These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Structure Fuel Block consumption.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Darrien
Ouroboros Logistics
#1 - 2016-10-12 08:14:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Darrien
Scrap the 25% fuel reduction bonus for all structures:
It can be confusing. ie Standup Cloning Center I .... does that cost me 7.5 fuel blocks an hour to run on a Citadel ?

Flatten service module consumption:
Basic modules ( Reprocessing, Cloning, Labs, Manufacturing, Invention ) 5 blocks a hour.
Advanced modules ( Capital construction ) 10 blocks a hour.
Speciality modules ( Super Cap construction, Market ) 15 blocks a hour.

Scale cost with structure size ( bigger things cost more to run but also have wider utility with rigs ):

Medium
3 - 5 service slots 15-25 fuel blocks an hour

Large:
100% increase to fuel block consumption
5 - 7 service slots 50 - 80 fuel blocks an hour

X-Large:
200% increase to fuel block consumption
6-8 service slots 105-120 fuel blocks an hour

This system brings costs roughly in line with the old POS system at the medium and large tiers, promotes service module diversity as there's less penalty for cross installing and makes fuel calculations slightly easier.
YeuxVerts Belle
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2016-10-12 14:33:34 UTC  |  Edited by: YeuxVerts Belle
Darrien wrote:

Large:
100% bonus to fuel block consumption

Is that a bonus, or an increase? I'm guessing the latter.

Darrien wrote:
This system brings costs roughly in line with the old POS system at the medium and large tiers, promotes service module diversity as there's less penalty for cross installing and makes fuel calculations slightly easier.

1. Because old POS did that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Larger structures already cost more to install, give me a good reason why they also need more to maintain.
2. It only promotes service diversity for the smaller structures, which can't offer service diversity because of too few service slots.
3. I don't see how calculations are easier aside of the odd 7.5 fuel consumption for bonused cloning. They're actually more complicated because structure size comes into play for calculations in addition to structure type.

Basically, your idea might be good, but for all the wrong reasons. Or it might just be plain bad.

The above message presents my opinions on the topic at hand. If there is a conflict between my views and reality, consider reality to be correct until proven otherwise.
Darrien
Ouroboros Logistics
#3 - 2016-10-12 16:53:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Darrien
YeuxVerts Belle wrote:
Darrien wrote:

Large:
100% bonus to fuel block consumption

Is that a bonus, or an increase? I'm guessing the latter.

Darrien wrote:
This system brings costs roughly in line with the old POS system at the medium and large tiers, promotes service module diversity as there's less penalty for cross installing and makes fuel calculations slightly easier.

1. Because old POS did that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Larger structures already cost more to install, give me a good reason why they also need more to maintain.
2. It only promotes service diversity for the smaller structures, which can't offer service diversity because of too few service slots.
3. I don't see how calculations are easier aside of the odd 7.5 fuel consumption for bonused cloning. They're actually more complicated because structure size comes into play for calculations in addition to structure type.

Basically, your idea might be good, but for all the wrong reasons. Or it might just be plain bad.


Thanks, bonus changed to increase for clarity.

1.) Ok firstly what I have proposed for large structures roughly keeps the price the same as they are proposing at the moment or intending to be ( Reprocessing service is more expensive to run but Labs and Manufacturing are cheaper to run )

Why larger structures need more to maintain ( apart from being more realistic ):
Because at the moment due to rig scaling there is little to no benefit building anything other than a XL Structure in the long run.
Ok so initial outlay is a huge factor, a massive factor. Fair enough you pay, 7-8 Billion for a Abzel you want it to be better than a 1-2 Billion Raitaru, and with larger rigging it automatically is.
At the moment an Engineering complex with one Manufacturing Plant I service module will cost around 53 million a week to run, 70.8 million for a citadel ( which also functions slower and less efficientently )
As you go from down the structure sizes why should a inherently less efficient Service module cost you the same to run as the higher tier ?
Also use is a factor as structures get larger and rig bonuses more efficient larger structures will inherently get more use yet cost exactly the same to run as smaller structures.

2.) It promotes service diversity for all structures, I for one would be less bothered by fitting a engineering service module in a citadel if it didn't cost me a extra 25% to run sure, less efficient but probably more convenient and I have more slots to fill..
This of course scales with the structure ie XL owners are probably richer and less concerned with running cost than a large owner and so on.

3.) Ok here goes:
Citadel Service Modules:
Clone Bay 10 per hour, 7.5 for a Citadel
Market Hub 40 per hour, 30 for a Citadel ( Fortizar and Keepstar Only )

Reprocessing:
Reprocessing Service Module 4 per hour.

Engineering:
Lab/Manufacturing/Invention Service 20 per hour, 15 for a Engineering Complex
Capital Shipyard 30 per hour, 22.5 for a Egineering Complex
Super Cap 40 per hour, 30 for a XL Egineering Complex

So thats five cost tiers, two of which can result in half numbers......
YeuxVerts Belle
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2016-10-13 06:38:10 UTC
Darrien wrote:

Because at the moment due to rig scaling there is little to no benefit building anything other than a XL Structure in the long run.

If that were true, nobody would build Astrahuses or even Fortizars.
The thing is, those structures have benefits beyond their service slots and their rigs. They have high/mid/low slots that can be used for combat (less so for ECs, but still), and they offer tethering and safe storage.

Darrien wrote:
As you go from down the structure sizes why should a inherently less efficient Service module cost you the same to run as the higher tier ?
Also use is a factor as structures get larger and rig bonuses more efficient larger structures will inherently get more use yet cost exactly the same to run as smaller structures.

This is somewhat incorrect. A Raitaru fitted for efficient copying of blueprints is just as efficient at the task as an Abzbel correctly fitted. The difference is the Raitaru is less versatile, not less efficient. Given the current implementation, that statement doesn't bother me in itself (although the details of the rigs' implementation are another matter entirely).

Darrien wrote:
2.) It promotes service diversity for all structures, I for one would be less bothered by fitting a engineering service module in a citadel if it didn't cost me a extra 25% to run sure, less efficient but probably more convenient and I have more slots to fill..
This of course scales with the structure ie XL owners are probably richer and less concerned with running cost than a large owner and so on.

But it defeats the purpose of an engineering complex. If the EC doesn't have a bonus for its task (industry), then why build one instead of a more resilient citadel ?

Darrien wrote:
3.) Ok here goes:
[...]
So thats five cost tiers, two of which can result in half numbers......

Your suggestion would replace X tasks with two tiers, into X tasks with tree tiers. Hardly simpler, no matter how you look at it. The rounding problem is just that, a rounding problem.

The above message presents my opinions on the topic at hand. If there is a conflict between my views and reality, consider reality to be correct until proven otherwise.
Darrien
Ouroboros Logistics
#5 - 2016-10-13 07:58:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Darrien
Well this is just a suggestion, I doubt it'll change anyone's minds least of all the devs.
As EC's and the engineering service modules stand at the moment I doubt i'll be investing in either.

YeuxVerts Belle wrote:

This is somewhat incorrect. A Raitaru fitted for efficient copying of blueprints is just as efficient at the task as an Abzbel correctly fitted. The difference is the Raitaru is less versatile, not less efficient. Given the current implementation, that statement doesn't bother me in itself (although the details of the rigs' implementation are another matter entirely).


Not true, Raitaru's only have a 5% reduction in manufacturing and science required time as opposed to 10% or 15% for the larger EC's.

YeuxVerts Belle wrote:

But it defeats the purpose of an engineering complex. If the EC doesn't have a bonus for its task (industry), then why build one instead of a more resilient citadel ?


Erm my suggestion never said EC's or Citadels would loose there other role bonus. Just loose the fuel block reduction.