EVE Search - Sticky:New dev blog: Starbase happy fun time

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:New dev blog: Starbase happy fun time

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 15 post(s)
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 121	Posted - 2011.11.07 16:36:00 - [1] - Quote Good changes, but I see 2 issues. One is fuel savings from faction towers and sov. Fuel savings has THREE advantages: Lower cost, longer refuel times, and less to haul. The new block system increases the volume you need to haul to fuel your faction tower, a big issue for those who operate where a cloaky transport is the order of the day. CCP: how about having the fuel savings show up as towers taking "skip hours", that is some hours the tower would need one less block? The tower would calculate the number of blocks needed in decimal each hour and round up: Hour Needed Consumed 1 0.75 1 2 1.5 2 3 2.25 3 4 3 3 <---- skip hour 5 3.75 4 And so on. Or just make the blocks smaller and towers use more per hour. The other issue is that for people who collect their own fuel its not clear this saves effort. Old system: gather fuel via mining and PI, take to tower. New system: gather fuel via mining and PI, take to factory, make blocks, take blocks to tower. The new system is actually more work! (But not much more, I guess averaged over the player base it will save time). CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 122	Posted - 2011.11.07 17:00:00 - [2] - Quote To everyone suggesting faction towers have a longer fuel cycle time: Remember the one hour cycle is built into all pos processes, moon mining reactors and so on. Adding a new cycle timer for one of those processes (fuel use) would be a pain. Also remember that starbase charter consumption is not effected, so it would still be one per hour., resulting in different starbase fuels being consumed on different schedules. Im leaning to increase the fuel block count by x50 and drop their volume to 1 cu m. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 124	Posted - 2011.11.07 17:43:00 - [3] - Quote CCP: you may want to consider the Heavy water and Liquid ozone requirements to build cubes. Instead of making it equal to what a maxed out POS needs, make it to the Eve wide consumption remains unchanged. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 126	Posted - 2011.11.07 18:42:00 - [4] - Quote Scrapyard Bob wrote: Tas Nok wrote: which really brings up the other problem, this one size fits all while wonderful for POSes that have enough guns and arrays to really fill up an overview doesn't do much for the corp with the faction tower with only a few mods online specifically in order to save fuel costs! now with the blocks it won't matter if I have 1 gun online or 20... Which is not a real big issue. If you assume a non-faction, large tower with no sov bonuses you were paying current about (per 30 days): 174M for PI-sourced fuels 155-167M for isotopes (310M for oxytopes) 2.3M in Heavy Water - if you ran at full tilt 34.6M in Liquid Ozone - if you ran at full tilt So, Heavy Water was about 0.5% of your fuel cost per month and Liquid Ozone was about 9% of your fuel cost per month. Assuming that you used about half of your PG, you saved a mere 17.3M ISK/30d each month. This uses the costs as they are now, not as they will be in 2 months. If we get a heavy water shortage the cost could go sky high. What is needed to insure ice mining supplies sufficient heavy water for POS needs, either by boosting heavy water obtained from ice or by reducing the need in fuel cube production. Edit 1 CCP: If Im a POS user who mines his own ice, mining sufficient ice to get the isotopes should also get me sufficient heavy water and liquid ozone. Edit 2 If it all comes from ice in sort of set amounts that get used in set amounts, why have them? Maybe HW and LO have outlived their usefulness as game mechanics. Just get rid of them. Jump bridges run on fuel cubes. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 127	Posted - 2011.11.07 22:20:00 - [5] - Quote Dex Ironmind wrote: Weaselior wrote: Dex Ironmind wrote: The only people this is really "easier" for are those who simply buy their fuel directly off the market! Am I mistaken? For everyone else, this actually adds a step to the refuel process, as well as some potential initial logistics (buying BP's and/or installing an ammo array if you don't have one). It doesn't sound like this requires any skills. fueling a tower is shift-dragging your fuel stack onto the tower instead of laborously computing the precise number of eight different fuel types to get a tower max-fueled then moving those fuel types one at a time if you have ever fueled a tower anywhere but in w-space this is a stupendous improvement Fair answer ... thanks. Hadn't thought of it that way. I can get behind that. Still would like to know about the details of the building process. Dex was here. My guess on the build process, based on my experience building POS arrays (which use many of the same materials) and building stuff at a POS: Put the components in the hangar, along with the BPO. Click on the BPO, select manufacturing, do normal job install. Also Im sure the materials to make the fuel blocks will be listed on the BPO as "extra materials needed" which cannot be reduced via research. As for convenience, I got this spreadsheet in which I enter what fuel is in the POS, what is in storage, and how many days I want to fuel to. It tells me what to buy and the total volume of the purchase. I adjust the days until the volume matches that of my hauler, and I got a shopping list. Its a bit of a pain. After this change the shopping list will always be the same. No need to do the inventory, no need for the spreadsheet. Just buy what we cannot make via PI, drop it in the ammo array, run the job. Having to do the manufacturing is an extra step, but it will be faster then doing the inventory. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 127	Posted - 2011.11.07 22:20:00 - [6] - Quote "we were ganked" double post. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 132	Posted - 2011.11.08 17:31:00 - [7] - Quote Nocturrne Primitive wrote: CCP, you are not listening.... We want a response to this question. How does adding extra steps to the POS fueling process make our lives easier? ...No, it doesn't. Repeat this in your mind over and over until you get it. Who is this "we"? You got mice in your pocket? For me it adds one step and removes several others, so its easier. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 132	Posted - 2011.11.08 17:58:00 - [8] - Quote I think having the faction towers at 10% and 20% savings is fine. Faction towers right now do not reduce the need for many fuel types, like robotics. With the new system they will reduce the need for all types, so a smaller percentage is a good balance. There still seem to be 2 concerns for me and seen in some posts. One is the overall increase in heavy water and liquid ozone use. If you mine basic ice, you get for every 12 units of isotopes, 2 units of HW and one of LO. But the blocks require for every 12 units of isotopes 4.5 units of HW and 4.5 of LO, a basic mis-match to the ore. For the high sec dweller who mines their own ice, this is an issue; they will have a WH and LO shortage unless they mine far more. Then they will have an isotope excess. Fixes: Change the fuel block build requirements. Add the other ices to all ice belts (even high sec), things like Dark Glitter and Glare Crust, and let the miners, the market and the sandbox figure it out. (Edit: Or add Dark Glitter and Glare Crust Grav sites to areas that normally do not have such ore). The other issue seems to be the block color. I can take or leave this one, but different colors would be cool. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. The Lostboys 133	Posted - 2011.11.08 19:50:00 - [9] - Quote Brock Nelson wrote: Quote: - is there a strong reason why these need to be unresearchable? I don't have an industry designer on hand right now or I'd ask them :) I disagree with making the fuel block blueprint researchable. Why not make it so that there's no extras? Same as the POS Tower blueprint. The new proposed change are already reducing fuel cost overrall and now you want to make it so that it's even more with researched blueprint? Actually the other way around. The material costs in the blog are for a fully researched BPO. If you do no research, its higher. CCP employees should never proclaim a feature to be awesome. Only subscribers should. Subscribers can never answer a question posed to CCP. Only CCP can.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.