Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 56 post(s) |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2390
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 14:26:00 -
[181] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: This is exactly the sort of thing that we're trying, where possible, to cut down in this release, precisely so we can make time for what we believe to be more interesting decisions such as "am I still doing industry in the correct place, or should I consider moving, or should I try and reshape my system so it stays optimal?". We want to create more decisions, not more clicks.
That's bogus. There is no point in moving your double digit billion ISK assets around every week or even more frequently. The only thing you achieve with that is to generate easy PVP content and frustration because your system, as it is now, is utterly vulnerable to manipulation and exploits, and, for instance, if you bid on a team and someone drives the prices higher and higher, there's not even a way to pull back out. It will also make it a lot easier to harass people, who actually won their team (as useless as it maybe) for their system, by driving cost of production/science up until everything you to do in this system turns into a loss of a lot of money from you. That is your vision of "making meaningful and more interesting decisions"? I don't even want to start with the corp hangar theft problem. Cooperation in EVE is as toxic as it can possibly get, there is no trust in this game and every person you put an ounce of trust in, is just someone who hasn't backstabbed, assaulted and robbed you yet. And in this environment I should grant access for others to my assets, which I amassed through hard labor and risking their theft for absolutely no rewards or gains from this sharing? What you (CCP in general) do is causing more hassle, more frustration and more 1-man corps instead of more interaction and cooperation. You take away safety and expect people to share more of their expensive assets. You cause people to split up work even more. You cause the lockup of your personal BPOs in your own 1-man corp, copying from them all the time and then handing out the copies to other alliance members (yes, alliance members, not corp members in order to remove the theft risk and the usage of a system that, according to CCP, doesn't even exist in the game's code), causing more load for some and less for others, more unnecessary complexity and usage of an utterly outdated and terrible system (namely POS), instead of fixing or replacing this POS/corporation code abomination with something new, easier to understand and to access and better usable. There are so many areas in the game that are used for industry and that would have needed improvements or replacement, before you throw more people into these ruins. And what does CCP do? Create more ruins and overpopulate existing ruins.
The goal with movement is that it's a question you're asking frequently but only acting upon occasionally. We know that people don't want to move large operations regularly.
We know that corp management needs an overhaul, that's why we have "overhaul corp management" high up on our to-do list. |
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3155
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 14:39:00 -
[182] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: This is exactly the sort of thing that we're trying, where possible, to cut down in this release, precisely so we can make time for what we believe to be more interesting decisions such as "am I still doing industry in the correct place, or should I consider moving, or should I try and reshape my system so it stays optimal?". We want to create more decisions, not more clicks.
That's bogus. There is no point in moving your double digit billion ISK assets around every week or even more frequently. The only thing you achieve with that is to generate easy PVP content and frustration because your system, as it is now, is utterly vulnerable to manipulation and exploits, and, for instance, if you bid on a team and someone drives the prices higher and higher, there's not even a way to pull back out. It will also make it a lot easier to harass people, who actually won their team (as useless as it maybe) for their system, by driving cost of production/science up until everything you to do in this system turns into a loss of a lot of money from you. That is your vision of "making meaningful and more interesting decisions"? I don't even want to start with the corp hangar theft problem. Cooperation in EVE is as toxic as it can possibly get, there is no trust in this game and every person you put an ounce of trust in, is just someone who hasn't backstabbed, assaulted and robbed you yet. And in this environment I should grant access for others to my assets, which I amassed through hard labor and risking their theft for absolutely no rewards or gains from this sharing? What you (CCP in general) do is causing more hassle, more frustration and more 1-man corps instead of more interaction and cooperation. You take away safety and expect people to share more of their expensive assets. You cause people to split up work even more. You cause the lockup of your personal BPOs in your own 1-man corp, copying from them all the time and then handing out the copies to other alliance members (yes, alliance members, not corp members in order to remove the theft risk and the usage of a system that, according to CCP, doesn't even exist in the game's code), causing more load for some and less for others, more unnecessary complexity and usage of an utterly outdated and terrible system (namely POS), instead of fixing or replacing this POS/corporation code abomination with something new, easier to understand and to access and better usable. There are so many areas in the game that are used for industry and that would have needed improvements or replacement, before you throw more people into these ruins. And what does CCP do? Create more ruins and overpopulate existing ruins. The goal with movement is that it's a question you're asking frequently but only acting upon occasionally. We know that people don't want to move large operations regularly. We know that corp management needs an overhaul, that's why we have "overhaul corp management" high up on our to-do list.
So how about delay this impending disaster, fix corp management FIRST, then look at this industry mess? Why is it so crucial to get the industry overhaul done before sorting out corp mechanics, which are critical to having these proposed industry changes function? Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
457
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 14:48:00 -
[183] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: So how about delay this impending disaster, fix corp management FIRST, then look at this industry mess? Why is it so crucial to get the industry overhaul done before sorting out corp mechanics, which are critical to having these proposed industry changes function?
because corp mechanics are not at all critical to having these industry changes function |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
457
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 14:50:00 -
[184] - Quote
An actual question: is there a timeline on when the invention revamp is going to come? I was under the impression it was initially scheduled for Crius back when the initial industry changes were Kronos. Is it just vaugely scheduled for "SoonTM" or is it vaugely scheduled for the patch after Crius?
basically I want to know how much optimization and investment I should be doing for the Crius invention mechanics or if I should basically plan to muddle through and invest in doing the new mechanics right |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2390
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 14:52:00 -
[185] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:An actual question: is there a timeline on when the invention revamp is going to come? I was under the impression it was initially scheduled for Crius back when the initial industry changes were Kronos. Is it just vaugely scheduled for "SoonTM" or is it vaugely scheduled for the patch after Crius?
basically I want to know how much optimization and investment I should be doing for the Crius invention mechanics or if I should basically plan to muddle through and invest in doing the new mechanics right
Current plan is to start work on it more-or-less immediately after Crius. Exactly which release it will ship in depends on how much we decide to change and how long it takes to get it into a good state :) This is the way a lot of things are going to be with the new development process - we can talk about what order we plan to start doing things in, but not so easily when they'll be done. |
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3155
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 14:55:00 -
[186] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: So how about delay this impending disaster, fix corp management FIRST, then look at this industry mess? Why is it so crucial to get the industry overhaul done before sorting out corp mechanics, which are critical to having these proposed industry changes function?
because corp mechanics are not at all critical to having these industry changes function
Um...in your null sec nirvana, trust issues are not a big deal because of the structure of your groups of people, and the strict control of who will be allowed to handle your BPO's.
In the rest of the Eve universe, corp mechanics are a massive impediment with regard to these proposed changes. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
457
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 15:00:00 -
[187] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote:An actual question: is there a timeline on when the invention revamp is going to come? I was under the impression it was initially scheduled for Crius back when the initial industry changes were Kronos. Is it just vaugely scheduled for "SoonTM" or is it vaugely scheduled for the patch after Crius?
basically I want to know how much optimization and investment I should be doing for the Crius invention mechanics or if I should basically plan to muddle through and invest in doing the new mechanics right Current plan is to start work on it more-or-less immediately after Crius. Exactly which release it will ship in depends on how much we decide to change and how long it takes to get it into a good state :) This is the way a lot of things are going to be with the new development process - we can talk about what order we plan to start doing things in, but not so easily when they'll be done. Gotcha, thanks. I suppose it might not be the wisest idea to invest in a tier 3 invention outpost yet then! |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
423
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 15:25:00 -
[188] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: So how about delay this impending disaster, fix corp management FIRST, then look at this industry mess? Why is it so crucial to get the industry overhaul done before sorting out corp mechanics, which are critical to having these proposed industry changes function?
because corp mechanics are not at all critical to having these industry changes function Um...in your null sec nirvana, trust issues are not a big deal because of the structure of your groups of people, and the strict control of who will be allowed to handle your BPO's. In the rest of the Eve universe, corp mechanics are a massive impediment with regard to these proposed changes.
So just add a division where only yoi have take role and everyone else have only view, so they can use but cant take your precious BPO. Or copy on station and manufacture from copies in a POS.
Corp roles management is not a blocking factor for industry overhaul.
Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1559
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 16:13:00 -
[189] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: So how about delay this impending disaster, fix corp management FIRST, then look at this industry mess? Why is it so crucial to get the industry overhaul done before sorting out corp mechanics, which are critical to having these proposed industry changes function?
because corp mechanics are not at all critical to having these industry changes function Um...in your null sec nirvana, trust issues are not a big deal because of the structure of your groups of people, and the strict control of who will be allowed to handle your BPO's. In the rest of the Eve universe, corp mechanics are a massive impediment with regard to these proposed changes.
Because Highsec groups are completely prevented from doing the same thing right? Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve. |
Alexander McKeon
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
65
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 16:44:00 -
[190] - Quote
Greyscale, while we've got your attention, could you please clarify the exact conversion formula for TQ BPCs with negative ME to the new system? I saw that it's balanced around +2/+4, but -4/-4 BPCs are being converted up to +6/+14, and -1/-1 to +9/+18, rather than +2 & + 5 respectively. |
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2391
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 17:38:00 -
[191] - Quote
Alexander McKeon wrote:Greyscale, while we've got your attention, could you please clarify the exact conversion formula for TQ BPCs with negative ME to the new system? I saw that it's balanced around +2/+4, but -4/-4 BPCs are being converted up to +6/+14, and -1/-1 to +9/+18, rather than +2 & + 5 respectively. Edit: On a closely related topic, what are the current thoughts on reimbursement for highly-researched BPOs (it was discussed for a while, then the topic was abandoned), and upon the extreme time scaling for ME 9 / 10 research under the new system? It would be unfortunate indeed if practical considerations led to effective 'legacy' ME 10 BPOs whereby it was unrealistic to ever create a new ME 10 Archon / Wyvern / etc BPO (Which I have seen on TQ), granting old vets a monopoly on the best production methods because new players couldn't catch up even after investing a similar amount of research time. Edit2: CCP Greyscale wrote:The real nasty case is building 10 JFs from 9 freighters, basically means you can't competitively build JFs if you can't do them in batches of 10. Have you carefully considered the implications of the discount for multiple runs on T2 ship production? There is the known application for T2 BPO holders, but under the new system where Process won't necessarily be the only viable decryptor for this purpose, an optimized augmentation decryptor would allow for 8-run JF BPCs, which comes in close to a 10% reduction in materials consumption versus eight single run BPCs. If you genuinely don't want to further centralize production of high-end T2 ships into the hands of those with enough capital to do eight-run JF jobs, this may merit consideration.
I believe what the script is currently doing is adding 6/12 to everything and then applying the general conversion as normal, which may or may not happen on TQ.
Reimbursement (if/what) is still under discussion. Time scaling should be moderated by the rank changes that are on SiSi now (titans f.ex came down from 3414 to 600); if your concerns are based on those raised by the original blog I'd appreciate if you'd revisit the new numbers and give feedback on those.
The batch discount for inherently long-running jobs is a thing that needs further looking at, it's probably too powerful right now. |
|
Alexander McKeon
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
65
|
Posted - 2014.06.18 18:35:00 -
[192] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote: if your concerns are based on those raised by the original blog I'd appreciate if you'd revisit the new numbers and give feedback on those.
The batch discount for inherently long-running jobs is a thing that needs further looking at, it's probably too powerful right now. Forums ate my extra numbers, but I double-checked the capital research times and they seem appropriate.
What is problematic however are the following numbers that I took from the research screen (not show info):
Dual 1000mm Railgun: (TQ numbers in parenthesis) ME 8 50 Days (27) ME 9: 119 Days (30) ME 10: 284 Days (34)
Raven Battleship: ME 8: 25 Days (27) ME 9: 59 Days (30) ME 10: 142 Days (34)
An extra eight months of research for the same result that someone currently has is hardly inconsequential.
Thanks for the quick response, I'm glad that the ME scaling with batch size is getting another look; the implications for production of high-end T2 ships would have been significant. |
Ereshgikal
Pigs and Sows Gentlemen's Agreement
31
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 00:46:00 -
[193] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:The only thing you achieve with that is to generate easy PVP content and frustration because your system, as it is now, is utterly vulnerable to manipulation and exploits, and, for instance, if you bid on a team and someone drives the prices higher and higher, there's not even a way to pull back out. It will also make it a lot easier to harass people, who actually won their team (as useless as it maybe) for their system, by driving cost of production/science up until everything you to do in this system turns into a loss of a lot of money from you. That is your vision of "making meaningful and more interesting decisions"?
So...you are saying that someone will "harass" others by starting lots of R&D/manufacturing jobs....and pay for those...with increasing cost....to drive down your margins? So they will waste potential jobs on characters and ISK to do this.... Somehow I don't see this happening.
But going after everyone in a system that has won a nice team? Oh, THAT will happen for sure. Bid on a nice Battleship/marauder team and people will know what you are doing and where you are doing it. :) This aspect I do like.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
581
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 09:29:00 -
[194] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote: So how about delay this impending disaster, fix corp management FIRST, then look at this industry mess? Why is it so crucial to get the industry overhaul done before sorting out corp mechanics, which are critical to having these proposed industry changes function?
because corp mechanics are not at all critical to having these industry changes function
What is not "at all critical" then, in a world where cooperation and interaction is to be the first and foremost principle? Without proper Corp management and POS management? You cannot share BPO/Cs/access to hangars/divisions/arrays via 3rd party tools.
--
Ereshgikal wrote: But going after everyone in a system that has won a nice team? Oh, THAT will happen for sure. Bid on a nice Battleship/marauder team and people will know what you are doing and where you are doing it. :) This aspect I do like.
And then there are people complaining about Watchlist surveillance being imbalanced and uncounterable. This is exactly the same. But we'll see how it turns out. Bidding on Teams in their current form is an absolute no-go for me, not enough gains and too much investment and uncertainty. |
Dimaxx
Terminus Est Lost Squadron Infinity Space.
71
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 10:21:00 -
[195] - Quote
Hi everyone! Pls comment on this situation:
1) Capital Titanium Diborite Armor Plate Blueprint
Tranq: PE=133 TE=20
Materials: Sylramic Fibers - 1501 Titanium Carbide - 2001
Sing: PE=10 TE=20
Materials: Sylramic Fibers - 1682 Titanium Carbide - 2242
It's a new near perfect BPO? It's a wasted time!! And so in all perfect or near perfect BPO! All perfect BPO with PE=10 use more materials than it is now.
2) Corp POS labs are not visible in the list available for use |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2393
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 10:34:00 -
[196] - Quote
Dimaxx wrote:Hi everyone! Pls comment on this situation: 1) Capital Titanium Diborite Armor Plate Blueprint Tranq:PE=133 TE=20 Materials:Sylramic Fibers - 1501 Titanium Carbide - 2001 Sing:PE=10 TE=20 Materials:Sylramic Fibers - 1682 Titanium Carbide - 2242 It's a new near perfect BPO? It's a wasted time!! And so in all perfect or near perfect BPO! All perfect BPO with PE=10 use more materials than it is now. 2) Corp POS labs are not visible in the list available for use
Is this from showinfo or from the industry window? Because the former is likely to be wrong. |
|
Dimaxx
Terminus Est Lost Squadron Infinity Space.
71
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 10:37:00 -
[197] - Quote
Show info -> Material List. From industry page:
Titanium Carbide [2222] Sylramic Fibers [1667]
it's not perfect
add:
Hm, from new industry window:
Titanium Carbide [2000] Sylramic Fibers [1501] |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2393
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 10:50:00 -
[198] - Quote
Dimaxx wrote:Show info -> Material List. From industry page:
Titanium Carbide [2222] Sylramic Fibers [1667]
it's not perfect
add:
Hm, from new industry window:
Titanium Carbide [2000] Sylramic Fibers [1501]
Showinfo code hasn't been updated, so it's generally expected to be wrong :) |
|
Dimaxx
Terminus Est Lost Squadron Infinity Space.
71
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 10:53:00 -
[199] - Quote
Another one!
Obelisk Blueprint
Tranq: PE=4 TE=2
Materials: Capital Armor Plates [14] Capital Cargo Bay [82] Capital Construction Parts [51] Capital Propulsion Engine [15]
Sing: PE=8 TE=14
Materials form Industry window: Capital Armor Plates [15] +1 Capital Cargo Bay [82] Capital Construction Parts [52] +1 Capital Propulsion Engine [16] +1
|
Dimaxx
Terminus Est Lost Squadron Infinity Space.
71
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 11:54:00 -
[200] - Quote
1) Invention missiles use only faction missiles as optional item! t1 missiles not available. 2) Mobile lab now not available for invention? Research PE/TE only? 3) Invention of t2 cruise missile on adv. mobile lab with my skills is 9h37m (on station is 18h55m) and only 1 run?! Now on tranq is 37m and 10 run. OMG!!! What did you do with the production??? |
|
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
1029
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 13:57:00 -
[201] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Dimaxx wrote:Show info -> Material List. From industry page:
Titanium Carbide [2222] Sylramic Fibers [1667]
it's not perfect
add:
Hm, from new industry window:
Titanium Carbide [2000] Sylramic Fibers [1501] Showinfo code hasn't been updated, so it's generally expected to be wrong :) I got caught by this two, thought I was getting screwed having most of my BPO's over 100 ME and 0.1% waste on TQ. But numbers in industry window seem pretty much the same. |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2393
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 14:05:00 -
[202] - Quote
Dimaxx wrote:1) Invention missiles use only faction missiles as optional item! t1 missiles not available. 2) Mobile lab now not available for invention? Research PE/TE only? 3) Invention of t2 cruise missile on adv. mobile lab with my skills is 9h37m (on station is 18h55m) and only 1 run?! Now on tranq is 37m and 10 run. OMG!!! What did you do with the production???
- Looking into this; can you say exactly which missiles you were using? T1 base missiles shouldn't be available as it's only meta 1-4 that are optionals, right? - The different labs allow different things now, see the starbase devblog for more info - The run outputs are run, that should be 10 run, and the time is balanced by the decrease in needed copy time (no longer need max run) |
|
Arana Mirelin
Te'Rava Industries
36
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 14:16:00 -
[203] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Dimaxx wrote:1) Invention missiles use only faction missiles as optional item! t1 missiles not available. 2) Mobile lab now not available for invention? Research PE/TE only? 3) Invention of t2 cruise missile on adv. mobile lab with my skills is 9h37m (on station is 18h55m) and only 1 run?! Now on tranq is 37m and 10 run. OMG!!! What did you do with the production??? - Looking into this; can you say exactly which missiles you were using? T1 base missiles shouldn't be available as it's only meta 1-4 that are optionals, right? - The different labs allow different things now, see the starbase devblog for more info - The run outputs are run, that should be 10 run, and the time is balanced by the decrease in needed copy time (no longer need max run)
I believe on the old system, the meta 0 item was also allowed, even though it had no effect on the outcome. To me, it sounds like one of those needless complexities which I will not mourn the passing of.
|
Freyr Udan
nXo Circle-Of-Two
1
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 15:42:00 -
[204] - Quote
Some bugs i found
When you complete an invention job theres no advertise if you failure or get the t2 bpc as before
when you use some decryptors (I do test on blackbird bpc to falcon with esoteric process (+3ME) its says you will get the falcon at +5%ME but while doing the job it say job it will be at +2%Me, finally if you get the t2bpc, you will get it at 2%ME
All my test on 1 runs copies,
Suggestion
Could be great if you can add some way to know how one bpc will get on material cost when you research it, i mean, at lvl 0 it ask for 3000 trit and 1500 Isogen so when you going up on your ME, it will show how much mats it will ask
For the people with the mismatch error if you delete your cache everytime before you open your client you will be ablo to do jobs on a POS |
Dimaxx
Terminus Est Lost Squadron Infinity Space.
71
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 15:44:00 -
[205] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:- Looking into this; can you say exactly which missiles you were using? T1 base missiles shouldn't be available as it's only meta 1-4 that are optionals, right? - The different labs allow different things now, see the starbase devblog for more info - The run outputs are run, that should be 10 run, and the time is balanced by the decrease in needed copy time (no longer need max run) - Currently on the tranq can be used any cruise missiles as an optional item. - OK but now all labs can be used for invention. Maybe I read inattentively. - Number of run t2 BPC in the industry window does not change. I selected t1 BPC (with max run) and select the output t2 BPC. That's all. Output runs is always 1.
Why such a big increase invention time? On tranq now t1 cruise missile is 1h15m, on sing is 18h55m. It will kill t2 ammo production! Reduce the number of runs of 10 and increase the time to 15 times! Why? |
Dimaxx
Terminus Est Lost Squadron Infinity Space.
71
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 16:33:00 -
[206] - Quote
OMG! What's this?
Golem BPC
TQ: PE=-1 TE=-1 Manufacturing time 2d 5h 45m
Materials: Construction Blocks [360] Gravimetric Sensor Cluster [690] Graviton Reactor Unit [180] Magpulse Thruster [300] Morphite [780] Quantum Microprocessor [4800] Scalar Capacitor Unit [2400] Sustained Shield Emitter [3036] Titanium Diborite Armor Plate [30000] R.A.M.- Starship Tech GÇö [20] Raven [1]
Sing: PE=9 TE=18 Manufacturing time 2d 21h 31m
Materials (industrial window): Tritanium [3378861] Pyerite [844875] Mexallon [211626] Isogen [52843] Nocxium [13194] Zydrine [3146] Megacyte [1002] Raven [1] Construction Blocks [410] +50 Morphite [888] +108 R.A.M.- Starship Tech [28] Magpulse Thruster [342] +42 Gravimetric Sensor Cluster [786] +96 Quantum Microprocessor [5460] +660 Titanium Diborite Armor Plate [34125] +4125 Graviton Reactor Unit [205] +25 Scalar Capacitor Unit [2730] +330 Sustained Shield Emitter [3454] +418
How to explain it? You kidding me? Do as it was on TQ! |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3432
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 17:36:00 -
[207] - Quote
I can explain it.
Right now, SiSi is using materials generated in the following fashion:
take the invTypeMaterials entry. Add the extra materials to it, multiplied appropriately.
However, the extra materials can have a flag which marks them as recyclable. If this is set, you have to remove the materials which make up that thing (a raven, in this case) from the entries from invTypeMaterials.
It's an easy miss, and a known bug.
Aside from that, yes, some materials are going up. Especially when they're for things which are made using decryptors. I wouldn't expect that to change much. (It's part of the rebasing math.) Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Scout Vyvorant
University of Caille Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 21:54:00 -
[208] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Dimaxx wrote:1) Invention missiles use only faction missiles as optional item! t1 missiles not available. 2) Mobile lab now not available for invention? Research PE/TE only? 3) Invention of t2 cruise missile on adv. mobile lab with my skills is 9h37m (on station is 18h55m) and only 1 run?! Now on tranq is 37m and 10 run. OMG!!! What did you do with the production??? - Looking into this; can you say exactly which missiles you were using? T1 base missiles shouldn't be available as it's only meta 1-4 that are optionals, right? - The different labs allow different things now, see the starbase devblog for more info - The run outputs are run, that should be 10 run, and the time is balanced by the decrease in needed copy time (no longer need max run)
I underlined the part I consider very important to this change.
People and Devs have already noted how copying is a choke point in the invention and production, also having jobs that complete in a little more than hour mean two things:
1) After 4 hours you have burned out your 2 days and 15 hours of copy job, leaving you with 2 days and 11 of inactive research lines
2) Having jobs that complete in 1 hour mean you have to be actually there to setup new jobs every hour
Now, I don't know what people consider and percieves as "fun and interesting", but logging in game to setup 8 research jobs every hour, on multiple account (if you are one of those high sec, single player, multi alt industrial corps) is not a compelling game style, probably just a step above mining.
This change will make research closer to prize the decision making process (what, when and where) rather than being simply there 23/7 setting up jobs, also having to log twice a day to setup jobs will make industry easier to manage to new players and/or simply people that wish to try out this aspect of the game.
However, this wont make the industry any easier or forgiving, remember that now the BPO that most corp keep locked in their hangars are going to start travel in new eden..
I want to conclude this post expressing my concern about this last point, as I'm not totally sure that BPOs are going to running around as much as CCP wish. First, even a humble inventor like me has in its hangars thousand of BPC, max run, made during years of industry; with the changes to invention, it will take a year or more before I finish those BPC. Second, to be on the safe side, I'll probably accept the increased cost of copying a BP in a station rather than risking it into a gate camp, assuming the cost of the BP is relevant, like in the case of battleship, capital component and alike.
Instead of proposing something like "destroy all the BPC!", I wanted to suggest something along these lines:
Why don't you allow invention directly from BPO with an increased chance of success over BPC? With this you'll give a reward to risking BPOs (the famous risk vs reward factor of eve), and if people wish to play it safe, they can use their BPC. |
Dimaxx
Terminus Est Lost Squadron Infinity Space.
71
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 22:14:00 -
[209] - Quote
Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Blueprint
PE/TE=0
Research PE to +10% (max) need (with my perfect skills) on station 31d 16h and 703.452.239 ISK!!! Wut? Damn cheap BPO need ~3/4 bil ISK for research?
double facepalm |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
77
|
Posted - 2014.06.20 00:27:00 -
[210] - Quote
Dimaxx wrote:Large Capacitor Control Circuit I Blueprint PE/TE=0 Research PE to +10% (max) need (with my perfect skills) on station 31d 16h and 703.452.239 ISK!!! Wut? Damn cheap BPO need ~3/4 bil ISK for research? double facepalm
amounts for job costs are broken |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |