Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Mai Khumm
172.0.0.1
856
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 15:20:16 -
[781] - Quote
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
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
435
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 15:30:45 -
[782] - Quote
Just a small QoL request, any chance you can put the rig requirements up as a spreadsheet, instead of just a jpg?
EVE-Mogul: https://www.eve-mogul.com
CEO/Programmer
Trade Profit Tracking Service
|
Darrien
Ouroboros Logistics
28
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 15:48:16 -
[783] - Quote
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.
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 15:52:48 -
[784] - Quote
This has probably been asked before but can't remember if I saw anything about it... what about API Asset view of stuff in Citadels/EC's? Will this be released with the initial release in November or some time soonGäó?
The game client is seriously lacking in anything management related, without the ability for 3rd party developers to augment the management of things we're stuck with spreadsheets that need manually updated and with the latest scrolling fix, copy/pasta out of inventory windows is a chore in and of itself. |
Icarus Narcissus
Pathway to the Next
42
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 15:56:24 -
[785] - Quote
Hey! My suggestions about the Material bonuses and reduced rig strength were used!
Great job CCP, I think this is a much more viable route to go with these structures! |
Kuhn Arashi
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
16
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 16:03:27 -
[786] - Quote
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
12
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 16:04:09 -
[787] - Quote
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
3057
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 16:07:55 -
[788] - Quote
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
9
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 16:09:27 -
[789] - Quote
Will there be an option to lockdown BPOs inside corp hangars in Citadels/Engineering Complexes soon? |
Kuhn Arashi
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
16
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 16:10:05 -
[790] - Quote
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
6231
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 17:10:30 -
[791] - Quote
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
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 Brave Collective
23
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 17:11:12 -
[792] - Quote
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 ?
|
Winter Archipelago
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
790
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 17:12:50 -
[793] - Quote
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.
For the Newbies: The 8 Golden Rules - The Magic 14 Skills - Finding the Right Corp - EVE University Wiki
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
6231
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 17:15:08 -
[794] - Quote
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
2555
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 17:31:52 -
[795] - Quote
The ROI on the T2 rigs, relative to the T1, seems a little grim.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Chani El'zrya
Beyond Frontier Brave Collective
23
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 17:34:40 -
[796] - Quote
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
389
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 17:54:37 -
[797] - Quote
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
Crusader Brewery
41
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 18:22:16 -
[798] - Quote
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
12
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 19:10:01 -
[799] - Quote
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. |
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC
82
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 19:29:37 -
[800] - Quote
Nfynity Prime wrote: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. twice? lol in a engineering complex Raitaru the services will cost 27 blocks every hour. thats not twice the cost of a medium.its 35% more than a medium? |
|
Nfynity Prime
Nfynity Prime Corp
12
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 19:45:10 -
[801] - Quote
RainReaper wrote:Nfynity Prime wrote: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. twice? lol in a engineering complex Raitaru the services will cost 27 blocks every hour. thats not twice the cost of a medium.its 35% more than a medium?
Well if you want to be picky, its 68.75% more than my medium faction POS. But my point still stands. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
2557
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 19:53:54 -
[802] - Quote
Nfynity Prime wrote:RainReaper wrote:Nfynity Prime wrote: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. twice? lol in a engineering complex Raitaru the services will cost 27 blocks every hour. thats not twice the cost of a medium.its 35% more than a medium? Well if you want to be picky, its 68.75% more than my medium faction POS. But my point still stands.
At 21K/fuel block, your medium faction POS costs you 242M/mo in fuel and gives a 2% ME bonus, so your payback on the fuel is at about 12 billion in input per month Vs. NPC, and all else being equal.
A 3 service EC with T1 rigs, in HS, would cost about 408M/mo in fuel and give an aggregate 3% ME bonus, putting the payback at about 13.6B in input, relative to NPC. There's also the index benefit baked into the hull, now, which will further reduce that value. If you're that small, sure, go back to NPC or use someone else's EC, but that's not a wildly disparate parity point, now.
You will have less diversity of bonus availability, and on the whole, I think that's a good thing from the standpoint of curtailing overproduction.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Min Jouhinen
The House of Jew Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 20:00:08 -
[803] - Quote
In regards to service modules, will the supercap module allow the production of regular caps or will you need to both both to the complex? |
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC
82
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 20:01:50 -
[804] - Quote
Min Jouhinen wrote:In regards to service modules, will the supercap module allow the production of regular caps or will you need to both both to the complex? the super cap one can accualy build supers and regualr capitals. so you dont need both. but you do still need the supercapital idnex thing in ordewr to online one in the sotiyo |
Arronicus
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
1544
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 20:02:28 -
[805] - Quote
Nfynity Prime wrote: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.
You're stuck in a completely wrong, highly entitled mindset here. You are under the belief that ccp needs to, or at least should make new content as broad or effective as the content it replaces, and that is broken thinking. Sometimes, to spur positive change, you have to tone things down, to scale them back. Being able to produce everything in one spot, very cheaply, was not healthy for either competition, or risk reward. The sooner you and others get rid of the idea of having pos level efficiency and cost, the sooner you can start enjoying the new industrial landscape of eve, with more specialization and cooperation. |
Arronicus
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
1544
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 20:04:38 -
[806] - Quote
RainReaper wrote:Min Jouhinen wrote:In regards to service modules, will the supercap module allow the production of regular caps or will you need to both both to the complex? the super cap one can accualy build supers and regualr capitals. so you dont need both. but you do still need the supercapital idnex thing in ordewr to online one in the sotiyo
Dev blog specifically stated that installation of the super service required the regular capital service. When did they change this? |
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC
82
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 20:06:18 -
[807] - Quote
Arronicus wrote:RainReaper wrote:Min Jouhinen wrote:In regards to service modules, will the supercap module allow the production of regular caps or will you need to both both to the complex? the super cap one can accualy build supers and regualr capitals. so you dont need both. but you do still need the supercapital idnex thing in ordewr to online one in the sotiyo Dev blog specifically stated that installation of the super service required the regular capital service. When did they change this? ...well i might ahve missed that part. i jsut remember checking the service on sisi and the sueprcapital one saying it allows both. but maybe it meant both as in you need the regualr one anyways? |
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC
82
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 20:09:33 -
[808] - Quote
RainReaper wrote:Arronicus wrote:RainReaper wrote:Min Jouhinen wrote:In regards to service modules, will the supercap module allow the production of regular caps or will you need to both both to the complex? the super cap one can accualy build supers and regualr capitals. so you dont need both. but you do still need the supercapital idnex thing in ordewr to online one in the sotiyo Dev blog specifically stated that installation of the super service required the regular capital service. When did they change this? ...well i might ahve missed that part. i jsut remember checking the service on sisi and the sueprcapital one saying it allows both. but maybe it meant both as in you need the regualr one anyways?
anyways it IS possible to try it out on sisi. everything is there. go try it and see what you can do with it. |
Arronicus
Fusion Enterprises Ltd Badfellas Inc.
1545
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 20:09:58 -
[809] - Quote
RainReaper wrote:Arronicus wrote:RainReaper wrote:Min Jouhinen wrote:In regards to service modules, will the supercap module allow the production of regular caps or will you need to both both to the complex? the super cap one can accualy build supers and regualr capitals. so you dont need both. but you do still need the supercapital idnex thing in ordewr to online one in the sotiyo Dev blog specifically stated that installation of the super service required the regular capital service. When did they change this? ...well i might ahve missed that part. i jsut remember checking the service on sisi and the sueprcapital one saying it allows both. but maybe it meant both as in you need the regualr one anyways?
I just reread the entire Dev blog, and couldn't find any evidence supporting my statement. I must have misread the first few times. Looks like you really don't need the capital for the super |
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC
82
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 20:13:45 -
[810] - Quote
Arronicus wrote:RainReaper wrote:Arronicus wrote:RainReaper wrote:Min Jouhinen wrote:In regards to service modules, will the supercap module allow the production of regular caps or will you need to both both to the complex? the super cap one can accualy build supers and regualr capitals. so you dont need both. but you do still need the supercapital idnex thing in ordewr to online one in the sotiyo Dev blog specifically stated that installation of the super service required the regular capital service. When did they change this? ...well i might ahve missed that part. i jsut remember checking the service on sisi and the sueprcapital one saying it allows both. but maybe it meant both as in you need the regualr one anyways? I just reread the entire Dev blog, and couldn't find any evidence supporting my statement. I must have misread the first few times. Looks like you really don't need the capital for the super well there you go :p ANYWAYS it is possible to test thigns out on the test server. so in order to be 100% sure you can go to sisi. and just try it out. then you wont have to assume anything lol |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |