Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2555
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 17:19:00 -
[61] - Quote
I'd be surprised if they make current things unable to be done by an individual.
New things, or making it easier/safer/less insane to do in a group is possible though. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Xurr
Angelic Insurrection Corp
71
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 17:43:00 -
[62] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Survey filled out. From the sort of questions they're asking,looks like they're trying to kill off the single player S&I corps by forcing it to be a cooperative action. What next, one person to power the mining laser and another to aim it?
Don't forget about the people needed to pick up the ore spew. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1182
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 21:23:00 -
[63] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:I'd be surprised if they make current things unable to be done by an individual.
New things, or making it easier/safer/less insane to do in a group is possible though.
first they need to find something that can't be solved by throwing more alts at the problem. definitely a non-trivial task. We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Banner was used for this Post |
Batolemaeus
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 22:07:00 -
[64] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:I'd be surprised if they make current things unable to be done by an individual.
New things, or making it easier/safer/less insane to do in a group is possible though. first they need to find something that can't be solved by throwing more alts at the problem. definitely a non-trivial task.
Invention minigame, requiring constant solving of the hacking minigame while docked in station.
You heard it here first. |
Elgin Stone
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 22:13:00 -
[65] - Quote
The S&I survey is broken. |
Kumduh
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 23:09:00 -
[66] - Quote
Mentioned this in the survey, but from the perspective of someone doing exploration, a lot of the stuff we pick up from data sites isn't even worth the cargo space.
An Occult Tuner Data Interface for example. For the most part, all the mats used to make it are dirt cheap, less than a thousand ISK, but their weight is1m^3 each. In total it would take 89m^3 of my precious cargo space to make a data tuner which sells for a whopping 800k. It simply isn't worth the cargo space, and is easier to just eject it into space. So I guess for starters you could lower the volume of things like Auxiliary Parts so that they are even worth carrying to the market. |
Gloria Stephson
Star circle
2
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 05:29:00 -
[67] - Quote
Batolemaeus wrote:Gilbaron wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:I'd be surprised if they make current things unable to be done by an individual.
New things, or making it easier/safer/less insane to do in a group is possible though. first they need to find something that can't be solved by throwing more alts at the problem. definitely a non-trivial task. Invention minigame, requiring constant solving of the hacking minigame while docked in station. You heard it here first.
That would seriously make me want to slit my wrists.
Like many others I run a alt indy corp, because the way corp role mangment works. I will not risk my BPO and material stockpiles by letting in other players inside my corp. |
Nex Killer
Drunk3n Industry
49
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 06:44:00 -
[68] - Quote
I can't find the post but someone had an idea for BPC that I really liked. They said what if you could take BPCs of the same ME/PE and combine them into one big BPC. So lets say you had 100 BPC of something but they all had different runs left you could combine for a fee and make them into one big BPC. That would be cool :D |
Sister Sinescha
Joint Venture Engineering Special Circumstances Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 07:20:00 -
[69] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest
could you please also try and reduce the clickfest ?
oh, and less clicks please :)
the amount of essentially free production lines in highsec is too damn high
I wouldn't say the number of production lines is too high. You often have to go to some backwater systems to not have a wait. Its just that the demand for the product is not necessarily balanced with the production capability. Since you are in a null-sec alliance, I am assuming you are comparing the number of lines in highsec with the number available in null-sec. Null-sec industry is so bad it is a joke. Trying to supply a null-sec region with its available production lines is like trying to put out a raging hi-rise fire with a dixie-cup of water.
However, less clicks, please.
|
Sister Sinescha
Joint Venture Engineering Special Circumstances Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 07:23:00 -
[70] - Quote
Gloria Stephson wrote: Like many others I run a alt indy corp, because the way corp role mangment works. I will not risk my BPO and material stockpiles by letting in other players inside my corp.
There's nothing about manufacturing that can't be done better with a few alts. There's no go way to delegate your work to someone else that doesn't put you in a position to be completely ****** over and robbed blind. |
|
Bremir Sol
Solar Ventures Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 16:51:00 -
[71] - Quote
Nex Killer wrote:I can't find the post but someone had an idea for BPC that I really liked. They said what if you could take BPCs of the same ME/PE and combine them into one big BPC. So lets say you had 100 BPC of something but they all had different runs left you could combine for a fee and make them into one big BPC, would be nice for Tech 2 BPCs. That would be cool :D
I left this exact feedback in the survey. The ability to split or consolidate BPCs with similar levels would be incredible. For instance, splitting a single 10 run BPC into 10 one run BPCs, so I can queue them all at once. Mind you, queue them all at once through the new and improved non-click-festy interface, of course. Or, conversely, take a bunch of different run BPCs and combine them into a single larger BPC, up to the maximum possible run count, of course.
The first part would actually be equivalent to not locking up the BPC in the job, so you can run concurrent jobs from it. The whole thing, in fact, could have a much simpler interface - just input {number of jobs} x {number of runs}, drop in a bunch of BPCs with enough runs to cover the total, and click OK.
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2558
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 16:56:00 -
[72] - Quote
Being able to combine blueprints would be a game changer.
As it would mean you could keep your production lines running 24x7 in T2 production. This wouldn't improve your productivity. It would reduce the price for those items with a less than 24 hour run time. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Liner Xiandra
Sparks Inc Zero Hour Alliance
266
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 19:25:00 -
[73] - Quote
Some more means to disrupt your competitors would be nice as well.
Currently we can: - Increase POCO tax, -Wardec corp to take down POS
and that is pretty much it.
Highsec production slots are too plentyful, too anonimous, too cheap. Hauling can be solved with out of corp alts; and station traders (strictly not S&I) are immune to everything and everyone.
I guess this is way out of scope/reasonable but I'd like to be able to hire Dust mercenaries (or some other mechanic) to engage rival PI extractors; or blow up their production lines. Or clear out some drone infestation and have my own PI efficiency get back to 100%. Hack their hisec invention laboraties.
|
Belmarduk
Followers of Chuthulu
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 19:35:00 -
[74] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest
could you please also try and reduce the clickfest ?
oh, and less clicks please :)
the amount of essentially free production lines in highsec is too damn high
THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:24:00 -
[75] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Cloaky McWarpStab wrote:Xurr wrote:Hey CCP,
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want 150bil in BPOs stolen.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want my jobs to be canceled for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want them to be able to shoot my freighters for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want the fuel dumped out of my POS for the lulz.
Isn't trust a key game play element? The thing is: What's the benefit of working in the same corp as another player, from an industrial stand point? (Rather than a looser association. Not an alliance, as that just makes you a more attractive target for war decs, but grouping you together for a single dec) I can only think of one. Standings, for anchoring POS. If everyone is careful not to have standings which mess with the chosen faction.
No one likes to be ganked or wardecced but without those two elements EVE Online would not be EVE Online anymore.
Bringing up the obvious yet again but the one thing that has to be fixed by CCP to enable industrial cooperation is to fix Corporation Roles & Permissions and their interaction with POSes & Outposts. Make them very user friendly and enable all resources and structures to be secure and free from theft or interference. Add a user friendly taxing system for corporations & alliances out there in null-sec so they can tax, hopefully fairly , ALL activities in their sov territory.
I'd imagine the best way to do this would be to develop a new system for corp roles & permissions then remove the old system and slot the new one in. That's me looking on from my luddite viewpoint - I don't expect it would be that simple. But CCP don't seem too keen on repairing the old system so the above seems logical to me.
To my mind it would have been better to to the above, or at least make a start on it, rather than introducing ghost sites, messing with warp values, and making interceptors OP. Would be nice for a change to get what we want rather than what we (don't) need. |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:30:00 -
[76] - Quote
Summer Isle wrote:Some of these questions needs a "does not apply or not involved with" option for the things we have no involvement in, and have no real clue about. I feel odd answering "easy" or "hard" on, say, Capital manufacturing, Star Base reactions, deployment, etc., considering I have absolutely no involvement with any of them, and can't give an accurate opinion for it.
It is fairly obvious which are the more complicated and which are fairly straightforward to get involved in eg T3 production, moon mining, and drug production all have multiple stages to complete and so would be classed as 'hard'. |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:36:00 -
[77] - Quote
Rodrik Vikary wrote:I've answered this survey yesterday, even though my knowledge in the area of S&I is very low. I mainly do PI, which was hard in the beggining (lost some isk having to rebuild after noticing mistakes) but now it is really easy.
My main problem with S&I is that, it seems there are just too many skills for it. I can't begin to understand what all those Science skills are used for and I think the information should be more ingame than now. Right now there is too much info that I need to search elsewhere to understand how things work since I'm a new player here (6 months).
I understand the need for specialization with EVE but it seems like getting into S&I is practically impossible for people like me and I believe in a sandbox, all aspects of the game should be a little bit easier to understand and to begin. The most manufacturing I've done so far was getting a BPC and using it, like in the tutorials, because the rest is kind of a mystery to me.
You are asking for the game to be dumbed down. This is not what most players of EVE Online would want. We have had too much dumbing down already for example the simplification of some item names when the previous names were much better. Most players are, arguably, adults and are capable of figuring things out. |
Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:39:00 -
[78] - Quote
The emphasis on 'cooperation' within this survey is somewhat worrying as to what CCP intend to use it to impose on us. If it means they will fix Corp Roles & Permissions that's great but I fear it may be something pretty duff that no one will want. Just look at the furore over the ESS being forced onto null sec ratters and you get an idea of what could happen. |
Ricard Defondel
Digital Alchemist The Fire Nation Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 14:02:00 -
[79] - Quote
It seems to me if more co-operation is desired, the Corp structure needs fixing to facilitate this. An option that forces shareholders to cash in shares on departure. A type of share that doesn't permit have voting rights would get ordinary members involved without risk to the Corp owners. A more advanced method of controlling budgets limits so individuals with access can't clear out the corp. A Factory ship which can process ore on site and issue contracts for goods would be useful for corps doing group mining ops, and would make it more profitable to co-operate. |
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
20
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 14:21:00 -
[80] - Quote
Hi there, posted a proposal related to industry here |
|
Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
783
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 15:12:00 -
[81] - Quote
Haha, you forget Storyline Item Production...
Or perhaps I should not laugh at that, as construction costs for many of these items have been borked since Invention was introduced and should have been addressed years ago. I guess this "low hanging fruit" has in fact gone underground and is no longer visible. Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook-á |
Tiolth Daganth
Clan Daganth
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 18:20:00 -
[82] - Quote
Allow PI to be less passive, provide more incentives and opportunities to have more cooperation.
Simple dump from a simple mind:
- Corporate/dedicated/contracted CO transporter (pickup and delivery between COs)
- Specialized CC/Skill(s) to facilitate transport of resources between other players facilities on the same planet
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2559
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 18:23:00 -
[83] - Quote
Calorn Marthor wrote:Hi there, posted a proposal related to industry here
Not too bad an idea.
However, I'd prefer to keep it all in space, where it has at least some vulnerability.
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/2013/11/24/retooling-industry-eve-blue-sky/ is something I wrote on it a while ago.
Barriers to entry is a good thing. Not insurmountable barriers, but some. Skill and ISK, primarily. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
395
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 03:50:00 -
[84] - Quote
Batolemaeus wrote: Did you just try to out-bitter me? I thought that was impossible.
Sorry, I trained Bitter V a long time back. I've handed them ideas that I've had to make this a better game for ten years, and am still to this day stickied in the Features and Ideas section for threads I OPd before you started that character. Some of them were picked up and run with by other game companies for other games.
The very few they embraced, they proceeded to **** up beyond all sanity, trying to force them to benefit their pet alliance of the week or to somehow shoehorn PvP into it, badly.
I've started a betting pool for how long before jump-drives require five plex to activate, and if all T2 bpos except those belonging to goonswarm will be turned to bpcs.
Unless your thread is limited to how 'awesum!' Eve Online is, ISD will lock the thread.-á You will find it is particularly common if CCP might have to make a public response to the thread subject, as opposed to bury it in the GM que for the forseeable future and then prohibit telling anyone what the GM said, if it's ever answered at all. |
Black Panthera
5
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 11:35:00 -
[85] - Quote
Make possible to share items stored in outposts/stations between different toons (alts) without need to be in same corp ie without using corp hangars.
Also, will there ever be way to tax production or mining? |
Billy Hix
Team JK
79
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 17:17:00 -
[86] - Quote
One thing thats pretty important for CCP to remember.
If they make S&I easier, better, or draw attention to it as a feature in an upcoming expansion, its vital to introduce new stuff that needs to be made. If CCP improve S&I a load more people will enter the market, and while the extra competition will help the market run smoother than ever it will also exacerbate the over supply problem we already have. |
Muffet McStrudel
Aliastra Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 20:15:00 -
[87] - Quote
Liner Xiandra wrote:Some more means to disrupt your competitors would be nice as well.
Currently we can: - Increase POCO tax, -Wardec corp to take down POS
and that is pretty much it.
Highsec production slots are too plentyful, too anonimous, too cheap. Hauling can be solved with out of corp alts; and station traders (strictly not S&I) are immune to everything and everyone.
I guess this is way out of scope/reasonable but I'd like to be able to hire Dust mercenaries (or some other mechanic) to engage rival PI extractors; or blow up their production lines. Or clear out some drone infestation and have my own PI efficiency get back to 100%. Hack their hisec invention laboraties.
You can put a hit on someone and ruin their hauling alts for a long time. Isn't that enough?
Not sure why you think there are too many plentiful hi-sec slots? Not sure why you think they are cheap or you should know who's doing what where? Doesn't hi-sec research take long enough already?
Blowing up PI? Really? So you basically want industry tools to grief people. Good lord. |
Muffet McStrudel
Aliastra Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 20:17:00 -
[88] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:
I've started a betting pool for how long before jump-drives require five plex to activate, and if all T2 bpos except those belonging to goonswarm will be turned to bpcs.
Considering the number of hours invested to gain some of those BPO's that line isn't even funny. Nothing would make me dump my sub quicker than if my one last method of earning safe, passive isk got hit with a nerf bat.
|
Cholly Chi
Acme Entropy
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 23:33:00 -
[89] - Quote
Dear CCP Arrow,
I've completed the survey but forgot to note what for me is the single most frustrating aspect of S&I: managing BPs. If I can make two suggestions:
1. Enable stacking and repackaging of identical and unmodified BPOs and BPCs. 2. Implement some kind of graphic or hover-over which allows you to see the ME/PE of the BP in question (and possibly the number of remaining runs, as applicable).
Anyone serious about S&I acquires reams of BPOs, and makes tonnes of BPCs. Having to pore through the (very well designed) information screens, or scroll and click through all of these to find or sort the ones you want, robs considerable time from the workday. If I could just see the info in pale characters right there on the little BP, or do a quick hover-over - management of thousands of BPs would be much easier.
Thanks:) |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
533
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 14:20:00 -
[90] - Quote
For PI - ability to save/restore manufacturing configurations. Cost of reconfiguration is fine, but the click nightmare would be backed into a corner.
CCP Punkturis-á "I want to get in on the goodposter circle jerk!"
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |