Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Winthorp
2709
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 22:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
Source: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/lighting-the-invention-bulb/
So with the changes RE is now being merged into invention they have made further worrying changes to subsystem reverse engineering.
The new change is you will be able to select the subsystem directly and not the random chance it is currently. While short term this is great as there will be no wastage involved with reverse engineering unprofitable subsystems long term it worries me.
Long term we were told by devs that when they are looking at the T3 rebalance their ideal outcome would be rebalancing susystems so that all subsystems become useful unlike their current form. The changes to reverse engineering do not really go hand in hand with what we understood to be their future plans.
It was my understanding that T3's are after recons in the rebalance cycle so T3's should be getting looked at either now by developers or very soon behind the scenes.
So should we start to worry or should we have the dreaded T3 debate now so we don't get a Hyperion level patch we all hate?
EDIT: They are also adding decryptor usage and a 40% reduction in RE % rates you can expect your current cheap T3 costs to change. |
Icarus Able
Revenant Tactical
479
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 23:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
Um...So they want to make all the subsystems useful. Therefore making all of them wanted by some people, and your logic is that noone will build them or want them....
Im really confused. |
Winthorp
2709
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 23:05:00 -
[3] - Quote
Icarus Able wrote:Um...So they want to make all the subsystems useful. Therefore making all of them wanted by some people, and your logic is that noone will build them or want them....
Im really confused.
My logic is this change to RE dos not go hand in hand with them making every subsystem usefull in the future and there is now concern that won't happen.
Please read again before derping. |
Icarus Able
Revenant Tactical
479
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 23:22:00 -
[4] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Icarus Able wrote:Um...So they want to make all the subsystems useful. Therefore making all of them wanted by some people, and your logic is that noone will build them or want them....
Im really confused. My logic is this change to RE dos not go hand in hand with them making every subsystem usefull in the future and there is now concern that won't happen. Please read again before derping.
How do they not go hand in hand? Making all the subs useful and being able to choose the sub you make have no connection...
|
Winthorp
2709
|
Posted - 2014.09.11 23:27:00 -
[5] - Quote
Icarus Able wrote:Winthorp wrote:Icarus Able wrote:Um...So they want to make all the subsystems useful. Therefore making all of them wanted by some people, and your logic is that noone will build them or want them....
Im really confused. My logic is this change to RE dos not go hand in hand with them making every subsystem usefull in the future and there is now concern that won't happen. Please read again before derping. How do they not go hand in hand? Making all the subs useful and being able to choose the sub you make have no connection...
/Sigh... OK.
The change is made from short term goals due to the heavy whining from people that make subsystems and continually get subsystem BPC's that never get built due to the profit margins, so this change is a play to that so they can avoid unprofitable susbs.
If in the future there was changes to subsystems so they are all useful then this change wouldn't be needed as the builder would be happy with a variable chance based system.
See my concern now? Short term this change suits me greatly, long term it leads towards they either havn't spoken with other CCP teams that would be working on T3 changes now or in the future or the future changes just won't be happening. |
Louis Catcher
J-Space BrotherHood Zombie Pony Express
9
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 01:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
Hmm... I myself get almost 100% of my income through subsystems, i get all nanoribbs, relic loot and data loot myself or through the corp, i normally trade my blue loot through my corp for more material. This makes me very very concerned. Will i have to take down my manufacturing pos or not?
The general knowledge about subs at the moment is that they will increase in price, therefore you should hold on to your precious subs right? Now if they let us choose bpc then the price would decrease dramatically as those nanobot and good offensive systems will be increased in masses :(
Thats how I would interpret it I am probably wrong but hey lets just let ccp screw us over even more shall we? |
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3792
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 02:41:00 -
[7] - Quote
As long as I can still buy Proteus' in Jita it's fine. Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
Winthorp
2711
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 02:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:As long as I can still buy Proteus' in Jita it's fine.
See they will always be there, what concerns me is nothing will change about them and we will have the same ****** subs forever. |
Glyndi
Doom Generation THE H0NEYBADGER
246
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:14:00 -
[9] - Quote
Sounds like they are making changes to how they are made which kind of goes with the whole industry releases. How could you possibly tin foil that into them not changing subs? This is what's called "jumping to conclusions".
I mean, I get a person could now just make the "good" sub while avoiding the potential for one of the **** ones.
Either way, seems like a stretch. |
HerrBert
V0LTA Triumvirate.
513
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 03:32:00 -
[10] - Quote
I will post this written schnapshot of schei+ƒe that ccp has to deal with.
- Pos - Tech3 - Wormhole "PvE" - Incursions - Faction Warfare???? GO BLASTER SUPREMACY - Jita - Nullsec - Did I mention Pos? - Drones - Supercapitals - Jump Bridges - Roles and Asset Management - That fugging door - Legion (that one ... ha) - Next CCP Guard Song (still waiting for the record) - The Trailer for ... Kronos? - Fixing MONUMENT NAME FINDER - BETA* (if that Intern is still working on it) - Solid Wormhole Forum (just saying) - Scanning - Wormhole "Management" and Mapping Tool - Next Level Burner Missions - 6/10 and the story of the silly loot drops - Blitzing 10 / 10 oh wait .. actually blitzing any kind of mission or the "static" thing of missions in general (something something hard coded but Fozzie said things will come) - Waterboarding - TiDi (this just roll with it mentality is stressful, it clearly doesnt work in your favor and by that i mean ccp, more money could have burned) - "Station infestion of nullsec, by that i mean that the station coverage out in null is better then in Empire" - "More null to null connections"
and so on and on and on...
still love the changes to the fleet mechanics (non warp and management are dreams) Community-Challenge: Make Jack Miton sing a Duett with me. http://www.youtube.com/user/HerrBertism Jibbychiggawooooow - CSM 9 Corbexx
|
|
Maduin Shi
Perkone Caldari State
100
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 05:21:00 -
[11] - Quote
Glyndi wrote:Sounds like they are making changes to how they are made which kind of goes with the whole industry releases. How could you possibly tin foil that into them not changing subs? This is what's called "jumping to conclusions".
I mean, I get a person could now just make the "good" sub while avoiding the potential for one of the **** ones.
Either way, seems like a stretch.
I think this is the proper take. If anything, the fact that they're making changes to RE means that the subsystem rebalance is going to happen and its going to happen soon.
This may be a case of CCP doing things in an unexpected order because invention was sorta broken with Crius and folding in RE changes ahead of subs rebalancing was simply more convenient for the devs.
That said I hope our CSMs are on top of this. |
Ghenghis Kralj
Big Johnson's Dominatus Atrum Mortis
29
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
I am not sure I agree. The production/RE side is a separate issue. Let's get that done. I would also be guessing that it's a completely different team handling it.
I am not expecting any changes for T3 pricing. Yes, you have a lower probability of success, but you can use decryptors and actually RE stuff you want. At the end of the day, you'll end up at the same point.
Could be wrong. |
Kirasten
No Vacancies
84
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 06:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
After the way they handled the wormhole changes, am I alone in my fear of them touching t3s? |
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
97
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 07:30:00 -
[14] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:It was my understanding that T3's are after recons in the rebalance cycle so T3's should be getting looked at either now by developers or very soon behind the scenes. Sadly it is more like: Ishtar-another BS pass-Ishtar-Recons and bombers (and hopefully coverops thanks to midslotscanmodules)-Ishtar and EAFs- T3s....
And while I do not agree with Winthorp, this part of the devblog worried me, too. We are aware that Tech III subsystems are not all equally valuable right now, which is why we may iterate on their material composition to counteract these changes if needed. This sounds alot like tenguparts too good, make them cheaper to produce to "balance it".
Also the Pre-Summit-0.0-thread is a slap in the face of the wormhole community |
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
181
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 07:32:00 -
[15] - Quote
So,
two changes
1. RE allows making of specific BPC 2. Rebalance of subs to make them all useful
If 1 happens but not 2, you will no longer waste time/isk on shitsubsystem bpc's anymore so you should be happy if 1 AND 2 happen you get the added benefit of being able to use all your stored "**** bpc's" so you should be happy if 2 happens but not 1 you will be able to use your "**** bpc's" so you should be happy if neither happens, you should be happy because CCP already gave us all these lovely Hyperion changes.
Did I get that right?
|
Winthorp
2711
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 07:43:00 -
[16] - Quote
Ya Huei wrote:So,
two changes
1. RE allows making of specific BPC 2. Rebalance of subs to make them all useful
If 1 happens but not 2, you will no longer waste time/isk on shitsubsystem bpc's anymore so you should be happy if 1 AND 2 happen you get the added benefit of being able to use all your stored "**** bpc's" so you should be happy if 2 happens but not 1 you will be able to use your "**** bpc's" so you should be happy if neither happens, you should be happy because CCP already gave us all these lovely Hyperion changes.
Did I get that right?
You fail to grasp the entire point of this thread.
I will adapt regardless just as my post suggests. I have a stupid amount of ISK
Pro tip: this post is about future T3 rebalance and is it happening? Should we start discussing it seriously now to avoid a Hyperion level expansion?
And given that they are letting sov null know the timetable of their changes now i think we deserve being told when our T3's are to be rebalanced as we didn't get any warning our entire way of life was getting rebalanced in Hyperion.
For the source on how much notice they have been given and how much input they are getting compared to WH space: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=372889 |
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
751
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 07:46:00 -
[17] - Quote
Maduin Shi wrote:Glyndi wrote:Sounds like they are making changes to how they are made which kind of goes with the whole industry releases. How could you possibly tin foil that into them not changing subs? This is what's called "jumping to conclusions".
I mean, I get a person could now just make the "good" sub while avoiding the potential for one of the **** ones.
Either way, seems like a stretch. I think this is the proper take. If anything, the fact that they're making changes to RE means that the subsystem rebalance is going to happen and its going to happen soon. This may be a case of CCP doing things in an unexpected order because invention was sorta broken with Crius and folding in RE changes ahead of subs rebalancing was simply more convenient for the devs. That said I hope our CSMs are on top of this.
Such is the development process. I imagine things will be much more clear after the summit next week. I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I-- THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/asayanami Twitter: https://twitter.com/Asayanami Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/Asayanami
|
Winthorp
2711
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 07:49:00 -
[18] - Quote
Asayanami Dei wrote:
Such is the development process. I imagine things will be much more clear after the summit next week.
Considering it has already been stated that the majority of the summit will be concerning sov null i wouldn't hold your breath. |
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
181
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 08:06:00 -
[19] - Quote
What makes you think that T3 rebalance will not happen ? There is no reason to assume CCP will decide to ignore that ship class but do all the other ones ? that is just silly.
What I can predict however is that there will be a massive outcry when it does happen because the nerfbat will strike hard. |
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
751
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 08:23:00 -
[20] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Asayanami Dei wrote:
Such is the development process. I imagine things will be much more clear after the summit next week.
Considering it has already been stated that the majority of the summit will be concerning sov null i wouldn't hold your breath. https://i.imgflip.com/85j5j.jpg I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I-- THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/asayanami Twitter: https://twitter.com/Asayanami Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/Asayanami
|
|
Winthorp
2711
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 08:26:00 -
[21] - Quote
Asayanami Dei wrote:Winthorp wrote:Asayanami Dei wrote:
Such is the development process. I imagine things will be much more clear after the summit next week.
Considering it has already been stated that the majority of the summit will be concerning sov null i wouldn't hold your breath. https://i.imgflip.com/85j5j.jpg
Are you that mad i said you should resign that you fail to even discuss a serious issue?
I understand NDA but that is not the issue here and you are just being a giant ****.
|
Maduin Shi
Perkone Caldari State
100
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 09:01:00 -
[22] - Quote
I did hear from Fozzie amongst the wormhole podcasts that some kind of nerf to armor tanked proteus fits is "a safe bet". I'll pull up that podcast and listen to it again to confirm. Can't remember if he was talking about subsystems generally or about the Proteus in particular (or both). |
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
751
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 09:06:00 -
[23] - Quote
Given that the schedule of the summit has not been posted your assumptions are far fetched to say the least. Like i say, there will be more to discuss after the summit. I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I-- THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/asayanami Twitter: https://twitter.com/Asayanami Twitch: http://www.twitch.tv/Asayanami
|
Jessica Duranin
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
134
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 09:07:00 -
[24] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:My logic is this change to RE dos not go hand in hand with them making every subsystem usefull in the future and there is now concern that won't happen. Given how the last wormhole changes worked out I would honestly prefer if CCP wouldn't touch T3s at all.
|
Enthropic
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
150
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 09:16:00 -
[25] - Quote
excuse my ignorance, but may I ask if the mass-based wh spawn distance changes are also going to be a topic for the CSM summit? Also, where can the meeting minutes be found? I look here, but that only goes back to 2012.. https://community.eveonline.com/community/csm/meeting-minutes/
I know, wrong thread, sorry |
Maduin Shi
Perkone Caldari State
100
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 09:16:00 -
[26] - Quote
Jessica Duranin wrote:Winthorp wrote:My logic is this change to RE dos not go hand in hand with them making every subsystem usefull in the future and there is now concern that won't happen. Given how the last wormhole changes worked out I would honestly prefer if CCP wouldn't touch T3s at all.
Yeah. But they're gonna. |
Loki O'Grady
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
24
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 10:11:00 -
[27] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Asayanami Dei wrote:
Such is the development process. I imagine things will be much more clear after the summit next week.
Considering it has already been stated that the majority of the summit will be concerning sov null i wouldn't hold your breath.
Considering that CCP have moved to ten releases per year and the summits remain at two per year, wouldn't it be fair to assume that this next summit will cover more than just what will be in Oceanus? |
Winthorp
2711
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 10:17:00 -
[28] - Quote
Loki O'Grady wrote:Winthorp wrote:Asayanami Dei wrote:
Such is the development process. I imagine things will be much more clear after the summit next week.
Considering it has already been stated that the majority of the summit will be concerning sov null i wouldn't hold your breath. Considering that CCP have moved to ten releases per year and the summits remain at two per year, wouldn't it be fair to assume that this next summit will cover more than just what will be in Oceanus?
When did i say the summit will be all about Oceanus? Sure just make stuff up.... |
Winthorp
2711
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 10:18:00 -
[29] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Zifrian wrote:2 - Costs of T3 items are primarily determined by Melted Nanoribbons and one or two polymers. Will you adjust the salvage drop rates (maybe this should have been done with the WH updates) or readjust the requirements so that there is a more dynamic market for building T3? After you dumb this down and combine it with invention, the market is going to tank and cease to be specialized. Can you make some sort of adjustments to ensure that doesn't happen as badly? We will adjust salvage requirements if we think it's needed yes.
So this change we should just ignore this as i guess RE changes won't affect WH space at all. |
Loki O'Grady
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
24
|
Posted - 2014.09.12 10:49:00 -
[30] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Loki O'Grady wrote:Winthorp wrote:Asayanami Dei wrote:
Such is the development process. I imagine things will be much more clear after the summit next week.
Considering it has already been stated that the majority of the summit will be concerning sov null i wouldn't hold your breath. Considering that CCP have moved to ten releases per year and the summits remain at two per year, wouldn't it be fair to assume that this next summit will cover more than just what will be in Oceanus? When did i say the summit will be all about Oceanus? Sure just make stuff up....
Okay, fair enough. The point I was (poorly) attempting to make was that all the previous summits have been about both what's coming up next and also what CCP have planned for further down the track. So even if fixing sovnull is a priority, there is bound to be plenty of discussion unrelated to that goal. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |