Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
4640
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
While the changes to industry with the Crius release were undoubtedly massive and quite successful, there is more to come: Science! Invention and Reverse Engineering are going to be revamped and improved.
Here a brief overview of the proposed changes (which are not coming with Oceanus):
- To invent Tech-2 items you require for each invented item a set of two specific science skills. Which skills you exactly need will be changed. For ships you always needed the Mechanical Engineering skill, that is going to change depending on the role of the invented ship.
- Reverse Engineering to create a Tech-3 blueprint will be merged with Invention, you also will be able to select which subsystem you would like to create. As the invention of Tech-3 blueprints is then integrated in the Invention system, will can also use decryptors for Tech-3 invention.
- The use of meta items will be removed from Invention, instead of meta items you will be able to use Teams in Invention.
- Data Interfaces will be removed (and properly reimbursed).
- Invention results will be non-binary, with some good luck to get an extra boost of ME/TE or,with only a little bad lack you will receive back some datacores used in the invention.
- Success chances of items and ships will be tweaked a little bit.
- Installing multiple invention runs at once instead of installing the same invention every hour over and over.
To give everyone enough time to adjust and to get enough feeback, these changes are NOT coming with Oceanus.
Please read all the exciting details, explanations why something is done the way it is and all the juicy background information in CCP Ytterbium's latest dev blog Lighting the invention bulb. CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager |
|
Kusum Fawn
State Protectorate Caldari State
542
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
finally getting around to this ? hmm... 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.
|
Panteraa
Bermuda Tax Haven
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
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. |
Sentient Blade
Crisis Atmosphere
1337
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
He's the problem I see. You're making it progressively more complicated to run calculations and analysis on what is necessary to produce, this punishes people willing to make the time investment to work things out properly.
Say I wanted to invent 90 ishtars, I would calculate the amount of materials to produce them using the best value racial decryptor (3 run) and invest in buying those component materials. I would then proceed to have my characters do as many invention jobs as necessary to get the 30 runs (i.e. 30 successful operations).
Now, by throwing more randomness into the fire, I'm not sure what I need without going through, checking every single blueprint and adding them all up, grouping them, calculating them all in turn and then merging the results back together.
I love the idea that failure does not have to consume all of the datacores, but dislike all the extra calculator work that can only be known once the invention jobs have completed. |
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
12879
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
\o/
|
|
Kynric
Sky Fighters
167
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:36:00 -
[6] - Quote
Are there any plans to add value to data sites to compensate for the loss of data interface related drops? |
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Curatores Veritatis Alliance
165
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:36:00 -
[7] - Quote
Quote: Multiple invention runs
Last but not least, we recently changed Invention to only consume one run of a Tech I blueprint copy instead of eating the whole stack. The next logical course of action is to allow players to start invention with multiple runs (that each consume one run of the input blueprint copy) so they donGÇÖt have to launch them manually every hour, which is what weGÇÖre going to do with this set of changes.
As a direct consequence of whatGÇÖs explained just above and after gathering some data of whatGÇÖs happening post-Crius, we may tweak invention times further on some blueprints to make sure Invention is in a proper state before we move on. We will post more details on this particular point as we get them.
This was most time from it. What you say, "every hour" is like twice a day, or a single time. People either have a chance to put a job in before to head to work, or not, but they most probably have, after work. depending on one's biocycles, maybe one more job if it's a very short one.
Personally right now i even feel using a POS for inventions (half the time) pointless, because t simply wouldn't allow me to install more jobs. So, according to murphy, 4 hours = 7 h = 6h = ... = 24h, as per jobtime. It doesn't matter how long it takes, because it's just not possible for most of us to do anything with it, it simply doesn't fit real life cycles.
Hope this can be taken as an input, and not in the "let's nerf it even more" way.
|
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
739
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:40:00 -
[8] - Quote
what's this about inventing capital industrial ships now? |
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Curatores Veritatis Alliance
165
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sentient Blade wrote:He's the problem I see. You're making it progressively more complicated to run calculations and analysis on what is necessary to produce, this punishes people willing to make the time investment to work things out properly.
Say I wanted to invent 90 ishtars, I would calculate the amount of materials to produce them using the best value racial decryptor (3 run) and invest in buying those component materials. I would then proceed to have my characters do as many invention jobs as necessary to get the 30 runs (i.e. 30 successful operations).
Now, by throwing more randomness into the fire, I'm not sure what I need without going through, checking every single blueprint and adding them all up, grouping them, calculating them all in turn and then merging the results back together.
I love the idea that failure does not have to consume all of the datacores, but dislike all the extra calculator work that can only be known once the invention jobs have completed.
I could of course save the extra components for a later build, but that then adds more leg-work by having to factor that in when building the next round of materials.
Except for the statistical analysis for planning the production batch's cost ahead, the other things you mention here can be pretty much handled. We have assets API to take the remnants into account. We have the SDE with all the data and do recursive analysis for total material requirements. We can select the best-ME BP for each iteration for the quantity it has. So, most of this can be done. However, excel sheets are not much use anymore I agree to that.
And the additional complexity from the variable outputs is really a headache. Right now it's easy to statistically predict the cost of a production batch, including copying, inventions, whatnot. The variable ME throws a bunch of factors in, which will really be a headache to calculate with.
|
Kusum Fawn
State Protectorate Caldari State
542
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:44:00 -
[10] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:While the changes to industry with the Crius release were undoubtedly massive and quite successful, there is more to come: Science! Invention and Reverse Engineering are going to be revamped and improved. Here a brief overview of the proposed changes (which are not coming with Oceanus): - To invent Tech-2 items you require for each invented item a set of two specific science skills. Which skills you exactly need will be changed. For ships you always needed the Mechanical Engineering skill, that is going to change depending on the role of the invented ship.
- Reverse Engineering to create a Tech-3 blueprint will be merged with Invention, you also will be able to select which subsystem you would like to create. As the invention of Tech-3 blueprints is then integrated in the Invention system, will can also use decryptors for Tech-3 invention.
- The use of meta items will be removed from Invention, instead of meta items you will be able to use Teams in Invention.
- Data Interfaces will be removed (and properly reimbursed).
- Invention results will be non-binary, with some good luck to get an extra boost of ME/TE or,with only a little bad lack you will receive back some datacores used in the invention.
- Success chances of items and ships will be tweaked a little bit.
- Installing multiple invention runs at once instead of installing the same invention every hour over and over.
To give everyone enough time to adjust and to get enough feeback, these changes are NOT coming with Oceanus. Please read all the exciting details, explanations why something is done the way it is and all the juicy background information in CCP Ytterbium's latest dev blog Lighting the invention bulb.
1. Why? please justify changing this. It doesnt make sense.
2 this is because not all subs are good at what they are supposed to do and are not particularly useful in any meta.
3. Are teams not working as expected? Players not using them as much as you wanted? Thats because the implementation of them is terrible.
4. .. Kind of like how bpos were ? great.
5. this will result in standardized inventors (as noted by another poster) to have larger shifts in his calculations. while that isnt bad, it also isnt good. a bad ME print hurts far more then a good ME print helps.
6 and 7 . The only interesting parts of this. Everything else is stupid change for the sake of changing things. 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.
|
|
MuraSaki Siki
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
57
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:47:00 -
[11] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote: [list] Data Interfaces will be removed (and properly reimbursed).
how about the exploration tweak? data site right now is full of data interfaces raw materials and BPC
does it mean data site will contain only Decryptors after this proposed changes?
or is it something new to add in data site exploration? |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
782
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:48:00 -
[12] - Quote
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? This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
handige harrie
Hedion University Amarr Empire
259
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:48:00 -
[13] - Quote
Hmm, I always liked Railguns as a Caldari weaponsystem and Blasters being Gallente. This way you had Caldari with missiles and Railguns being all efficient from range and Gallente with Drones and Blasters being all pew pew in your face. Baddest poster ever |
Noriko Mai
1484
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:53:00 -
[14] - Quote
Please proofread... will can also... bad lack = recieve something back? -Æ-ï-¦-+-Ç-ï! -Æ-ï-¦-+-Ç-ï! -Ü-¦-+-¦-+-¦-¦-é-ï - -+-+-¦-+-Ç-ï! | -ô-¦-+-¦-+-¦-¦-+-¦ |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
730
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:54:00 -
[15] - Quote
Customers - prepare to have your skill set raped CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
|
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
739
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:57:00 -
[16] - Quote
So if I'm reading this correctly, when merging RE (where skills matter) and invention (where they essentially don't) you've made it so RE skills barely matter rather than the other way around? |
probag Bear
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
59
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 14:57:00 -
[17] - Quote
Ouch. Adding new outcomes to invention is going to be extremely painful for me.
Please, at least, consider giving us a better way to filter through all these new BPC options? The current S&I only lets you sort, not filter, by ME and TE. That's extremely unwieldy when you've got a couple of hundred of invention jobs finishing at the same time.
Also consider letting us trash items directly from the S&I interface? Currently, there is no way to filter OR sort blueprints in the inventory menu, and since the inventory is the only way we can currently trash items, that means it will be close to impossible to sort through all the outcomes and trash the undesirables. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3694
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:00:00 -
[18] - Quote
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. |
|
Ms Michigan
Aviation Professionals for EVE Rim Worlds Protectorate
53
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:00:00 -
[19] - Quote
Overall as a former industry/science guy, I like the changes.
The major thing I caution you on is the value of Meta 2-4 gear post this change!
If you implement this as is I can forsee an overabundance of either A) wasted meta bpcs, or B) excess meta loot added to the market.
Before all of you go flaming me, I think it needs mention that I do recollect that Meta loot drops might be removed all together? and Meta loot WILL be tweaked (I believe CCP Fozzie mentioned this).
With that said, I would like to see CCP comment here on how these changes take into account this problem and working with the META loot tweaks before this thread turns into a 100 page rage fest on this topic. |
Michael Gaulewicz
Bohemian Veterans Nulli Secunda
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:03:00 -
[20] - Quote
still not info about the data sites - I would like to see more BPC of ships and another stuff there instead of material nad BPCs for interfaces - will be reimbursed also material needed for Interfaces? |
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3428
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:04:00 -
[21] - Quote
Love that graph displaying a significant surge in manufacturing being done.
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.
I also love how many T2 profit margins, as predicted, are wiped out for the casual player now. DC II's are at about 60-70% of their pre-Crius price, as an example, while risk of transportation, time required in said transportation, and overhaul hassle, has gone up exponentially.
If you can pull up detailed graphs exploring overall manufacturing, you could certainly produce detailed ones showing the activity and profit margins in the various sectors of space now.
But I am not holding my breath on that one.
As for these invention changes, who really cares anymore. (Though I am pretty sure you will get an earful from whatever wh groups are left after the jump range disaster) You are making changes for change sake, as far as I can see. You will do what you think is best, regardless of the player feedback.
Based on the activity level in game recently, that has worked out beautifully.
Do you guys really believe that changing this system into something else, even if it is supposed to be simpler, will encourage more people to play Eve in the long run? All it does it allow the casual industrial player to figure out faster that he should stop industry because he is barely making profits, or even losing ISK.
But hey, outside of a surge pre-Crius to use up some soon to be useless T2 BPC's, I don't do industry anymore, and shut down my indy accounts long ago. These new low prices actually are good for me, as module costs go down. Too bad they wreck the game for so many. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3696
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:04:00 -
[22] - Quote
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. |
|
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
731
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:09:00 -
[23] - Quote
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.
CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
|
Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
102
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:09:00 -
[24] - Quote
So, first, let me caveat all this with of my 5 accounts, 4 are currently unsubbed. I used to run a large POS for T2 invention and production. Well, Crius rolled around and said to my spreadsheet "well, **** you" and obsoleted it followed by me looking at said spreadsheet, figuring how much more work I'd need to throw into it just to get back into operationg and said "well, **** that", and have been slowly unsubbing since. I don't have much of a dog in how this goes (yet).
Datacore normalization: I'm okay with, it'll make some waves in the market but hey, that's what happens with change.
T2 invention success rate: Your graphs x-axis makes no sense. But it appears that it won't be significantly different from inventing without meta items anyway, so it's okay.
Multiple outcomes to invention: Why? Dealing with invention means taking the long view of success % over time. When you're dealing with several hundred attempts, the success rate works itself out to the expected value. Adding 'granularity' to it adds nothing. If what looks like 7% (I can't ******* tell, I'm red/green colourblind and all those colors in that pie chart run together) of all invention jobs ended up with a mishmash of ME -1/2, that just means I'm going to end up with a little bit of excess spoor on the floor. The TE bonus? An hour or two one way or another isn't likely to make a lick of difference.
When I operated, and I suspect the majority of inventors were this way, I worked on a block 24 hour schedule. That means that I'm going to calculate everything normalized around setting a build/invention job batch once every 24 hours. Whether a job ends in seven hours or six and a half because of some TE bonus that I didn't bother to pay attention to, doesn't matter one bit to my cost/output calculation. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3822
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:10:00 -
[25] - Quote
Noriko Mai wrote:Please proofread... will can also... bad lack = recieve something back?
Little bad luck. If you're not /really/ unlucky, you can get some of your datacores back. you've still failed, but it's not cost you so much.
Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
739
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:10:00 -
[26] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Love that graph displaying a significant surge in manufacturing being done. "the facts are completely the opposite of everything I've claimed they will be. the facts must be wrong. bad facts, do what dinsdale tells you" |
Z1gy
Vindicator Corporation
9
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:12:00 -
[27] - Quote
as an inventor i do agree with some of the comment regarding multiple invention run time - pls try to tweak it so that at least it will coincide with our RL work timer rather than making it into another alarm clock indy CTA!
I do not agree in removing data interface and substituting team for it.
i do like the non binary outcome for the t2 bpc and the abilities to choose the subsystem outcome for the t3 subs bpc
as for the JF - can increase the base chance or keep it as it were?
by merging RE and invention - will you making them bland? |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3822
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:12:00 -
[28] - Quote
Just as a note to people about Meta Items:
Module Teiricide is coming. All meta items will be useful (or removed if there's no way to have them being useful in comparison to other meta levels)
Don't have a timescale. Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Aliventi
C.Q.B Gods Work.
766
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:17:00 -
[29] - Quote
When it comes to decyptors I always wished there was a way to dynamically build your own instead of the static decyptor we have now. Perhaps there is a way to change each current decyptor into giving a single bonus. Have one that gives +1 ME, another that gives +1 TE, another that gives +1 run, and another that give +% chance. Then we can use any number and combination of them that we choose (with a maximum) to have even greater influence on the output BPO.
Part of the changes for industry were designed to increase skill in industry so industry could be something you are "good" at. I feel like the ability to decide how to build the best decyptor for the job would take some skill.
Also, I kind of wished you would have just doubled the materials needed for invention and by doing so guaranteed success. This way if I want 20 BPCs I still need to invest the same amount of materials, I just don't have to try inventing 40 jobs to get there (with perfect skills). Then the skills could influence the % of exceptional, great, good, standard success. Great skills means you will have a competitive edge because you will get better T2 BPCs. |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
740
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 15:17:00 -
[30] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Just as a note to people about Meta Items:
Module Teiricide is coming. All meta items will be useful (or removed if there's no way to have them being useful in comparison to other meta levels)
Don't have a timescale. the correct phrasing is "Soon(TM)" |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |