Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Greig Hul
Ore Extraction Technologies
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 13:18:00 -
[1]
First up, I am enjoying the new PI much better than before. Routing is greatly simplified and its no longer an annoying clickfest.
My question is; Having noticed that when you overlap extractor heads' area of effect, the extracted amount decreases - will such a decrease be suffered if another player is extracting in the same area as me and overlaps their extractors with mine?
Bonus question: if i re-run the same job twice, will the result differ the second time around? do i need to move my extractor heads each time I decide to install a mining job to maximize output, or can i just leave them be and repeatedly install the same program?
|
Wezzord
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 14:54:00 -
[2]
Yeah the new PI seems nice. But I have an annoying problem. Every time I shall submit the pending edits then PI hangs(no windows pop up when clicking on a building, except for the CC). And if I press submit again a windows says that I shall wait 10 seconds. Well that doesn't work. No matter how long I wait PI will never go back to normal. I have to exit PI and enter again. Then the changes are done and I can continue with the next batch of changes, press submit, exit PI, enter again and continue. Takes a bit of time to set up all the new extractors.
Is there something going on with the server or do my client have corrupted cache or something?
Anyone with similar problems.
|
Amelie Cassi
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 15:07:00 -
[3]
Same problem here.
|
|
CCP Tuxford
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 16:58:00 -
[4]
Probably something failed. Can you guys run the logServer and submit a bug report.
As for the questions. 1. No you are not affected by other players extractor heads 2. When you install a program we deplete the resource a bit. It does regenerate but your heads might not be at "optimal position" next time you survey for resources.
_______________ |
|
Amy Frost
Einmal mit Profis arbeiten
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 17:27:00 -
[5]
First off I love the new Extractor Survey Menu, it makes alot of stuff so much easier (like calculating amount/hour).
My question: Is it intended to break Single Planet Robotics Production chains (or any Single t3 Planet Production Chains for that matter)?
Single Planet Robotics Production Example: 4x Extractor Control Unit (Noble, Heavy, Base + Non-CS) = 4x 2800 MW = 11.200 MW + at least 4x Extractor Head Units Total (Noble, Heavy, Base + Non-CS) = 4x 552 MW = 2.208 MW 4x Basic Industry Facility (Precious, Toxic, Reactive + Chiral) = 4x 800 MW = 3.200 MW 3x Advanced Industry Facility (Consumer Electronics, Mechanical Parts, Robotics) = 3x 700 MW = 2.100 MW ----------------------- 18.708 MW + Launchpad 700 MW ======================= 19.408 MW
Command Center Maximum Upgrade Level 19.000 MW
It was a very tight squeeze before the changes, but now even without the Launchpad it only leaves 292 MW for links. So in reality it makes it impossible to run 23/h cycles with this Setup in Empire (maybe it's still theoretically possible to do it in 0.0 where all the resources sit on top of each other in vast amounts).
Am I missing something where you can extract 2 types of materials with the same Extractor Control Unit (for example Base+Heavy Metals as those are often available close to each other) at the same time or did you intend to break it?
Amy Frost --
Originally by: t20 WE AER GIOGN FRO MROE BREE
|
Amelie Cassi
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 17:41:00 -
[6]
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Probably something failed. Can you guys run the logServer and submit a bug report.
Done. Hope it helps.
|
Sherksilver
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 22:38:00 -
[7]
I noticed the same as well. Before - even for a P2 item planet, you could potentially run 4 lines (say 4 sets of Mech parts). With the new control heads and power requirements this will no longer be possible. 1 Control + 4 heads ==> 2800 + 2208 = 5008 (times 2) = 10,016 8 Basic Processors = 6,400 power 4 Advanced Processors = 2,800 power
10016 + 6400 + 2800 = 19,216, before you even consider links, etc...
And that kind of mining is the same overall hourly output I was achieving with 5x extractors pre-change, which was possible and could fit.
Is it intentional to slow down / reduce what can be done on a planet as part of these changes?
|
Wezzord
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 22:41:00 -
[8]
Originally by: CCP Tuxford Probably something failed. Can you guys run the logServer and submit a bug report.
Done.
|
Candente
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 22:46:00 -
[9]
Is it just me or whenever I make changes to PI network on a planet and I click "submit", nothing happens. But if I exit the PI interface and re-enter that planet, I can see the actions are done. Anyone else got this problem? ------------- rawr~ |
|
CCP Tuxford
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 22:53:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Amy Frost First off I love the new Extractor Survey Menu, it makes alot of stuff so much easier (like calculating amount/hour).
My question: Is it intended to break Single Planet Robotics Production chains (or any Single t3 Planet Production Chains for that matter)?
Single Planet Robotics Production Example: 4x Extractor Control Unit (Noble, Heavy, Base + Non-CS) = 4x 2800 MW = 11.200 MW + at least 4x Extractor Head Units Total (Noble, Heavy, Base + Non-CS) = 4x 552 MW = 2.208 MW 4x Basic Industry Facility (Precious, Toxic, Reactive + Chiral) = 4x 800 MW = 3.200 MW 3x Advanced Industry Facility (Consumer Electronics, Mechanical Parts, Robotics) = 3x 700 MW = 2.100 MW ----------------------- 18.708 MW + Launchpad 700 MW ======================= 19.408 MW
Command Center Maximum Upgrade Level 19.000 MW
It was a very tight squeeze before the changes, but now even without the Launchpad it only leaves 292 MW for links. So in reality it makes it impossible to run 23/h cycles with this Setup in Empire (maybe it's still theoretically possible to do it in 0.0 where all the resources sit on top of each other in vast amounts).
Am I missing something where you can extract 2 types of materials with the same Extractor Control Unit (for example Base+Heavy Metals as those are often available close to each other) at the same time or did you intend to break it?
Amy Frost
I can¦t really answer for game design about their intent but afaik we didn't want to muck about with the production chains. Of course ECUs are different than extractors so some changes were inevitable and network that used to work might not have the powergrid or cpu anymore.
I'll forward your concerns to the team. _______________ |
|
|
Amelie Cassi
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 23:05:00 -
[11]
I have two more questions.
1) When I start a program, the total output changes. I presume that it's the real total output, and before the program starts, it's a skill based total output. Am I right or is it something else ? Sometimes I have a little more, often I have lower.
2) How work the routes ? There's always a predefined amount of materials to be routed, changing with the total ouput, but it's often lower than my first two or three cycles output. How is this amount calculated ? Can I route all the materials at the end of each cycle ?
Thanks in advance.
|
|
CCP Tuxford
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 23:16:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Amelie Cassi I have two more questions.
1) When I start a program, the total output changes. I presume that it's the real total output, and before the program starts, it's a skill based total output. Am I right or is it something else ? Sometimes I have a little more, often I have lower.
The resource harmonic is cached and you might not get the full harmonic based on your skills. So when moving heads around you're working on your best estimate, but when you install the program you get the actual numbers. Those numbers will then be used when you actually submit your network changes.
Originally by: Amelie Cassi
2) How work the routes ? There's always a predefined amount of materials to be routed, changing with the total ouput, but it's often lower than my first two or three cycles output. How is this amount calculated ? Can I route all the materials at the end of each cycle ?
The variance is basically a decay and some oscillations of different frequencies. If you move a head around you can see them change a bit drastically. There is however a theoretical maximum we can route and thats the number we tell you to route. To account for the varying output we made the actual routing a bit smarter. It routes first to process pins. Of those it can route to it prioritizes process pins that have more material in first.
_______________ |
|
Naradak
Minmatar Cube Zombie Consortium
|
Posted - 2010.12.18 23:57:00 -
[13]
Are the current output rates pretty much what they will be when this is implemented?
|
|
CCP Tuxford
|
Posted - 2010.12.19 12:52:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Naradak Are the current output rates pretty much what they will be when this is implemented?
I belief they are unless we ****ed up copying some static data. It's should be more than last iteration of the new ECUs but should be almost equivalent to current TQ iirc. _______________ |
|
Amy Frost
Einmal mit Profis arbeiten
|
Posted - 2010.12.19 13:27:00 -
[15]
Oh and could somebody make it possible to move the Command Centers location around on the Planet without the need to destroy it, now half of my CC are on the other side of the Planet where I actually do all the extraction these days.
Amy Frost --
Originally by: t20 WE AER GIOGN FRO MROE BREE
|
Dej Asekur
|
Posted - 2010.12.19 17:54:00 -
[16]
My first impression of the new extraction interface is very positive as it adds much needed flexibility while reducing repetition for working with planetary interaction. However, the proposed implementation means increased fitting requirements for high end extraction operations. As an example I currently run 5 planets with the following setup. Current Setup 4x Extractor & Processor for each resource type 4 T2 Processor and LaunchPad 1 Storage Buffer for each resource type
Each planet is required to produce 20 T2 components per hour meaning that I need to harvest 24000 units of each R0 per hour. Currently on TQ I average roughly 38000 units per hour during a 5 hour cycle (null sec).
However the proposed changes would not allow me to achieve these sorts of volumes (even less if I want some storage facilities for buffer) The best I could come up with on sisi was this: SISI - 1, SISI - 2 - not even close to what I am currently able to do, which makes the new feature rather annoying for me rather than an improvement.
Perhaps if the grid requirements for the Extractor Control Unit were reduced, and the cost of each extraction head was slightly increased - then complex T3 and high volume T2 production schemes would continue to be workable post incursion.
|
Dark Striped
|
Posted - 2010.12.19 19:33:00 -
[17]
teh last time thsi was on sisi there were refund for old command centres and also for extracters that have to be removed. is that just an omission from this or will there me no refunds?
|
Mike deVoid
Federal Defence Union
|
Posted - 2010.12.19 20:51:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Candente Is it just me or whenever I make changes to PI network on a planet and I click "submit", nothing happens. But if I exit the PI interface and re-enter that planet, I can see the actions are done. Anyone else got this problem?
Getting the same problem here too -------- Is this a rhetorical question? |
|
CCP Tuxford
|
Posted - 2010.12.20 13:20:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Mike deVoid
Originally by: Candente Is it just me or whenever I make changes to PI network on a planet and I click "submit", nothing happens. But if I exit the PI interface and re-enter that planet, I can see the actions are done. Anyone else got this problem?
Getting the same problem here too
I've found the issue and fixed it. It should be ported to sisi this week. Thanks for the bug reports _______________ |
|
Sturmwolke
|
Posted - 2010.12.20 16:40:00 -
[20]
Please create an icon or link in the planetary view mode that allows you to click and view the next planet in the list or whatever that planet that you've clicked on. Having to run back to Science & Industry window to change planet (to manage) is ridiculous for obvious reasons. If it's not a priority (or out of scope), make it a priority. |
|
J'J'J'Jita
Ch'Ch'Ch'Chia Corp
|
Posted - 2010.12.20 23:36:00 -
[21]
Originally by: CCP Tuxford
I can¦t really answer for game design about their intent but afaik we didn't want to muck about with the production chains. Of course ECUs are different than extractors so some changes were inevitable and network that used to work might not have the powergrid or cpu anymore.
I'll forward your concerns to the team.
On a common nullsec extraction-->p2 setup, you'll have 3-4 extractors at each hotspot (for a total of about 5600 powergrid, 7x800). With the new ECUs, you're using 5600pg just to place two ECUs before any heads at all. The new ECUs absolutely hurt the ability to produce straight to p2 (or p3) on a single planet.
|
Kalle Demos
Amarr Hysteria Nexus
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 00:52:00 -
[22]
Originally by: J'J'J'Jita
Originally by: CCP Tuxford
I can¦t really answer for game design about their intent but afaik we didn't want to muck about with the production chains. Of course ECUs are different than extractors so some changes were inevitable and network that used to work might not have the powergrid or cpu anymore.
I'll forward your concerns to the team.
On a common nullsec extraction-->p2 setup, you'll have 3-4 extractors at each hotspot (for a total of about 5600 powergrid, 7x800). With the new ECUs, you're using 5600pg just to place two ECUs before any heads at all. The new ECUs absolutely hurt the ability to produce straight to p2 (or p3) on a single planet.
There is a nice way to work around this but tbh with sisi being a bit buggy I think CCP will change this.
On an unrelated note, there is 4 Ch then Chia not 3, just saying
Originally by: Kool StoryBro <---
Originally by: CCP Spitfire Spam post removed.
Random forum moments ftw |
Sherksilver
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 03:55:00 -
[23]
Any info on the amounts, etc? This is a big change if the ECU is going to cost this much power wise.
Essentially almost every P3 chain or a planet will no longer be viable on a single planet. Most systems / planets will HAVE to down-scale on production amounts to maintain function.
Realistically - right now for a planet to produce say: Mech Parts: I use 10 Extractors, 8 P1 Processors, and 4 P2 Processors. The command Center and a Launch Pad. This is NO longer possible with current ECU and Head costs. Period.
Sure, I can do the Processors, LP and CC - but the extractors (10 == 8000, which equals barely 2 ECU's, with 2 heads each) there is No way that those 2 heads will equal 5 of the current extractors for amount harvested - not even close (on same exact planet).
So, I would really like to hear more on the intentions, etc...
(I can live with it, but just want to know what is intended).
|
J'J'J'Jita
Ch'Ch'Ch'Chia Corp
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 06:25:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Kalle Demos
Originally by: J'J'J'Jita
Originally by: CCP Tuxford
I can¦t really answer for game design about their intent but afaik we didn't want to muck about with the production chains. Of course ECUs are different than extractors so some changes were inevitable and network that used to work might not have the powergrid or cpu anymore.
I'll forward your concerns to the team.
On a common nullsec extraction-->p2 setup, you'll have 3-4 extractors at each hotspot (for a total of about 5600 powergrid, 7x800). With the new ECUs, you're using 5600pg just to place two ECUs before any heads at all. The new ECUs absolutely hurt the ability to produce straight to p2 (or p3) on a single planet.
There is a nice way to work around this but tbh with sisi being a bit buggy I think CCP will change this.
On an unrelated note, there is 4 Ch then Chia not 3, just saying
No, you are incorrect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chia_Pet http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzY7qQFij_M
|
Jaranis
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 09:42:00 -
[25]
Love the new extractors, but can we balance them somewhat to bring it back in line with the previous setups? Where I was once able to put down 6 extractors, 4 P0-P1 and 2 P1-P2, extracting two different items in equal amounts, I can now extract either of them at increased net efficiency, but not both at even equal efficiency. I wouldn't mind if it wasn't such a horrible clickfest to set up a factory, but that's what factories are still. Clickfests.
Is it possible to change the routing to apply to structures rather than products? Instead of saying 'route your aqueous liquids from this to this and then put your water to this' you could say 'request for products here, take them, send the finished goods back when done'. This would remove 80% of the clickfest of factories and allow you to just switch the schematic to match your extraction, as you can no longer do the dual-extraction setup.
|
Schanah
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 12:55:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Schanah on 21/12/2010 12:55:38 Something chocked me about the new extracting program system
-With the current PI system, perma-running 5h programs is ~2.4* more efficient than perma-running 23h programs.
Maths : 42000 P0 with a 5h cycle so 8400 P0/hr perma-runned , 80000 P0 with a 23h cycle so 3480P0 /hr perma-runned. 8400/3480 = 2.4 (calculus made on a single base metal extractor on a barren planet)
-With the singularity PI system, it is only ~1.5* more efficient.
Maths : 120000 P0 with a 5h cycle so 24000 P0/hr perma-runned , 368000 P0 with a 23h cycle so 16000P0 /hr perma-runned. 8400/3480 = 1.5 (calculus made on an base metal CU with 3 heads)
Nowaday, I perma run 4 mechanical parts chains on every barren planete I use with 3-4 5h cycles a day, with the current PG requirments and the new extracting rates it won't be possible. (Or there is something I didn't figure out)
|
Tortarga
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 13:04:00 -
[27]
I haven't played with PI on TQ, but the way it is on Sisi is pretty cool, will defiantly train up my PI skills before the January release.
One question, I noticed that factories will store the resources needed for their next cycle. But if there's 2 factories both being fed out of a Launchpad, both have 50% input products stored but one is halfway through a cycle and the others idle there should be a priority to supply the idle factory. I think I've seen it where one factory gets filled to the brim first while the other does nothing. Is there any heirachy coded into where products go where, or I have I neglected an aspect of setting up my planet?
|
Margatroid Alice
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 17:29:00 -
[28]
I tried since hours and, PI will be nerfed, that's all i saw.
If i adapt my current production line to the new PI, i lose 25% of the total amount, and i need to haul each panete five time more than on TQ.
the clickfest is going to be a haulfest.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 17:51:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Schanah -With the current PI system, perma-running 5h programs is ~2.4* more efficient than perma-running 23h programs.
Have you taken into account that with the new system, you don't want to set short programs?
You want as long programs as possible, but you never let them run to completion ù instead, you want to abort them to create the optimal cycle length for your purposes.
By your description, it sounds like you're setting the program to run 5h and 23h, respectively. That's not how to make the most of the new system, since this would mean including a lot of long-tail/low-efficiency extraction. It's far better to run long programs and just cut of the juicy short-term/high-efficiency head of the extraction curve. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Schanah
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 18:35:00 -
[30]
I DO use short programs since they grant me a better efficiency than one-day-long programs (2 5h cycles give more than 1 23h cycle). It isn't possible for everyone to do so, neither is it for everyone to spend hours farming or mining.
everything seems to be calibrated on the current 23h cycle.
I'm glad I can set longer cycles and abort them, but I'd rather not be able to and still have the ultra-efficient 5h cycles ...
Originally by: Tippia
It's far better to run long programs and just cut of the juicy short-term/high-efficiency head of the extraction curve.
Yeah ... except the spike isn't always on the begining of the extraction curve.
Originally by: Margatroid Alice
If i adapt my current production line to the new PI, i lose 25% of the total amount, and i need to haul each panete five time more than on TQ.
That's right, POS fuel price is going to rise again ... and so will T2 price ... and so on ...
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |