Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
111
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:51:00 -
[331] - Quote
George K'ntara wrote:Dear CCP Greyscale,
So you can't make a faction POS use only 75% of a fuel block.
How about having the faction towers use the block for 133% longer instead.
For example a normal tower consumes one block every hour. A low grade faction tower consumes one block every 80 minutes. A high grade faction tower consumes one block every 100 minutes.
Is there a reason that wouldn't work? That would affect reactions too, as they output every tower tick. Not the way to go
K.I.S.S. Just make it 400 / hour for a regular large and scale that down as necessary for the others, faction, and SOV.
|
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
88
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:52:00 -
[332] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote: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.
Heavy water shortages only exist in the minds of clueless speculators. Ice mining in empire produces much more heavy water than liquid ozone. Even dark glitter, the best source of LO, still produces 1 unit of HW for each 2 units of LO.
Ozone gets used by towers, cynos, and most importantly, jump bridges.
Heavy water gets used by... towers.
I really don't see the demand catching up to the supply any time soon.
|
Camios
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:55:00 -
[333] - Quote
Hi Devs, wile you're at it why don't you take a look to the efficiency of Refining arrays ?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=312464#post312464
35% maximum for the basic ones 75% maximum for the intensive ones
Too big a penaly to refine in a POS. A boost seems reasonable to me...
|
Radix Salvilines
Massive PVPness EntroPraetorian Aegis
15
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:55:00 -
[334] - Quote
"it's impossible to give faction towers a fuel consumption bonus any more (you can't consume 2/3 of a block)."
you guys fell over the simpliest of things...
Give a faction towers an extra option that players may switch on at their whim. This option will make starbases use 2 blocks per 3 hours.
More clearly:
Mode A: 1 hour cycle time/1 block consumed
Mode B: 3 hours cycle time/2 blocks consumed
(this is just a general idea not real numbers) I cant believe how simple is that... |
ED209X
South Park Development
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:57:00 -
[335] - Quote
Yeah, why doesn't skills increase the percentage? |
Frozen Guardian
Registered Amateur Mathematicians
22
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 18:59:00 -
[336] - Quote
To give faction tower bonuses in high-sec, if they match the racial type of the system's NPC faction no charters are needed. In fact actually I don't understand why you can't just get rid of the entire charter system to begin with while doing this fuel change and just require faction standing?
It's more or less a pointless inconvenience than anything as it doesn't come close to breaking the bank in terms of money. Why force people to now calculate that they lose a fuel block of space adding in a random amount of charters? |
BeanBagKing
Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing
13
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:00:00 -
[337] - Quote
CCP Soundwave wrote:Ciar Meara wrote:Most important sentence:
"While we're waiting to do a proper rewrite of the starbase system"
Give us a modular POS, like the great flogger of the dead horse in the sky saw in his dreams! Agree, let's do exactly this.
Wait... wait... what?... did CCP just say they were going to rewrite the starbase system, and like 3 posts not one but two CCP'ers agreed that the flogging a dead horse idea needed to be implemented? What happy alternate universe full of rainbows and unicorns that fart chocolate did I enter into? This is too good to be true... |
Maxsim Goratiev
Imperial Tau Syndicate POD-SQUAD
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:00:00 -
[338] - Quote
Sinq Arnolles wrote:I have to say I hate this idea.
Currently I fuel pos's to 18 days and we have about 40 with the current system I can carry 18 days of fuel for 2 large pos's and a medium at a time in my rorqual that has about ~150k m3. This will only let me carry a large and a medium at once.
So thanks for making me use more jump fuel, spend allot more time having to fuel the damn things and il have to train up another manufacturing alt just to keep up with building the damn fuel blocks. Yeah thanks. Unless you produce all the fuel yourself, why would you want to manufacture all the fuel blocks yourself? Just buy them off the market like you do with the fuel.
And hooray to CCP, I had POS ina WH and it was a horrible pain the ass, i would always forget some fuel type and had to look for another exit before the damn thing goes offline. |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
298
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:03:00 -
[339] - Quote
Frozen Guardian wrote:To give faction tower bonuses in high-sec, if they match the racial type of the system's NPC faction no charters are needed. In fact actually I don't understand why you can't just get rid of the entire charter system to begin with while doing this fuel change and just require faction standing?
It's more or less a pointless inconvenience than anything as it doesn't come close to breaking the bank in terms of money. Why force people to now calculate that they lose a fuel block of space adding in a random amount of charters?
Charters aren't that big of a deal (and they already removed them from being required in lo-sec). And they make role-play sense that you need a contract from the sov owner in order to run a tower. They also provide a small LP sink, which makes other LP stuff worth more due to LP being spent on charters.
|
paik
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:03:00 -
[340] - Quote
Wow!
Im pretty excited I have to admit. I think this is a good change but more importantly I really like the new shift in attitude approach and engaging relationship of devs/players. I find myself shifting from being sad that the game that I love so much one in which I have made so many great friendships is dieing. Now I feel happy and hopefull for what is to come hoping that some of my friends will return and perhaps the game will attract new players.
CCP good show! |
|
HelicoBacter
Lords of Sandbox Bloodbound.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:05:00 -
[341] - Quote
we want sov bonus in 0.0 :P
we wat faction tower bonus :P
we dont want new industrial characters to produce this batches
WHY now large tower consumes 450 isotopes , 5 mechanical parts per hour and after patch 400 and 4 ?:P
if batches make them biger than 4 :P |
darius mclever
9
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:05:00 -
[342] - Quote
Grukni wrote:I sign for more fuel granularity: 40 cubelets instead of 4
Does CCP want to get rid of fuel reduction advantages of faction POSes and Sov? please, CCP, comment on this.
you could have just read the thread and found the posting that they are looking into this.... |
Kiithnaras
Black Ice Protectorate The Imperial Senate
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:05:00 -
[343] - Quote
Everything looks amazing and thanks a ton. Caveat: Faction towers. The operating costs are the main issue, not time to refuel, though that is part, too. I would, to address that, just split each proposed fuel block into 10 equal parts and adjust the production batch sizes to match. That way faction towers can still receive a suitable fuel bonus whilst implementing this awesome system. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:06:00 -
[344] - Quote
I don't think this is as good of a change as many of you believe. Expect this to increase your costs:
1) Fuel blocks - Nice concept. But, we still have to PI fuel and mine ice. And now, we have to manufacture blocks. Either we do that ourselves, adding steps to our fueling process or we purchase the blocks from someone else increasing our costs so they can get compensated. There is good news here, however. There's enough idiots in Eve to probably produce fuel cubes for below market value of the fuel components as is the case in the T3 production. So maybe the price increase will be mitigated.
2) Blueprints - are these going to be BPO's or BPC's. Either way, we now have an additional component to buy, regularly I would bet.
3) Increased fuel demands from faction towers overall increase demand of the entire market. There are a lot of faction towers. So, not only have faction tower operators received increased fuel costs but so has the rest of Eve to accommodate their increased demand.
4) There are no conservation methods available to fuel usage. I.E. You can't offline needless modules and save on ozone and heavy water. Typical of a tower is to have a small amount of cpu and pg unused as you have no module to only to use such a small amount. It's not a big savings or anything but now CCP is utilizing that for us and to a small degree increasing costs.
I'm not seeing how this is making so many people happy. We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
Alec Freeman
The Dark Space Initiative Revival Of The Talocan Empire
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:08:00 -
[345] - Quote
Pfft. Removing faction bonuses is going to render faction towers almost useless and as they are the faction towers are an excellent isk sink for WH dwellers (cant speak for Kspace) because of the sole reason they cost less to fuel each month. The extra time is just a small bonus. It would not be hard to remedy this.
Instead of 1x 50m3 block have 1x 5m3. 10 of these blocks would run a small POS for 1 hours and 7 or 8 would run a faction tower (depending on tier) then just scale up from there (80 blocks for a large tower and 56-64 fuel blocks per hour for large faction depend in tier). Having a "not so simplefied" system would well make up for the bonus recieved from faction towers.
Whoever the "large starbase operators" you have been speaking too are either large nullsec directors who have more isk than sense or a terrible source of information (probably both). |
Crunchmeister
THORN Syndicate BricK sQuAD.
84
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:10:00 -
[346] - Quote
Another change to starbases I would love to is is the ability to anchor reactors anywhere rather than just 0.3 and below. Perhaps even just in 0.4 systems and not in high sec.
Sure, restrict moon mining to 0.3 and below systems, but this would allow industrialists to purchase moon goo from the market and run reactions towers to supply themselves with their own T2 components rather than being dependent on others to do it. |
Vanessa Vansen
Cybermana
8
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:10:00 -
[347] - Quote
GREAT!!!
That's one big step into a good direction ... fuel blocks & timers
Jump Bridges seem to be good to but I can't judge, never used one until now.
|
Brock Nelson
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:12:00 -
[348] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:I don't think this is as good of a change as many of you believe. Expect this to increase your costs:
1) Fuel blocks - Nice concept. But, we still have to PI fuel and mine ice. And now, we have to manufacture blocks. Either we do that ourselves, adding steps to our fueling process or we purchase the blocks from someone else increasing our costs so they can get compensated. There is good news here, however. There's enough idiots in Eve to probably produce fuel cubes for below market value of the fuel components as is the case in the T3 production. So maybe the price increase will be mitigated.
It will take 10 minutes to produce 4 Ice Block, so it will take 5 days to produce a month worth of fuel for a large tower |
HelicoBacter
Lords of Sandbox Bloodbound.
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:13:00 -
[349] - Quote
Alec Freeman wrote:
Instead of 1x 50m3 block have 1x 5m3. .
lol u want to haul pos fuel in frigate ?:P
we need logistic as its one of the profesions in game :P
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
1905
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:15:00 -
[350] - Quote
Great change CCP. I must say you are slowly starting to win my respect back.
Thank you.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
|
Ripard Teg
Selective Pressure Rote Kapelle
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:15:00 -
[351] - Quote
Nye Jaran wrote:Not sure if someone has said this already. Get rid of the fuel blocks concept. Replace it with fuel pellets. Conversion rate from blocks to pellets is 100 pellets for every block.
Building them requires the the same materials (minus heavy water and liquid ozone) but makes 400 pellets instead of 4 blocks, and it takes 10 minutes. A single pellet is .5 m3, or 50m3 per 100 pellets . Fuel consumption is as follows:
Small Regular - 100 pellets / hour Med Regular - 200 pellets / hour Large Regular - 400 pellets / hour I endorse this, and the rest of what's in this post, just divided by 10. Jester's Trek: wherein I ramble about EVE Online, gaming, and from time to time... life. |
Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange Nabaal Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:15:00 -
[352] - Quote
Five second anchor timers? Glory glory hallelujah!
*ahem*
The only part of this I dislike is the loss of faction tower fuel use bonuses. Keep the numbers you've got, but have the fuel block recipe give 40 instead of 4. T1 towers use 10/20/40, tier-1 faction use 9/18/36, and tier-2 faction use 8/16/32. They're relatively round numbers, and you're keeping the bulk of their bonus(which is a big part of their current value) intact. The longer fuel duration is handy, I guess, but the real value is in the cost savings, especially with post-PI fuel prices.
Seriously though, the Mea Culpa expansion is shaping up to be a great one. Keep this up. Late's still better than never. |
Smoking Blunts
Zebra Corp BricK sQuAD.
133
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:17:00 -
[353] - Quote
Brock Nelson wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:I don't think this is as good of a change as many of you believe. Expect this to increase your costs:
1) Fuel blocks - Nice concept. But, we still have to PI fuel and mine ice. And now, we have to manufacture blocks. Either we do that ourselves, adding steps to our fueling process or we purchase the blocks from someone else increasing our costs so they can get compensated. There is good news here, however. There's enough idiots in Eve to probably produce fuel cubes for below market value of the fuel components as is the case in the T3 production. So maybe the price increase will be mitigated. It will take 10 minutes to produce 4 Ice Block, so it will take 5 days to produce a month worth of fuel for a large tower
so 6 pos's per manufaturing slot per month. it ok i guess if you dont actually want to produce anything else with that slot or are running a lot of corp pos's
should be reduced to 1min before the bpo is pe'd
CCP-áare full of words and no action. We will watch what they are doing, for now
|
Callic Veratar
Power of the Phoenix
64
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:18:00 -
[354] - Quote
Chesticular Homicide wrote:Faction fuel pellet blueprints are a terrible idea.
Where would they come from? They wouldn't be BPO's, no faction blueprints are. So, there would end up being a per pellet blueprint cost associated with the pellet, which could end up negating the fuel savings benefit you get from the tower.
All factions have LP stores. Problem solved. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:18:00 -
[355] - Quote
Brock Nelson wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:I don't think this is as good of a change as many of you believe. Expect this to increase your costs:
1) Fuel blocks - Nice concept. But, we still have to PI fuel and mine ice. And now, we have to manufacture blocks. Either we do that ourselves, adding steps to our fueling process or we purchase the blocks from someone else increasing our costs so they can get compensated. There is good news here, however. There's enough idiots in Eve to probably produce fuel cubes for below market value of the fuel components as is the case in the T3 production. So maybe the price increase will be mitigated. It will take 10 minutes to produce 4 Ice Block, so it will take 5 days to produce a month worth of fuel for a large tower
You can't produce more blocks than the supply from PI or Ice. That's called a bottleneck. If you're doing it all yourself, it's going to take you slightly longer to produce that month worth of fuel because now you have to produce blocks. But even if the blocks didn't require time and effort to produce, you can't produce blocks faster than the components you need to build them.
So....moot point is moot? We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
Calistro
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:22:00 -
[356] - Quote
Serious question that I don't think has been covered. Are you planning on removing the arbitrary 5 POSes a corp pr system limit that is currently a leftover from the POS spamming days? Moving reaction chains is a nightmare currently because of this. |
Blancanieves
X-Ray Industries
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:22:00 -
[357] - Quote
I really like the idea of faction fuel blocks whose blueprints produce, e.g., 5 blocks per run instead of 4 for the empire faction towers.
This, on the on hand, lets faction tower owners keep their reduced costs and, on the other hand, makes for more manufacturing work or market niches for the new mini-profession.
Of course, the faction blocks would need the same ingredients (i.e., the same racial isotope) as their empire faction variants.
A few questions (ifthose weren't already answered but I somehow overlooked them):
a.) Will the blueprints' material research and manufacturing skills affect the needed ingredients? I.e., will unexperienced manufacturers with unresearched blueprints use more fuel for their blocks?
b.) Did I read it right and you can really build the blocks in ANY station, i.e., you need no empty manufacturing slot? Will producing them in Jita be possible? |
SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:22:00 -
[358] - Quote
I haven't read past the first couple of pages but overall this change will increase industry costs. That's not to say I don't welcome them, but there is a cost increase.
Industry POSES do not use 150 ozone and heavy water, there are two types.. Research POS which consumes water, and production POS which uses ozone. They normally do not use both equally, and I've never really designed a POS setup which both are used at their maximum consumption. I actually think it's next to impossible, short of throwing up heaps of guns after your research POS is deployed. But a production POS you have no choice, it'll consume power, and lots of it and next to no heavy water.
Some food for thought...
- Normally in High-sec people offline defense/offense to save fuel costs - This is removed so you'll have a thousands more online MODS which I'm sure consume more server resources then offline mods. You will online them because you cost for having them online is no different then with offline so you might as well just run them online.
- Reduction in anchoring time will make POS warfare a little easier for the defenders. - Normally you may anchor lots of additional mods and keep on ready for an attack. This is no longer needed since it takes seconds to anchor. You can store all your mods somewhere and just deploy for corp and anchor when needed. Online time was also reduces making it even more attractive to simple keep an inventory of EWAR mods at your disposal.. You run out of gun.. OK load up on hardeners and EWAR annoy the attackers to no end..
- The Faction POS is now pretty useless, a normal POS would consume the same amount of materials at the same rate. Why use a 1-2billion ISK POS when you can use a sub 500mil ISK tower. Sure you have to fuel it a whopping SIX TIMES more per year, but really the cost of the Faction POS is now not worth it for industrial players.
Personally I don't have any real issue with the changes, but it seems like the only people who contributed to the basic concept lived in 0.0 and don't really handle POS logistics..
It's pretty obvious that not one single high-sec industrial players perspective was asked. One block for a small per hour, but ignoring the cost increase but increased fuel time is not a concern for an industry player. Null sec - hell yeah they would want longer fuel times so that reward seems reasonable. High sec care-bear cares not for this but cares about the bottom line..
Recommendation - One run for Fuel makes 40 blocks, Small uses 10, medium uses 20, large uses 40. Reduce Tier 1 Faction by 10%, Tier 2 Faction by 20%, keep the Fuel bays the same size. |
Jaggins
Ixion Defence Systems Tactical Narcotics Team
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:23:00 -
[359] - Quote
These changes are great! It is so nice to see CCP kicking ass on EVE again. |
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
66
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:23:00 -
[360] - Quote
HelicoBacter wrote:Alec Freeman wrote:
Instead of 1x 50m3 block have 1x 5m3. .
lol u want to haul pos fuel in frigate ?:P we need logistic as its one of the profesions in game :P
Basically:
If i have to set up a Tower with fuel for 1 Month and you have 140k space and have to fuel it with a 10.000 k ship. How many runs do you have to take?
or if you use a Iteron V with 38 k space. it is still a pain in the ass. Yeah you start to love those weekly runs where you are jumping fuel from System A to System B. Great way of spending time. NOT.
DISSONANCE is recruiting Members: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=70361#post70361 Black-Mark Alliance Recruitment: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6710 |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 [12] 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 39 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |