These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Lighting the invention bulb

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#41 - 2014-09-11 15:36:54 UTC
CCP Nullarbor wrote:
KIller Wabbit wrote:
Sure there was a surge of industry after the patch - people shut down weeks prior in order to not get raped over in the market after the changes. Show a graph of previous 6 months if you want cred CCP.


Going back 2 years and redrawing the same graph tells the same story.


"show"
Z1gy
Vindicator Corporation
#42 - 2014-09-11 15:38:32 UTC
Komi Toran wrote:
Not liking the changes.

In my mind, anything that makes invention harder = good. Anything that makes it easier = bad. There are some exceptions to the rule, but generally, this is where the margins on T2 production come from. So you've got two things that qualify as good here. First, even if it's annoying, is the skill requirement rebalance. I may be sad that my Mechanics V skill won't be all that useful anymore, but eggs and omelets and all that. Second is the meta item removal. Lower chance of invention success means more time to successfully invent.

Now you go and muck it up by raising the invention chance for ships and including the new non-binary success chance. The dev blog states this is "quite needed to counteract the success changes," but it doesn't present any evidence of that assertion. The ability to have multiple invention runs alone could be enough. I find recovering datacores to be questionable, as they long ago lost 90% of their market value. This is just going to hit them again, which is another nerf to data sites.

In short, I was really hoping this was going to go the other direction.


it will hit the R&D agent and the faction warfare farmers hard.
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2014-09-11 15:38:37 UTC
The announcement of chained invention runs makes me both scared and excited. It's probably gonna crush the margin without a significant increase in invention times (takes longer the more runs are chained together.

Other than that, sad to see meta loot gone, it was never a good feature, but always a nice twist.

I like the new partial failure thing.

And I really wonder what I should speculate on :D
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#44 - 2014-09-11 15:41:42 UTC
I like the new non-binary invention outcomes, makes it a little more interesting.

One thing I always wanted since I started with invention was to have the option to deliberately spend additional datacores for a slightly improved invention chance, maybe this could be implemented, too?

Also glad to hear that you are going to take another look at decryptors... some of them feel just incredibly useless to me, a rebalancing would be really appreciated.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#45 - 2014-09-11 15:44:09 UTC
Any chance you can make all the pictures of the module group in the blog be the same module/market group for those who have zero previous experience in industry/science? Would simplify things's fantastically.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#46 - 2014-09-11 15:46:20 UTC
Querns wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Querns wrote:
Very glad to see meta items and data interfaces being removed from the invention process.

A question (if it can even be answered at this point): how will decryptors affect the new non-binary success chance?


Since the non-binary success chance will be affected by anything that affects invention chance. Thus, decryptors with a high chance bonus may be worthwhile to use to try and get an exceptional result.

However, as mentioned in the blog, we'll need to make sure Decryptors are properly balanced not to break things in the new system.

So, the chance for each type of successful result would be increased at the same time?

E.g. (with fake numbers): I have a 50% chance to invent normally, with a 30% standard, 10% good, 7% great, and 3% exceptional. I add a decryptor that changes my success chance to 75% -- would that change my success "bands" to 45% standard, 15% good, 10.5% great, and 4.5% exceptional?


Yes. Granular outcomes are based on the standard chance to succeed. If standard chance goes up, so does the others as you explained.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#47 - 2014-09-11 15:48:49 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

How about breaking it down showing how much was done in high sec pre and post Crius. Or how many characters are doing industry today (and not 1 week's worth to test out the new system), as opposed to 1 year ago, and where they are located. Maybe that would explain the drop in the PCU.

They actually did this during the Alliance Tournament -- during a break between fights, CCP Greyscale showed some charts with industry breakdown before and after Crius along highsec / lowsec / nullsec lines. There wasn't much change -- both sides showed 80-85% highsec, 15-20% nullsec. (I don't recall the exact amount, sorry.) Total job count increased in highsec's favor very slightly ( < 1% ) and total job minutes increased in nullsec's favor very slightly ( < 1% ).

Incidentally, despite having access to superlative facilities in nullsec, I'm doing all of my manufacturing in highsec, because, surprise surprise, nullsec's shipping costs make my particular industry a non-starter. I'm turning over hundreds of billions of isk a week and pocketing 5-10% margin for my troubles.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
DaOpa
Static Corp
#48 - 2014-09-11 15:49:43 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
Panteraa wrote:
Are there plans to change T2 BPO's? I'm not looking for details, I'm just curious if a change is on the timeline.


We are not happy with them in general - what would exactly happen to them and when remains quite undefined for now.



Wow, this is exactly what I dont want to hear - a Undefined answer, no clarity - nothing ..


Keep it simple -

Either totally remove T2 BPO's

or

During Invention, have a rare chance to spawn a BPO instead of a BPC


Other changes that need to happen for industry since the removal of slots is to change the caps on how many jobs you can have ...

Max Level Science / Manufacture Jobs at 11 - to low, update this higher.


I personally would like to see "caps" removed, since there is no more slot limitations.

LP Stores DB - WH List / Systems - Live Streamer
Fade Toblack
Per.ly
The 20 Minuters
#49 - 2014-09-11 15:51:33 UTC
On the skill changes, http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66476/1/Newskillreq2.png - it would make more sense for "Advanced Battleship Construction" to have "Battleship Construction" as a pre-req rather than "Cruiser Construction".
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#50 - 2014-09-11 15:53:36 UTC
Fade Toblack wrote:
On the skill changes, http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66476/1/Newskillreq2.png - it would make more sense for "Advanced Battleship Construction" to have "Battleship Construction" as a pre-req rather than "Cruiser Construction".

Considering that "Battleship Construction" is being transformed into "Advanced Battleship Construction," that'd be impossible. :V

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Fade Toblack
Per.ly
The 20 Minuters
#51 - 2014-09-11 16:01:37 UTC
Querns wrote:
Considering that "Battleship Construction" is being transformed into "Advanced Battleship Construction," that'd be impossible. :V


Ah in that case, CCP need to improve the confusing image I linked, because it still lists "Cruiser Construction" as a pre-req for "Advanced Battleship Construction". Roll
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
#52 - 2014-09-11 16:04:22 UTC
Well, for the most part things look very good.

But the changes to base invention chance have me very confused.

Freighters are currently grouped with frigates and destroyers with a base of 30%.

The new invention chances do not list "Freighters" specifically, but I assume they will fall under Capitals and Capital Industrial Ships have 20%". Although they are NOT listed as capital industrial ships in the market tree. If they are, that will be a huge negative impact for jump freighters, are they not expensive enough already?

This title just seems odd to me, as there are no other ships in this catagory with a T2 variant. the only "capital" ship industrial or otherwise with a T2 variant is freighters>>Jump freighters.

Also this one"All Battleships, Industrial Command Ship have 25%"

What industrial command ships are there? The ORCA is the only one I can think of as the Roqual should fit under the capital industrial ship catigory with the freighters. However neither the ORCA or the Roqual blueprints can be invented from, so the invention chance does not apply to them.

Why list ships here that do not have a T2 variant that can be invented? Should we expect T2 ORCA's, Roquals, Dreads, and Carriers, coming so that these new invention chances would have something to be applied to?
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#53 - 2014-09-11 16:07:50 UTC
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
Well, for the most part things look very good.

But the changes to base invention chance have me very confused.

Freighters are currently grouped with frigates and destroyers with a base of 30%.

The new invention chances do not list "Freighters" specifically, but I assume they will fall under Capitals and Capital Industrial Ships have 20%". Although they are NOT listed as capital industrial ships in the market tree. If they are, that will be a huge negative impact for jump freighters, are they not expensive enough already?

This title just seems odd to me, as there are no other ships in this catagory with a T2 variant. the only "capital" ship industrial or otherwise with a T2 variant is freighters>>Jump freighters.

Also this one"All Battleships, Industrial Command Ship have 25%"

What industrial command ships are there? The ORCA is the only one I can think of as the Roqual should fit under the capital industrial ship catigory with the freighters. However neither the ORCA or the Roqual blueprints can be invented from, so the invention chance does not apply to them.

Why list ships here that do not have a T2 variant that can be invented? Should we expect T2 ORCA's, Roquals, Dreads, and Carriers, coming so that these new invention chances would have something to be applied to?

I kinda doubt they are specifically planning new T2 ships as a result of this change. Listing the chances like this just lets them have that work done now in case they want to do it later, if at all.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#54 - 2014-09-11 16:10:57 UTC
Fade Toblack wrote:
Querns wrote:
Considering that "Battleship Construction" is being transformed into "Advanced Battleship Construction," that'd be impossible. :V


Ah in that case, CCP need to improve the confusing image I linked, because it still lists "Cruiser Construction" as a pre-req for "Advanced Battleship Construction". Roll


Yes, those should be "Advanced Battleship Construction" and "Advanced Cruiser Construction" on the screenshot Oops
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#55 - 2014-09-11 16:13:16 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Querns wrote:
Bugsy VanHalen wrote:
Well, for the most part things look very good.

But the changes to base invention chance have me very confused.

Freighters are currently grouped with frigates and destroyers with a base of 30%.

The new invention chances do not list "Freighters" specifically, but I assume they will fall under Capitals and Capital Industrial Ships have 20%". Although they are NOT listed as capital industrial ships in the market tree. If they are, that will be a huge negative impact for jump freighters, are they not expensive enough already?

This title just seems odd to me, as there are no other ships in this catagory with a T2 variant. the only "capital" ship industrial or otherwise with a T2 variant is freighters>>Jump freighters.

Also this one"All Battleships, Industrial Command Ship have 25%"

What industrial command ships are there? The ORCA is the only one I can think of as the Roqual should fit under the capital industrial ship catigory with the freighters. However neither the ORCA or the Roqual blueprints can be invented from, so the invention chance does not apply to them.

Why list ships here that do not have a T2 variant that can be invented? Should we expect T2 ORCA's, Roquals, Dreads, and Carriers, coming so that these new invention chances would have something to be applied to?

I kinda doubt they are specifically planning new T2 ships as a result of this change. Listing the chances like this just lets them have that work done now in case they want to do it later, if at all.


Yep, that's why we wanted to keep the groups vague, in case we want to add something in the future.

For clarity purposes, Freighters belong in the Capitals and Capital Industrial Ships group for the invention chance, so yes, it's a reduction in success rate.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#56 - 2014-09-11 16:22:31 UTC
Interesting changes indeed.

I think however that polishing invention could've been the opportunity to completely remove RNG-based elements, as they provide no benefits to gameplay or enjoyment whatsoever.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
Rapscallion Jones
Omnibus Solutions
#57 - 2014-09-11 16:33:22 UTC
When do I get to invent with an industrial command ship BPC and what will it do?!?! :-D
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#58 - 2014-09-11 16:34:22 UTC
Hmmm

As far as I know industrial command ship and Capital Industrial Ship do not have a T2 version, yet are specifically listed



Spoiler alert maybe with some rebalancing?? Fozzie said Rorqual rebalance coming soon??
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
#59 - 2014-09-11 16:35:06 UTC
Kynric wrote:
Are there any plans to add value to data sites to compensate for the loss of data interface related drops?


Since the exploration mini-game was introduced the selling price of those interface BPCs is miniscule. Remember when the ship ones sold for 120 million ISK each ? Or was it 150 million ISK each - I forget. Admittedely those were silly prices but after the mini-game it went completely the other way.

" 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. ' .
Qoi
Exert Force
#60 - 2014-09-11 16:35:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Qoi
The multiple invention runs change was long awaited and will do very crazy things to the market Big smile

Will Rapid Heavy Missile Launcher II still be the only blueprint with a default number of 20 output runs on invented blueprints?

What is the unmodified ME/TE for Tech II and Tech III invention, will it be -2% -4% for both?

http://eve-industry.org