Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
649
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 18:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
So after many years of completely ignoring this feature, I trained up a character to do PI and am experimenting with various setups/layouts. One thing I can't get my head around is why you can't create a route between, say, your launchpad and a storage facility. You have to "expedite" the transfer.
So my question is more about why the developers who do something so nonsensical. It rules out quite a lot of rather nice (for someone who's got OCD) layouts, especially on planets that are dedicated to production rather than extraction. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3704
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 19:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
The problem is that storage is neither a consumer nor a producer (there is no way to indicate material movement direction), so material will not flow unless you manually move it. |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
649
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 20:01:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:The problem is that storage is neither a consumer nor a producer (there is no way to indicate material movement direction), so material will not flow unless you manually move it.
Surely not. Storage is a consumer of whatever is routed to it and a producer of whatever is routed out of it. At least that's the logic at a more abstract level as far as I can see. |
Jockari Morden
Lords Of Anarchy
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 22:00:00 -
[4] - Quote
It does nothing with the things so it does not consume nor produce.
Receiving is not consuming, sending is not producing. That is the logic of a dictionnary, even if I don't know which level it is. |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
649
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 22:04:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jockari Morden wrote:It does nothing with the things so it does not consume nor produce.
Receiving is not consuming, sending is not producing. That is the logic of a dictionnary, even if I don't know which level it is.
Of course it is. It's a null process inside the store. It's output is its input. It's the simplest kind of process you can imagine. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3704
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 22:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Tau Cabalander wrote:The problem is that storage is neither a consumer nor a producer (there is no way to indicate material movement direction), so material will not flow unless you manually move it. Surely not. Storage is a consumer of whatever is routed to it and a producer of whatever is routed out of it. At least that's the logic at a more abstract level as far as I can see. Connect two silos. Which way does the material flow and how much?
There is no way to automatically determine this. |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
649
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 22:38:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Victoria Sin wrote:Tau Cabalander wrote:The problem is that storage is neither a consumer nor a producer (there is no way to indicate material movement direction), so material will not flow unless you manually move it. Surely not. Storage is a consumer of whatever is routed to it and a producer of whatever is routed out of it. At least that's the logic at a more abstract level as far as I can see. Connect two silos. Which way does the material flow and how much? There is no way to automatically determine this.
Of course there is. A consumer pulls from the silo. A producer pushed to the silo. |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3704
|
Posted - 2014.06.07 23:26:00 -
[8] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:Tau Cabalander wrote:Connect two silos. Which way does the material flow and how much?
There is no way to automatically determine this. Of course there is. A consumer pulls from the silo. A producer pushed to the silo. But a silo is neither, hence you have to manually move the material.
Example:
Consumer GåÉ Silo1 - Silo3 - Silo2 GåÆ Producer
What is the material flow for Silo3? It can't be determined, because PI silos do not work on a cycle basis (reaction silos do: every hour they move all available material from their input to their output, storing the difference). |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
650
|
Posted - 2014.06.08 09:45:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tau Cabalander wrote:Victoria Sin wrote:Tau Cabalander wrote:Connect two silos. Which way does the material flow and how much?
There is no way to automatically determine this. Of course there is. A consumer pulls from the silo. A producer pushed to the silo. But a silo is neither, hence you have to manually move the material. Example: Consumer GåÉ Silo1 - Silo3 - Silo2 GåÆ Producer What is the material flow for Silo3? It can't be determined, because PI silos do not work on a cycle basis (reaction silos do: every hour they move all available material from their input to their output, storing the difference).
The user decides what goes where. If the user wants stuff in silo 1 to go to Consumer, he can set that up. If he wants stuff in silo 2 to go to the producer, he can set that up. In the example you've given, clearly silo 3 is idle. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
1825
|
Posted - 2014.06.08 11:35:00 -
[10] - Quote
But why not just route from your processors direct to the launch pad?
No need for expedited transfer then.
Raw materials into storage and then all processed materials to the launch pad, even those that are intermediates towards the final product. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
. -á<- Argue this, not this ->-á( -í-¦ -£-û -í-¦) |
|
George Gouillot
Eleutherian Guard Villore Accords
18
|
Posted - 2014.06.08 13:05:00 -
[11] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:But why not just route from your processors direct to the launch pad?
No need for expedited transfer then.
Raw materials into storage and then all processed materials to the launch pad, even those that are intermediates towards the final product.
Cycle and storage optimization. I would like to see a routing between storages as well, especially on factory planets. |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
651
|
Posted - 2014.06.08 18:31:00 -
[12] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:But why not just route from your processors direct to the launch pad?
No need for expedited transfer then.
Raw materials into storage and then all processed materials to the launch pad, even those that are intermediates towards the final product.
That's what I do on my extractor planets, but on my factory planet I have 3 sets of 6 factories. I need one launch pad per set and that takes up quite a lot more CPU. Expedited transfers also have a cooldown, which is kind-of inexplicable to me but there you go.
CCP always go most of the way to make something that's really fun to play with and then seem to screw it up or make it annoying in the home straight. |
Gorr Shakor
Shakor Freight and Mining Service
2
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 12:02:00 -
[13] - Quote
I might be missing something (would not be the first time) but we can already route stuff from/to a Storage Facility? |
Cyniac
Twilight Star Rangers Create Alliance
196
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 16:43:00 -
[14] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:So after many years of completely ignoring this feature, I trained up a character to do PI and am experimenting with various setups/layouts. One thing I can't get my head around is why you can't create a route between, say, your launchpad and a storage facility. You have to "expedite" the transfer.
There are maybe three different reasons for this:
1) Way PI is coded - when a planetary structure cycles, stuff moves.
So for instance, I have an extractor. When it finishes it cycle it pushes the material to wherever it needs to go. A basic production facility cycles - it pulls materials it needs and pushes materials out when it cycles. i.e. cycling is the trigger that makes things move around.
Since none of the three storage buildings cycle (storage facility, launchpad or command centre) there is no "trigger" to move stuff between them.
2) Gameplay balance
There are actually a few ways how you could use extensive storage-to-storage transfer to build up a kind of material battery which would allow you to do all sorts of weird things with PI - the most obvious one is simply stocking up on materials then re-purposing production facilities to produce higher and higher PI stuff without having to move it from planet to planet. Though of course you can already do this, if you implement a battery of storage facilities you could literally run an extraction planet for months remotely without having to visit it to do anything with it. This is kinda contrary to the design concept where you are supposed to you know, move stuff around, get shot at, pay taxes etc. Then of course there is the question of building up launchpads vs storage facilities (in production planets not an issue really you have plenty of CPU, not so much in high end production planets)
3) Evil loops that break the game....
Consider:
PI stuff goes from storage 1 to storage 2 to storage 3 back to storage 1. Congratulations on producing an infinity loop and making the server very very very unhappy.
Though I don't think any of the aboverSo put all those things together and basically moving stuff from storage to storage - meh...
|
Aenaenon
Modulated Dreams Circle-Of-Two
0
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 16:55:00 -
[15] - Quote
They are probably afraid of people creating sloppy routes to and from storage facilities and creating infinite loops. I would love to be able to route from my spaceport to my storage. It would drastically cut down how many spaceports I need on my factory planets and make managing it just a little bit easier. |
Inxentas Ultramar
Ultramar Independent Contracting Advanced Amateurs
1305
|
Posted - 2014.06.12 17:52:00 -
[16] - Quote
The storage is indeed by design, so you cannot set your planets to crunch on for weeks unless you don't mind slower production speed. The idea is to balance between micromanagement and profit. Extracting and shipping off P0 stuff is indeed a big hit on the micromanagement level. As a rule of thumb I try to make efficient setups that will allow me to export P2 at least. An alternative setup I use is basicly the factory planet which doesn't extract, but converts P2+ materials into even smaller stuff.
That being said I am not dependent on PI, I just have the skills and it would be a waste to not utilize them. Hence my cycles are usually set to 2 days, 3 at most. If I don't alternate extraction (switching the resource mined) before the 4th day I usually get into storage trouble. Then I prefer to let the planet not mine for a while, it can usually convert for a few hours untill P2 production itself is actually halted. I prefer missing a few hours of production over micromanaging transfers.
Also, do the actual math. At some point you get a natural feel for how much of resource A you need to have in stock to keep producing after extraction of resource B stops. I just eyeball this a bit, but you could calculate that using a spreadsheet. |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
653
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 11:48:00 -
[17] - Quote
I still haven't work out whether to make P2 or just P0 to P1. I think it should work out to be the same in terms of productivity because you have the same hard limits on CPU and power on any planet you choose to work with and due to that if you're going to extract more than one resource, you have to halve the number of heads on your extractors, also halving the number of factories P0->P1. Regardless it doesn't amount to a whole hill of beans to be honest but it's interesting to play around with it. |
Cyniac
Twilight Star Rangers Create Alliance
196
|
Posted - 2014.06.13 21:31:00 -
[18] - Quote
Victoria Sin wrote:I still haven't work out whether to make P2 or just P0 to P1. I think it should work out to be the same in terms of productivity because you have the same hard limits on CPU and power on any planet you choose to work with and due to that if you're going to extract more than one resource, you have to halve the number of heads on your extractors, also halving the number of factories P0->P1. Regardless it doesn't amount to a whole hill of beans to be honest but it's interesting to play around with it.
A lot less hauling if you go P0->P2. In fact you cut down hauling to a quarter of what you would have if you were working from P0->P1.
Depending on your logistics situation this can make it much more efficient to convert all the way to P2 on a single planet.
|
TigerXtrm
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
716
|
Posted - 2014.06.14 11:25:00 -
[19] - Quote
If you're using storage buildings you're doing it wrong to begin with. You should never need them. Ever. My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things! |
Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
653
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 11:30:00 -
[20] - Quote
TigerXtrm wrote:If you're using storage buildings you're doing it wrong to begin with. You should never need them. Ever.
You can't just come here and make a broad sweeping statement without any explanation and then leave. These are the Eve forums. You have to provide us with a deep, meaningful treatise on why. |
|
Jdestars
Stars Research systems Incorporation
25
|
Posted - 2014.06.15 11:43:00 -
[21] - Quote
some year before i used In storage buffer like
launcher pad -> processor -> storage ->adv processor -> launcher pad But I abandoned(gave up) this solution its was too limited before the last modification and we cant chain storage with automatic Fillful routine
launcher pad -> processor -> storage 1 ->storage 2 ->adv processor -> launcher pad
now id separated the process ans use always 1 launcher pad for input and a nother for output and in major case
|
Sola Mercury
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
64
|
Posted - 2014.06.16 08:05:00 -
[22] - Quote
So, how would you calculate link capacities for links connectimg the two storages? |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |