| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Scojo27
   |
Posted - 2010.12.22 07:15:00 -
[31]
I have to agree with what has been said, my concern is that this is not mentioned in a dev blog just the short videos. While the interface is much better and fun the returns and extra time spent will only make people not want to do it! This need to be address and clearly stated to the community as it stands now. I think if this was post as a dev blog you would get a lot more feedback that changes have to happen before launch.
|
|
CCP Tuxford
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 09:18:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Margatroid Alice
I tried since hours and,
PI will be nerfed, that's all i saw.
If i adapt my current production line to the new PI, i lose 25% of the total amount, and i need to haul each panete five time more than on TQ.
the clickfest is going to be a haulfest. 
Why do you lose 25% of the total amount? We are no looking into some pgu/cpu issues with the ECUs based on feedback from this thread I belief.
_______________ |
|
Sherksilver
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 13:55:00 -
[33]
I believe the 25% comes in as:
1. Under new system as is right now, I can only run 3 lines for a given component - say mechanical parts, yet on TQ I can practically run 4 - the 4th is not 100% dep on planet, but runs most of the time.
2. Under new system, you cannot run a P3 line on a single planet - as you cannot mine 4 separate elements at the same time (and still do anything else).
I am glad to hear that the numbers are being looked at :)
|
|
CCP Tuxford
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 14:03:00 -
[34]
ah well, like I said the plan wasn't really to **** with the balance of things so lets give the game designers some time to refine the numbers.
_______________ |
|
JiJiCle
Gallente
Kermit Space Industies
|
Posted - 2010.12.22 14:07:00 -
[35]
I also noticed a decrease in configuration layouts possibilities.
While it's obviously more efficient for simple harvesting installations, the more complex your installation is the less number of configuration types/layout are possible or even impossible for some single planet P3 (or at greatly decreased rate).
The cost of a single ECU (even without any extraction pins) is so high you can't afford to have like 4 differents AND the processors/storage/launchpad.
Why haven't you kept the original PWG usage of extractors for each new extraction pins and added a few PWG for the ECU ? (or even 0  )
A little feature request while I'm here 
Could you please make each planet nameable, and show this name in Science&Industry windows (new column) and in the Planet view mode ?
This would make deeply easier to know what planet I want/have to visit instead of uselessly visit each one and just skip it because everything runs fine.
random examples:
"Jita IV Rocket Fuel /2days"
"Perimeter IX Planetary Vehicles /1day"
etc...
I also support the idea of previous/next planet button and the scroll view with arrows in planet view mode.
|
Gavi Loken
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 16:01:00 -
[36]
I've been quite successful using PI on TQ, and would love to offer feedback on the new system as it's my primary source of income and I know pretty much all there is to know about it.. However, this message is kicking my butt:
"You cannot add another extraction head on that control frequency as another extraction head is already utilizing it."
What does that mean? What am I doing wrong?
|
|
CCP Tuxford
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 17:00:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Gavi Loken
Edited by: Gavi Loken on 23/12/2010 16:08:04
I've been quite successful using PI on TQ, and would love to offer feedback on the new system as it's my primary source of income and I know pretty much all there is to know about it.. However, this message is kicking my butt:
"You cannot add another extraction head on that control frequency as another extraction head is already utilizing it."
What does that mean? What am I doing wrong?
EDIT: Nevermind, it suddenly began working.
It basically means that you're trying to submit the same head twice,... so it actually means that somehow, somewhere I ****ed up. If you have logs then please bug report it with as detailed repro-steps as you can remember.
_______________ |
|
Tsabrock
Gallente
Circle of Friends
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 19:53:00 -
[38]
Although I love the new ECU's, as they stand I will need to completely redo almost all of my planets & chains due to their current CPU and Power Grid requirements. One of my planets produces mostly Coolant, with a little Oxygen thrown-in. With the new extractors, rough numbers show that not only would I need to remove the Oxygen line entirely, my Coolant production would be reduced by about 25%-33% of my current numbers.
On a related note, will we see any other tweaks to PI structures? For instance, Standard Storage PIN's are almost completely worthless as they are currently. They use the same powergrid as Launchpads and have half the capacity. Their only advantage is they use less CPU, but on every planet I've run CPU is never a problem. I feel they should have reduced PG requirements and/or much greater storage capacity.
---
If you've read something I posted and want to contact me, EVE-Mail me, or contact me via EVE Gate. |
Dreknid Khan
Amarr
Ministry of War
|
Posted - 2010.12.26 02:12:00 -
[39]
Only had limited experience with the first version; just extracting Noble Metals for direct sale. Profitable? Somewhat. Fun? Nope, so I stopped after a few weeks.
Is the new version different? Yes. Better? Nope, not for a casual user like me. I found the new interface much less intuitive, and fairly confusing; but eventually figured it out.
Less clicks? Maybe one less in head setup. But the automated setup never gets it right, because it insists on centering itself, leaving no room for others within the same area. Don't know if this is a bug, or if I'm not using it right, or just poor design. Regardless, I'd rather have the original control over setup.
I've been running a program for a few days and already see the problem; the 14 days is an illusion, since it quickly becomes unprofitable and has to be manually stopped and restarted. So there's actually more babysitting required than before. Granted, this is probably more realistic, and a bit more profitable.
Bottom line: zero fun, zero entertainment value. Still pants.
|
Darod Zyree
Gallente
Zyree Holding
|
Posted - 2010.12.26 23:05:00 -
[40]
To test the new PI I started from scratch on a planet in our wormhole system.
The new extractor, I love it.
Instead of having to reset 10 extractors a few times a day I would have do reset just one, awesome.
Question: when the program is finished can I restart the same time program or do I have to set the timer all over again? If so can we have saved programs? Like, I would want to run a 5 hour program every time, instead of resetting the extraction area size bar I could just load a saved program.
One of several things I hoped for would also be in the new PI was some form of copy paste action on factories.
Changing factories is still a lot of clicking, I would like to just copy paste a factory multiple times, not having to set the same schematic, link and route to the same storage/launch pad every time.
-Darod- |
|
|
Amateratsu
Caldari
The Pegasus Project
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 11:14:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Amy Frost
Oh and could somebody make it possible to move the Command Centers location around on the Planet without the need to destroy it, now half of my CC are on the other side of the Planet where I actually do all the extraction these days. 
Amy Frost
This.....
With the need to move extraction heads around to optimise output, being able to move the cc would be a godsend so you don't end up with the cc sitting on 1 side of a planet and having to search for your pins on the other side.
Especially as entering planet view always homes on the cc.
á
|
Aidan Patrick
Zero Point Group
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 11:19:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Aidan Patrick on 27/12/2010 11:27:55
Edited by: Aidan Patrick on 27/12/2010 11:24:04
Edited by: Aidan Patrick on 27/12/2010 11:19:08
Thought I'd throw my 2 ISK in as well.
First off, not being able to effect/be effected by other players extractors is a very bad thing. Here are some reasons why:
- 1. Infinite players can take advantage of the same resource pool.
- 2. Players are unable to create colonies with the sole purpose of decreasing the yield of someone else's colonies.
- 3. Scarcity of resources becomes a non-issue, meaning that DUST will be completely useless upon launch as Capsuleers will have no reason to pay a console player to attack a facility for anything less than griefing a target corporation.
- 4. Did I mention multiple players using the same resource pool is a bad thing? I can just imagine rare plasma planets with 1500 command centers and extractors all around the same perfect pocket of resources. Or better yet a single corporation utilizing a "best profit" pool en masse with no penalty.
With that said, I hope CCP rethinks whether or not extractor heads affect other players or not.
Moving on... I'm extremely disappointed to see that storage facilities are still useless. 5k storage space, compared to the 20,000 units on a launch pad and they both still use 700 MW power, the only difference is that the launch pad uses a few times more CPU. As most people know the CPU is a non-issue, especially on larger colonies. This means that instead of storage facilities you have launch pads. Understandable but really? It doesn't make sense to me.
What I would like to see is this:
- 1. Storage Facility changed to use 250 MW, retaining 500 CPU usage & storage space of 5,000 M3
- 2. "Large Storage Facility" Added, uses 500 MW & 2500 CPU, boasts a storage capacity of 40,000 M3
That change would allow for storage facilities to still be used on basic colonies but provide a more elegant option for more advanced colonies and also make up for the fact that you will potentially have more powergrid used in extractors with the new head system.
Now in addition to my storage facility change, I propose a simpler way of producing goods, allow for less micro-management. Heres the idea:
Seperate "Request Resources" Idea
- 1. Retain existing function to route materials to a processor.
- 2. Add a function to the processor to "request resources from" similar to routing from storage to the processor, but reversed.
- 3. Only allow a processor to "request resources from" storage facilities. Why? Because launch pads are meant for getting goods on or off world.
- 4. Retain "request resources from" setting until manually reset so extractor output can be changed at will.
Now with the above suggestion you have the ability for people to retain their current setups that rely entirely on a single launch pad for storage. However what you get with this feature is the ability to remove a lot of pain and suffering. Heres some stuff I think it would enhance:
- 1. Changing the processors output becomes stream lined, allowing for less clicks.
- 2. "Less Clicks" comes about by no longer having to set routes for every single resource required for a processor
- 3. Setting up routes to multiple processors becomes less confusing.
- 4. Allows the use of storage facilities as a "Hopper" centralizing the storage of player goods on the colony.
- 5. Confusion on what routes are set up where becomes alleviated more.
- 6. Once again, you no longer need to set up all your routes again because you changed what your processors are outputting.
[*]7. Allows dedicated production colonies to be set up and more easily managed.
Anyways, I hope both my ideas are implemented, but at the very least I REALLY think the "request resources from" is needed big time.
- Aidan Patrick |
electrostatus
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 16:18:00 -
[43]
The current extractor fitting cost on tranquility is 800MW and 200tf. The current cost on singularity is much higher than this. The minimum cost (the control unit and one head) is 3352MW and 510tf, which is 4.2 times as much MW and 2.5 times as much tf required on tranquility. Even when I have 10 extractor heads and spread the control unit cost to each of them, a head costs 832MW and 150tf. The cpu fitting is now lower than on tranquility, but the powergrid is still higher.
I suggest the powergrid of the control unit be cut 15%, thus putting it at 2380MW. There, when spread across all the heads, makes each head cost 790MW and 150tf, closer to what is currently on tranquility.
When placing a new head, it sometimes gets placed on my other buildings. because of that, I can't select them and move them elsewhere, as the mouse wants to select the building instead of the head.
Originally by: Aidan Patrick
First off, not being able to effect/be effected by other players extractors is a very bad thing. Here are some reasons why:
IsnÆt that whatÆs currently on tranquility? Though, IÆve noticed on the test server that after extracting, the resources do go down on the planet around the heads, so it might be that while the extractors donÆt interfere with other playersÆ extractors, they all suck the spot dry.
―
Vexo M > He turned the drives up to 11 |
Tiril Darente
Wings of Redemption
Black Flag Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 16:44:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Aidan Patrick
First off, not being able to effect/be effected by other players extractors is a very bad thing. Here are some reasons why:
The "players don't affect each other" statement was regarding the extraction efficiency penalty you get from overlapping heads. I haven't seen Tuxford say anything regarding resource depletion but I'd expect it to work the same as TQ.
|
Darod Zyree
Gallente
Zyree Holding
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 18:16:00 -
[45]
Originally by: CCP Tuxford
2. When you install a program we deplete the resource a bit. It does regenerate but your heads might not be at "optimal position" next time you survey for resources.
How much has this been changed?
I noticed quite a big difference on sisi compared to tranq.
The orange spot on the sisi planet is gone after a days program but on the same location on the tranq planet i have never seen it disappear.
-Darod- |
Silen Boon
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 20:34:00 -
[46]
I do like the way the new PI works, however all of my current PI networks are no longer feasible. The new extractors require a vast amount of power that means its become uneconomic to extract more than one material from a planet.
Most of my planets extracted at least 2 tier 1 components, that were processed to tier 2 and then exported.
I hope the power requirements of the extractor can be rebalanced or PI will be very dull.
|
Babay 14th
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 07:19:00 -
[47]
1. on 4th level of command center upgrades I was able to run (in 0.0)
6-8 extractors
8 basic processors
3-1 advanced processors
2 spaceports
and links for that.
so I could use 4 mining planets and 1 finally producing planet to make 24 Organic Mortars a day.
the time I spent on it: 3 time a day I had to rerun extractors. once in 3 days I had to fly and transport resources from planet to planet.
and now I can't produce two resource types on one planet.
I had to set up planets once and then re-run extractors. that's all.
and now... now it's impossible (at 4th level of command center upgrades) to produce matherials in the same ammounts. I'll have to produce only one type of matherials on each planet. so, I can't produce Organic Mortars any more.
Is the intent to slow down planetary matherials production?
2. as far as I see, planetary production will take much more time: each time I run etractor, I'll have to move extractor heads. that's takes plenty of time.
hi-productive spot drifts and fades. I guess that I'll have to move processors and spaceport each week, folowing that spot.
3. strange situation: I plan extraction (place extractor heads) and is says 'average speed is 62.000 m3 in an hour". but after I "start program" average extraction falls to 20000 m3. Is it intended to be so ?
|
Darod Zyree
Gallente
Zyree Holding
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 08:11:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Babay 14th
2. as far as I see, planetary production will take much more time: each time I run etractor, I'll have to move extractor heads. that's takes plenty of time.
hi-productive spot drifts and fades. I guess that I'll have to move processors and spaceport each week, folowing that spot.
This is going to be real annoying.
Having to set up all the processors every few days 
CCP can't we have some form of copy/paste or select all structures and move them around the planet?
Instead of having to rebuild stuff every few days following the spots around?
-Darod- |
Babay 14th
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 13:11:00 -
[49]
in this case they should do "travelling" of buildings: they should be able to move with some speed, following deposits.
also, it is bad, that deposits degrades on production start: do it several times: start-stop extraction as fast as possible (approx 30 secs) on the same place - and you'll see, that production drastically decreased.
|
Ludacrys
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 18:50:00 -
[50]
Edited by: Ludacrys on 28/12/2010 18:51:21
The extractor control unit cost is ******ed, with the system the way it is on SISI right now it only favors those who PRODUCE P1 only, like oxygen, or those who haul everything to one factory planet
IF You want to make something complex on one planet, like robotics on a plasma planet, you are ****ed since the cost of 4 ECUs + heads make it impossible
i have a suggestion: why not make the extractor control unit PG requirements much lower and the actual heads something like the old single extractors used to require?
1 ECU unit + 5 extractors should not be that much easier to install than 3 ECUS + 3 extractors, its really unbalanced to people who want to produce stuff like POS fuel on as few planets as possible
|
|
|
tradierd
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 18:55:00 -
[51]
I have a suggestion:
Bring back POS FUEL NPC ORDERS and get rid of this crime against gameplay called PI, seriously it was the worst unnecessary feature ever implemented
|
May Waifu
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 19:28:00 -
[52]
I dont understand the New extractor rate...
The surveying program before being installed said:
12650 units/hour
The surveying program after being installed said:
11282 units/hours
The surveying program said THE CURRENT CYCLE OF ONE HOUR WOULD GIVE ME:
27651 units
It actually produced:
8575 units in the first hour
what am i missing here?
|
May Waifu
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 19:42:00 -
[53]
Edited by: May Waifu on 28/12/2010 19:43:51
Can i just leave my extractors the way they are or am i going to be forced to switch to the new, completely ******ed system?
I was just making POS fuel for my own 2 poses but if nothing changes from SISI right now to TQ release im going to just stop, you made it so i dont have to 2 click each extractor each day, BUT INSTEAD I PRODUCE MUCH MUCH LESS AND HAVE TO MOVE MY EXTRACTORS AROUND? I RATHER CLICK THANK YOU VERY MUCH
THis change only benefits people who make ONE type of P0 or P1 per planet, anyone else has been ****ed in the as.s |
Saju Somtaaw
Gallente
Department of Defence
Apotheosis of Virtue
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 21:56:00 -
[54]
Originally by: May Waifu
Edited by: May Waifu on 28/12/2010 19:43:51
Can i just leave my extractors the way they are or am i going to be forced to switch to the new, completely ******ed system?
I was just making POS fuel for my own 2 poses but if nothing changes from SISI right now to TQ release im going to just stop, you made it so i dont have to 2 click each extractor each day, BUT INSTEAD I PRODUCE MUCH MUCH LESS AND HAVE TO MOVE MY EXTRACTORS AROUND? I RATHER CLICK THANK YOU VERY MUCH
THis change only benefits people who make ONE type of P0 or P1 per planet, anyone else has been ****ed in the as.s
First avoiding the filter is not allowed, but on the topic no it is bennificial I run several planets makeing P2 goods, and I plan to move one up to P3 in January when I can upgrade the command center w/o having to destroy all my factorys, launchpads and storage facilities. The main bennefit is that it gets rid of a lot of tedious clicking making it a simpler, easier process to maintain your extractors.
---- --- ---
|
Babay 14th
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 22:09:00 -
[55]
May Waifu, you are wrong.
producing single P1 is harmed too.
I've installed a 10-head extractor on the best deposit on the planet. (water on temperate planet, 0.0). it had white paint in it.
initial 'planned production' was 57 000 m3 in an hour.
and now it dropped to 6 600 m3 in an hour.
yes, I've 'cheated': I've started and stopped extraction jobs as fast as possible.
but.. you see.
as far as I've see, the 'planned extraction speed' shows an ideal case when the deposit that haven't been extracted (it's fully regenerated).
but when you install extraction program - you see actual numbers based on deposit state (some amount was extracted, some was regenerated).
so, it is a question to CCP: how fast does planetary raw materials regenerate?
is I have virgin deposit, install 10 extractor heads and planned productivity is 60 000 m3 in an hour, when what productivity will be in 30 days, after extraction and regeneration processes are balanced?
and why does all the planned for extraction material (but not extracted) get lost if I stop extraction manually ?
|
Babay 14th
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 22:16:00 -
[56]
Saju Somtaaw you're wrong. )
1. you'll need much more powergrid to extract the same amounts of P0 patherials if you extract more then one on a planet.
2. you won't have 'clickfest'. but... deposits do degrade when you extract from them. And sometimes it looks like they move out. So, you'll might have to move all your infrastructure to a new deposit.
3. you might need to move extractor heads each time you start your extraction. that's much more job, then clicking and rerunning extraction jobs.
|
Apsidia
|
Posted - 2010.12.29 11:18:00 -
[57]
Edited by: Apsidia on 29/12/2010 11:21:55
After test new PI on sisi:
1. The amount of framing of resources for a cycle not in cubic meters/hours is inconvenient to look.
I permanently don't know, whether throughput of a link between spaceport and an extractor will suffice.
Can be, add number of meters cubic pre hour in brackets after units/hour number? 
2. Whether players can move extraction head points independently and setup extraction area size manually for each head point?
|
Alexander Lion
|
Posted - 2010.12.29 13:45:00 -
[58]
i did PI from the first minute.
so now my questions:
why can¦t the ecu handle to extract 2 different types of recource? 2 seperate programms on one ecu should be possible because if someone want to build coolant on one planet he has to put up 2 ecu with only 5 ehu used each and maybe both resource hot spots are in extraction range.
|
Midnight Hope
|
Posted - 2010.12.29 21:00:00 -
[59]
I noticed that I can place an extractor, arrange the heads and forget to route the extracted product and I do not get any warning at all after submitting it.
It would be nice if the extractor/processor turned red (as extractors turn yellow before submitting) if any of the required incoming or outgoing links are not satisfied.
|
Miyau
|
Posted - 2010.12.30 01:17:00 -
[60]
Originally by: electrostatus
The current extractor fitting cost on tranquility is 800MW and 200tf. The current cost on singularity is much higher than this. The minimum cost (the control unit and one head) is 3352MW and 510tf, which is 4.2 times as much MW and 2.5 times as much tf required on tranquility. Even when I have 10 extractor heads and spread the control unit cost to each of them, a head costs 832MW and 150tf.
Yeah these new powergrid numbers really encourage fewer extractors (i.e. fewer different types of resources harvested).
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |