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) |
paik
Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:24:00 -
[361] - 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.
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.
I might be wrong but perhaps you have never had to sit and calculate fuel for several towers. Then when you get to the tower you have to balance the fuel because basic calculations didnt work. Because the LO and HW numbers were always off. O and you didn't dare drag out the existing stack and replace it with the new because that time you did it and tower cycled and went offline. ill happily take tossing fuel in the cooker in a nice station or paying a little extra to buy pellats then dealing with current mechanics. This has now became a much less " lifesucking endeavour".
|
penelope pitbull
Aperture Harmonics K162
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:25:00 -
[362] - Quote
Really happy about the changes, except for 2 things which show this hasn't been worked through enough. Already the prices of HW and LOzone are spiking like crazy, because of the massive increase in future demand created by a) nerfing faction POS's b) removing the benefit of running your POS barebones.
The reason people pay 2 bill and up for a faction POS is mainly because of the reduced running cost, which has the added benefit of requiring less hauling etc. For us wormhole dwellers, making us have to haul even more crap in from empire (thanks for the huge pellet size too - thats just rubbing it in) is a right kick in the spuds.
So, please keep all the changes, but revisit the nerf to faction POS's and think carefully about the effect on logistics. Maybe an option to run at a lower pellet consumption rate with reduced CPU/PG would be cool for example? |
Bjurn Akely
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:26:00 -
[363] - Quote
The only thing I can see that is negative with this is the immersion factor. Sort of like we can now pretend that we actually use machinery and robotics to maintain the station...
But since I'm not a RP geek, I strongly approve and would also want to point out that... NI! |
Brock Nelson
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:27:00 -
[364] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote: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?
You're making 2 wrong assumptions here; 1. People value their time in this game (Free mineral anyone?) 2. POS owners makes their own PI and mines their ice, I think you're forgetting that mining ice and making PI is easily bottable. |
Wiu Ming
Wrecking Shots Morsus Mihi
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:29:00 -
[365] - Quote
Entity wrote:Quote:The one downside of this big-blocks approach is that it's impossible to give faction towers a fuel consumption bonus any more (you can't consume 2/3 of a block). We talked to some large-scale starbase operators about this, and they told us that the main bonus of faction towers for them is actually that they last longer between fuel cycles. To try and compensate for the increased running costs, we've taken the above bay size increases and added +25% bay size on top of that for the "tier 1" faction towers, and +50% bay size for the "tier 2" ones. We're hoping people will find that a satisfactory tradeoff, but we're listening for further feedback on this change. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOThe benefit of faction towers is two-fold: - Longer run time before refuel - Lower cost per period You're basically removing the cost benefit.
eh - i'm strangely ok with this. yeah, the faction tower just got a tiny nerf, but worse things have happened. is it worth giving up in exchange for the new, (relatively) headache-free pellet system? probably.
|
ED209X
South Park Development
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:29:00 -
[366] - Quote
penelope pitbull wrote:Really happy about the changes, except for 2 things which show this hasn't been worked through enough. Already the prices of HW and LOzone are spiking like crazy, because of the massive increase in future demand created by a) nerfing faction POS's b) removing the benefit of running your POS barebones.
The reason people pay 2 bill and up for a faction POS is mainly because of the reduced running cost, which has the added benefit of requiring less hauling etc. For us wormhole dwellers, making us have to haul even more crap in from empire (thanks for the huge pellet size too - thats just rubbing it in) is a right kick in the spuds.
So, please keep all the changes, but revisit the nerf to faction POS's and think carefully about the effect on logistics. Maybe an option to run at a lower pellet consumption rate with reduced CPU/PG would be cool for example?
This I agree with. |
Sam Tully
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:30:00 -
[367] - Quote
Starbases are large commercial/industrial installations analagous to factories and research facilties we have today. It makes sense that they require a wide variety of inputs to maintain and that different facilities can be operated with varying efficiencies.
I didn't think that the number of differnt types of fuels was a major roadblock to starbase operation. I've run multiple towers for years and it's frankly never crossed my mind.
Making us take all the same materials as before and simmer them down into a ubiquitous goo that we then deliver to the tower is not a meaningful change. (And from a gameworld perspective I can't imagine stuff like Robotics or Mechanical Parts will work very well floating in a vat of mystery liquid comprised mainly of radioactive radiator fluid - and that's only if the Oxygen is soluble in the combined liquids in the first place!)
At the end of the day I will be buying or making, hauling, and burning some material to keep a starbase online. That means that whatever the fuel actually is, it's just flavor, and you're watering it down.
You're just trading apples for oranges here, unless somthing significantly impacts (positively or negatively) either our game time or our wallets you are not making much head way.
Above all that though, please continue A) Working on FiS and B) Talking to us about it, this is getting better.
Thanks
Edit: As long as this is happening though, +1 to racial colors for the icons. |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
298
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:30:00 -
[368] - 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
Yeah, that needs to be tuned downward by about a factor of 5x. It should only take you 1 day to produce enough fuel for a large tower in a hi-sec station (1.0x time multiplier). In an ammo array at a POS, that would then go much faster and it wouldn't excessively tie up stations.
(Maybe turn it down a full 10x - to keep from tying up every single manuf line in hi-sec.) |
Wiu Ming
Wrecking Shots Morsus Mihi
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:31:00 -
[369] - Quote
a little off topic, but...
"We're hoping people will find that a satisfactory tradeoff, but we're listening for further feedback on this change."
This line, in one form or another, has been popping up all over the place lately. Seriously, this is huge and the best Christmas present of all. Thank you CCP... |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:32:00 -
[370] - Quote
Brock Nelson wrote:Mr Kidd wrote: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? You're making 2 wrong assumptions here; 1. People value their time in this game (Free mineral anyone?) 2. POS owners makes their own PI and mines their ice, I think you're forgetting that mining ice and making PI is easily bottable.
I think I already addressed your first point. Your second point, POS owners do mine their own ice and do PI their own fuel. I do the PI in my corp for fuel. A bud does the ice mining. But, in either case of producing, not producing POS fuel, yes botters are in the game. Your point? How that changes anything is eluding me.
We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
|
Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express Intrepid Crossing
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:32:00 -
[371] - Quote
I have a question about the blueprints.
Will ME affect in any way what it takes to make the blocks, in other words is there any wastage. I realize probably mostly would just affect isotopes, heavy water and liquid ozone, but it could make a big difference really.
|
Mad Shopper
Mad Industrys
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:33:00 -
[372] - Quote
Entity wrote:Quote:The one downside of this big-blocks approach is that it's impossible to give faction towers a fuel consumption bonus any more (you can't consume 2/3 of a block). We talked to some large-scale starbase operators about this, and they told us that the main bonus of faction towers for them is actually that they last longer between fuel cycles. To try and compensate for the increased running costs, we've taken the above bay size increases and added +25% bay size on top of that for the "tier 1" faction towers, and +50% bay size for the "tier 2" ones. We're hoping people will find that a satisfactory tradeoff, but we're listening for further feedback on this change. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOThe benefit of faction towers is two-fold: - Longer run time before refuel - Lower cost per period You're basically removing the cost benefit. Better solution: Instead of producing 4 fuel blocks per batch, produce like 100 or some other larger quantity per batch (and obviously make the volume per block lower and the blocks consumed/cycle higher). then you can apply fuel reduction bonuses as per usual and everyone will be happy. Again, a lot of people, including me, bought a faction tower to save fuel cost, which is not insignificant. Removing that makes the investment pointless if all it does is give more time between refuels, which with this change would be of questionable value since it will be much easier.
+1
But as a highsec pos owner I would list them in the other. It takes me all of 5-10 min for me to undock from my station, warp to my pos and refuel it. And since my tower will now use 100% LO and HW I'll probably have to refuel the tower MORE often after the patch as I'm well under on PG. |
Dagda Morr
Evolution The Initiative.
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:34:00 -
[373] - Quote
Great work! Next expansion is shaping up to be awesome! |
Gizan
Hounds Of War Bloodbound.
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:35:00 -
[374] - Quote
CynoNet Two wrote:Neo Agricola wrote:Creat Posudol wrote: That actually isn't a real issue, since it's just an investment. You can unanchor and resell it (if it hasn't gotten blown up of course) at any time, getting your "deposit" back :)
yeah. they are still woth 2 bil, because everyone wants them for there reduced Fuel need. oh wait... They're worth 2bil because drop rates for faction POS gear have been ****** for a while, and very few if any new ones show up.
faction tower/module bpc's dont drop anymore cuz ccp was too lazy to change them to require Pi instead of before where it required minerals. instead of re-doing the faction bpc's they just did the "easy" thing and removed them. |
Brock Nelson
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:36:00 -
[375] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:Brock Nelson wrote:You're making 2 wrong assumptions here; 1. People value their time in this game (Free mineral anyone?) 2. POS owners makes their own PI and mines their ice, I think you're forgetting that mining ice and making PI is easily bottable. I think I already addressed your first point. Your second point, POS owners do mine their own ice and do PI their own fuel. I do the PI in my corp for fuel. A bud does the ice mining. But, in either case of producing, not producing POS fuel, yes botters are in the game. Your point? How that changes anything is eluding me.
I owned 4 POS Tower last month and didn't make any PI material or mined ice. My point is that you're assuming that every POS owner produce their own fuel. I don't need to tell you that there are dedicated PI producer that makes the good just to sell it to the market, not because someone wants to cut down T2 production or fuel cost. |
Mentat Cthulhu
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:37:00 -
[376] - Quote
Alec Freeman wrote: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).
The cost is the small bonus! Being able to refill it every 30days instead of 20days is a huge bonus!!! (except maybe if you're poor and run like 1-2 pos in some c2 wh). |
Miraqu
Marquie-X Corp
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:41:00 -
[377] - Quote
Why has it to be 1 - 2 - 4?
Can't a faction tower (large) just use 3? |
Alec Freeman
The Dark Space Initiative Revival Of The Talocan Empire
32
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:43:00 -
[378] - Quote
Mentat Cthulhu wrote:Alec Freeman wrote: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). The cost is the small bonus! Being able to refill it every 30days instead of 20days is a huge bonus!!! (except maybe if you're poor and run like 1-2 pos in some c2 wh).
Errr. You havnt heard of holding extra fuel in your CHA?
+ Grtz HelicoBacter for quoting 1 line out of context. |
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University Ivy League
300
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:45:00 -
[379] - Quote
Neo Agricola wrote: 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.
They make these ships called Orcas, Freighters and Jump Freighters... |
Saikoyu
Rho Dynamics
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:45:00 -
[380] - Quote
Not sure if this got talked about yet, to lazy to read through all of this so I just searched and couldn't find it.
What about starbase charters? They are not menctioned here, so I assume that they will not be a part of the fuel blocks, but will they still be needed for hi-sec POSes? Again I am assuming so, but confirmation would be nice. Thanks. Siakoyu Eblis-Kad Manager of Rho Dynamics Head of Capsuleer operations for New Life Project |
|
Erye Vanwerin
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:46:00 -
[381] - Quote
I love most all of these changes!
That being said.... I have to throw my lot in with giving faction towers more of a bonus. You can argue that decreasing their benefits will drive market prices down a bit but given their rarity I frankly don't think it'd be anything significant; not enough to justify buying one just for the extended periods without refueling for sure.
Faction towers are so expensive that removing the day to day bonus of having one up in space actually makes them an asset liability, something shiny for people to pew for no potential gain whatsoever in return for the operator.
I would argue that for most eve players, it isn't the act of logging in and fueling the tower that is the pain in the rear, it's the act of hauling all of that fuel to the tower itself. It takes up less space to haul 1 month's worth of fuel to a true sansha large than it does an amarr large. The time bonus is completely irrelevant when you notice that you're hauling the same amount of fuel per day/unit hour/etc... It's going to take you the same amout of time overall to fuel the tower per month since you'll be doing the same amount of fuel runs (that is, unless you're using a freighter to fuel your tower, in which case this might actually benefit you. Everyone else won't). |
Crunchmeister
THORN Syndicate BricK sQuAD.
84
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:48:00 -
[382] - Quote
Saikoyu wrote:Not sure if this got talked about yet, to lazy to read through all of this so I just searched and couldn't find it.
What about starbase charters? They are not menctioned here, so I assume that they will not be a part of the fuel blocks, but will they still be needed for hi-sec POSes? Again I am assuming so, but confirmation would be nice. Thanks.
No planned changes to charters. You'll still need them separately from the fuel to run high sec POSes. |
darius mclever
11
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:48:00 -
[383] - Quote
Saikoyu wrote:Not sure if this got talked about yet, to lazy to read through all of this so I just searched and couldn't find it.
What about starbase charters? They are not menctioned here, so I assume that they will not be a part of the fuel blocks, but will they still be needed for hi-sec POSes? Again I am assuming so, but confirmation would be nice. Thanks.
It is even mentioned in the dev blog itself.... |
Raziphan Rebular
Crypsus Tetsuo Shio
27
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:48:00 -
[384] - Quote
Saikoyu wrote:Not sure if this got talked about yet, to lazy to read through all of this so I just searched and couldn't find it.
What about starbase charters? They are not menctioned here, so I assume that they will not be a part of the fuel blocks, but will they still be needed for hi-sec POSes? Again I am assuming so, but confirmation would be nice. Thanks.
In the dev blog the mention star base charters will remain a separate item. So you high sec pos owners you need to load up the blocks and the charters as well. |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:48:00 -
[385] - Quote
Brock Nelson wrote:Mr Kidd wrote:Brock Nelson wrote:You're making 2 wrong assumptions here; 1. People value their time in this game (Free mineral anyone?) 2. POS owners makes their own PI and mines their ice, I think you're forgetting that mining ice and making PI is easily bottable. I think I already addressed your first point. Your second point, POS owners do mine their own ice and do PI their own fuel. I do the PI in my corp for fuel. A bud does the ice mining. But, in either case of producing, not producing POS fuel, yes botters are in the game. Your point? How that changes anything is eluding me. I owned 4 POS Tower last month and didn't make any PI material or mined ice. My point is that you're assuming that every POS owner produce their own fuel. I don't need to tell you that there are dedicated PI producer that makes the good just to sell it to the market, not because someone wants to cut down T2 production or fuel cost.
Nothing you're saying here is wrong. But, supply will remain relatively static while we'll see increased demand. So, yeah, it's telling me fuel costs whether you produce or not, are going up.
I know not every POS owner does PI or mines Ice. But there are quite a few that do. I only do the PI because I only have to look at it once a week. Sometimes less. If I had to micromanage it I swear I'd cut my wrists. On the other hand, I'd be an idiot to ignore the cost savings it provides me for the few minutes a week it requires as presently setup. Robotics, I buy. Too much of a hassle for me to produce where I live and impossible to produce on one planet. We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
Insane Randomness
Among the Shadows Takahashi Alliance
7
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:51:00 -
[386] - Quote
Entity wrote:Quote:The one downside of this big-blocks approach is that it's impossible to give faction towers a fuel consumption bonus any more (you can't consume 2/3 of a block). We talked to some large-scale starbase operators about this, and they told us that the main bonus of faction towers for them is actually that they last longer between fuel cycles. To try and compensate for the increased running costs, we've taken the above bay size increases and added +25% bay size on top of that for the "tier 1" faction towers, and +50% bay size for the "tier 2" ones. We're hoping people will find that a satisfactory tradeoff, but we're listening for further feedback on this change. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NOThe benefit of faction towers is two-fold: - Longer run time before refuel - Lower cost per period You're basically removing the cost benefit. Better solution: Instead of producing 4 fuel blocks per batch, produce like 100 or some other larger quantity per batch (and obviously make the volume per block lower and the blocks consumed/cycle higher). then you can apply fuel reduction bonuses as per usual and everyone will be happy. Again, a lot of people, including me, bought a faction tower to save fuel cost, which is not insignificant. Removing that makes the investment pointless if all it does is give more time between refuels, which with this change would be of questionable value since it will be much easier.
I have a better idea.
Just make the online period longer. Instead of one hour per block (or group of blocks) make it two. Or one and a half. And then leave the fuel bay the same or whatever. Obviously it needs too be balanced, but that seems the obvious solution. |
Blue Harrier
12
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:52:00 -
[387] - Quote
IGÇÖve been talking this change over with my son who does reside in 0.0 and manufactures all the PI stuff to feed 5 POSGÇÖs for his corp.
The one thing we both came up with is the timing of the changeover, we noted the blocks, blueprints and changes to storage would be interlinked in the main update.
But at the same time all custom offices are being removed while the new Player Owned Offices are built to take their place. So PI in low and 0.0 will effectively come to a stand still just at the time when everyone will be clamouring for PI stuff to start making the new blocks and everyone building the new custom office replacements need supplies to build them.
This will mean from his point of view the only way to keep the POSGÇÖs running would be to ship stuff from 0.0 to Empire and back to get the blocks built ready for the next needed re-stock of the POSGÇÖs. We understand there will be a need to stockpile some goods to run the POSGÇÖs but as CCP have stated this would be a 50/50 mix of old and new and you canGÇÖt build new if you canGÇÖt make the parts needed because you donGÇÖt have a custom office to get your stuff on to the planet to make them. The first few weeks should be fun .
|
Sturmwolke
40
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:52:00 -
[388] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:The one downside of this big-blocks approach is that it's impossible to give faction towers a fuel consumption bonus any more (you can't consume 2/3 of a block). We talked to some large-scale starbase operators about this, and they told us that the main bonus of faction towers for them is actually that they last longer between fuel cycles. To try and compensate for the increased running costs, we've taken the above bay size increases and added +25% bay size on top of that for the "tier 1" faction towers, and +50% bay size for the "tier 2" ones. We're hoping people will find that a satisfactory tradeoff, but we're listening for further feedback on this change.
Wtf? Satisfactory? Simple answer, NO. While faction towers have longer refuel cycle, it isn't a major factor for the highsec research industry. Who are these people that you talked to and who interpreted it as such?
Fuel savings is the #1 consideration, without it, having a faction tower is meaningless. Your only solution to increase bay size is poorly thought out since that translates to player effort - which leaves it as a subjective solution. The inherent cost benefit for a faction tower should never be removed or watered down.
Strong suggestion : vary the block consumption rate (e.g. every 36hrs).
Other ideas (which shouldn't really be considered as it waters down the cost benefit) : - give ability for faction towers to use any 4 types of fuel block (meaning it's not locked to any racial isotope types) - unique ability to deploy 1x assembly array to manufacture fuel blocks, with it utilizing 0 PG and 0 CPU (require starbase to be online, shutsdown if re-inforced).
|
Neo Agricola
BLACK-MARK
66
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:53:00 -
[389] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:Neo Agricola wrote: 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.
They make these ships called Orcas, Freighters and Jump Freighters...
Yeah. they are great if you are in Highsec.
But I live in 0.0. There are times when you [d]cant [/d]+ñhm. shouldn't use them. (neuts in System and so on).
And yes. you can jump a JF from System A to System B. But i don't know what you are thinking about risking a 5 Bil. ISK ship for transporting Fuel from System A to B, well I hope you got the point...
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 |
Avila Cracko
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
81
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 19:55:00 -
[390] - Quote
some ppl talk about BPCs... will we buy faction fuel BPCs in faction LP store? |
|
|
|
|
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 |