Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 21 post(s) |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
3757
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 19:05:19 -
[61] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:CCP: To help with all the concerns about fuel, I recommend you take advantage of something that you already built into citadels: Infinite storage.
Store the fuel in a hangar, one big stack that can handle months of use, so I do not have to deal with it very often. CCP needs to come out on how they plan to have citadels charge these fuel blocks for industry.. i mean how many blocks would it take to cook up ships/mods do they think 1 person would be the only one making things in a citadel?? what about the fuel cost of 100 builders running jobs at various times throughout the day? the numbers are way off.. and detached from reality. My guess: A industry service module uses xx blocks per hour, irrelevant of use level. Why do I think that? The reprocessing plant is 5 blocks an hour, and there seems to be no limit on how much it can reprocess in that hour, or how many people can use it at once. In addition, CCP got rid of "manufacturing slots". I doubt they will bring them back in citadels.
Know a Frozen fan? Check this out
Frozen fanfiction
|
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2304
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 19:07:30 -
[62] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:CCP: To help with all the concerns about fuel, I recommend you take advantage of something that you already built into citadels: Infinite storage.
Store the fuel in a hangar, one big stack that can handle months of use, so I do not have to deal with it very often. CCP needs to come out on how they plan to have citadels charge these fuel blocks for industry.. i mean how many blocks would it take to cook up ships/mods do they think 1 person would be the only one making things in a citadel?? what about the fuel cost of 100 builders running jobs at various times throughout the day? the numbers are way off.. and detached from reality. By the looks, you cannot produce in Citadels in the first place. You can only reprocess and compress. There will be specific production plant structures at a later stage. And judging by the dev blog, there is no per job cost for things like production but a module cost to run that module and with that module you can run as many jobs as you want.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
Iski Zuki DaSen
Icarus Academy
11
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 19:09:39 -
[63] - Quote
what is the base offices a large citadel will get and what is for XL ? what is the 8/40/WIP/WIP for t1 rig and 16/40/WIP/WIP for the t2? can you specify those plz?
(i gues WIP stands for Work In progress?) |
Richard Bong
Hole Violence Goonswarm Federation
74
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 19:22:37 -
[64] - Quote
Querns wrote:Thanks for the reply.
Another question: adding 400 stront to the build reqs of fuel blocks increases the m^3 required to build fuel blocks considerably. Is this intended? I'd argue to lower the m^3 of stront, but that has knock-on effects with regards to siege, triage, and titans. Are there any metrics on how much stront gets used in a given time period due to POS reinforcement, across all of Eve?
Considerably is kind of an understatement. "stront is 3m3 per unit. so, if you're doing 20k runs(not at all unreasonable), that's 24 million m3 in cargo just for the stront" that is 24 fully expanded freighters. Even cutting that number in half is way too much, cutting it down to just 40 is still 2.4 million m3.
This isn't including the cost for 20k runs with 400 stront which is now an extra 6.4b isk at current prices.
I really hope you take a look at the stront requirements again.
[ASK] Me about drive by thread shitting!
|
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
31
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 19:26:00 -
[65] - Quote
Richard Bong wrote:Querns wrote:Thanks for the reply.
Another question: adding 400 stront to the build reqs of fuel blocks increases the m^3 required to build fuel blocks considerably. Is this intended? I'd argue to lower the m^3 of stront, but that has knock-on effects with regards to siege, triage, and titans. Are there any metrics on how much stront gets used in a given time period due to POS reinforcement, across all of Eve? Considerably is kind of an understatement. "stront is 3m3 per unit. so, if you're doing 20k runs(not at all unreasonable), that's 24 million m3 in cargo just for the stront" that is 24 fully expanded freighters. Even cutting that number in half is way too much, cutting it down to just 40 is still 2.4 million m3. This isn't including the cost for 20k runs with 400 stront which is now an extra 6.4b isk at current prices. I really hope you take a look at the stront requirements again.
Looking at 50 freighter trips for my weekly fuel needs for just the stront. gosh how excited I am about that |
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate Together We Solo
286
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 19:34:46 -
[66] - Quote
Lelira Cirim wrote:Vincent Athena wrote: If the medium citadel is intended to replace a POS, does it share one attribute with a POS:
Everything I have ever read about this topic gives me the impression this is a misconception. The POS is not ready to be replaced yet. "Small" structures are what POSes currently are in the design docs. They will be replaced with new "small" structures for rapid deployment for common POS purposes. Happy to admit that I'm also mistaken, if only to reinforce that there is a lot of bad intel still flitting about.
Yea, I'm getting a bit confused by the messaging from CCP on this too. It does look like the new citadel really doesn't 'replace' the small and medium POS's. I can see how the medium citadel is a replacement for a large POS (in functionality and price), but there seems to be a hole in the lineup that small and medium POS's fill now. |
Rivr Luzade
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
2304
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 19:35:28 -
[67] - Quote
Firvain wrote:Richard Bong wrote:Querns wrote:Thanks for the reply.
Another question: adding 400 stront to the build reqs of fuel blocks increases the m^3 required to build fuel blocks considerably. Is this intended? I'd argue to lower the m^3 of stront, but that has knock-on effects with regards to siege, triage, and titans. Are there any metrics on how much stront gets used in a given time period due to POS reinforcement, across all of Eve? Considerably is kind of an understatement. "stront is 3m3 per unit. so, if you're doing 20k runs(not at all unreasonable), that's 24 million m3 in cargo just for the stront" that is 24 fully expanded freighters. Even cutting that number in half is way too much, cutting it down to just 40 is still 2.4 million m3. This isn't including the cost for 20k runs with 400 stront which is now an extra 6.4b isk at current prices. I really hope you take a look at the stront requirements again. Looking at 50 freighter trips for my weekly fuel needs for just the stront. gosh how excited I am about that Resurrection of the convoys. You should rejoice.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
Alain Colcer
Agiolet Security and Logistics
145
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 19:39:14 -
[68] - Quote
Would it be possible to understand what yield % in reprocessing the astrahaus medium sized citadel will get when stationed in high-sec and using the specialization module "reprocessing plant" plus the rig "medium reprocessing effiency II"
not sure if the plant facility gives any basic % yield in reprocessing, or the max amount of reprocessing value with the rig will be 54%.
If its the latter, it is a tad low, given that the citadel is vulnerable to war-decs, and not better than a NPC station.
On the other hand the XL-citadel named Keepstar, how does it compare to a fully upgraded Minmatar outpost dedicated to reprocessing ores?
|
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
33
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 19:56:37 -
[69] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Firvain wrote:Richard Bong wrote:Querns wrote:Thanks for the reply.
Another question: adding 400 stront to the build reqs of fuel blocks increases the m^3 required to build fuel blocks considerably. Is this intended? I'd argue to lower the m^3 of stront, but that has knock-on effects with regards to siege, triage, and titans. Are there any metrics on how much stront gets used in a given time period due to POS reinforcement, across all of Eve? Considerably is kind of an understatement. "stront is 3m3 per unit. so, if you're doing 20k runs(not at all unreasonable), that's 24 million m3 in cargo just for the stront" that is 24 fully expanded freighters. Even cutting that number in half is way too much, cutting it down to just 40 is still 2.4 million m3. This isn't including the cost for 20k runs with 400 stront which is now an extra 6.4b isk at current prices. I really hope you take a look at the stront requirements again. Looking at 50 freighter trips for my weekly fuel needs for just the stront. gosh how excited I am about that Resurrection of the convoys. You should rejoice.
I already have 10 freighters, that is quite enough tbh. Got other more important **** to move lol |
Mr Grape Drink
Sugar - Water - Purple Who.
84
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 20:00:06 -
[70] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:CCP: To help with all the concerns about fuel, I recommend you take advantage of something that you already built into citadels: Infinite storage.
Store the fuel in a hangar, one big stack that can handle months of use, so I do not have to deal with it very often. CCP needs to come out on how they plan to have citadels charge these fuel blocks for industry.. i mean how many blocks would it take to cook up ships/mods do they think 1 person would be the only one making things in a citadel?? what about the fuel cost of 100 builders running jobs at various times throughout the day? the numbers are way off.. and detached from reality.
Huh?
Its going to take a set amount per hour per array. Whether 0 or 100 people use said array its going to take that set amount of blocks per hour to keep it running. Pretty simple math. And the numbers they have so far of 10-40 blocks per hour...not what I would call off or detached from any reality.
And I'm guessing they'll have a Fuel Bay that everything runs from. Probably why they have everything take fuel at the top of the hour no matter what, that way you know when all your ***** gonna go offline! |
|
Lineothel
Matari Construction Corp
0
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 20:09:14 -
[71] - Quote
Quick question on the possibility of using the Citadel as a revenue producing mechanic.
If I fit the market, clone and office modules to my Citadel, I understand that there will be NPC taxes involved in their operation according to the Dev Blog. My question is will the corp that launches the Citadel be able to reap some of the tax money, office fees, brokers fees etc of the different types of transactions that occur at its Citadel?
Thanks! Lineothel |
Mr Grape Drink
Sugar - Water - Purple Who.
84
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 20:12:20 -
[72] - Quote
Firvain wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Firvain wrote:Richard Bong wrote:Querns wrote:Thanks for the reply.
Another question: adding 400 stront to the build reqs of fuel blocks increases the m^3 required to build fuel blocks considerably. Is this intended? I'd argue to lower the m^3 of stront, but that has knock-on effects with regards to siege, triage, and titans. Are there any metrics on how much stront gets used in a given time period due to POS reinforcement, across all of Eve? Considerably is kind of an understatement. "stront is 3m3 per unit. so, if you're doing 20k runs(not at all unreasonable), that's 24 million m3 in cargo just for the stront" that is 24 fully expanded freighters. Even cutting that number in half is way too much, cutting it down to just 40 is still 2.4 million m3. This isn't including the cost for 20k runs with 400 stront which is now an extra 6.4b isk at current prices. I really hope you take a look at the stront requirements again. Looking at 50 freighter trips for my weekly fuel needs for just the stront. gosh how excited I am about that Resurrection of the convoys. You should rejoice. I already have 10 freighters, that is quite enough tbh. Got other more important **** to move lol
Not only will it be a pain in the ass for production, but if this change rolls out while POS are still the only way to moon mine, its gonna raise some mineral/T2 prices. Currently just adding that stront will raise the cost of a small tower by 50mil a month. Thats not including the probable massive spike in stront value as supply is going to be so much higher and supply the same. |
A Research Alt
Perkone Caldari State
152
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 20:21:50 -
[73] - Quote
strontium use in fuel blocks is ill-conceived and should not be implemented |
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
351
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 20:27:22 -
[74] - Quote
it looks like ccp has some idea that folks should pvp in it judging by the fitting window.
wow this is what you're doing to your player housing in this game. sorry not impressed at all. its a tedious isk sink that is nothing but a loot pi+Ķata waiting for goons or PL or the like to just come on in and drop supers, etc on.. just to have its residents go batshit crazy over losing their house.
yet you pretend you think about the casual/little guy...
ccp you're full of it.. this is not going to work.
hey can i roam in the citadel since it fits like as hip now?
how does warp scams on a citadel act??/
you mean to tell me an XL citadel can only lock onto 8 targets not 800 since that's whats going to be thrown at her?
|
RainReaper
RRN Assembly INC Straw Hat Legion
25
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 20:29:46 -
[75] - Quote
I have one question here! I know that citadels have their asset safety mechanic that protects inventories and such upon being destroyed. So keeping expensive things like bpos and such in there is no problem cause you wont completely lose those if the citadel gets blasted. However! Is manufacturing/research stations gonna have that same kind of asset safety? If not then people are really gonna risk it if they put their blueprints in one of those, personaly i would not use those then and just use my citadel for all my research/manufacturing, no matter how inefficient it is. |
Andraea Sarstae
Circle of Steel Inc. Care Factor
23
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 20:41:31 -
[76] - Quote
"Unlimted Personal and Corporation Hangars provide residence for even the largest of Alliances."
This is currently listed here: http://updates.eveonline.com/coming/spring/
Yet, you have rigs that increase the number of offices in a citadel.
Does that line from the webpage actually mean "unlimited storage space"? |
Mr Omniblivion
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
546
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 20:55:39 -
[77] - Quote
I am all for a change in stront consumption; however, this change to fuel blocks shoild be introduced only once existing POS starbases are removed.
Stront consumption is not changing much simply by releasing citadels. In fact, we will probably see more siege cycles. Stront usage will fall only when POS are removed from the game, at which time it would make sense to make the stront change in fuel.
Adding a stront requirement to fuel with the release of the first citadels would be catastrophic to the tech 2 market as fuel cost would skyrocket and drive up the cost of all t2 items. Not to mention, you'd have to immediately change the size of stront or the raw requirements or the supply of stront to keep up with the immediate demand of thousands of towers across eve, each requiring 9 stront per block. |
Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
352
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 21:15:28 -
[78] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:I am all for a change in stront consumption; however, this change to fuel blocks shoild be introduced only once existing POS starbases are removed.
Stront consumption is not changing much simply by releasing citadels. In fact, we will probably see more siege cycles. Stront usage will fall only when POS are removed from the game, at which time it would make sense to make the stront change in fuel.
Adding a stront requirement to fuel with the release of the first citadels would be catastrophic to the tech 2 market as fuel cost would skyrocket and drive up the cost of all t2 items. Not to mention, you'd have to immediately change the size of stront or the raw requirements or the supply of stront to keep up with the immediate demand of thousands of towers across eve, each requiring 9 stront per block.
THIS! |
David Zeta
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
5
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 21:19:58 -
[79] - Quote
Unless they make fuel blocks about 7 times as massive, which I don't think can be considered feasible, you're also going to have a way to move enormous amounts of Stront at a low m^3 via reprocessing.
If you do make fuel blocks that much larger, I shudder to think of the logistics involved with WH supply.
Looooooks like someone didn't think about volume and it's tag-on effects before adding Stront to the fuel block mix. |
Tara Anju
Tempus Manus
2
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 21:46:24 -
[80] - Quote
I have a question I have been wondering about for quite some time even before the new structures where even announced: what are market services in stations or in future market hub service modules good for ?
Since I can access the market through the main EVE menu at any time and anywhere - even in space - and can buy or sell items on any station even if it does not have a market service ... why on earth should I waste a service slot on fitting a market hub module ? |
|
Catalina Franklin
Blind Assault Silent Infinity
0
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 22:13:15 -
[81] - Quote
Yeah so Im going to add my voice into the fray and state that the 400 stront per 40 fuel blocks is ridiculous and not thought through. I feel many people have accurately made the point of the amount of m^3 needed for a 20000 block run would be crazy plus you just don't get enough through mining at the moment to enable that change. And then there is the impact on manufacturing itself due to the actual cost of the block (if bought, due to the pain to mine in the amounts suggested). You all really need to take a step back and rethink your current position on fuel blocks. |
Circumstantial Evidence
255
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 22:27:55 -
[82] - Quote
Stont added to fuel blocks: agree with Mr Omniblivion: Until POS are removed, POS owners would be paying twice for stront: once for their stront bay (which are NOT always completely filled up, for reinforcement timing reasons) and again for what gets added to fuel blocks.
Skills for Citadels: While an improvement over the hard barrier of Starbase Defense Management, adding skills giving any bonuses for structure control, even with a low cost and low multiplier seems to contradict the intent that all players should feel welcome to assume control. These platforms are already very powerful; if the new skills are intentionally mild bonuses... why have them? |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2966
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 22:39:39 -
[83] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
We will iterate on reprocessing capabilities to give a higher impact between high and null-sec yes, 1% isn't enough of a difference. - Querns Reprocessing rigs are part of the drilling specialization yes, but we wanted to give them to you right now as they provide significant value. Ideally you wouldn't get such high rates on a Citadel, but we'll leave these numbers until we introduce the Drilling Platform, then reduce them and potentially offer a rig removal. - Hendrink Collie [/list] This is very disappointing. The whole argument was that Null sec had to invest more into their outposts so should get more in return. Now you are asking Higsec to invest just as much, yet get less. In addition the reprocessing difference actually does not promote local industry, but an import industry, since it means Null can afford to pay more for the same piece of ore than someone in highsec can, meaning they don't bother to mine locally. Given the investment in all areas of space is now the same, and yes highsec people don't have to defend against caps but they also don't have caps to defend their structures either so that element balances out, the reprocessing in a Citadel should also be made equal. If Null needs something it should be an advantage in raw material production, not a magic advantage that makes the same piece of ore worth more minerals in different areas of space.
The fuel block use is also disappointing since we were told it was going to be when the services were actually used, which would therefore have made it easy to assign a tax to individual jobs, since you could tax them based on how many fuel blocks their particular job used, rather than a constant trickle of fuel blocks that you then have to work out how to account for dead time between uses as well.
Finally, what are the details on Fighters, What is the bandwidth, how many squadrons under the new system, what sort of DPS can we expect to get from said fighters, how many spares can be kept. Currently the launcher DPS seems..... weak, and will be trivially easy to ignore for any reasonable attackers, therefore the Citadels won't contribute much to the overall firepower on the field, which seems very contrary to their design goals. So unless the Fighters are actually a huge majority of their DPS, Citadels are going to be outright walk overs. |
Kuetlzelcoatl
28
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 22:49:56 -
[84] - Quote
Circumstantial Evidence wrote:.... if the new skills are intentionally mild bonuses... why have them?
isk sink?
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
2349
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 22:52:56 -
[85] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote: This is very disappointing. The whole argument was that Null sec had to invest more into their outposts so should get more in return. Now you are asking Higsec to invest just as much, yet get less. In addition the reprocessing difference actually does not promote local industry, but an import industry, since it means Null can afford to pay more for the same piece of ore than someone in highsec can, meaning they don't bother to mine locally.
This is incorrect -- there is a significant amount of mining going on in nullsec, and it's advantageous to mine in nullsec still -- shipping costs money, and locally-sourced goods are cheaper than imports. Plus, you can't get ABCs in highsec without paying a premium for it being shipped OUT of nullsec.
Need proof? I can provide it.
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Deklein#adm http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Pure_Blind#adm
Any system with an ADM over 4.5, by necessity, has had people mining in it recently. (Sov index of 5 and military index of 5 = 4.5 ADM.) As of this post, 17 systems in Deklein and 11 systems in Pure Blind have at least some active miners. This does not include systems that could potentially have mining occurring instead of ratting.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Soldarius
O C C U P Y Test Alliance Please Ignore
1459
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 23:01:23 -
[86] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:I am all for a change in stront consumption; however, this change to fuel blocks shoild be introduced only once existing POS starbases are removed.
Stront consumption is not changing much simply by releasing citadels. In fact, we will probably see more siege cycles. Stront usage will fall only when POS are removed from the game, at which time it would make sense to make the stront change in fuel.
Adding a stront requirement to fuel with the release of the first citadels would be catastrophic to the tech 2 market as fuel cost would skyrocket and drive up the cost of all t2 items. Not to mention, you'd have to immediately change the size of stront or the raw requirements or the supply of stront to keep up with the immediate demand of thousands of towers across eve, each requiring 9 stront per block.
100% agreement. The current plan will result in a 40% increase in POS fuel costs for Gallente POSes alone. Prepare yourself for 350M isk T2 cruisers. And there is also the volume of stront required issue.
Next: "We are also going to increase all capital ship signature radius to at least 10km to account for the structure missiles listed above."
Torpedo Phoenix has a 110k damage volley. Are you sure you want it to have 100% application to every capital ship in the game? I'm pretty sure I remember someone that works for CCP saying that that would be really broken. I might actually finally train JDC5 if this change goes through.
Finally, have you reconsidered the material requirements for T2 XL rigs? I seem to recall that a couple of them require the entire universal supply of certain kinds of T2 salvage per unit. The requirements were completely unfeasible.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Midnight Hope
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
187
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 23:38:33 -
[87] - Quote
Will you be able to tell what's fitted in the Citadel just by looking at it?
I am not only thinking in weapons (which you can do today with ships, so I assume this is a given), but also with ECM/Scrams/Disruptors/Hardeners which you can definitely do today by looking at the POS modules deployed and online around each POS. |
Rabbit P
Nuwa Foundation
55
|
Posted - 2016.02.10 23:58:40 -
[88] - Quote
can CCP state clear that "no shattered wormhole Citadel"?
it only stated in CSM Citadel FAQ , and now said again " All area of space " without mentioning a word of "shattered wormhole"
just a clarification is needed. |
Alain Colcer
Agiolet Security and Logistics
146
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 00:56:35 -
[89] - Quote
CCP, one Last question
If the citadel concept is succesful and players adopt them quickly enough, would you consider creating a small sized citadel?. |
Dirk D'Aguilar
Kraken Exploration and Janitorial Services The Bastion
3
|
Posted - 2016.02.11 01:20:48 -
[90] - Quote
Alain Colcer wrote:CCP, one Last question
If the citadel concept is succesful and players adopt them quickly enough, would you consider creating a small sized citadel?.
The medium is cheap enough to be easily in reach of most individual players, so I'm not really seeing a need for a small. Depending on the desired functionality of a medium citadel/mining platform/research lab/etc, your fuel costs can be very low - as low as no fuel required at all. There should be no problem with running costs if you only want a limited -functionality structure, which could have been the other reason you would want a small structure.
The small deployables in the current plan are structures like mobile depots and the like. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |