These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: Building Dreams: Introducing Engineering Complexes

First post First post First post
Author
Kuhn Arashi
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#761 - 2016-10-27 15:18:51 UTC
Darrien wrote:
Are there anymore Citadel Service modules down the line that will provide Astrahus's with a bit more utility ?


I believe all service modules will be able to be fitted to astrahus unless they specifically say they do not.
All of the engineering ones can be fitted, you just wont get the bonuses from the engineering hulls. on SISI currently you also cannot fit engineering rigs to regular citadels, I'm unsure if that is changing with the adjustments that were mentioned in this thread today.
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
#762 - 2016-10-27 15:20:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Mai Khumm
A reply!

This is a welcome change for fuel needed. I would've preferred 50%, but 40% I can happily live with!

I'll still be sticking with my Astrahus for my intended manufacturing plan...the incentive isn't really there to invest in another Structure...
Jeronica
Mogul Holdings
Mogul Financial
#763 - 2016-10-27 15:30:45 UTC
Just a small QoL request, any chance you can put the rig requirements up as a spreadsheet, instead of just a jpg?

EVE-MOGUL.COM

Trade Profit Tracking&Analytics

Offering Sotiyo Services In

New Caldari | Ashab

IPOs & Investments

Darrien
Ouroboros Logistics
#764 - 2016-10-27 15:48:16 UTC
Kuhn Arashi wrote:
Darrien wrote:
Are there anymore Citadel Service modules down the line that will provide Astrahus's with a bit more utility ?


I believe all service modules will be able to be fitted to astrahus unless they specifically say they do not.
All of the engineering ones can be fitted, you just wont get the bonuses from the engineering hulls. on SISI currently you also cannot fit engineering rigs to regular citadels, I'm unsure if that is changing with the adjustments that were mentioned in this thread today.


Aye, it's just the only service module that a Astrahus get's a bonus to using is the Clone Bay, I guess it's main utility is it's invulnerability timer ?
Narook
Lucifer's Hammer
A Band Apart.
#765 - 2016-10-27 15:52:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Narook
[deleted] - not really a concern...
Icarus Narcissus
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#766 - 2016-10-27 15:56:24 UTC
Hey! My suggestions about the Material bonuses and reduced rig strength were used! Shocked

Great job CCP, I think this is a much more viable route to go with these structures! Big smile
Kuhn Arashi
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#767 - 2016-10-27 16:03:27 UTC
Darrien wrote:
Kuhn Arashi wrote:
Darrien wrote:
Are there anymore Citadel Service modules down the line that will provide Astrahus's with a bit more utility ?


I believe all service modules will be able to be fitted to astrahus unless they specifically say they do not.
All of the engineering ones can be fitted, you just wont get the bonuses from the engineering hulls. on SISI currently you also cannot fit engineering rigs to regular citadels, I'm unsure if that is changing with the adjustments that were mentioned in this thread today.


Aye, it's just the only service module that a Astrahus get's a bonus to using is the Clone Bay, I guess it's main utility is it's invulnerability timer ?


Seems that is the intention. The first set of citadels look to be intended as staging points or home stations for small entities. So they have much tougher defenses and staying power (a little too easy to spam, but yeah..). They look to be a jack of all trades kinda thing where you can set them up to do pretty much whatever you need them to do, but other structures will do them better.
Z1gy
Vindicator Corporation
#768 - 2016-10-27 16:04:09 UTC
would ccp considers reducing the rig price further or reducing the mat as we might change the rig on the fly according to market forces
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#769 - 2016-10-27 16:07:55 UTC
Sounds reasonable, definitely the right direction with the new bonuses and fuel consumption now.

I'm my own NPC alt.

Jaden Noah
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#770 - 2016-10-27 16:09:27 UTC
Will there be an option to lockdown BPOs inside corp hangars in Citadels/Engineering Complexes soon?
Kuhn Arashi
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#771 - 2016-10-27 16:10:05 UTC
Jaden Noah wrote:
Will there be an option to lockdown BPOs inside corp hangars in Citadels/Engineering Complexes soon?


I too, am interested in this.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#772 - 2016-10-27 17:10:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Steve Ronuken
Skia Aumer wrote:
Space Vixen wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:
I like how good is CCP in communicating. Neither them or CSM are here to explain the design and address concerns. As I mentioned earlier, the clear statement of design goals would've prevented a larger part of frustration - alas, that's too much effort for them I guess.


I think this is the biggest issue in this entire discussion.
This entire thread is basically heated debate about the implied design strategy of CCP, based on people's interpretation of the proposed features/tactics.
CCP - if you made the strategy clear, I belive it would be far more acceptable to people.

And the big questions remain without answers.
1. What are the design goals?
2. Why u no change NDA and let CSM speak for themselves?



We can speak for ourselves?

We can't talk about things CCP tell us, but once things are out in public, we can talk about them to our hearts content?

I just tend not to speak in threads like this, unless I need to prompt people to ask or answer specific questions (which then inform my conversations with CCP) I have been talking with a bunch of different players about this stuff already.

My gut feel was that they were too specialied, and it needed to be opened up. I'd have preferred it a little more open, but I'm not done annoying CCP yet Blink


Edit: Just realised that this might look like I'm trying to take all the credit. I'm not. I've been involved in the conversation, but I'm not the only one.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Chani El'zrya
Beyond Frontier
Pandemic Horde
#773 - 2016-10-27 17:11:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Chani El'zrya
Hey !!!!

Thanks for those changes.
Now, there are much more reasons for everyone to use ECs.

Two questions :
- the 1% flat bonus on ME, is it additive or multiplicative ? For the rigs i assume it's still multiplicative.
- Is it possible to cancel jobs after armor reinforcement ?
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
#774 - 2016-10-27 17:12:50 UTC
I'm extremely glad to see that the fuel requirements have been reduced. They're now much more in-line with where towers were at, and were my largest complaint by a wide margin. I'm still disappointed over the degree of division on Medium rigs, but the included small bonus in the structure itself helps to alleviate that.

I look forward to giving these a try in the future.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#775 - 2016-10-27 17:15:08 UTC
Chani El'zrya wrote:
Hey !!!!

Thanks for those changes.
Now, there are much more reasons to use ECs for everyone.

Two questions :
- the 1% flat bonus on ME, is it additive or multiplicative ? For the rigs i assume it's still multiplicative.
- Is it possible to cancel jobs after armor reinforcement ?








All bonuses are multiplicative.

The only time you add, is for skills, before you then multiply it in.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
#776 - 2016-10-27 17:31:52 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
The ROI on the T2 rigs, relative to the T1, seems a little grim.

Looks like - napkin math - it would take about a trillion in input material, all else being equal, to make up the rig price difference between a T1 and T2 manufacturing rig on an Azbel in low sec.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Chani El'zrya
Beyond Frontier
Pandemic Horde
#777 - 2016-10-27 17:34:40 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
Chani El'zrya wrote:
Hey !!!!

Thanks for those changes.
Now, there are much more reasons to use ECs for everyone.

Two questions :
- the 1% flat bonus on ME, is it additive or multiplicative ? For the rigs i assume it's still multiplicative.
- Is it possible to cancel jobs after armor reinforcement ?



All bonuses are multiplicative.

The only time you add, is for skills, before you then multiply it in.


Ok then, in high sec, we have exchanged:
- a ME bonus of 3.6% on specialized items and 0 on other items with,
- a ME bonus of 3.376% on specialized items and 1% on other items

Well why not.
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#778 - 2016-10-27 17:54:37 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
I just tend not to speak in threads like this

Maybe you should?
It's been over 666 posts of feedback where people ask questions, make suggestions, sometimes cheer, mostly rage and... And the whole thread feels like it's abandoned. Dont get me wrong, I know that you folks do a lot, but it looks and feels like CSM mind their own business and doesnt care about us players.
xXxNIMRODxXx
Angelus.Mortis
Goonswarm Federation
#779 - 2016-10-27 18:22:16 UTC
any chance to have ME and TE rig all in one piece with a better-than-t1 but lower-than-t2 bonus?
seriously. All that diversification is rather too much.
Nfynity Prime
Nfynity Prime Corp
Shadow of Nfynity
#780 - 2016-10-27 19:10:01 UTC
The changes are in the right direction, but the fuel costs are still twice what a medium POS setup costs, for less functionality, more cost, and more vulnerability. Now I can live with putting the structure at risk, but it would be nice to have comparable functionality and costs in the new structures, in comparison to a POS. After all, we are putting more at risk, so I would think we should at least get as much out of them as the structures they are meant to replace, if not more.

Unless the fuel costs are reduced further it looks like its back to the NPC station with 0 risk and no chance of content generation for a lot of us.