse on wrecked hulls (suboptimal to use them for that, but some people do that i supose) as max 3 runs can be runned then.

Also at this moment there are no time saving bonuses available for t3's (it always have me 0) EXCEPT the new advanced industry skill (ofc I have it at level 5).
Hopefully the increased effect You have in plan will make it below 48h mark.
My quick calculation for 3% per level gives me roughly 44H so well within game time when a player will want to run next batch - so there is hope and probably that is the solution for that problem, even for 2% per level thats 47ish hour - not as good but acceptable

Edit: forgot about implants. Im using 2% one. With 4% its still above 48h mark

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Arcosian
Arcosian Heavy Industries Corp Holding
#8 - 2014-07-26 22:35:19 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
As a heads-up for some adjustments we're just rolling through:
- Types with build requirements defined in the back end as "recycle" (eg the T1 ship in T2 ships) should now have more accurate numbers. This shouldn't affect build requirements at all, but means that when you reprocess it the base reprocess amounts accurately reflect what went into it.
- Max runs on blueprints are now rounded to 1 significant figure, as I've now figured out how to make Excel do that
- For T2 things that previously only had one of a given item required, but were being multiplied by 1.5 and then rounding up to 2, I've put in a special case to pull them back down to 1, as the .5 that in principle you'd get because of -ve ME was I believe ignored in most situations.
- T3 build costs were increased because they were being treated as if they'd previously had waste, which they didn't, so we fixed this

A new SDE will be generated at some point, and we're hoping to get this on SiSi soonish.

Does this include T3 subsystems also because the hybrid components needed to make them are currently affected by the ME level of hybrid component BPOs which also didn't have waste before crius?
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2014-07-26 23:39:49 UTC
Any chance you are gonna increase the build time for fighters and cap mods again?
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2014-07-28 06:33:35 UTC
Arcosian wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
As a heads-up for some adjustments we're just rolling through:
- Types with build requirements defined in the back end as "recycle" (eg the T1 ship in T2 ships) should now have more accurate numbers. This shouldn't affect build requirements at all, but means that when you reprocess it the base reprocess amounts accurately reflect what went into it.
- Max runs on blueprints are now rounded to 1 significant figure, as I've now figured out how to make Excel do that
- For T2 things that previously only had one of a given item required, but were being multiplied by 1.5 and then rounding up to 2, I've put in a special case to pull them back down to 1, as the .5 that in principle you'd get because of -ve ME was I believe ignored in most situations.
- T3 build costs were increased because they were being treated as if they'd previously had waste, which they didn't, so we fixed this

A new SDE will be generated at some point, and we're hoping to get this on SiSi soonish.

Does this include T3 subsystems also because the hybrid components needed to make them are currently affected by the ME level of hybrid component BPOs which also didn't have waste before crius?


I'm almost sure they had waste. They just had all materials in extra materials section so it was not affecting. If you researched to 10 you should have comparable bpo but i also noticed slight increase so it would be great if ccp could confirm that to

Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Maruk Ihnati
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#11 - 2014-07-28 13:40:30 UTC
Thanks for fixing the items with 1 of each required materials. I can start selling and not hold on to the stocks I have now.

When are these planned for TQ?
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#12 - 2014-07-28 13:42:33 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
Any chance you are gonna increase the build time for fighters and cap mods again?


Not unless there's a compelling reason to, no. Is there?

Arcosian wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
As a heads-up for some adjustments we're just rolling through:
- Types with build requirements defined in the back end as "recycle" (eg the T1 ship in T2 ships) should now have more accurate numbers. This shouldn't affect build requirements at all, but means that when you reprocess it the base reprocess amounts accurately reflect what went into it.
- Max runs on blueprints are now rounded to 1 significant figure, as I've now figured out how to make Excel do that
- For T2 things that previously only had one of a given item required, but were being multiplied by 1.5 and then rounding up to 2, I've put in a special case to pull them back down to 1, as the .5 that in principle you'd get because of -ve ME was I believe ignored in most situations.
- T3 build costs were increased because they were being treated as if they'd previously had waste, which they didn't, so we fixed this

A new SDE will be generated at some point, and we're hoping to get this on SiSi soonish.

Does this include T3 subsystems also because the hybrid components needed to make them are currently affected by the ME level of hybrid component BPOs which also didn't have waste before crius?


Believe so, yes.
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2014-07-28 19:07:57 UTC
One of the good things about caps (and supers) is that it takes a while to build the ships and the modules they need. It should not be trivial to build a capfleet (and even more so, to replace it).

A supercarrier fleet that lost its bombers was severely crippled for a week or more, even more if someone (*cough*) bought all bombers from the public market right after, or even during the fight.

That was a very interesting gameplay opportunity on many levels that has changed for the worse (or less interesting)

Was there a compelling reason to change that? I don't think so, but I would like to hear your arguments. (

I'm a bit mad at myself that I missed the change when I looked over your blueprint data adjustment files, I would have made myself heard earlier)
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#14 - 2014-07-28 20:16:25 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
One of the good things about caps (and supers) is that it takes a while to build the ships and the modules they need. It should not be trivial to build a capfleet (and even more so, to replace it).

A supercarrier fleet that lost its bombers was severely crippled for a week or more, even more if someone (*cough*) bought all bombers from the public market right after, or even during the fight.

That was a very interesting gameplay opportunity on many levels that has changed for the worse (or less interesting)

Was there a compelling reason to change that? I don't think so, but I would like to hear your arguments. (

I'm a bit mad at myself that I missed the change when I looked over your blueprint data adjustment files, I would have made myself heard earlier)


Nope, no compelling reason, I just picked numbers that looked pretty.

How long *should* it take to replace capital gear, and what numbers get us there? I'm trying as much as possible in this project to avoid "just make it like it used to be", but if people can come up with approximations for targeting industrial stats onto reasonable external targets, I'm all ears.
Jon Lucien
Goosefleet
Gooseflock Featheration
#15 - 2014-07-28 23:13:42 UTC
Why must the t3 blueprint changes go to sisi first? Is there a specific reason we need to publicly test whether moving the material requirements back to where they were previously works? Can you please just push the t3 blueprint material adjustment to TQ?
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#16 - 2014-07-28 23:38:29 UTC
Jon Lucien wrote:
Why must the t3 blueprint changes go to sisi first? Is there a specific reason we need to publicly test whether moving the material requirements back to where they were previously works? Can you please just push the t3 blueprint material adjustment to TQ?


Technical handwaving. They shooooould be out tomorrow, I think.

("OMG GRAYSLACE Y U NO NO?" "Because I'm at home and Nullarbor is no longer within shouting distance" "ZOMG U SUX CPC PLS" "Sure.")
Jon Lucien
Goosefleet
Gooseflock Featheration
#17 - 2014-07-28 23:57:14 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Jon Lucien wrote:
Why must the t3 blueprint changes go to sisi first? Is there a specific reason we need to publicly test whether moving the material requirements back to where they were previously works? Can you please just push the t3 blueprint material adjustment to TQ?


Technical handwaving. They shooooould be out tomorrow, I think.

("OMG GRAYSLACE Y U NO NO?" "Because I'm at home and Nullarbor is no longer within shouting distance" "ZOMG U SUX CPC PLS" "Sure.")


Quoting for posterity. Show us on the doll where the angry players touched you.
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2014-07-29 01:12:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Gilbaron
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Gilbaron wrote:
One of the good things about caps (and supers) is that it takes a while to build the ships and the modules they need. It should not be trivial to build a capfleet (and even more so, to replace it).

A supercarrier fleet that lost its bombers was severely crippled for a week or more, even more if someone (*cough*) bought all bombers from the public market right after, or even during the fight.

That was a very interesting gameplay opportunity on many levels that has changed for the worse (or less interesting)

Was there a compelling reason to change that? I don't think so, but I would like to hear your arguments. (

I'm a bit mad at myself that I missed the change when I looked over your blueprint data adjustment files, I would have made myself heard earlier)


Nope, no compelling reason, I just picked numbers that looked pretty.

How long *should* it take to replace capital gear, and what numbers get us there? I'm trying as much as possible in this project to avoid "just make it like it used to be", but if people can come up with approximations for targeting industrial stats onto reasonable external targets, I'm all ears.


it's really hard to come up with numbers that are not the old ones when thinking the old ones were better :D

replacing a supercarriers ~15 fighters takes a day in crius. that's shorter than pretty much all reinforcement timers. not cool. the longest reinforcement timer is 74 hours on an outpost. so ~7 hours per fighter(bomber) would move us somewhere interesting (not being able to completely replace a lost drone bay until the next timer) bombing the (fighter)bombers of your enemy a few times can mean that he may run into problems in a prolonged war, especially if you start controlling the jita market. (rank somewhere close to the one medium control towers have)

cap modules would be next. i know that hulls take 10 days to build (and i think that this is a very reasonable value)

however, controlling the market for cap hulls is hard, controlling the market for crucial modules isn't nearly as hard (a corpmate of mine often bought all bubble launchers in an enemies staging system when they tried to pin our ships down with lots of dictors. buying dictor hulls would have had the same effect at a much higher price. it's like a pressure point. The same thing happened to us when someone bought all subsystems of a certain kind. many of us were simply unable to replace the lost proteus and we were forced to switch to a less effective doctrine for some days.

if you can prevent (or slow down) your enemy from reshipping into dreads by buying all siege modules, you can have a nice and measurable effect that works on a completely different level, even forcing an enemy to reship into T1 instead of T2 dreads has an impact.


i would argue for ~20 hours per capital module, maybe shorter for guns and (remote) repair things, but longer for triage and siege modules. (rank somewhere close to the one large control towers have)

that means it takes a single character using a single slot about 7 days to rebuild everything for a triage carrier (up to 7 capital mods). the same character, using all his slots would be able to build the fitting for ~1.5 carriers per day.

you can't really solve the problem via price. we are so spacerich that we will pay pretty much any price when necessary. the only thing you can't buy when it's to late is time. you can try to prepare for all kinds of situations, but preparation opens a whole rabbit hole of meta gaming opportunities. even thinking about some traitor being in charge of our strategic bomber reserve excites me.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#19 - 2014-07-29 10:59:11 UTC
Update: T3 fixes hopefully Thursday, "technical reasons", IANAP. Will answer Gilbaron after next meeting, hopefully.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#20 - 2014-07-29 13:39:39 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Gilbaron wrote:
One of the good things about caps (and supers) is that it takes a while to build the ships and the modules they need. It should not be trivial to build a capfleet (and even more so, to replace it).

A supercarrier fleet that lost its bombers was severely crippled for a week or more, even more if someone (*cough*) bought all bombers from the public market right after, or even during the fight.

That was a very interesting gameplay opportunity on many levels that has changed for the worse (or less interesting)

Was there a compelling reason to change that? I don't think so, but I would like to hear your arguments. (

I'm a bit mad at myself that I missed the change when I looked over your blueprint data adjustment files, I would have made myself heard earlier)


Nope, no compelling reason, I just picked numbers that looked pretty.

How long *should* it take to replace capital gear, and what numbers get us there? I'm trying as much as possible in this project to avoid "just make it like it used to be", but if people can come up with approximations for targeting industrial stats onto reasonable external targets, I'm all ears.


it's really hard to come up with numbers that are not the old ones when thinking the old ones were better :D

replacing a supercarriers ~15 fighters takes a day in crius. that's shorter than pretty much all reinforcement timers. not cool. the longest reinforcement timer is 74 hours on an outpost. so ~7 hours per fighter(bomber) would move us somewhere interesting (not being able to completely replace a lost drone bay until the next timer) bombing the (fighter)bombers of your enemy a few times can mean that he may run into problems in a prolonged war, especially if you start controlling the jita market. (rank somewhere close to the one medium control towers have)

cap modules would be next. i know that hulls take 10 days to build (and i think that this is a very reasonable value)

however, controlling the market for cap hulls is hard, controlling the market for crucial modules isn't nearly as hard (a corpmate of mine often bought all bubble launchers in an enemies staging system when they tried to pin our ships down with lots of dictors. buying dictor hulls would have had the same effect at a much higher price. it's like a pressure point. The same thing happened to us when someone bought all subsystems of a certain kind. many of us were simply unable to replace the lost proteus and we were forced to switch to a less effective doctrine for some days.

if you can prevent (or slow down) your enemy from reshipping into dreads by buying all siege modules, you can have a nice and measurable effect that works on a completely different level, even forcing an enemy to reship into T1 instead of T2 dreads has an impact. (because us nullsec overlords can pay pretty much any price).

i would argue for ~20 hours per capital module, maybe shorter for guns and (remote) repair things, but longer for triage and siege modules. (rank somewhere close to the one large control towers have)

that means it takes a single character using a single slot about 7 days to rebuild everything for a triage carrier (up to 7 capital mods). the same character, using all his slots would be able to build the fitting for ~1.5 carriers per day.

you can't really solve the problem via price. we are so spacerich that we will pay pretty much any price when necessary. the only thing you can't buy when it's to late is time. you can try to prepare for all kinds of situations, but preparation opens a whole rabbit whole of meta gaming opportunities. even thinking about some traitor being in charge of our strategic bomber reserve excites me.


Good reasoning, I'll go talk to people about this :) To be clear, we're not opposed to ending up somewhere near the old numbers, but we'd prefer the reasoning driving that to be this sort of thing ("how quickly can a single blueprint replenish a fighter bay") rather than just wanting to return to the old arbitrary balance because the new arbitrary balance is different.
12Next page