Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
4873
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:16:12 -
[1] - Quote
With Phoebe (coming in a few days on November 4th) we will see brilliant change coming to the Invention system, for example:
- Merging Tech-3 Reverse Engineering into the Invention system and selection of the subsystem you want to invent
- Multiple invention runs per installed invention job
- Removal of Interfaces
- Generic decryptors instead of race specific decryptors
- Update of build material requirements for Tech 3 component production
Discover what other exciting changes we will get and read CCP Ytterbium's latest blog Invention updates in Phoebe!
CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
947
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:25:47 -
[2] - Quote
The six week release cycle working as intended again! Glad to see you were willing to punt on some of this stuff rather than try to cobble it into the release in a less-than-polished manner. Looking forward to the results of the teams retooling.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
317
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:41:49 -
[3] - Quote
You've badly screwed up how to compensate for directed subsystem invention.
Before, you had to run 4 jobs to get the 1 you wanted: so for each subsystem you consumed (on average) four times one invention job. Now, you'll do one invention job, but the manufacturing will cost a lot more. Your goal, presumably, is to keep the end price of the subsystem constant. However, you've badly screwed up the balance of the components.
Post-patch, you will use 1/4th as many relics, decryptors, and datacores as you did pre-patch. Their price will fall through the floor. However, material use will go way up, bottlenecking melted nanoribbons even more. What you're basically doing is murdering the value of sleeper sites and transferring it to sleeper salvage. That sounds like a side effect that was not well considered.
The correct fix would be to require 4x the relics you required before for a single job, which will maintain the balance of value between reverse engineering materials and construction materials. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3727
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:44:58 -
[4] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:You've badly screwed up how to compensate for directed subsystem invention.
Before, you had to run 4 jobs to get the 1 you wanted: so for each subsystem you consumed (on average) four times one invention job. Now, you'll do one invention job, but the manufacturing will cost a lot more. Your goal, presumably, is to keep the end price of the subsystem constant. However, you've badly screwed up the balance of the components.
Post-patch, you will use 1/4th as many relics, decryptors, and datacores as you did pre-patch. Their price will fall through the floor. However, material use will go way up, bottlenecking melted nanoribbons even more. What you're basically doing is murdering the value of sleeper sites and transferring it to sleeper salvage. That sounds like a side effect that was not well considered.
The correct fix would be to require 4x the relics you required before for a single job, which will maintain the balance of value between reverse engineering materials and construction materials.
We have also stated in the blog this has been done to stimulate Tech III component market as a whole. So far Nanoribbons and few others where the most demanded components, we've changed things around to make the other components more needed as well. |
|
Magic Crisp
Amarrian Micro Devices Curatores Veritatis Alliance
180
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:47:30 -
[5] - Quote
So you say:
Quote: To compensate for this change, all those skills will now give a 1% Time Efficiency bonus for the Tech II manufacturing job they are required for, which is still going to give an incentive for players to train those up, or give an edge for players that already trained them. ... So after the change, the Arazu manufacturer would gain a 15% TE bonus if he / she had Advanced Medium Ship Construction, Gallente Starship Engineering and Electronic Engineering skills at 5.
That doesn't make sense, sorry. If it was to give 1% bonuses, then on lvl5 3 skills would give a total of 0.95^3=.857375 time factor, that is a 14.2% reduction.
If it was not percentages but percentage points then it would be 15%.
Could you please elaborate on this? :)
|
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
26
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:51:31 -
[6] - Quote
How many times do we have to tell you....we did NOT train all these skills to level 5 for a mere 1% Build Time bonus. Trust us when we say, if we had an option to train other skills, or a single skill for 20+ days to get a mere 1% bonus....we would leave it at level 4.
Also, you do realize there SHOULD be atleast a small barrier to entry into building T2 items. Unless you want to delete all lvl 5 skills needed to use the same T2 ships/modules? Because that follows the same logic. Or please explain how i'm wrong.
Lastly (i'm just highly disappointed in the whole of that blog), why the smug attitude about how 'great for the game' your idea of multiple outcomes was...even after nearly the entire thread of responses from ppl who actually play the game told you it was bad on every level? |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
317
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 14:56:23 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: We have also stated in the blog this has been done to stimulate Tech III component market as a whole. So far Nanoribbons and few others where the most demanded components, we've changed things around to make the other components more needed as well.
Whoops, missed that part. However, unless you did your math very carefully, that won't work (at least for salvage, might work for gasses). Sleeper salvage is a naturally bottlenecked system: the salvage is produced in one fixed ratio, and consumed in another. You can't seek out specific salvage (you get whatever your salvagers give you), and you can't shift what you build to avoid specific salvage (or if you do, someone else must build with it because at the end of the day you need a full set of subsystems and a hull).
In these sorts of systems, one item is used up completely and there is an excess of the others. The one used up item will gain all of the value attributable to the whole bottlenecked system, while the others become worthless. To the extent you boost their use, it doesn't matter, unless you get it to exactly the use of nanoribbons (in which case they'll both share the value) or boost it above nanoribbons (in which case they become bottlenecked and the nanoribbons become worthless).
I guess I'll poke around at the math some to see what the end results will be since I don't know what goes into particular T3 components off the top of my head, but if your goal is to boost the price of non-nanoribbon salvage (instead of the gasses) it won't work.
And you're still going to have the problem of relics becoming stupendously worthless. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
948
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:02:40 -
[8] - Quote
Lil' Brudder Too wrote:How many times do we have to tell you....we did NOT train all these skills to level 5 for a mere 1% Build Time bonus. Trust us when we say, if we had an option to train other skills, or a single skill for 20+ days to get a mere 1% bonus....we would leave it at level 4.
Also, you do realize there SHOULD be atleast a small barrier to entry into building T2 items. Unless you want to delete all lvl 5 skills needed to use the same T2 ships/modules? Because that follows the same logic. Or please explain how i'm wrong.
Lastly (i'm just highly disappointed in the whole of that blog), why the smug attitude about how 'great for the game' your idea of multiple outcomes was...even after nearly the entire thread of responses from ppl who actually play the game told you it was bad on every level? Considering the only use for those skills prior to Phoebe was to enable you to build certain blueprints at all, I'm failing to see why adding a time bonus to the skill at all is a bad thing.
Hell GÇö I know someone who trained Battleship Construction 5, despite the fact that it was useless. He's now moderately enthused about his useless skill training actually doing something.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company Galactic Skyfleet Empire
35
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:08:48 -
[9] - Quote
Quote:Regarding invention teams, we are currently investigating the purpose and state of teams in the game as a whole.
I really like teams and the idea of "bending" the dynamic industrial spacescape a bit to fit your purposes. Only the possibility to snipe the auction pretty much defeats its purpose.
|
|
Chribba
Otherworld Enterprises Otherworld Empire
13098
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:11:43 -
[10] - Quote
Less clickeh, we like!
GÿàGÿàGÿà Secure 3rd party service GÿàGÿàGÿà
Visit my in-game channel 'Holy Veldspar'
Twitter @Chribba
|
|
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
317
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:12:27 -
[11] - Quote
Calorn Marthor wrote:Quote:Regarding invention teams, we are currently investigating the purpose and state of teams in the game as a whole.
I really like teams and the idea of "bending" the dynamic industrial spacescape a bit to fit your purposes. Only the possibility to snipe the auction pretty much defeats its purpose. Yeah, I have the money for a team, I have a setup that would do well with a team, and I want a team. But I sure as hell am not setting an alarm for when the team I need is about to finish auction so I can actually get it. If I could set an ebay-like bid and forget about it, I'd be using them constantly. |
Lyta Jhonson
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
66
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:14:22 -
[12] - Quote
It's becoming a trend to drop most innovative changes: overheat rigs some time ago, manufacturing discounts for bulk production and now variable invention outcomes... While they don't look like big thing at a glance, they introduce new and interesting mechanics while most of other changes don't affect bigger picture.
And argument of player wish to accurately predict things just not make sense: if players were given right to choose, they'd like a "give me isk" and "blow-up enemy" buttons but a game developer should know that it's no fun to play a game where everything is that easy. And industry in EVE is already in a such state that the question "what to manufacture to get biggest profit?" could be automatically answered with all the data available. |
H3llHound
Koshaku Tactical Narcotics Team
48
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:18:32 -
[13] - Quote
In which category does the Venture/Prospect fall? Frigate or Mining Barge
also :grrCCP: for making me change my excel sheets every 6 weeks |
Psyrelle
Coalition Of Gentlemen.
29
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:19:08 -
[14] - Quote
Few things I want to get out.
Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it. And no as an inventer i would not rather have forced projection fixed than the awesome thing called multi-invention outcome. any realy inveter or industrialist don't use the ingame system for calculation anyway. multi invention would have made my day for this mini expansion/patch.
Also your changes to invention chances. awesome we don't have to use meta items but don't you bullshit us that the invention chances is roughly the same. Now due to lack of meta items which can be gotten really cheap I go from 71,4% chance of success to 45,05% And on ammo which i also made a lot of I go from 46,0% to 45,05% Now the ammo is not that bad tbh but when the market is already pretty unstable due to the reprocessing changes its hard to make real iskies.
0,95% less isk means I can barely have above 5isk per unit profit with the meta lvl decrease I basicly have no profit anymore.
So I urge you to try make it work cause with these changes industry is no longer worth it. |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
5009
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:20:04 -
[15] - Quote
Variable invention outcomes as described was a nuisance and I am glad they're not shipping it with Phoebe.
They also didn't say it was dropped, but needed more work, which they decided to spend on power projection instead, so we may see a more elegant version of it at a later date.
Sovereignty and Population
New Mining Mechanics
|
H3llHound
Koshaku Tactical Narcotics Team
48
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:21:43 -
[16] - Quote
Psyrelle wrote:Few things I want to get out.
Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it. And no as an inventer i would not rather have forced projection fixed than the awesome thing called multi-invention outcome. any realy inveter or industrialist don't use the ingame system for calculation anyway. multi invention would have made my day for this mini expansion/patch.
Also your changes to invention chances. awesome we don't have to use meta items but don't you bullshit us that the invention chances is roughly the same. Now due to lack of meta items which can be gotten really cheap I go from 71,4% chance of success to 45,05% And on ammo which i also made a lot of I go from 46,0% to 45,05% Now the ammo is not that bad tbh but when the market is already pretty unstable due to the reprocessing changes its hard to make real iskies.
0,95% less isk means I can barely have above 5isk per unit profit with the meta lvl decrease I basicly have no profit anymore.
So I urge you to try make it work cause with these changes industry is no longer worth it.
Where do you see force projection comments? |
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
27
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:27:46 -
[17] - Quote
H3llHound wrote:Psyrelle wrote:
Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it.
Where do you see force projection comments? I like how CCP is constantly stating how they have all their teams compartmentalized so that delaying one thing doesn't mean they can work on something else....then they come out with this...saying their invention team has decided to go and work on Null/Low force projection instead of the 'feature' that most of the feedback was negative for? |
Psyrelle
Coalition Of Gentlemen.
29
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:27:58 -
[18] - Quote
H3llHound wrote:Psyrelle wrote:Few things I want to get out.
Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it. And no as an inventer i would not rather have forced projection fixed than the awesome thing called multi-invention outcome. any realy inveter or industrialist don't use the ingame system for calculation anyway. multi invention would have made my day for this mini expansion/patch.
Also your changes to invention chances. awesome we don't have to use meta items but don't you bullshit us that the invention chances is roughly the same. Now due to lack of meta items which can be gotten really cheap I go from 71,4% chance of success to 45,05% And on ammo which i also made a lot of I go from 46,0% to 45,05% Now the ammo is not that bad tbh but when the market is already pretty unstable due to the reprocessing changes its hard to make real iskies.
0,95% less isk means I can barely have above 5isk per unit profit with the meta lvl decrease I basicly have no profit anymore.
So I urge you to try make it work cause with these changes industry is no longer worth it. Where do you see force projection comments?
So we instead decided to spend our time working on force projection changes, which weGÇÖre sure you can agree was a much more pressing problem to address for this particular release.
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
317
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:31:57 -
[19] - Quote
Lil' Brudder Too wrote:H3llHound wrote:Psyrelle wrote:
Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it.
Where do you see force projection comments? I like how CCP is constantly stating how they have all their teams compartmentalized so that delaying one thing doesn't mean they can work on something else....then they come out with this...saying their invention team has decided to go and work on Null/Low force projection instead of the 'feature' that most of the feedback was negative for? Generally they're saying that when some idiot asks why they updated the model of a ship instead of [desired programming change], when they're pointing out that their artists are not programmers and if they weren't doing ship art they wouldn't be doing programming. |
Bill Stork
Arax Solutions
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:43:00 -
[20] - Quote
What's the plan for decryptor market orders? |
|
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
27
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:43:19 -
[21] - Quote
Querns wrote:Lil' Brudder Too wrote:How many times do we have to tell you....we did NOT train all these skills to level 5 for a mere 1% Build Time bonus. Trust us when we say, if we had an option to train other skills, or a single skill for 20+ days to get a mere 1% bonus....we would leave it at level 4.
Also, you do realize there SHOULD be atleast a small barrier to entry into building T2 items. Unless you want to delete all lvl 5 skills needed to use the same T2 ships/modules? Because that follows the same logic. Or please explain how i'm wrong.
Lastly (i'm just highly disappointed in the whole of that blog), why the smug attitude about how 'great for the game' your idea of multiple outcomes was...even after nearly the entire thread of responses from ppl who actually play the game told you it was bad on every level? Considering the only use for those skills prior to Phoebe was to enable you to build certain blueprints at all, I'm failing to see why adding a time bonus to the skill at all is a bad thing. Hell GÇö I know someone who trained Battleship Construction 5, despite the fact that it was useless. He's now moderately enthused about his useless skill training actually doing something. Okay, so lvl 5 wasn't exactly great, but lvl 4 was very much not useless...in as much as any ship or module skill @ lvl 5 to use certain ships/modules. It also served as a level of check system...okay, you've put in so much time...have likely researched how this thing works...you have now earned the right to build these items smartly to maximize your profit. If every newb in eve starts inventing and building all these T2 items, i guarantee you will see your margins drop significantly or go negative...because they still have the 'what i mine is free' mentality...
My main point is they are NOT worth a very long train for that little 1%. And again, as said by many-a-industrialist, this bonus will only help those that run their lines 23.5 hours every day. This will have absolutely no helpful benefit to the remaining 98% who make their builds over-night or during work hours. |
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
415
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:48:38 -
[22] - Quote
I thought the racial decryptors added a nice cultural and sci fi variety rather than needless complexity. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3729
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 15:48:55 -
[23] - Quote
Psyrelle wrote:Few things I want to get out.
Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it. And no as an inventer i would not rather have forced projection fixed than the awesome thing called multi-invention outcome. any realy inveter or industrialist don't use the ingame system for calculation anyway. multi invention would have made my day for this mini expansion/patch.
Also your changes to invention chances. awesome we don't have to use meta items but don't you bullshit us that the invention chances is roughly the same. Now due to lack of meta items which can be gotten really cheap I go from 71,4% chance of success to 45,05% And on ammo which i also made a lot of I go from 46,0% to 45,05% Now the ammo is not that bad tbh but when the market is already pretty unstable due to the reprocessing changes its hard to make real iskies.
0,95% less isk means I can barely have above 5isk per unit profit with the meta lvl decrease I basicly have no profit anymore.
So I urge you to try make it work cause with these changes industry is no longer worth it.
Regarding the invention chances, that was comparing the first blog on invention with that one. It's not comparing current invention chances on TQ with that blog, which are going to drop yes. |
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
339
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:03:33 -
[24] - Quote
Generally a positive change. However, I am concerned with industrial speed power creep, which started with the Advanced Industry change. Could you look at adjusting T2 build times back up to compensate for the ~14.3% reduction you're including here? |
Shamus en Divalone
The Clandestine Forge
25
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:05:00 -
[25] - Quote
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:I thought the racial decryptors added a nice cultural and sci fi variety rather than needless complexity.
This ^
I think 'Minmatar' Instead of 'Cryptic Process' would suffice, it's fun to send teams out to gather from certain locations depending on need. |
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources Silent Infinity
55
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:08:34 -
[26] - Quote
What about skill requirements for building T3 items? Are there any plans for lowering the skill requirements in a similar way as for T2 construction?
Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
|
Sarah Flynt
Federation Interstellar Resources Silent Infinity
55
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:11:44 -
[27] - Quote
Komi Toran wrote:Generally a positive change. However, I am concerned with industrial speed power creep, which started with the Advanced Industry change. Could you look at adjusting T2 build times back up to compensate for the ~14.3% reduction you're including here?
+1
Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3730
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:18:42 -
[28] - Quote
Sarah Flynt wrote:Komi Toran wrote:Generally a positive change. However, I am concerned with industrial speed power creep, which started with the Advanced Industry change. Could you look at adjusting T2 build times back up to compensate for the ~14.3% reduction you're including here? +1
We'll keep an eye on build times to make sure this doesn't spin out of control yes. |
|
Kaydar ArX
Scorch Inc.
2
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:20:27 -
[29] - Quote
tldr: We removed the need of decent levels in science skills to invent T2 and gave a useless TE bonus to them.
Status of the 15 pages of feedbacks following the "lighting the invention bulb": [X] Ignored. |
Cristl
Perkone Caldari State
175
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:23:05 -
[30] - Quote
Quote:To compensate for this change, all those skills will now give a 1% Time Efficiency bonus for the Tech II manufacturing job they are required for, which is still going to give an incentive for players to train those up, or give an edge for players that already trained them.
1% TE as adequate compensation?
For shame CCP, for shame. You insult us to be honest.
|
|
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
5010
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:26:26 -
[31] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Sarah Flynt wrote:Komi Toran wrote:Generally a positive change. However, I am concerned with industrial speed power creep, which started with the Advanced Industry change. Could you look at adjusting T2 build times back up to compensate for the ~14.3% reduction you're including here? +1 We'll keep an eye on build times to make sure this doesn't spin out of control yes. Do you also keep an eye on incidents of market saturation and price collapses?
Sovereignty and Population
New Mining Mechanics
|
Psyrelle
Coalition Of Gentlemen.
29
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:30:24 -
[32] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Psyrelle wrote:Few things I want to get out.
Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it. And no as an inventer i would not rather have forced projection fixed than the awesome thing called multi-invention outcome. any realy inveter or industrialist don't use the ingame system for calculation anyway. multi invention would have made my day for this mini expansion/patch.
Also your changes to invention chances. awesome we don't have to use meta items but don't you bullshit us that the invention chances is roughly the same. Now due to lack of meta items which can be gotten really cheap I go from 71,4% chance of success to 45,05% And on ammo which i also made a lot of I go from 46,0% to 45,05% Now the ammo is not that bad tbh but when the market is already pretty unstable due to the reprocessing changes its hard to make real iskies.
0,95% less isk means I can barely have above 5isk per unit profit with the meta lvl decrease I basicly have no profit anymore.
So I urge you to try make it work cause with these changes industry is no longer worth it. Regarding the invention chances, that was comparing the first blog on invention with that one. It's not comparing current invention chances on TQ with that blog, which are going to drop yes.
so what are you gonna do about it?
Cause this is a significant loss.
And as mentioned before margins will only continue to decrease due to idiots(sorry for lack of better words).
Its already hard to make massive amount of isk on invention as it is.
|
Jo TwoTimes
Just Like Home
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:32:18 -
[33] - Quote
Hello, i've made the suggestion a while back but i'll redo it, you never know:
To ease the first steps of new players, i really believe that the scicne skill tree should be split in 2 : - science should only contain whats needed for TEch 1 manufacturing new skill folder Invention with the gazillion of various skills needed for invention/manufacturing (ie the encryption process + all that need science V) That would make it much easier for new players to start training just waht is needed for a bit of T1 manufacturing without having to sort through 30 + skills
otherwsie, love the changes, will try i am skilling up for it |
Gordon Gecco
Bluestar Airlines
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:34:27 -
[34] - Quote
Quote:Since the Crius release in July, invention only consumes one blueprint copy run at a time. As such we are adding the possibility for Phoebe to queue those runs on a similar manner with Manufacturing runs.
We will keep a close eye on the effect of this change on the game, and we may tweak blueprint job times if the need arises.
I believe this nice change should be exactly the same as manufacturing and I would expect the market to compensate. Please don't ever think about changing this. I really don't see it saturating the t2 market.
|
Vesan Terakol
Capsuleer Outfitters Bad Intention
111
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:35:12 -
[35] - Quote
The decrease in invention probability seems like a way to limit the amount of available t2 commodities on the market. It likely is there to compensate for the influx of those as industry became a lot more desirable with the update of the interface. I see it as a positive change. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1555
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:36:42 -
[36] - Quote
i must admit i'm a bit disappointed by the fact that the variable outcomes have been removed.
i't a bit sad that predictability has a higher value for you than the occasional "ohhhh, nice, i got a really good BPC for something really expensive here" moment.
oh, and a 1% te bonus is nothing but a joke. a bad one.
Build your empire !
Start today ! Rent Space in Perrigen Falls and Feythabolis
Contact me for details :)
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
339
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:51:04 -
[37] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:i't a bit sad that predictability has a higher value for you than the occasional "ohhhh, nice, i got a really good BPC for something really expensive here" moment. The original idea was still predictable, only over a population rather than a single invention job. That made it needless complexity, and the only people saying "ohhhh, nice" would be those that didn't understand probability and hadn't already factored it into the equation for determining profitability. In other words, the "idiots" other people in this thread complain about. |
Gordon Gecco
Bluestar Airlines
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:53:22 -
[38] - Quote
Ok guys. Lets just take the shot in the nuts that is the TE bonus and move on. We are men, not null sec cry babies here! |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1555
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:53:27 -
[39] - Quote
even if you know something cool happens every now and then, it's still nice to see it actually happen.
Build your empire !
Start today ! Rent Space in Perrigen Falls and Feythabolis
Contact me for details :)
|
Nalha Saldana
Shattered Void Spaceship Samurai
861
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:53:36 -
[40] - Quote
What you need to fix with teams is sniping, the only reason that i never use them is because i never managed to get a team to my station. |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
949
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 16:59:50 -
[41] - Quote
Gordon Gecco wrote:Ok guys. Lets just take the shot in the nuts that is the TE bonus and move on. We are men, not null sec cry babies here! The ironic thing is, as a devout nullsec haver, I am perfectly fine with the TE bonus.
Like, what were you all expecting? TE is the only bonus that skills can apply to manufacturing post-Crius. Adding any other concession dilutes the whole purpose of the expansion.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
196
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:00:25 -
[42] - Quote
H3llHound wrote:Psyrelle wrote:Few things I want to get out.
Why the heck are you including force projection in a invention blog. inventers don't give **** about it. And no as an inventer i would not rather have forced projection fixed than the awesome thing called multi-invention outcome. any realy inveter or industrialist don't use the ingame system for calculation anyway. multi invention would have made my day for this mini expansion/patch.
Also your changes to invention chances. awesome we don't have to use meta items but don't you bullshit us that the invention chances is roughly the same. Now due to lack of meta items which can be gotten really cheap I go from 71,4% chance of success to 45,05% And on ammo which i also made a lot of I go from 46,0% to 45,05% Now the ammo is not that bad tbh but when the market is already pretty unstable due to the reprocessing changes its hard to make real iskies.
0,95% less isk means I can barely have above 5isk per unit profit with the meta lvl decrease I basicly have no profit anymore.
So I urge you to try make it work cause with these changes industry is no longer worth it. Where do you see force projection comments?
Near the end of the blog. Refers to the new jump system in nullsec. It is actually quite important as once nullsec people go back to killing each other more people will log on in nullsec and the economy will improve.
" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick.
" Find out what ? "-áAbraham.
" They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick.
Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
|
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
417
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:01:57 -
[43] - Quote
Jo TwoTimes wrote:Hello, i've made the suggestion a while back but i'll redo it, you never know:
To ease the first steps of new players, i really believe that the science skill tree should be split in 2 : - science should only contain whats needed for T 1 manufacturing new skill folder 'Invention' with the gazillion of various skills needed for invention/T2 manufacturing (ie the encryption process skills + all that needs science V) That would make it much easier for new players to start training just what is needed for a bit of T1 manufacturing without having to sort through 30 + skills
otherwise, love the changes, will try it, I am skilling up for it
Or like Theoretical Science and Applied Science as the two levels/categories. |
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
196
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:08:34 -
[44] - Quote
Utremi Fasolasi wrote:I thought the racial decryptors added a nice cultural and sci fi variety rather than needless complexity.
As per usual it's over-simplification that is more the problem. Some of the new names being used to rename modules such as 'ample' are just plain ghastly.
" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick.
" Find out what ? "-áAbraham.
" They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick.
Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
72
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:14:48 -
[45] - Quote
Just wow ccp.. just wow.. you didn't take not one bit of suggestions from the feedback thread.. you didn't even discuss it with us.. you just went with what you wanted.
is this what it feels like to be bish slapped?
ouch! my jaw hurts cause its on the floor right now..
wow just wow.. 1% TE invention bonus.. not only that you've dropped the levels to build down to lvl 1.. zero compensation for folks who leveled up to distance themselves from newbs.. im greatly disappointed with these changes.. you didn't even take discuss this with us.. you just steamrolled it into Phoebe.. wow just wow |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
319
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:16:22 -
[46] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:Just wow ccp.. just wow.. you didn't take not one bit of suggestions from the feedback thread.. you didn't even discuss it with us.. you just went with what you wanted. is this what it feels like to be bish slapped? ouch! my jaw hurts cause its on the floor right now.. wow just wow.. 1% TE invention bonus.. not only that you've dropped the levels to build down to lvl 1.. zero compensation for folks who leveled up to distance themselves from newbs.. im greatly disappointed with these changes.. you didn't even take discuss this with us.. you just steamrolled it into Phoebe.. wow just wow I have every construction skill to V. I like this change. |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
5012
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:17:25 -
[47] - Quote
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:Utremi Fasolasi wrote:I thought the racial decryptors added a nice cultural and sci fi variety rather than needless complexity. As per usual it's over-simplification that is more the problem. Some of the new names being used to rename modules such as 'ample' are just plain ghastly. I still hope they are only placeholders until someone from the writing staff is free to go over the modules and add more lore appropriate names.
Sovereignty and Population
New Mining Mechanics
|
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn
Department 10
196
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:17:42 -
[48] - Quote
Regarding compensation for the sets of interfaces that a lot of industrialists will still own has any thought be given as to the amount of compensation given to everyone for them Some people will have bought or constructed them before the hacking mini-game obliterated the market in exploration derived loot items. Whereas others will have acquired or constructed them after the exploration loot prices collapse. The four ship interfaces used to sell for a hell of a lot of ISK relative to now.
With the impending over-simplification of decryptors and their use removed from the construction of COSMOS modules do you predict an additional collapse in the market for decryptors and exploration loot/exploration as a career option
" They're gonna feel pretty stupid when they find out. "-áRick.
" Find out what ? "-áAbraham.
" They're screwing with the wrong people. "-áRick.
Season four.-á-á ' The Walking Dead. ' .
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
184
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:18:06 -
[49] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:zero compensation for folks who leveled up to distance themselves from newbs.
Actually, the compensation would be 4% TE per skill that you have at 5 that a noob would have at 1. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
319
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:18:57 -
[50] - Quote
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:Regarding compensation for the sets of interfaces that a lot of industrialists will still own has any thought be given as to the amount of compensation given to everyone for them Some people will have bought or constructed them before the hacking mini-game obliterated the market in exploration derived loot items. Whereas others will have acquired or constructed them after the exploration loot prices collapse. The four ship interfaces used to sell for a hell of a lot of ISK relative to now. With the impending over-simplification of decryptors and their use removed from the construction of COSMOS modules do you predict an additional collapse in the market for decryptors and exploration loot/exploration as a career option You can probably count on one hand the number of decryptors used daily for COSMOS modules. |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
950
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:19:56 -
[51] - Quote
Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:Regarding compensation for the sets of interfaces that a lot of industrialists will still own has any thought be given as to the amount of compensation given to everyone for them Some people will have bought or constructed them before the hacking mini-game obliterated the market in exploration derived loot items. Whereas others will have acquired or constructed them after the exploration loot prices collapse. The four ship interfaces used to sell for a hell of a lot of ISK relative to now. Wow GÇö talk about a Hail Mary. I guess it never hurts to ask, but this is exceedingly silly and is not going to happen.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Aebe Amraen
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
98
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:26:49 -
[52] - Quote
1% time reduction on a 5x skill?
This is a joke, right? |
NEONOVUS
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
945
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:27:20 -
[53] - Quote
So understanding this, I can now invent happily and manufacture tediously all the things on all my alts now, as I just need level 1, while my alts posses min level 3 in the skills?
Nice, I am happy with that Invention bonus and a time bonus. Now I have a very good reason to have their skills up. Oh look my wallet just threw itself into the teer tanker to save time on the plex issue. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
950
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:30:30 -
[54] - Quote
In case you all hadn't noticed GÇö CCP has not, historically, performed any kind of compensation upon the easing of skill requirements for anything. If you're expecting some sort of largesse to come drifting out of the clouds because you endured some insensate MISJUSTICE by training a skill to 5 and then find, in the future, that it doesn't do the same thing, you're both a fool and have a really poor memory of the track record for these sorts of things.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
27
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:32:25 -
[55] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:Milla Goodpussy wrote:zero compensation for folks who leveled up to distance themselves from newbs. Actually, the compensation would be 4% TE per skill that you have at 5 that a noob would have at 1. Yes, because that will lead to more iskies when we usually only have jobs running for 8 hours a day anyways....yep, sounds about right. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
950
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:33:21 -
[56] - Quote
Lil' Brudder Too wrote:Mr Omniblivion wrote:Milla Goodpussy wrote:zero compensation for folks who leveled up to distance themselves from newbs. Actually, the compensation would be 4% TE per skill that you have at 5 that a noob would have at 1. Yes, because that will lead to more iskies when we usually only have jobs running for 8 hours a day anyways....yep, sounds about right. Run longer jobs. With invention batching, there's no excuse!
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Psyrelle
Coalition Of Gentlemen.
29
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:33:22 -
[57] - Quote
As it is right now. Id rather you take this entire mess of a invention "fix" back to the drawing board and ship it with the next patch/mini expansion.
Cause frankly this is ****.
Read what people is suggesting instead of doing the I like this so screw everyone I am gonna implement it.
This is the only good thing.
"Multiple Invention runs Since the Crius release in July, invention only consumes one blueprint copy run at a time. As such we are adding the possibility for Phoebe to queue those runs on a similar manner with Manufacturing runs.
We will keep a close eye on the effect of this change on the game, and we may tweak blueprint job times if the need arises." |
Arcos Vandymion
White Beast Inc.
73
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:35:13 -
[58] - Quote
I shouldn't have sold me Legion two weeks ago.
$%&-º ! |
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
27
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:35:51 -
[59] - Quote
Querns wrote:Lil' Brudder Too wrote:Mr Omniblivion wrote:Milla Goodpussy wrote:zero compensation for folks who leveled up to distance themselves from newbs. Actually, the compensation would be 4% TE per skill that you have at 5 that a noob would have at 1. Yes, because that will lead to more iskies when we usually only have jobs running for 8 hours a day anyways....yep, sounds about right. Run longer jobs. With invention batching, there's no excuse!
Okay, and exactly how am i supposed to run 'longer jobs' if i can only run the max 10 runs off each copy to begin with? |
Capsups
Blitzkrieg. Get Off My Lawn
5
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:38:10 -
[60] - Quote
Dev blog wrote: Blueprint copies will be reimbursed at a static price.
Does this mean all current T3 BPCs will be reimbursed into ISK? If that's the case, could you guys elaborate on what this price is and how it was/will be calculated? |
|
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
28
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:41:43 -
[61] - Quote
Capsups wrote:Dev blog wrote: Blueprint copies will be reimbursed at a static price.
Does this mean all current T3 BPCs will be reimbursed into ISK? If that's the case, could you guys elaborate on what this price is and how it was/will be calculated? I almost want to bet it will be based on the new market value that will be slightly *scewed* come tuesday...
-edit- I see you aren't taking feedback anymore on this as you have just published the patchnotes for tuesday...nice to see you being very community orriented and only giving us 2 hours to state our opinions on this big change before you lock it in stone....when we've been begging for you to respond in the feedback thread for MONTHS!!!! |
Guttripper
State War Academy Caldari State
564
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:45:41 -
[62] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:Ekaterina 'Ghetto' Thurn wrote:Utremi Fasolasi wrote:I thought the racial decryptors added a nice cultural and sci fi variety rather than needless complexity. As per usual it's over-simplification that is more the problem. Some of the new names being used to rename modules such as 'ample' are just plain ghastly. I still hope they are only placeholders until someone from the writing staff is free to go over the modules and add more lore appropriate names. Doubt that will happen... CCP changed them over the years since they thought (new) players were too dumb to right click on a module while the old lore names of said modules just stalled their brain processes. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
950
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:48:40 -
[63] - Quote
Lil' Brudder Too wrote:Querns wrote:Lil' Brudder Too wrote:Mr Omniblivion wrote:Milla Goodpussy wrote:zero compensation for folks who leveled up to distance themselves from newbs. Actually, the compensation would be 4% TE per skill that you have at 5 that a noob would have at 1. Yes, because that will lead to more iskies when we usually only have jobs running for 8 hours a day anyways....yep, sounds about right. Run longer jobs. With invention batching, there's no excuse! Okay, and exactly how am i supposed to run 'longer jobs' if i can only run the max 10 runs off each copy to begin with? I didn't say "run longer jobs of the same thing you're building now." Not everything has such a short build time. If your barrier is length of jobs, switch to something that takes longer, like ships instead of modules.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
319
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 17:57:18 -
[64] - Quote
Lil' Brudder Too wrote: Okay, and exactly how am i supposed to run 'longer jobs' if i can only run the max 10 runs off each copy to begin with?
Then you're making modules, and the entire discussion of the ship skills is irrelevant to you. So why on earth are you whining about it? |
Shaera Taam
Khanid Prime Free Irregulars
120
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:05:09 -
[65] - Quote
as a part-time industrialist, the changes represented here are for-the-most-part good, and seem fairly balanced. Yeah, sure, there will be market changes and different requirements for building pretty much everything.
i dont care.
these changes affect everyone evenly, even if not everyone has the same skill sets built up. that's fair.
that's what i care about. fairness.
if your skillset is greatly impacted and you think you have a legitimate ( ie you can work out the math and prove it ) concern, go ahead and bring it to their attention. but dont go on crying and carrying on with it. that only makes you look childish.
Thus Spake the Frigate Goddess!
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
762
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:13:54 -
[66] - Quote
thanks CCP for devalueing my invested skill-time into all-V science skills |
Psyrelle
Coalition Of Gentlemen.
29
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:14:12 -
[67] - Quote
Shaera Taam wrote:as a part-time industrialist, the changes represented here are for-the-most-part good, and seem fairly balanced. Yeah, sure, there will be market changes and different requirements for building pretty much everything.
i dont care.
these changes affect everyone evenly, even if not everyone has the same skill sets built up. that's fair.
that's what i care about. fairness.
if your skillset is greatly impacted and you think you have a legitimate ( ie you can work out the math and prove it ) concern, go ahead and bring it to their attention. but dont go on crying and carrying on with it. that only makes you look childish.
The only thing i'm really mad about is the dropping of stuff in favor of something else and me losing 25%+ invention chance cause they decide to remove meta level items in invention without compensating. Actually they are decreasing the chance across the board.
And with the fact that the market is ****** up already due to reprocess changes I will barely be able to keep profit on what I do.
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
934
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:15:44 -
[68] - Quote
regarding the multiple outcomes removal , i thought making things unpredictable was the point? at least thats what seagull has been saying lately
Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists
ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic.
Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
951
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:18:31 -
[69] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:thanks CCP for devalueing my invested skill-time into all-V science skills Uh, all fives in science skills just got a LOT more important. They shifted the contribution to invention success chance heavily in favor of skills. You are in a much, much better place post-Phoebe.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
184
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:18:50 -
[70] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:regarding the multiple outcomes removal , i thought making things unpredictable was the point? at least thats what seagull has been saying lately
"This chance-based activity should be predictable enough that it doesn't inconvenience people who do it in bulk"
|
|
Banko Mato
Republic University Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:19:04 -
[71] - Quote
Why does it have to be yet another TE bonus? We got more than enough of that with the (Advanced) Industry skill(s) already... How about considering something along the line of what I proposed in the invention bubble thread a while ago? Tl;Dr: Make the skills intended for TE bonus instead provide a small (fraction of a single percent per skill level) ME boost, that accumulates with all skills required for a blueprint. When chosen correctly the resulting ME bonus would be small enough to not represent a barrier of entry, but still big enough to have a nice impact for the serious producer (2 to 3 ME for a max bonus on a blueprint is just in the range of average specialized teams, so should not break anything).
Apart from that the changes look good to me ;) |
Sam Spock
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:47:51 -
[72] - Quote
My market speculation crystal ball is telling me that this may make some T2 items go up in price a little due to the decreased chances of success. Less T2 BPOs=less production=less supply.
I was looking forward to the variable outcomes though. I do exploration as my main activity so finding cool things appeals to me.
Teams could have been used to help fill in the lack of meta module use for invention chances so I am sad to see that left out.
Not sure what this will do to the decryptor market as a whole but the more expensive racial versions are about to crash. Anyone who had Arbelest Light Missile Launchers in their hanger before the last patch can tell you what that is like.
|
Sam Spock
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:51:40 -
[73] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:Harvey James wrote:regarding the multiple outcomes removal , i thought making things unpredictable was the point? at least thats what seagull has been saying lately "This chance-based activity should be predictable enough that it doesn't inconvenience people who do it in bulk"
Just had a crazy idea about this: What if you make the multiple outcomes be opt-in? And make them give a slightly lower chance to get the standard output if they chose that option? That way those that want predictability can get it and those that want some Wow with their invention can get that too. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
410
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 18:52:07 -
[74] - Quote
Now this my come as a shock but did you consider them datacores at all?
You those thingies that look like a bottle of some sort that agents give you one per day.
By all means carry on and when datacores become a problem, don't come back to me so I can rub that into your nose and I say I told you so (again).
signature
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
762
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:01:08 -
[75] - Quote
Querns wrote:Robert Caldera wrote:thanks CCP for devalueing my invested skill-time into all-V science skills Uh, all fives in science skills just got a LOT more important. They shifted the contribution to invention success chance heavily in favor of skills. You are in a much, much better place post-Phoebe.
but its now mostly rank1's |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:02:38 -
[76] - Quote
Quote:Added Compact mode to the Industry window so that players can now minimize the top half of the window as they browse their blueprints. It is not possible to submit a job in this view, but double clicking a blueprint will expand the visualization area to allow you to do so
:happysun:
CCP you really should be advertising this more it sounds like a great change. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
4102
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:04:42 -
[77] - Quote
elitatwo wrote:Now this my come as a shock but did you consider them datacores at all?
You those thingies that look like a bottle of some sort that agents give you one per day.
By all means carry on and when datacores become a problem, don't come back to me so I can rub that into your nose and I say I told you so (again).
You mean the things which mostly come from faction warfare, in return for LP?
Woo! CSM 9!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
341
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:13:41 -
[78] - Quote
Sam Spock wrote:Just had a crazy idea about this: What if you make the multiple outcomes be opt-in? And make them give a slightly lower chance to get the standard output if they chose that option? That way those that want predictability can get it and those that want some Wow with their invention can get that too. It's quite simple: If the multiple outcomes option provides better profit over the long term than the single outcome, then the multiple outcome option is the only one that matters. If the single outcome option provides better profit over the long term than the multiple outcome option, then that is the only option that matters. If they're both exactly the same, then it's a pointless diversion of resources for CCP to do it.
It's a bad idea, and was repeatedly explained why it was a bad idea in the original dev blog thread. It's rather funny hearing people yelling that "CCP doesn't listen!" when this change shows they did.
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
72
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:22:13 -
[79] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:elitatwo wrote:Now this my come as a shock but did you consider them datacores at all?
You those thingies that look like a bottle of some sort that agents give you one per day.
By all means carry on and when datacores become a problem, don't come back to me so I can rub that into your nose and I say I told you so (again). You mean the things which mostly come from faction warfare, in return for LP?
hope you're being sarcastic steve.. seriously.. you are aware that folks do play the R & D agents missions.. grind up standings to use a better agent to spend their RP"s on datacores for specific sciences. right? right??
a very slow passive grind 100 RP - 1 datacore varying in science skill. more skill level you have.. the more RP's the agents provide you day to day.. there was not even a slight mention of it.. they once thought about removing it.. now I don't know what they'll do..guess it fits in the "we'll come back to it in the future" statement they love to use like nanite paste!!!!!
I think the dev completely over looked that.. I think he forgot all about it.. seems ccp spreads their limited resources around so much that things get overlooked.. and decides to just steamroll on in. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
320
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:29:15 -
[80] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote: hope you're being sarcastic steve.. seriously.. you are aware that folks do play the R & D agents missions.. grind up standings to use a better agent to spend their RP"s on datacores for specific sciences. right? right??
a very slow passive grind 100 RP - 1 datacore varying in science skill. more skill level you have.. the more RP's the agents provide you day to day.. there was not even a slight mention of it.. they once thought about removing it.. now I don't know what they'll do..guess it fits in the "we'll come back to it in the future" statement they love to use like nanite paste!!!!!
I think the dev completely over looked that.. I think he forgot all about it.. seems ccp spreads their limited resources around so much that things get overlooked.. and decides to just steamroll on in.
you mean the passive free income that was deliberately nerfed by shifting the primary source of datacores to fw with the explicit goal of nerfing the passive income from completing the R&D grind once? |
|
Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union The Unthinkables
173
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:36:22 -
[81] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:hope you're being sarcastic steve.. seriously.. you are aware that folks do play the R & D agents missions.. grind up standings to use a better agent to spend their RP"s on datacores for specific sciences. right? right??
CCP has said many times since 2012 that they don't like the passive gameplay associated with Research Agent Datacore farming:
Quote:A change mentioned during Fanfest concerns datacores and research agents in general. While we do acknowledge that initial the initial period to train up for high-level research agents take times, effort and money, we are not particularly fond of the passive datacore income in general.
Considering Datacores are obtained through Faction Warfare LP stores, and through Exploration, they have added enough active methods to obtain Datacores that maybe they should consider phasing out Research Agents, unless there is a compelling argument for keeping them.
Maybe the R&D Agent missions need another look at what we want to get out of them, as I see all of the missions (Security, Distribution, etc) being just different routes for getting standings, ISK, and LP.
Would it make more sense to instead just have Datacores available in the regular mission LP store at a reduced ratio compared to Faction Warfare?
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
870
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:38:42 -
[82] - Quote
DB wrote: As part of our effort to remove needless complexity from EVE, racial decryptors are now going to be merged into one set of generic decryptors which affect all races in the same way. Decryptors will also now affect Ancient Relics.
So, for example, if you had an Occult Accelerant and Esoteric Accelerant Decryptor in your hangar, you will now receive 2x Accelerant Decryptors when Phoebe goes live.
How are these decryptors "needless complexity"? They are flavor and spices added to the game! |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
951
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:42:24 -
[83] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:elitatwo wrote:Now this my come as a shock but did you consider them datacores at all?
You those thingies that look like a bottle of some sort that agents give you one per day.
By all means carry on and when datacores become a problem, don't come back to me so I can rub that into your nose and I say I told you so (again). You mean the things which mostly come from faction warfare, in return for LP? hope you're being sarcastic steve.. seriously.. you are aware that folks do play the R & D agents missions.. grind up standings to use a better agent to spend their RP"s on datacores for specific sciences. right? right?? a very slow passive grind 100 RP - 1 datacore varying in science skill. more skill level you have.. the more RP's the agents provide you day to day.. there was not even a slight mention of it.. they once thought about removing it.. now I don't know what they'll do..guess it fits in the "we'll come back to it in the future" statement they love to use like nanite paste!!!!! I think the dev completely over looked that.. I think he forgot all about it.. seems ccp spreads their limited resources around so much that things get overlooked.. and decides to just steamroll on in. He's saying that the bare trickle of datacores coming out of R&D agents these days pales in comparison to the volume gushing forth from Faction Warfare LP stores.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
2502
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:52:54 -
[84] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:DB wrote: As part of our effort to remove needless complexity from EVE, racial decryptors are now going to be merged into one set of generic decryptors which affect all races in the same way. Decryptors will also now affect Ancient Relics.
So, for example, if you had an Occult Accelerant and Esoteric Accelerant Decryptor in your hangar, you will now receive 2x Accelerant Decryptors when Phoebe goes live. How are these decryptors "needless complexity"? They are flavor and spices added to the game! Not to mention the average value of data sites will plummet, decrypters were where the biggest value for data sites came from and now there is effectively 3x more of them on the market.
-
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
951
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 19:54:25 -
[85] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:DB wrote: As part of our effort to remove needless complexity from EVE, racial decryptors are now going to be merged into one set of generic decryptors which affect all races in the same way. Decryptors will also now affect Ancient Relics.
So, for example, if you had an Occult Accelerant and Esoteric Accelerant Decryptor in your hangar, you will now receive 2x Accelerant Decryptors when Phoebe goes live. How are these decryptors "needless complexity"? They are flavor and spices added to the game! Not to mention the average value of data sites will plummet, decrypters were where the biggest value for data sites came from and now there is effectively 3x more of them on the market. Sure, but there is a commensurate increase in usage for that decryptor.
Hell, there will probably be even MORE usage for decryptors now that you can batch invention jobs. Invention in TYOOL 2014 is heavily effort based, as the jobs are very short. Batching leads to a vast increase in the number of jobs you can grunt out in a given period of wakefulness.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
871
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 20:03:19 -
[86] - Quote
Ransu Asanari wrote:Milla Goodpussy wrote:hope you're being sarcastic steve.. seriously.. you are aware that folks do play the R & D agents missions.. grind up standings to use a better agent to spend their RP"s on datacores for specific sciences. right? right?? CCP has said many times since 2012 that they don't like the passive gameplay associated with Research Agent Datacore farming:
And FW farming is not passive gameplay?
|
Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union The Unthinkables
173
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 20:03:46 -
[87] - Quote
Quote:Removed data interfaces from Invention Removed and reimbursed all R.Db.-Hybrid Technology, data interfaces, subsystem interfaces, and their respective blueprints at average market price
How exactly do you refund blueprints at average market price, when there isn't a market for them? Contracts? Hoping the average goes back pre-Odyssey to give some of the long term Interface manufactures a bit of a break.
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
951
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 20:04:14 -
[88] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Ransu Asanari wrote:Milla Goodpussy wrote:hope you're being sarcastic steve.. seriously.. you are aware that folks do play the R & D agents missions.. grind up standings to use a better agent to spend their RP"s on datacores for specific sciences. right? right?? CCP has said many times since 2012 that they don't like the passive gameplay associated with Research Agent Datacore farming: And FW farming is not passive gameplay? You at least have to undock. R&D is "grind once, cash out as infrequently as you like. Years can elapse." It was stomped into the ground, and nothing of value was lost.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Ransu Asanari
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union The Unthinkables
173
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 20:07:21 -
[89] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:And FW farming is not passive gameplay?
I know there have been a lot of changes to reduce afk plexing - from increasing the npc damage amounts, and removing cloaking withing beacon range. And doesn't a lot of the LP come from missions, rather than the plexes themselves? And you get more LP if you offensively plex vs defensive?
I might be wrong on all that - I don't do FW, I just like to shoot at them :)
Powder and Ball Alchemists Union - "Turning Lead into Gold since 2008"
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
72
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 20:17:54 -
[90] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:Milla Goodpussy wrote: hope you're being sarcastic steve.. seriously.. you are aware that folks do play the R & D agents missions.. grind up standings to use a better agent to spend their RP"s on datacores for specific sciences. right? right??
a very slow passive grind 100 RP - 1 datacore varying in science skill. more skill level you have.. the more RP's the agents provide you day to day.. there was not even a slight mention of it.. they once thought about removing it.. now I don't know what they'll do..guess it fits in the "we'll come back to it in the future" statement they love to use like nanite paste!!!!!
I think the dev completely over looked that.. I think he forgot all about it.. seems ccp spreads their limited resources around so much that things get overlooked.. and decides to just steamroll on in.
you mean the passive free income that was deliberately nerfed by shifting the primary source of datacores to fw with the explicit goal of nerfing the passive income from completing the R&D grind once?
lol yeah that one |
|
Arcos Vandymion
White Beast Inc.
74
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 20:19:05 -
[91] - Quote
Not like it's hard to get the standing required to get to an L4 agent and train one or two science skills to IV. Doesn't pay out quite as much as V but takes no time at all.
Random question (might've been posted allready but I haven't seen it). "Sleeper Encryption Methods" sounds a lot like "Amarr Encryption Methods" but it's confusingly similar in name to "Sleeper Technology". In fact I'm completely confused as to what all those indy skills I trained because I could afford the skillbooks even do. Like ... Amarr Encryption Methods, Sleeper Encrytion Methods, Amarrian Spaceship Engineering and Sleeper Technology ... what? You sure this is gonna be less confusing after than it was before? I'm not convinced yet. |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
93
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 20:25:29 -
[92] - Quote
Ransu Asanari wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:And FW farming is not passive gameplay? I know there have been a lot of changes to reduce afk plexing - from increasing the npc damage amounts, and removing cloaking withing beacon range. And doesn't a lot of the LP come from missions, rather than the plexes themselves? And you get more LP if you offensively plex vs defensive? I might be wrong on all that - I don't do FW, I just like to shoot at them :)
it takes one run of missions to get 1 mil lp when the faction is at a high lv. it is done in an almost untouchable bomber with only t2 fittings it only takes 3-4 hours. run with multiple accounts for more success. it might as well be afk as most of the time is just travel time with 3-5 mins in a mission where you kill one then then warp off. also less grind to get lv4 FW mission access then R&D missions lv4 access. so its about a wash |
Damjan Fox
Fox Industries and Exploration
47
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 21:05:57 -
[93] - Quote
Quote:Not to mention the average value of data sites will plummet, decrypters were where the biggest value for data sites came from and now there is effectively 3x more of them on the market. Are you serious? Yes, there will be "3x more of them on the market", but you do realise, that there also will be 3x more the demand for them?
Of course the prices of the expensive/cheap decryptors will compensate and settle somewhere in the middle. If just someone had bought a lot of cheap decryptors, in hope that the expensive counterparts will drive the pirce up after they are getting merged when phoebe hits.... (*looks at his decryptor stack ) |
Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland The 99 Percent
858
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 21:42:53 -
[94] - Quote
I wasn't aware of there being any bonus to mfg for having high T2 construction skills. So not sure why people are upset over CCP adding a time bonus to skills that previously didn't have them. My alt will be happy to get those T2 rigs done faster, even if she doesn't have those skills to 5.
As for their effect on invention success, they still count for less than 1% per level. So I still won't be training them up to 5. Just not worth the training time.
Merging of Invention and RE, ok. Cool.
Renaming of skills: Excellent.
The reduction of skill requirements for advanced ship production: how long to make a minimum skill alt now? 3 hours for T1 frigates? Same for T3s isn't it? Well, more fodder for the markets, heh heh.
Removal of interfaces... le sigh. Just pick what you want to make now. "Well, I think I'll make 100 Accelerated Ejection Bays and crash the market today. Tomorrow, Rifled Launchers! Mwa-ha-ha!"
Honestly, there was a lot of potential in those items. If they were consumable they would be of value. Sad to see them go away and never come back. And once they are gone, you will never be able to bring them back without a lot of people getting really angry. So you better make sure.
Merging the decryptors seems... well... ok. I guess that means I can go exploring and always have what I want, rather than having to go to market and trade for them. Wondering if this change is geared more towards removing some of the regionalization of items.
Actually I wonder if all the consolidation and removal of items is geared towards removing a lot of stuff from the database... Hamsters getting a little too fat to spin the wheels?
Saved the best for last: Batch jobs. http://tshirtvila.com/products/square/12455.png
Overall I approve of this set of changes. I don't agree with everything. And I think a lot of potential is being left on the cutting room floor. But this will simplify invention and RE, as well as lowering the barrier of entry.
"Remember remember the 4th of November!"
Phoebe. Coming soon to Eve Online.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
956
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 22:40:21 -
[95] - Quote
Soldarius wrote: Removal of interfaces... le sigh. Just pick what you want to make now. "Well, I think I'll make 100 Accelerated Ejection Bays and crash the market today. Tomorrow, Rifled Launchers! Mwa-ha-ha!"
Um, in case you forgot, interfaces were buy-once, use-always. Anyone who was inventing just has one of each type. They don't cost that much.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
JamesT KirkJr
Asylum Institution Care Factor
23
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 22:40:53 -
[96] - Quote
I have issue with your plans for the following two changes:
Quote:In addition, we are going to decrease level requirements to 1 for Tech II item manufacturing on the following skills:
(snip)
To compensate for this change, all those skills will now give a 1% Time Efficiency bonus for the Tech II manufacturing job they are required for, which is still going to give an incentive for players to train those up, or give an edge for players that already trained them.
I want the skill points for training those skills over L1 back please. I paid you for the time to train the higher levels because you required them to manufacture higher level items. Since we all will be able to manufacture those items without that training, I want the choice on what the subscription time I expended accomplishes for my character.
Quote:Decryptor merging: As part of our effort to remove needless complexity from EVE, racial decryptors are now going to be merged into one set of generic decryptors which affect all races in the same way. Decryptors will also now affect Ancient Relics.
So, for example, if you had an Occult Accelerant and Esoteric Accelerant Decryptor in your hangar, you will now receive 2x Accelerant Decryptors when Phoebe goes live.
I'd rather be recompensed for the ones I own in ISK please, at their original purchase price, so that I'm not forced to take a loss on their value because of this change. Post-Phoebe I will purchase as many generic ones as I need at market prices.
Thank you for taking these small measures to prevent the changes from unfairly impacting players who have committed subscription time and in-game resources into T2 invention and production. |
Quadima
Steam Powered Spaceships
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 23:05:52 -
[97] - Quote
Totally agree with what most people here said:
1% TE for a 5x skill ? It's not a joke, it's a total insult to manufacturers!
1% ME - MAYBE, it would mean the people who invested a lot of points in training would actually have a MARGIN versus people who are just "Trying something" with those skills at I or II
Even slooowly training them at 5 would mean something, as you would have 12% theoretical profit above someone who didn't train them at all (just lvl 1)
--- p.s. "1%" is an insult when applied to ANY skill, not just industry.
"Hey, train this awesome 50-day skill for 1% more damage ! You'll feel so pro after it ..." |
Auric Megastryke
Iron Sun Explorations
10
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 23:20:41 -
[98] - Quote
OK - so you are making invention so easy a monkey can do it, and if you have dedicated an alt and a lot of training towards being able to invent at a decent percentage chance and produce at a decent profit you are just S.O.L on all that training. Here's a "1% time bonus" - you might as well say "here's a cookie kid, now go away and shut up".
|
Aluka 7th
177
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 23:41:11 -
[99] - Quote
Was wondering regarding batch job. If i do 5 run batch job, will all 5 ether fail or all 5 succeed; Or is it possible to get some of them succeed and some of them fail? |
PerrinBash
All The Rage
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 00:20:26 -
[100] - Quote
Right, so with dumbing down of eve your now allowing any active account to unlimited (basically) training, changed all the reprocessing, allow all of hi sec harassment and bumping as fair play, revamp of all manufacturing and research, making most skills to level 5 a thing of past, and don't allow freighters mid slots or rigs, or any capacity to defend themselves. Your moving toward the end game, lets just make it happen. Select the top 15% of SP players to get jovian technology and let us wreck eve, or....just keep chipping away at it bit by bit. |
|
PerrinBash
All The Rage
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 00:40:22 -
[101] - Quote
with my 7 alts and dc abilities I've massed a fortune from dc research, the root of it is they used to supply t2 BPO's as well. Stop the kiting around and get down to root CCP Right, so with dumbing down of eve your now allowing any active account to unlimited (basically) training, changed all the reprocessing, allow all of hi sec harassment and bumping as fair play, revamp of all manufacturing and research, making most skills to level 5 a thing of past, and don't allow freighters mid slots or rigs, or any capacity to defend themselves. Your moving toward the end game, lets just make it happen. Select the top 15% of SP players to get jovian technology and let us wreck eve, or....just keep chipping away at it bit by bit. |
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Northern Associates.
1580
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 00:42:25 -
[102] - Quote
Good stuff. Thank you for the update.
GÇ£Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do. GÇ¥ - Dale Carnegie
Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!
|
Medalyn Isis
Rosewood Productions
418
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 00:57:14 -
[103] - Quote
I just wanted to echo the sentiment that given the rank of the skills involved a 1% per level TE bonus isn't that great. Can't we be more inventive and come up with something a little more interesting? |
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
73
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 02:32:32 -
[104] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:I just wanted to echo the sentiment that given the rank of the skills involved a 1% per level TE bonus isn't that great. Can't we be more inventive and come up with something a little more interesting?
Also why exactly did you do away with using the level of them as a requirement to build each ship? Granted they needed sorting out to make a little more sense, but there was nothing wrong with them idea in principle as far as I can see. It is not like a couple of hour old newbie has any business or desire to be building a black ops or strategic cruiser anyway. And also it does take away from the scale of realism of the game when you think a low skilled newbie can now after pheobe build a highly advanced ship with little to no training.
My suggestion would be to re sort the skills in a way such as this or something similar.
Adv Small Ship I - Interceptor Adv Small Ship II - Assault Frigate Adv Small Ship III - Covert Ops / Ewar Adv Small Ship IV - Interdictor Adv Small Ship V - Tactical Destroyer
Adv Med Ship I - HAC Adv Med Ship II - Logistics Adv Med Ship III - Heavy Interdictor / Force Recon Adv Med Ship IV - Command Ship Adv Med Ship V - Strategic Cruiser
Adv Large Ship I - Marauder Adv Large Ship II - Black Ops Adv Large Ship III - Jump Freighter
it boggles my mind how they believe a low skilled newbie would jump into ADVANCED T2 building in the 1st place.. unless ccp is planning on a MAJOR moon goo nerf.. just due to the cost that goes into acquiring the materials to even build T2 ships alone.
since everyone now will just dive into T2 ship building.. what is the purpose for T1? a newbie should be focused on building that..instead of a advanced ship ....oh yeah.. that's right the advanced ship no longer takes a grind of time to build it..priceless thinking ccp.
|
Lors Dornick
Kallisti Industries Solar Assault Fleet
1133
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 05:45:48 -
[105] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:seriously.. you are aware that folks do play the R & D agents missions.. grind up standings to use a better agent to spend their RP"s on datacores for specific sciences. right? right??
Which might have been a good plan for a while, until it was shot down dead by CCP.
I know this very well after grinding 4+ toons up to the standings needed.
Now the datacores they provide is almost worth collecting them ...
CCP Greyscale: As to starbases, we agree it's pretty terrible, but we don't want to delay the entire release just for this one factor.
|
szaiboT Or
Enoria Foundation
1
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 10:43:27 -
[106] - Quote
Increasing the C3-FTM Acid use in Emergent Neurovisual Interface to 310 (+32)
I don't get this and next changes , they seems to be wrong. Isn't ENI using only 5 C3-FTM Acid and not 278 now ? |
Packe
Higher Than Everest Black Legion.
2
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 11:06:21 -
[107] - Quote
szaiboT Or wrote:Increasing the C3-FTM Acid use in Emergent Neurovisual Interface to 310 (+32)
I don't get this and next changes , they seems to be wrong. Isn't ENI using only 5 C3-FTM Acid and not 278 now ?
That changed a while ago. |
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
62
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 13:13:43 -
[108] - Quote
Could the players get an updated SDE with these changes in it, or at least just the blueprints.yaml file? I really want to start playing with these new numbers ASAP. Could we please get it before the weekend is done, since free time is sparce mid-week? |
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
62
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 15:09:18 -
[109] - Quote
Kaydar ArX wrote:tldr: We removed the need of decent levels in science skills to invent T2 and gave a useless TE bonus to them.
Status of the 15 pages of feedbacks following the "lighting the invention bulb": [X] Ignored.
Well huh. That's weird. My tl;dr was "We made it actually beneficial to level up science skills past I instead of just making another invention alt." I really wish I was in your boat, able to complain about how much "unnecessary" sp I've invested into the Science skills, instead of my boat, where I have to go buy 24 PLEXes and go restart a bunch of dual-training queues, just so I can stay competitive. Thank god Phoebe is going to mean I don't have to log in 24 times every 3 days and update every single one of them. |
Banko Mato
Republic University Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 16:18:48 -
[110] - Quote
probag Bear wrote: Well huh. That's weird. My tl;dr was "We made it actually beneficial to level up science skills past I instead of just making another invention alt." I really wish I was in your boat, able to complain about how much "unnecessary" sp I've invested into the Science skills, instead of my boat, where I have to go buy 24 PLEXes and go restart a bunch of dual-training queues, just so I can stay competitive. Thank god Phoebe is going to mean I don't have to log in 24 times every 3 days and update every single one of them.
It's more like "Nice to have a beneficial side effect of training those skills up, but why on earth had it to be TE?". I'd personally like to see those construction skills give a small ME bonus (link in my last post) instead of just being a stripped down version on top of the original (Advanced) Industry TE bonus. |
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
959
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 18:04:13 -
[111] - Quote
Banko Mato wrote:probag Bear wrote: Well huh. That's weird. My tl;dr was "We made it actually beneficial to level up science skills past I instead of just making another invention alt." I really wish I was in your boat, able to complain about how much "unnecessary" sp I've invested into the Science skills, instead of my boat, where I have to go buy 24 PLEXes and go restart a bunch of dual-training queues, just so I can stay competitive. Thank god Phoebe is going to mean I don't have to log in 24 times every 3 days and update every single one of them.
It's more like "Nice to have a beneficial side effect of training those skills up, but why on earth had it to be TE?". I'd personally like to see those construction skills give a small ME bonus (link in my last post) instead of just being a stripped down version on top of the original (Advanced) Industry TE bonus. Skills will never give ME bonuses now. Ever. Live in the now!
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Banko Mato
Republic University Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 18:26:10 -
[112] - Quote
Querns wrote: Skills will never give ME bonuses now. Ever. Live in the now!
And treating that as an absolute and unchangeable fact is imho just a stupid reduction in creativity, born from fear of creating another debacle like the old "lvl 5 or gtfo" Material Efficiency skill scenario. With the changes of how ME is applied and the wide spread ways of getting more or less small ME boni (research, teams, POS arrays, outposts) the entire ME structure is currently in a healthy enough state to allow a minor ME bonus from skills in the effective (meaning all skills affecting a single job calculated together) of 1 or 2. Remember, this only affects T2 and T3 production, both of which do not suffer from margin killing stocks and hundreds of "minerals are free so I can produce at a theoretical loss" baseline sellers.
Defaulting all boni to TE and speeding up production all the time might probably not be the best idea...
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
959
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 18:47:16 -
[113] - Quote
Banko Mato wrote:Querns wrote: Skills will never give ME bonuses now. Ever. Live in the now!
And treating that as an absolute and unchangeable fact is imho just a stupid reduction in creativity, born from fear of creating another debacle like the old "lvl 5 or gtfo" Material Efficiency skill scenario. It's not so much a "fear" as it is "reality." Adding ME bonuses to skills means that you have to get the skill to 5 to be able to compete. Period.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
347
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 19:19:07 -
[114] - Quote
Querns wrote:Banko Mato wrote:Querns wrote: Skills will never give ME bonuses now. Ever. Live in the now!
And treating that as an absolute and unchangeable fact is imho just a stupid reduction in creativity, born from fear of creating another debacle like the old "lvl 5 or gtfo" Material Efficiency skill scenario. It's not so much a "fear" as it is "reality." Adding ME bonuses to skills means that you have to get the skill to 5 to be able to compete. Period. I'm starting to think that may not actually be a bad thing when it comes to invention.
Now, the old Production Efficiency skill was bad in that you needed it to 5 to build anything. Missles? V. Cruisers? V. Cargo Expanders? V. Jump Freighter? V. The skill itself was no meaningful; it was just something that you had to train if you wanted to participate in what is a huge part of the game.
But when it comes to these skills, that's not true. You don't need any of them at V to be a successful industrialist: you can still build cap ships, or ammunition, or any T1 mod without them. But if you do train them, you are now expanding your options, and you need to choose which options you open up first. There is meaning in choosing to train Graviton Physics over Mechanical Engineering; everyone is not looking to train the same skills out of the gate, and they can live with holes in their capabilities until they decide there are no more interesting skills to train.
So yeah, maybe CCP should reconsider the blanket No ME ban. |
Banko Mato
Republic University Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 19:32:03 -
[115] - Quote
Querns wrote: It's not so much a "fear" as it is "reality." Adding ME bonuses to skills means that you have to get the skill to 5 to be able to compete. Period.
I honestly call that BS in the context of teams and the entirety that is advanced industry (i.e. T2) right now. I can easily compete in all my ship productions (T2 small + medium) without always having the best teams for everything ( meaning I miss a few ME points here and there). Maybe read my proposal I linked a few posts back... Having e.g. 0.1 ME per science skill and 0.2 ME per construction skill will in no way make them mandatory at lvl5. Lvl 3 or 4 would be more than enough for everybody in the T2 business to properly compete, and only the most serious producers might train them to 5 in order to squeeze the last few fractions of a percent point out of their efficiency.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1641
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 20:03:41 -
[116] - Quote
Banko Mato wrote: I honestly call that BS in the context of teams and the entirety that is advanced industry (i.e. T2) right now. I can easily compete in all my ship productions (T2 small + medium) without always having the best teams for everything ( meaning I miss a few ME points here and there). Maybe read my proposal I linked a few posts back... Having e.g. 0.1 ME per science skill and 0.2 ME per construction skill will in no way make them mandatory at lvl5. Lvl 3 or 4 would be more than enough for everybody in the T2 business to properly compete, and only the most serious producers might train them to 5 in order to squeeze the last few fractions of a percent point out of their efficiency.
Except teams are not baseline production. Which is why they aren't compulsory to compete for profit. If a skill gives any ME bonus, it will be taken to V, and it will become a V or bust skill because those margins are so tight. 0.5 ME + 0.5 ME + 1 ME = 2%. That's 50% of some items profit margin ignoring travel costs. And the skills will become baseline and influence the market enough to cut everyone else out.
So no, he's not wrong, any ME bonus = V or bust returns. |
Drabbin Mishi
Excognative Ignorance Northern Associates.
2
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 20:19:28 -
[117] - Quote
How are the static reimbursement prices for Interface BPC's being set? |
Banko Mato
Republic University Minmatar Republic
17
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 20:35:29 -
[118] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: Except teams are not baseline production. Which is why they aren't compulsory to compete for profit. If a skill gives any ME bonus, it will be taken to V, and it will become a V or bust skill because those margins are so tight. 0.5 ME + 0.5 ME + 1 ME = 2%. That's 50% of some items profit margin ignoring travel costs. And the skills will become baseline and influence the market enough to cut everyone else out.
So no, he's not wrong, any ME bonus = V or bust returns.
What items are you referring to? All the skills in question still only affect T2 and T3 production...
|
Eodp Ellecon
Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team
12
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 23:58:42 -
[119] - Quote
From GÇ£lighting inventionGÇ¥ Sept. 11, 2014 http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/lighting-the-invention-bulb
Tweak to base success chances We would like to tweak base success chance on various item types so they are a bit more consistent with ship sizes. Base invention chances currently are: Modules and Ammo have a base probability of 40% Frigates, Destroyers, Freighters and Skiff have a base probability of 30% Cruisers, Industrials and Mackinaw have a base probability of 25% Battlecruisers, Battleships and Hulk have a base probability of 20% We would like to tweak those numbers to: All modules, rigs and ammo have 40% All Frigates and Destroyers have 35% Cruisers, Battlecruisers, Mining Barges, Industrials, ORE industrial have 30% All Battleships, Industrial Command Ship have 25% Capitals and Capital Industrial Ships have 20%
So basically it results into a 5% base chance increase for all ships, except Freighters that drop down from 30% to 20% and Exhumers, which get a 0 to 10% boost depending on the exact hull.
From GÇ£invention updates in PhoebeGÇ¥ Oct. 31, 2014 https://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/invention-updates/
GÇ£In addition, base invention chance for all items is going to be modified to compensate for the formula tweaks above: GÇó All modules, rigs , ammo and all intact Ancient Relics: from 40% to 34% GÇó All Frigates, Destroyers and all malfunctioning Ancient Relics: from 35% to 30% GÇó Cruisers, Battlecruisers, Mining Barges, Industrials: from 30% to 26% GÇó All Battleships and all wrecked Ancient Relics: from 25% to 22% GÇó Freighters: from 20% to 18%
Taken in conjunction with the changes to the Invention formula above, that means the basic Invention chance will pretty much stay identical to its previous iteration.GÇ¥
This may be simply a translation thing, but the word GÇÿfromGÇÖ in the October update infers a reduction (from false numbers), while the September indicated a desire to improve base rate. TL:DR you may be GÇÿmaking it upGÇÖ in terms of skills calculations but itGÇÖs a marketing / language / translation problem of understanding.
Everything else is just is what it is.
Ty, Eo |
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
40
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 15:10:33 -
[120] - Quote
^this. And the fact it is actually going to be lower for everything that we've seen so far....more CCP doublespeak and ignoring the majority of the feedback because it doesn't fit into their thought bubble. |
|
Sjaandi HyShan
New Sepulchral Monolith
4
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 20:37:05 -
[121] - Quote
CCP,
Why not make the % bonus equal to the rank of the skill, adjusting build times to match? I would not have spent half a month training a skill for a paltry 1% bonus over someone with level 4 in an over-saturated market anyway (there's not THAT much volume with HICs and Command Ships). However a 5% bonus is respectable, especially since with the upgraded build times it would mean much more absolute time saved.
Also think of Capital ships. I can now build a Titan with level 1 in Capital Ship Construction without every learning battleship construction, all I need is Industry V and Advanced Industry V. At least with a 14% reduction per skill level (sounds high, but we have skills that give 20% per level and the build times would be higher initially) this could amount to a lot of time (days) at level V, since they have waited one and a half months to train the skill anyway. |
Arcturus Gallow
Three Stars Association
12
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 21:45:27 -
[122] - Quote
Hey everyone, I'm sorry if the question have already been asked here, but I didnt find it. Here is a quote of a question I asked in the wormhole subforum :
Arcturus Gallow wrote:Hello everyone Here is a quote from the patchnote: Quote:Removed and reimbursed all R.Db.-Hybrid Technology, data interfaces, subsystem interfaces, and their respective blueprints at average market price What about these items sitting in a corporate hangar array? Are they going to be reimbursed to the corporation owning the POS, or will we have to move everything in a station? Thank you in advance ! |
Medalyn Isis
Rosewood Productions
419
|
Posted - 2014.11.01 23:39:25 -
[123] - Quote
Sjaandi HyShan wrote:CCP,
Why not make the % bonus equal to the rank of the skill, adjusting build times to match? I would not have spent half a month training a skill for a paltry 1% bonus over someone with level 4 in an over-saturated market anyway (there's not THAT much volume with HICs and Command Ships). However a 5% bonus is respectable, especially since with the upgraded build times it would mean much more absolute time saved.
Also think of Capital ships. I can now build a Titan with level 1 in Capital Ship Construction without every learning battleship construction, all I need is Industry V and Advanced Industry V. At least with a 14% reduction per skill level (sounds high, but we have skills that give 20% per level and the build times would be higher initially) this could amount to a lot of time (days) at level V, since they have waited one and a half months to train the skill anyway. 5% per level would be acceptable to me, like you say 1% just doesn't cut it given the rank of the skill. Either that or CCP could go with my proposal in the last page.
I think at least when building sleeper technology, then level V in the respective skill should be required. IE level 1 for every ship, but then sleeper technology, due to the fact it is highly advanced and not just any newbie can construct it from the get go, should require level V. So small V for the new tactical destroyers, med V for strategic cruisers, and then eventually large V when we get a sleeper tech battleship.
It really irks me that such a low requirement is needed now to construct such advanced technology. |
Small Grey
The Classy Gentlemans Corporation Moist.
0
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 19:35:48 -
[124] - Quote
How is the refund for the data interfaces going work for those of us with our stuff at POS's? |
NEONOVUS
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
945
|
Posted - 2014.11.02 22:39:02 -
[125] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Sjaandi HyShan wrote:CCP,
Why not make the % bonus equal to the rank of the skill, adjusting build times to match? I would not have spent half a month training a skill for a paltry 1% bonus over someone with level 4 in an over-saturated market anyway (there's not THAT much volume with HICs and Command Ships). However a 5% bonus is respectable, especially since with the upgraded build times it would mean much more absolute time saved.
Also think of Capital ships. I can now build a Titan with level 1 in Capital Ship Construction without every learning battleship construction, all I need is Industry V and Advanced Industry V. At least with a 14% reduction per skill level (sounds high, but we have skills that give 20% per level and the build times would be higher initially) this could amount to a lot of time (days) at level V, since they have waited one and a half months to train the skill anyway. 5% per level would be acceptable to me, like you say 1% just doesn't cut it given the rank of the skill. Either that or CCP could go with my proposal in the last page. I think at least when building sleeper technology, then level V in the respective skill should be required. IE level 1 for every ship, but then sleeper technology, due to the fact it is highly advanced and not just any newbie can construct it from the get go, should require level V. So small V for the new tactical destroyers, med V for strategic cruisers, and then eventually large V when we get a sleeper tech battleship. It really irks me that such a low requirement is needed now to construct such advanced technology. You aren't pioneering anything, I mean ddi you post that with a gui or did you actually pass the strings through a http stack with the encoding for CCP forum servers to parse as in the days of Arpanet?
Congrats, my point is proven. You don't need to be an expert once some one spends a couple of times working out an easy method How To book This is just part of the EVE verse growing up, things get easier. |
Hashi Lebwohl
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
44
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 15:33:26 -
[126] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:oh, and a 1% te bonus is nothing but a joke. a bad one.
Even worse that 1% is stack penalised - it's actually only worth about 0.6%.
|
Lil' Brudder Too
Pistols for Pandas
41
|
Posted - 2014.11.03 17:33:38 -
[127] - Quote
*but its unfair if someone gets more profit out of something because they trained 5x skills to lvl 5*
Soooo, why don't we just apply this to ships as well....make all ships (and modules) available to all players with next to no skill training. That seems it would be the fairest way to do Eve afterall. CCP seems to believe that high SP veterans should not have any advantages over new players.
And no, those previous "must have lvl 5" skills like the efficiency one were actually NOT *must have*, I made plenty of profit on my non-indy characters that only had lvl 3 or 4 of that skill. The only reason i eventually trained it was to make the batch-jobs materials easier to calculate between using all my characters. |
Maenth
The Thirteen Provinces
12
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 17:38:04 -
[128] - Quote
I have to wonder... drone invention used to be [Electronic Engineering]+[Mechannical Engineering] ... now it is [Electronic Engineering]+[Graviton Physics] ... what do graviton physics have to do with drones?! |
Sial Harkonnen
mine crafting federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 22:50:14 -
[129] - Quote
thx for this "great patch" new datacores - graviton physics needed . thx where to get this? market is empty. thx collected over month datacores, and now there are useless. thx oh you buy my interfaces to avarge market price - the biggest joke. thx and i ned new 10mio sklil for graviton crap. thx
thx for nothing :(
|
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
4121
|
Posted - 2014.11.05 02:25:05 -
[130] - Quote
Sial Harkonnen wrote:thx for this "great patch" new datacores - graviton physics needed . thx where to get this? market is empty. thx collected over month datacores, and now there are useless. thx oh you buy my interfaces to avarge market price - the biggest joke. thx and i ned new 10mio sklil for graviton crap. thx
thx for nothing :(
http://eve-central.com/home/quicklook.html?typeid=20419 you mean?
Plenty on the market.
Woo! CSM 9!
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
|
|
Maenth
The Thirteen Provinces
12
|
Posted - 2014.11.05 05:01:19 -
[131] - Quote
I actually really like Phoebe ... but I really do want to know why Graviton Physics was made required for drones, when ... reality, mechanical + electronic engineering, srsly |
Scarlet Bear
Alliance Mining Operations Command Space Warriors
3
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 00:48:17 -
[132] - Quote
CCP Phantom wrote:With Phoebe (coming in a few days on November 4th) we will see brilliant change coming to the Invention system, for example: - Merging Tech-3 Reverse Engineering into the Invention system and selection of the subsystem you want to invent
- Multiple invention runs per installed invention job
- Removal of Interfaces
- Generic decryptors instead of race specific decryptors
- Update of build material requirements for Tech 3 component production
Discover what other exciting changes we will get and read CCP Ytterbium's latest blog Invention updates in Phoebe!
need to check again the bpos Heavy Neutron Blaster 1 and Heavy Electron Blaster 1 when you copy them to BPC and then convert them to T2 it still wanting the incognito date interface it seems to be all the Hybrid or Gallente guns,
and very good update |
Nyjil Lizaru
Aideron Robotics
34
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 19:38:50 -
[133] - Quote
OK, I'm late to comment, but I have a couple questions:
-Overdrive injector systems are 'propulsion upgrades' but did not have their required invention skill/DC changed to Rocket science as it indicated in the Devblog. Error or unannounced late change (e: or do I need my eyes checked)? (I think there are some other cases of this, but CBA to check)
-Making a Stiletto (as an example) uses one science skill for the invention and a different on for the build, why? Or why not do it for the other cases?
These are niggling little things, but they seem 'odd' to me.
In other news I have some Rocket Science DCs to sell cheap, PM me!
Nyjil's corollary to Malcanis' Law: -á "Any attempt by CCP to smooth the learning curve of EVE Online will be carried out via the addition of extra factors and 'features' such that there is a net increase in complexity."
|
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
91
|
Posted - 2014.11.06 20:06:21 -
[134] - Quote
Nyjil Lizaru wrote:OK, I'm late to comment, but I have a couple questions:
-Overdrive injector systems are 'propulsion upgrades' but did not have their required invention skill/DC changed to Rocket science as it indicated in the Devblog. Error or unannounced late change (e: or do I need my eyes checked)? (I think there are some other cases of this, but CBA to check)
-Making a Stiletto (as an example) uses one science skill for the invention and a different on for the build, why? Or why not do it for the other cases?
These are niggling little things, but they seem 'odd' to me.
In other news I have some Rocket Science DCs to sell cheap, PM me!
its cause he was so busy working on other things and decided to just mix/match everything up with zero lore or common sense, since those other skills were not used as much as the original..
in shorter terms.. he made the changes to make it look like he actually worked on it. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |