Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
|

CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
492

|
Posted - 2014.01.16 17:55:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hey everyone.
Team Game of Drones is doing extensive investigation and discovery work for Science & Industry in EVE (referred to as S&I) as a part of a larger effort of getting insight into the current player preferences and user behavior related to S&I.
Please take the survey and help us improve the game - Your opinion matters!
http://industry.questionpro.com
Fly safe, @CCP_Arrow CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Game Design Director -á|-á-áEVE Online -á|-á-á@CCP_Arrow |
|

Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
252
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 17:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
"Oops! Google Chrome could not find industry.questionpro.com+" If in doubt...do...excessively. |

Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1175
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 18:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest
could you please also try and reduce the clickfest ?
oh, and less clicks please :)
the amount of essentially free production lines in highsec is too damn high We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Banner was used for this Post |

Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
176
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 18:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
A lot of great questions are being asked in this poll. I really liked to hear the parts about delegation, especially. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |

Abramul
StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome.
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 18:11:00 -
[5] - Quote
Better in-game option for build cost calculation. Ideally, should use player-entered price rather than just looking at regional average. "If I mine it, it's free", after all.
Less BPC clutter. |

Circumstantial Evidence
100
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 19:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
Love EVE surveys! Much less messy for developers, than sorting through a ton of forum responses, that everyone writes in different ways. I liked the text box for the open ended question "How would you improve things?" - left a short novel. |

ManWhoSoldTheWorld
For Queen and Country
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 19:25:00 -
[7] - Quote
Please Please Please let us select the first available line with a single click/enter key press. |

Bertrand Prout
Sunday Sessions
38
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 19:41:00 -
[8] - Quote
I'd like to see the ME, PE and runs on my BPC icon without clicking show info or going by the blueprint window. That window is way too slow when you have thousands of BPCs.
Edit: did the survey but I forgot to add that one. |

Grarr Dexx
Snuff Box
307
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 19:44:00 -
[9] - Quote
Answered it and also gave my opinion on how reactions and other tower processes could be improved. |

Random Woman
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
118
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 19:52:00 -
[10] - Quote
Just change PI and reactions to something else, honestly I cant think of many things that would make those activities worse (well old PI was). But even if CCP software engineering is at works, and breaks those things completly like its tends to to, it will have improved the overall game, as nobody has to suffer through the process of making a strong booster at a pos again. |
|

mxzf
Fairweather Ice Cream Co
2161
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 19:52:00 -
[11] - Quote
I filled out the survey.
Personally, I believe that the single most significant S&I change from an effort/benefit standpoint is to make it so that you can batch start production/research/invention jobs that are identical. It would be a MASSIVE QoL improvement for anyone that does medium to large-scale production. |

probag Bear
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 19:54:00 -
[12] - Quote
"How many Tech 1 blueprint originals (BPOs) do you currently own?"
Is this asking how many individual BPOs I own, or how many kinds of BPOs? Because I've got 10 copies of nearly every BPO I own, and I'm not entirely sure I belong to the 80+ group CCP was thinking of when they formulated this survey. |

Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
3082
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 20:01:00 -
[13] - Quote
I learned about this thread through Reddit, since CCP rarely ever posts in the Science & Industry forum, except to moderate  |

Batolemaeus
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
26
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 20:01:00 -
[14] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest
could you please also try and reduce the clickfest ?
oh, and less clicks please :)
the amount of essentially free production lines in highsec is too damn high
Yeah, that.
Also, how about we have a chat about this on coldfront. It's not like there are many people who do S&I, really. |

Liner Xiandra
Sparks Inc Zero Hour Alliance
266
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 20:16:00 -
[15] - Quote
Please rip out all the tabular presented data, my out of game calculators already are enough to cope with. (my out of game tools are also giving me an advantage over the average player, so please don't dumb it down enough to make me lose my edge )
I think S&I could be well served if it was represented as industrial process diagrams, (work your ISIS magic please) which you could configure to do: - N runs of Product - run for N amount of time - run continuously;
and use your pos modules/station hangers as hoppers that you could top off if needed. Eliminating manual selection of production lines in the process.
And try to sort out the needed corporate roles in the process. Alliance level access, renting out production facilities, proper access management. I'd like to cooperate my builds with corp members, but setting up restricted access between various corp members is a major headache if not impossible; and it stops me from recruiting new players.
|

Nicen Jehr
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
326
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 20:46:00 -
[16] - Quote
In the 'How would you make S&I better if you were in charge?' question I answered:
Quote:I would add the ability to pipe minerals from my hangar into a production chain... Let me set up a system that produces two rifters per day up to n total if minerals are available in my items hangar. Then let me set up a rush job for a navy vexor that takes precedence so other jobs stop taking minerals, and the navy vexor starts production as soon as the minerals are in the hangar.
This lets me approach production as a side job, like market trading. I can use a courier contract or market order or my own hauler to drop off the minerals, or I can just skip it and nothing gets produced for a while. Little Things to improve GëíGïüGëí-á| My Little Things posts |

probag Bear
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
11
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 20:46:00 -
[17] - Quote
Comment about the survey itself: the page asking "Which step of S&I would benefit the most from" does not have the option "No step would benefit". I bring this up only because I feel this to be the case for 2 / 3 things on that page. |

Dunk Dinkle
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
13
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 20:49:00 -
[18] - Quote
The first you should see when choosing Manufacturing off a blueprint should be the materials list showing how many you can build with materials in your hangar. The current process is backwards.
Thanks for looking into this! |

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2550
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 21:01:00 -
[19] - Quote
I put this in my survey response as well: https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/2013/11/24/retooling-industry-eve-blue-sky/ https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/2013/05/12/renting-player-slots-reworking-industry/ https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/2012/11/20/industry-iteration/ Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |

Jax Revelos
Airkio Mining Corp Gentlemen's Agreement
6
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 21:14:00 -
[20] - Quote
Bertrand Prout wrote:I'd like to see the ME, PE and runs on my BPC icon without clicking show info or going by the blueprint window. That window is way too slow when you have thousands of BPCs.
Edit: did the survey but I forgot to add that one.
This |
|

CirroWing
Sky Boxers Northern Associates.
15
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 21:16:00 -
[21] - Quote
'Which of the following S&I activities are you currently most/least happy with? (Choose all that apply).'
'happy' in this context is a pretty vague question, as developers you probably mean happy as in which activity do we think needs UI/other development iterations the most, as opposed to happy as in which activity we enjoy/loathe most. |

Zendon Taredi
Tier Four Technologies
45
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 21:47:00 -
[22] - Quote
t2 is profitable because people cannot handle the clicking. let's not change that. 
more clicks! |

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2609
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 22:00:00 -
[23] - Quote
Odd, I did not get the 'How would you make S&I better if you were in charge?' question. Instead I got one on cooperative S&I. Something about having better monitoring tools for who is contributing what.
What I said is a do not want any such tools. I want it built into the game so its inherent. An example is the current market you get at any station. Example:
Miners mine, and place their minerals up for sale. Builds buy it, and the miners get paid for their effort. No one need keep track of how many hours who mined what. No tools are needed. Its all inherent in the system.
But its not really "cooperative industry game play". The market is faceless, there is no need for all who contribute to be in the same corp or know each other.
Going back to my mining example, it all falls apart if its a multi-person mining op where people dump their ore in an orca. One person takes it to station. Now how do you make sure everyone is paid? Many solutions have been found, but all require someone to do a bunch of work sorting out payments.
What if instead the miners SOLD ore to the hauling ship? That is the ship had a market built in? The hauler sets buy orders for the ore. Then sits back and watches the ore come in while the ISK goes out. No additional effort is needed to insure everyone is paid for their effort. Not tools are needed to track contributions. Its all inherent.
For bigger projects there could be corp owned and alliance owned markets. This lets a big task get coordinated just by setting buy and sell orders. As an incentive, broker fees and taxes would be less. (And maybe increased at NPC stations).
Such private markets would also help with the case of an industrialist being asked to build 200 PvP Thrashers, with various different fits. Make everything, fit all the different ships, keep them sorted by fit.. its a pain. Better would be to give the users the ISK and let the them fit their own ships, buying the parts off the corp market.
CCP; if you want to foster cooperative S&I play, you need to make it so cooperation is easier (or at least no harder) than buying and selling on the market, and most likely with an ISK savings to boot. Right now the game punishes trying to be cooperative. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |

baltoxtdl
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 22:06:00 -
[24] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest
could you please also try and reduce the clickfest ?
oh, and less clicks please :)
the amount of essentially free production lines in highsec is too damn high
that would be same as giving turrets/missiles ability to work same as drones, automatic killing stuff around you. |

Frickin Rhino
Criminally Incompetent
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 22:10:00 -
[25] - Quote
Save PI Configurations like you can save fittings, but rather than by ship or class, by planet type... allow corp PI configs too. This will make peeps with 5+ accounts not want to rip their eyeballs out when moving and setting up 30 new planets. |

Summer Isle
Autumn Industrial Enterprises
16
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 22:17:00 -
[26] - Quote
Some of these questions needs a "does not apply or not involved with" option for the things we have no involvement in, and have no real clue about. I feel odd answering "easy" or "hard" on, say, Capital manufacturing, Star Base reactions, deployment, etc., considering I have absolutely no involvement with any of them, and can't give an accurate opinion for it. |

Sabriz Adoudel
Mission BLITZ
1773
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 23:13:00 -
[27] - Quote
Feedback provided.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=238931 - an idea for a new form of hybrid PVE/PVP content. EVE's golden rule: Never trust anyone in-game unless you are sleeping with them in real life. Even then, they may only be screwing you to screw you. |

Kismeteer
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
576
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 23:23:00 -
[28] - Quote
One man's S&I is another man's Logistical nightmare. Good luck fixing this stuff. |

Nex Killer
Drunk3n Industry
49
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 23:33:00 -
[29] - Quote
Frickin Rhino wrote:Save PI Configurations like you can save fittings, but rather than by ship or class, by planet type... allow corp PI configs too. This will make peeps with 5+ accounts not want to rip their eyeballs out when moving and setting up 30 new planets.
This 100x this! I would love to save my PI setups so I can trade or share them with my other accounts! |

Markku Laaksonen
EVE University Ivy League
325
|
Posted - 2014.01.16 23:34:00 -
[30] - Quote
Some kind of integration with DUST would be nice. DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/
EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
|
|

Sheeana Harb
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
3
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 00:00:00 -
[31] - Quote
Survey completed.
On a sidenote, given the amount of attention S&I quality of life has received over the past years, pretty much any (upcoming) change is welcome. |

RetardedNeuron
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 00:14:00 -
[32] - Quote
Here was my suggestion: a new mobile structure(s) specifically for researching/coping BPOs.
I know, I'm crazy, but hear me out. For new players coming into Eve, if they want to do industry, the major hurdle is either setting up a POS or finding a corp to do join that already. Obviously these new players are not going to have great expensive BPOs, but they can certainly get some of the noob friendly T1 BPOs. Now, if this structure REQUIRED that the BPO be in it, and had a reinforce timer, there would be some great opportunities for player content.
Younger players can get into the industry game faster, PvP is always a possibility, and of course the stucture would be appropriately balanced so that a POS far outdid it. Perhaps double the station research time, etc.
Anyhow, food for thought.
|

Xurr
Angelic Insurrection Corp
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 01:55:00 -
[33] - Quote
Hey CCP,
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want 150bil in BPOs stolen.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want my jobs to be canceled for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want them to be able to shoot my freighters for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want the fuel dumped out of my POS for the lulz.
|

Fix Lag
703
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 02:54:00 -
[34] - Quote
Yeah if POS roles weren't so horrendous that giving someone fuel access to one tower meant they could turn off every tower, that'd be great.
But saying that just reminds me of how POS roles have been supposed to be redone for the last half decade... CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude. |

Cloaky McWarpStab
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 03:34:00 -
[35] - Quote
Xurr wrote:Hey CCP,
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want 150bil in BPOs stolen.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want my jobs to be canceled for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want them to be able to shoot my freighters for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want the fuel dumped out of my POS for the lulz.
Isn't trust a key game play element? |

Nex Killer
Drunk3n Industry
49
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 03:56:00 -
[36] - Quote
Markku Laaksonen wrote:Some kind of integration with DUST would be nice.
I think that is the master plan. This is from the fanfest Dust514 thing: http://imgur.com/a/lvm0L |

TheMercenaryKing
StarFleet Enterprises Almost Awesome.
109
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 04:03:00 -
[37] - Quote
Tech 2 Capital Manufacturing?
Supers or something you guys just did an OOPS moment? |

Xurr
Angelic Insurrection Corp
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 04:12:00 -
[38] - Quote
TheMercenaryKing wrote:Tech 2 Capital Manufacturing?
Supers or something you guys just did an OOPS moment?
Jump freighters. |

Phoenix Jones
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
395
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 04:41:00 -
[39] - Quote
Allow bpo's to be researched at alliance pos's properly (from your personal storage array and/or from your station item area (private one not the corporation shared one).
Allow people to rent out pos modules.
Fix the damn ore reprocessing modules in the pos (its science and industry).
Assembly of a t3 in a pos array would be nice (dunno if they fixed that). The wormhole guys would like it.
Need more PI based manufacturing goods (smaller ones). Nanite repair paste is great, need more though. Stabbers are totally broken
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15116553
|

Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
84
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 05:32:00 -
[40] - Quote
Filled it out, still mildly agitated I couldn't leave the question "what are you most happy about" blank.
In all seriousness, I have next to no faith anything is going to change until a dev sits down and tries to make some income. Let's say the value of a plex for a month or two. If that happens, all the flaws with the current system should be fairly self evident and I'd look forward to some changes. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven. |
|

Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
85
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 05:39:00 -
[41] - Quote
baltoxtdl wrote:Gilbaron wrote:reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest
could you please also try and reduce the clickfest ?
oh, and less clicks please :)
the amount of essentially free production lines in highsec is too damn high that would be same as giving turrets/missiles ability to work same as drones, automatic killing stuff around you.
There'd be an incredible shitstorm if turrets worked like installing S&I jobs.
There'd be no weapon grouping. You'd have to push F1, select a target through a nested window, type in the number of rounds you'd like to fire, hit enter twice and repeat that for each turret and launcher. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven. |

Zoldarion Katelo
Void.Tech Get Off My Lawn
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 07:48:00 -
[42] - Quote
less clicks please, that is all! |

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
860
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 08:58:00 -
[43] - Quote
I'd like to thank CCP for this survey, and also report that the question a 3x3 table where every line can only contain one choice was very... disconcerting. (The one about "At the beggining" "In the middle" "At the end" of the S&I process)
Also, the question about the area of space where we make the most S&I was frustrating since you could only tick one element.
PS : Oh and yes, less clickfest. Also if you happen to touch the hacking minigame, less clickfest would also be a plus :D Don't know if it is directly related to S&I. I'm signature tanking !
|

Mira Taras
Minion Powered Bomb Construction
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 09:06:00 -
[44] - Quote
Just some ideas:
1) Let me create folders in the blueprint / corp blueprint overview.
2) Reduce the clickfest.
Would be nice to have at least something like the save option from the sales options menu.
Really nice would be a graphical overhaul of the job creation page. Let us create and bookmark jobs, based on our owned blueprints: like build 10 Damage Controls Give us a graphical list of all available production lanes on the left, the list of our bookmarked jobs on the right so i can just drop the wished job into the lane and be done. Show me the jobs as long as i have an unused blueprint that the jobs needs. So if i have 3 DC blueprints i could drop it 3 times in my lanes, then the job will be hidden in the list. Copying and Invention could be similar.
S&I is a repetitive job, so cater the gui around it please.
Non repetive tasks, like ME&PE research can still use the drag and drop, just give all available blueprints in the right list. Let me then set the wanted amount of research with mousewheel or something.
3) Improve blueprint informations. Let me see ME&PE in the symbol or something. |

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2554
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 10:07:00 -
[45] - Quote
Cloaky McWarpStab wrote:Xurr wrote:Hey CCP,
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want 150bil in BPOs stolen.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want my jobs to be canceled for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want them to be able to shoot my freighters for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want the fuel dumped out of my POS for the lulz.
Isn't trust a key game play element?
The thing is:
What's the benefit of working in the same corp as another player, from an industrial stand point? (Rather than a looser association. Not an alliance, as that just makes you a more attractive target for war decs, but grouping you together for a single dec)
I can only think of one. Standings, for anchoring POS. If everyone is careful not to have standings which mess with the chosen faction. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |

Aineko Macx
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
282
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 10:42:00 -
[46] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:What's the benefit of working in the same corp as another player, from an industrial stand point?
I can only think of one. Standings, for anchoring POS. If everyone is careful not to have standings which mess with the chosen faction. While it can be a benefit, the standings are an obstacle most of the time. I'd get rid of the standing requirements for anchoring POS altogether.
Other potential benefits of working in the same corps: - Separation of duties (specialization) - Sharing of underutilized BPOs and POS - Timezone coverage |

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2554
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 11:18:00 -
[47] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:What's the benefit of working in the same corp as another player, from an industrial stand point?
I can only think of one. Standings, for anchoring POS. If everyone is careful not to have standings which mess with the chosen faction. While it can be a benefit, the standings are an obstacle most of the time. I'd get rid of the standing requirements for anchoring POS altogether. Other potential benefits of working in the same corps: - Separation of duties (specialization) - Sharing of underutilized BPOs and POS - Timezone coverage
Separation of duties: A corp doesn't help with this. a loose association does it as well, without the risk of losing your stuff.
Sharing: True. Can't argue with this one.
Timezone Coverage: Not a huge issue for an industrial corp, except for defence
I would like there to be more reasons to be in a corp, but it requires more safeguards on your stuff, to stop it from being nicked by someone. Personal production facilities would help here, rather than global POS ones. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |

Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
338
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 11:22:00 -
[48] - Quote
mxzf wrote:batch start production/research/invention jobs that are identical
This. And if the client would remember the last used values that would help a hell of a lot.
Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene. |

Rodrik Vikary
EVE University Ivy League
8
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 11:40:00 -
[49] - Quote
I've answered this survey yesterday, even though my knowledge in the area of S&I is very low. I mainly do PI, which was hard in the beggining (lost some isk having to rebuild after noticing mistakes) but now it is really easy.
My main problem with S&I is that, it seems there are just too many skills for it. I can't begin to understand what all those Science skills are used for and I think the information should be more ingame than now. Right now there is too much info that I need to search elsewhere to understand how things work since I'm a new player here (6 months).
I understand the need for specialization with EVE but it seems like getting into S&I is practically impossible for people like me and I believe in a sandbox, all aspects of the game should be a little bit easier to understand and to begin. The most manufacturing I've done so far was getting a BPC and using it, like in the tutorials, because the rest is kind of a mystery to me. |

probag Bear
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 12:03:00 -
[50] - Quote
Ugh, completely forgot about this during the survey. Doing the daily S&I reminded me:
Either something must be done about be 1000 item cap, or BPC must be made stackable. As it stands, organizing BPCs is a nightmare of overflow containers, since each container can only hold 1000 copies. |
|

Sable Moran
Moran Light Industries
338
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 12:13:00 -
[51] - Quote
Rodrik Vikary wrote:My main problem with S&I is that, it seems there are just too many skills for it.
??
For T1 manufacturing there's only one mandatory skill and three optional (although one of the three really is really important and the other two are quite useful too). Four is not that many wouldn't you agree  
Anyway, maybe these help:
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Manufacturing https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Blueprints https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Research_and_manufacturing https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Researching_blueprints https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Invention
A lot of reading but that really is unavoidable. Sable's Ammo Shop at Alentene V - Moon 4 - Duvolle Labs Factory. Hybrid charges, Projectile ammo, Missiles, Drones, Ships, Need'em? We have'em, at affordable prices. Pop in at our Ammo Shop in sunny Alentene. |

probag Bear
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
12
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 12:37:00 -
[52] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote:While it can be a benefit, the standings are an obstacle most of the time.
Due to the way corporation standings update, as long as all your S&I alts have null standings as they should, you only need to hire a standings booster once. After corp standings update to the booster's standings, they will never change again. |

Rodrik Vikary
EVE University Ivy League
8
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 12:57:00 -
[53] - Quote
Then what are all those Science skills for?! Kidding, I know for T1 it is a little more basic stuff (I was able to manufacture my own Astero anyway) but it feels like there is so much more to it that I don't know and I need to check wikis to understand. I don't mind reading wikis, but more information should be available ingame I think (and newbie friendly too =] ).
Anyway, thanks for the links, I'll try to uncover those misteries as soon as I return from my little vacation! |

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2554
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 12:57:00 -
[54] - Quote
Rodrik Vikary wrote:I've answered this survey yesterday, even though my knowledge in the area of S&I is very low. I mainly do PI, which was hard in the beggining (lost some isk having to rebuild after noticing mistakes) but now it is really easy.
My main problem with S&I is that, it seems there are just too many skills for it. I can't begin to understand what all those Science skills are used for and I think the information should be more ingame than now. Right now there is too much info that I need to search elsewhere to understand how things work since I'm a new player here (6 months).
I understand the need for specialization with EVE but it seems like getting into S&I is practically impossible for people like me and I believe in a sandbox, all aspects of the game should be a little bit easier to understand and to begin. The most manufacturing I've done so far was getting a BPC and using it, like in the tutorials, because the rest is kind of a mystery to me.
T1 manufacturing has 5 skills which affect it: Industry: Time to make something (and as a requirement) Production Efficiency: The additional waste due to low skill. Supply Chain Networking: Start jobs remotely. Mass Production and Advanced Mass Production: for additional lines.
T1 research (ME, PE, copying) Lab operations, Advanced Lab operations: number of slots you have. Metallurgy: reduces ME research time. Research: reduces PL research time Scientific Networking: remote jobs.
T2 manufacturing has additional skill requirements for actually making the thing. No 'modifier' skills.
T2 /invention/ requires a bunch of science skills. You can get started with just 2. More open up more blueprints to invent from. You also need at least one Encryption methods skill. Other than that, it's the regular skills for research.
T3 needs some more skills (I've not touched it yet).
Refining needs some skills too, to reduce the waste.
So, all in all, not really /that/ many skills needed. Compare it to PvP.
Edit (I posted late, due to work expecting me to actually do some work): Getting the information /in/ game isn't that easy to do, when it's as wide ranging as it is.
Mostly, referring people to the wiki makes sense. As it's 'official' documentation for the game. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |

Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
1205
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 14:09:00 -
[55] - Quote
Survey completed. Now don't tease us with a survey and not do anything, I know what you lot are like you scallywags  Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up! |

Markku Laaksonen
EVE University Ivy League
327
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 14:28:00 -
[56] - Quote
Cloaky McWarpStab wrote:Xurr wrote:Hey CCP,
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want 150bil in BPOs stolen.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want my jobs to be canceled for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want them to be able to shoot my freighters for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want the fuel dumped out of my POS for the lulz.
Isn't trust a key game play element?
I trust my alts. (I don't have alts. ) DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/
EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
|

Xurr
Angelic Insurrection Corp
71
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 15:49:00 -
[57] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Aineko Macx wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:What's the benefit of working in the same corp as another player, from an industrial stand point?
I can only think of one. Standings, for anchoring POS. If everyone is careful not to have standings which mess with the chosen faction. While it can be a benefit, the standings are an obstacle most of the time. I'd get rid of the standing requirements for anchoring POS altogether. Other potential benefits of working in the same corps: - Separation of duties (specialization) - Sharing of underutilized BPOs and POS - Timezone coverage Separation of duties: A corp doesn't help with this. a loose association does it as well, without the risk of losing your stuff. Sharing: True. Can't argue with this one. Timezone Coverage: Not a huge issue for an industrial corp, except for defence I would like there to be more reasons to be in a corp, but it requires more safeguards on your stuff, to stop it from being nicked by someone. Personal production facilities would help here, rather than global POS ones.
You can argue with the sharing of underutilized BPOs.
Ok so you lock them down. If you don't have all the shares of the corp then they are still at risk. Ask bad bobby how sharing locked down BPOs works out.
If only one person in the corp owns BPOs to be locked down and they own all the shares and they set up the roles for a single division at a single station I think you still face the issue of them being able to cancel jobs. I'm not 100% on that as I don't feel like finding out the hard way.
If you wanted to have multiple people sharing multiple BPOs you'd face lock down issues, you'd face a lack of divisions, if you wanted to 5 or 10 people access to a group of BPOs in one division in one station they could still steal from each other.
|

Batolemaeus
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 16:40:00 -
[58] - Quote
Cloaky McWarpStab wrote: Isn't trust a key game play element?
No.
Handling trust is the single most important thing in Eve, not trust itself.
The problem is how the corp interface does not facilitate handing out trust in proper doses. It is all or nothing. Give someone the roles to fuel a POS, and he can bring down every single POS you have. Give someone some shares, and come back after a week's vacation to find your entire corp stripped and taken over.
The problems of S&I, beyond the clickfest, are a collision of S&I with corp roles, hangar management and unintuitive rights management combined with a lack of granular roles.
I'd love to be able to, say, rent out my unused BPO portfolio to others, but in doing so I am opening myself up to tremendous risks that I do not feel adequately equipped for, because managing rights is confusing and error prone.
Seriously, managing ACL in a Windows Active Directory environment, which is what I do at work, is LESS error prone and confusing than Eve's corp role management. MS is definitely not known for clear-cut designs, you know... |

Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
394
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 17:02:00 -
[59] - Quote
Survey filled out. From the sort of questions they're asking,looks like they're trying to kill off the single player S&I corps by forcing it to be a cooperative action. What next, one person to power the mining laser and another to aim it?
Unless your thread is limited to how 'awesum!' Eve Online is, ISD will lock the thread.-á You will find it is particularly common if CCP might have to make a public response to the thread subject, as opposed to bury it in the GM que for the forseeable future and then prohibit telling anyone what the GM said, if it's ever answered at all. |

Batolemaeus
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 17:12:00 -
[60] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Survey filled out. From the sort of questions they're asking,looks like they're trying to kill off the single player S&I corps by forcing it to be a cooperative action. What next, one person to power the mining laser and another to aim it?
Did you just try to out-bitter me? I thought that was impossible. |
|

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2555
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 17:19:00 -
[61] - Quote
I'd be surprised if they make current things unable to be done by an individual.
New things, or making it easier/safer/less insane to do in a group is possible though. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |

Xurr
Angelic Insurrection Corp
71
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 17:43:00 -
[62] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:Survey filled out. From the sort of questions they're asking,looks like they're trying to kill off the single player S&I corps by forcing it to be a cooperative action. What next, one person to power the mining laser and another to aim it?
Don't forget about the people needed to pick up the ore spew. |

Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1182
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 21:23:00 -
[63] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:I'd be surprised if they make current things unable to be done by an individual.
New things, or making it easier/safer/less insane to do in a group is possible though.
first they need to find something that can't be solved by throwing more alts at the problem. definitely a non-trivial task. We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Banner was used for this Post |

Batolemaeus
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
29
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 22:07:00 -
[64] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:I'd be surprised if they make current things unable to be done by an individual.
New things, or making it easier/safer/less insane to do in a group is possible though. first they need to find something that can't be solved by throwing more alts at the problem. definitely a non-trivial task.
Invention minigame, requiring constant solving of the hacking minigame while docked in station.
You heard it here first. |

Elgin Stone
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 22:13:00 -
[65] - Quote
The S&I survey is broken. |

Kumduh
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
9
|
Posted - 2014.01.17 23:09:00 -
[66] - Quote
Mentioned this in the survey, but from the perspective of someone doing exploration, a lot of the stuff we pick up from data sites isn't even worth the cargo space.
An Occult Tuner Data Interface for example. For the most part, all the mats used to make it are dirt cheap, less than a thousand ISK, but their weight is1m^3 each. In total it would take 89m^3 of my precious cargo space to make a data tuner which sells for a whopping 800k. It simply isn't worth the cargo space, and is easier to just eject it into space. So I guess for starters you could lower the volume of things like Auxiliary Parts so that they are even worth carrying to the market. |

Gloria Stephson
Star circle
2
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 05:29:00 -
[67] - Quote
Batolemaeus wrote:Gilbaron wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:I'd be surprised if they make current things unable to be done by an individual.
New things, or making it easier/safer/less insane to do in a group is possible though. first they need to find something that can't be solved by throwing more alts at the problem. definitely a non-trivial task. Invention minigame, requiring constant solving of the hacking minigame while docked in station. You heard it here first.
That would seriously make me want to slit my wrists.
Like many others I run a alt indy corp, because the way corp role mangment works. I will not risk my BPO and material stockpiles by letting in other players inside my corp. |

Nex Killer
Drunk3n Industry
49
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 06:44:00 -
[68] - Quote
I can't find the post but someone had an idea for BPC that I really liked. They said what if you could take BPCs of the same ME/PE and combine them into one big BPC. So lets say you had 100 BPC of something but they all had different runs left you could combine for a fee and make them into one big BPC. That would be cool :D |

Sister Sinescha
Joint Venture Engineering Special Circumstances Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 07:20:00 -
[69] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest
could you please also try and reduce the clickfest ?
oh, and less clicks please :)
the amount of essentially free production lines in highsec is too damn high
I wouldn't say the number of production lines is too high. You often have to go to some backwater systems to not have a wait. Its just that the demand for the product is not necessarily balanced with the production capability. Since you are in a null-sec alliance, I am assuming you are comparing the number of lines in highsec with the number available in null-sec. Null-sec industry is so bad it is a joke. Trying to supply a null-sec region with its available production lines is like trying to put out a raging hi-rise fire with a dixie-cup of water.
However, less clicks, please.
|

Sister Sinescha
Joint Venture Engineering Special Circumstances Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 07:23:00 -
[70] - Quote
Gloria Stephson wrote: Like many others I run a alt indy corp, because the way corp role mangment works. I will not risk my BPO and material stockpiles by letting in other players inside my corp.
There's nothing about manufacturing that can't be done better with a few alts. There's no go way to delegate your work to someone else that doesn't put you in a position to be completely ****** over and robbed blind. |
|

Bremir Sol
Solar Ventures Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 16:51:00 -
[71] - Quote
Nex Killer wrote:I can't find the post but someone had an idea for BPC that I really liked. They said what if you could take BPCs of the same ME/PE and combine them into one big BPC. So lets say you had 100 BPC of something but they all had different runs left you could combine for a fee and make them into one big BPC, would be nice for Tech 2 BPCs. That would be cool :D
I left this exact feedback in the survey. The ability to split or consolidate BPCs with similar levels would be incredible. For instance, splitting a single 10 run BPC into 10 one run BPCs, so I can queue them all at once. Mind you, queue them all at once through the new and improved non-click-festy interface, of course. Or, conversely, take a bunch of different run BPCs and combine them into a single larger BPC, up to the maximum possible run count, of course.
The first part would actually be equivalent to not locking up the BPC in the job, so you can run concurrent jobs from it. The whole thing, in fact, could have a much simpler interface - just input {number of jobs} x {number of runs}, drop in a bunch of BPCs with enough runs to cover the total, and click OK.
|

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2558
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 16:56:00 -
[72] - Quote
Being able to combine blueprints would be a game changer.
As it would mean you could keep your production lines running 24x7 in T2 production. This wouldn't improve your productivity. It would reduce the price for those items with a less than 24 hour run time. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |

Liner Xiandra
Sparks Inc Zero Hour Alliance
266
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 19:25:00 -
[73] - Quote
Some more means to disrupt your competitors would be nice as well.
Currently we can: - Increase POCO tax, -Wardec corp to take down POS
and that is pretty much it.
Highsec production slots are too plentyful, too anonimous, too cheap. Hauling can be solved with out of corp alts; and station traders (strictly not S&I) are immune to everything and everyone.
I guess this is way out of scope/reasonable but I'd like to be able to hire Dust mercenaries (or some other mechanic) to engage rival PI extractors; or blow up their production lines. Or clear out some drone infestation and have my own PI efficiency get back to 100%. Hack their hisec invention laboraties.
|

Belmarduk
Followers of Chuthulu
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.18 19:35:00 -
[74] - Quote
Gilbaron wrote:reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest
could you please also try and reduce the clickfest ?
oh, and less clicks please :)
the amount of essentially free production lines in highsec is too damn high
THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!!
|

Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:24:00 -
[75] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:Cloaky McWarpStab wrote:Xurr wrote:Hey CCP,
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want 150bil in BPOs stolen.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want my jobs to be canceled for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want them to be able to shoot my freighters for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want the fuel dumped out of my POS for the lulz.
Isn't trust a key game play element? The thing is: What's the benefit of working in the same corp as another player, from an industrial stand point? (Rather than a looser association. Not an alliance, as that just makes you a more attractive target for war decs, but grouping you together for a single dec) I can only think of one. Standings, for anchoring POS. If everyone is careful not to have standings which mess with the chosen faction.
No one likes to be ganked or wardecced but without those two elements EVE Online would not be EVE Online anymore. 
Bringing up the obvious yet again but the one thing that has to be fixed by CCP to enable industrial cooperation is to fix Corporation Roles & Permissions and their interaction with POSes & Outposts. Make them very user friendly and enable all resources and structures to be secure and free from theft or interference. Add a user friendly taxing system for corporations & alliances out there in null-sec so they can tax, hopefully fairly , ALL activities in their sov territory.
I'd imagine the best way to do this would be to develop a new system for corp roles & permissions then remove the old system and slot the new one in. That's me looking on from my luddite viewpoint - I don't expect it would be that simple. But CCP don't seem too keen on repairing the old system so the above seems logical to me.
To my mind it would have been better to to the above, or at least make a start on it, rather than introducing ghost sites, messing with warp values, and making interceptors OP. Would be nice for a change to get what we want rather than what we (don't) need.  |

Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:30:00 -
[76] - Quote
Summer Isle wrote:Some of these questions needs a "does not apply or not involved with" option for the things we have no involvement in, and have no real clue about. I feel odd answering "easy" or "hard" on, say, Capital manufacturing, Star Base reactions, deployment, etc., considering I have absolutely no involvement with any of them, and can't give an accurate opinion for it.
It is fairly obvious which are the more complicated and which are fairly straightforward to get involved in eg T3 production, moon mining, and drug production all have multiple stages to complete and so would be classed as 'hard'. |

Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:36:00 -
[77] - Quote
Rodrik Vikary wrote:I've answered this survey yesterday, even though my knowledge in the area of S&I is very low. I mainly do PI, which was hard in the beggining (lost some isk having to rebuild after noticing mistakes) but now it is really easy.
My main problem with S&I is that, it seems there are just too many skills for it. I can't begin to understand what all those Science skills are used for and I think the information should be more ingame than now. Right now there is too much info that I need to search elsewhere to understand how things work since I'm a new player here (6 months).
I understand the need for specialization with EVE but it seems like getting into S&I is practically impossible for people like me and I believe in a sandbox, all aspects of the game should be a little bit easier to understand and to begin. The most manufacturing I've done so far was getting a BPC and using it, like in the tutorials, because the rest is kind of a mystery to me.
You are asking for the game to be dumbed down. This is not what most players of EVE Online would want. We have had too much dumbing down already for example the simplification of some item names when the previous names were much better. Most players are, arguably, adults and are capable of figuring things out. |

Bethan Le Troix
Krusual Investigation Agency
66
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:39:00 -
[78] - Quote
The emphasis on 'cooperation' within this survey is somewhat worrying as to what CCP intend to use it to impose on us. If it means they will fix Corp Roles & Permissions that's great but I fear it may be something pretty duff that no one will want. Just look at the furore over the ESS being forced onto null sec ratters and you get an idea of what could happen.  |

Ricard Defondel
Digital Alchemist The Fire Nation Syndicate
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 14:02:00 -
[79] - Quote
It seems to me if more co-operation is desired, the Corp structure needs fixing to facilitate this. An option that forces shareholders to cash in shares on departure. A type of share that doesn't permit have voting rights would get ordinary members involved without risk to the Corp owners. A more advanced method of controlling budgets limits so individuals with access can't clear out the corp. A Factory ship which can process ore on site and issue contracts for goods would be useful for corps doing group mining ops, and would make it more profitable to co-operate. |

Calorn Marthor
Standard Fuel Company
20
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 14:21:00 -
[80] - Quote
Hi there, posted a proposal related to industry here |
|

Jowen Datloran
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
783
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 15:12:00 -
[81] - Quote
Haha, you forget Storyline Item Production...
Or perhaps I should not laugh at that, as construction costs for many of these items have been borked since Invention was introduced and should have been addressed years ago. I guess this "low hanging fruit" has in fact gone underground and is no longer visible. Mr. Science & Trade Institute, EVE Online Lorebook-á |

Tiolth Daganth
Clan Daganth
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 18:20:00 -
[82] - Quote
Allow PI to be less passive, provide more incentives and opportunities to have more cooperation.
Simple dump from a simple mind:
- Corporate/dedicated/contracted CO transporter (pickup and delivery between COs)
- Specialized CC/Skill(s) to facilitate transport of resources between other players facilities on the same planet
|

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2559
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 18:23:00 -
[83] - Quote
Calorn Marthor wrote:Hi there, posted a proposal related to industry here
Not too bad an idea.
However, I'd prefer to keep it all in space, where it has at least some vulnerability.
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/2013/11/24/retooling-industry-eve-blue-sky/ is something I wrote on it a while ago.
Barriers to entry is a good thing. Not insurmountable barriers, but some. Skill and ISK, primarily. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/
Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |

Cygnet Lythanea
World Welfare Works Association Independent Faction
395
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 03:50:00 -
[84] - Quote
Batolemaeus wrote: Did you just try to out-bitter me? I thought that was impossible.
Sorry, I trained Bitter V a long time back. I've handed them ideas that I've had to make this a better game for ten years, and am still to this day stickied in the Features and Ideas section for threads I OPd before you started that character. Some of them were picked up and run with by other game companies for other games.
The very few they embraced, they proceeded to **** up beyond all sanity, trying to force them to benefit their pet alliance of the week or to somehow shoehorn PvP into it, badly.
I've started a betting pool for how long before jump-drives require five plex to activate, and if all T2 bpos except those belonging to goonswarm will be turned to bpcs.
Unless your thread is limited to how 'awesum!' Eve Online is, ISD will lock the thread.-á You will find it is particularly common if CCP might have to make a public response to the thread subject, as opposed to bury it in the GM que for the forseeable future and then prohibit telling anyone what the GM said, if it's ever answered at all. |

Black Panthera
5
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 11:35:00 -
[85] - Quote
Make possible to share items stored in outposts/stations between different toons (alts) without need to be in same corp ie without using corp hangars.
Also, will there ever be way to tax production or mining? |

Billy Hix
Team JK
79
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 17:17:00 -
[86] - Quote
One thing thats pretty important for CCP to remember.
If they make S&I easier, better, or draw attention to it as a feature in an upcoming expansion, its vital to introduce new stuff that needs to be made. If CCP improve S&I a load more people will enter the market, and while the extra competition will help the market run smoother than ever it will also exacerbate the over supply problem we already have. |

Muffet McStrudel
Aliastra Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 20:15:00 -
[87] - Quote
Liner Xiandra wrote:Some more means to disrupt your competitors would be nice as well.
Currently we can: - Increase POCO tax, -Wardec corp to take down POS
and that is pretty much it.
Highsec production slots are too plentyful, too anonimous, too cheap. Hauling can be solved with out of corp alts; and station traders (strictly not S&I) are immune to everything and everyone.
I guess this is way out of scope/reasonable but I'd like to be able to hire Dust mercenaries (or some other mechanic) to engage rival PI extractors; or blow up their production lines. Or clear out some drone infestation and have my own PI efficiency get back to 100%. Hack their hisec invention laboraties.
You can put a hit on someone and ruin their hauling alts for a long time. Isn't that enough?
Not sure why you think there are too many plentiful hi-sec slots? Not sure why you think they are cheap or you should know who's doing what where? Doesn't hi-sec research take long enough already?
Blowing up PI? Really? So you basically want industry tools to grief people. Good lord.  |

Muffet McStrudel
Aliastra Gallente Federation
34
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 20:17:00 -
[88] - Quote
Cygnet Lythanea wrote:
I've started a betting pool for how long before jump-drives require five plex to activate, and if all T2 bpos except those belonging to goonswarm will be turned to bpcs.
Considering the number of hours invested to gain some of those BPO's that line isn't even funny. Nothing would make me dump my sub quicker than if my one last method of earning safe, passive isk got hit with a nerf bat.
|

Cholly Chi
Acme Entropy
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.20 23:33:00 -
[89] - Quote
Dear CCP Arrow,
I've completed the survey but forgot to note what for me is the single most frustrating aspect of S&I: managing BPs. If I can make two suggestions:
1. Enable stacking and repackaging of identical and unmodified BPOs and BPCs. 2. Implement some kind of graphic or hover-over which allows you to see the ME/PE of the BP in question (and possibly the number of remaining runs, as applicable).
Anyone serious about S&I acquires reams of BPOs, and makes tonnes of BPCs. Having to pore through the (very well designed) information screens, or scroll and click through all of these to find or sort the ones you want, robs considerable time from the workday. If I could just see the info in pale characters right there on the little BP, or do a quick hover-over - management of thousands of BPs would be much easier.
Thanks:) |

KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
533
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 14:20:00 -
[90] - Quote
For PI - ability to save/restore manufacturing configurations. Cost of reconfiguration is fine, but the click nightmare would be backed into a corner.
CCP Punkturis-á "I want to get in on the goodposter circle jerk!"
|
|

Irya Boone
TIPIAKS
336
|
Posted - 2014.01.21 22:47:00 -
[91] - Quote
Tech3 from rigs
Implants from corpses
Get mobile Refiner A boost+10% ( remove the 25% waste and put it in the Stations refiners)
Give every mobile S&I a boost . RENAME null sec systems With the name of REAL Universe Stellar Name like KOI-730 etc etc It will be awesome. Need Black Ops be able to FIT cover ops cloaking device !!! |

Cryten Jones
Chill Cabal Catastrophic Uprising
107
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 00:09:00 -
[92] - Quote
Done...
I would also like to see the ability to query specific items via crest.. eg please tell me the ME and PE of item number 1231245534 |

Cyndrogen
Someone Else's Problem Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
479
|
Posted - 2014.01.23 19:51:00 -
[93] - Quote
I admit that for an MMO, S&I is mainly a solo endeavor. |

Liner Xiandra
Sparks Inc Zero Hour Alliance
268
|
Posted - 2014.01.24 11:52:00 -
[94] - Quote
Muffet McStrudel wrote:Liner Xiandra wrote:Some more means to disrupt your competitors would be nice as well.
You can put a hit on someone and ruin their hauling alts for a long time. Isn't that enough? Not sure why you think there are too many plentiful hi-sec slots? Not sure why you think they are cheap or you should know who's doing what where? Doesn't hi-sec research take long enough already? Blowing up PI? Really? So you basically want industry tools to grief people. Good lord. 
I am saying that industry is way too safe at the moment. Its also quite fitting that you'd post this being in an NPC corp.
|

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2588
|
Posted - 2014.01.24 12:24:00 -
[95] - Quote
Liner Xiandra wrote:Muffet McStrudel wrote:Liner Xiandra wrote:Some more means to disrupt your competitors would be nice as well.
You can put a hit on someone and ruin their hauling alts for a long time. Isn't that enough? Not sure why you think there are too many plentiful hi-sec slots? Not sure why you think they are cheap or you should know who's doing what where? Doesn't hi-sec research take long enough already? Blowing up PI? Really? So you basically want industry tools to grief people. Good lord.  I am saying that industry is way too safe at the moment. Its also quite fitting that you'd post this being in an NPC corp.
I'd like to see fewer station slots (perhaps limited in the number you can use per station too)
And an easier way to get production slots in space, for people who aren't in NPC corporations. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |

Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1199
|
Posted - 2014.01.26 23:22:00 -
[96] - Quote
a small idea with potentially interesting consequences
mass production allows using 5 production lines in a NPC station, a POS or an outpost advanced mass production allows using an additional 5 lines, but only in a POS or an outpost
laboratory operations allows using 5 station labs in a NPC station, a POS or an outpost advanced laboratory operation allows using an additional 5 labs, but only in POS or an outpost We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :)
Banner was used for this Post |

Elch Annages
Remnants of the Forgotten Seekers of the Unseen
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.28 18:50:00 -
[97] - Quote
Great Idea with the survey!
I have few points i would like to highlight which I believe deserve attention: 1) I believe High-sec fleet mining with maxed hulks, well fitted hulks is in risk comparable to running incursions with high-end group. But mining in high-sec is not even close as profitable as incursions because it's driven by Market prices which is the EvE way. Why not either add some additional advanced skills which will give bonuses to yield or cycle or even better , give them better and more expensive ships so the high-end mining is equally profitable, something made ONLY for group mining?
Or do the opposite, make incursions less profitable by introducing marketable items for it so it's govern by same rules as rest of the EvE -> Create a supply and demand for them.
2) Rorqual would deserve major changes for its defenses it's just not usable as on-grid ship but i think you already know that. It would be cool to have fleets done by smaller groups that actually use the tractor beam on that thing.
What do you guys think? |

Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
145
|
Posted - 2014.01.29 00:47:00 -
[98] - Quote
Billy Hix wrote:One thing thats pretty important for CCP to remember.
If they make S&I easier, better, or draw attention to it as a feature in an upcoming expansion, its vital to introduce new stuff that needs to be made. If CCP improve S&I a load more people will enter the market, and while the extra competition will help the market run smoother than ever it will also exacerbate the over supply problem we already have.
Yeah just take a look at exploration goods since the probing changes, to see what could happen to S&I as a money making activity.
|

Zane Tekitsu
D.I.C.A.D. Solutions
54
|
Posted - 2014.01.30 19:24:00 -
[99] - Quote
Davion Falcon wrote:baltoxtdl wrote:Gilbaron wrote:reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest reduce the clickfest
could you please also try and reduce the clickfest ?
oh, and less clicks please :)
the amount of essentially free production lines in highsec is too damn high that would be same as giving turrets/missiles ability to work same as drones, automatic killing stuff around you. There'd be an incredible shitstorm if turrets worked like installing S&I jobs. There'd be no weapon grouping. You'd have to push F1, select a target through a nested window, type in the number of rounds you'd like to fire, hit enter twice and repeat that for each turret and launcher.
Don't forget to terminate the launchers and turrets, so you can use them again once the cycle is complete. :D |

Eurydia Vespasian
Storm Hunters
5031
|
Posted - 2014.01.31 04:54:00 -
[100] - Quote
I want to be able to tax PI goods from stingy corp members to go to the fuel making pool  |
|

Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor Black Core Alliance
1401
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 11:00:00 -
[101] - Quote
Here are some thoughts I had on coop gameplay. Basically though, while one can do T2 production 'solo' most people truly don't. I don't know of anyone that has a full moon mat production chain to build an Ishtar for instance. Same with cap production, most people don't mine mats for a super solo. So in a way, the market is coop gameplay currently.
Any co-op changes will only be successful if there are incentives to do it. Right now the incentives are really small and you have to work to get them.
I wouldn't mind seeing something like co-op PI production that adds a link between two (or more) players setups on a planet. The incentive could be something like for every link to another player you gain some percentage boost of pg or CPU for instance. Yes, players with many alts could benefit but so does everyone else and it would allow solo players to co-op easier than before.
I'm not sure what to do with mining, maybe some sort of 'you must be at the keyboard to press X at the right time to get the bonus' would work. I played an MMO once where you could fit 8 players in a ram to break down a castle gate. The interface allowed players to click 'shove' based on the timing of the ram swing. The closer you were to pushing at the optimal time caused the whole ram to do more damage. If all 8 players were paying attention, and timing it right, you would have maximum effect. I'm not sure if that concept would work well but you could program something that isboxers and afkers couldn't benefit from and people paying attention could. So if coop players time hitting a 'boost' button at the right time every so often (30 minutes?) then you get bonuses that last for the next 30 minutes or something.
But anyway, without an incentive for doing something that they cannot get themselves, people won't do it. I hope CCP recognizes this and finds a way around using alts to do it. GÇ£Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do. GÇ¥ - Dale Carnegie
Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour! |

natsha Huren
Magnito Industries
0
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 12:40:00 -
[102] - Quote
Here is a idea for a S&I fix ! if the items is in the game or on the market list them there should be a BPO or BPC for it . or at least the parts to make or research it |

Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
506
|
Posted - 2014.02.05 16:09:00 -
[103] - Quote
Excellent first step. Surveys can be priceless tools for information gathering.
Any change to S&I has to go hand-in-hand with a POS mechanics revamp, especially access roles/titles.
For how many years have we complained that the method of setting up an alliance research POS is screwed? Why do we even need to have a corp hanger to do these things? I should be able to remote research anything if the darn module is set to alliance access.
Please decouple S&I POS modules from Corp hanger requirements. If you can do that, S&I POS use would boom. Can we link the outputs to a Personal Hanger Array or station within system if they are available?
Also, fix Refining Arrays. Why do they process ice at 100% efficiency, and ores at some ridiculously bad efficiency? That is totally unbalanced and discourages their use.
I ran a Hybrid Polymer POS in w-space and refused to run a refinery even for the tiny bit of ore I needed because it was easier and more efficient to scan down a hisec and bring the mins in on the return trip with POS fuel.
Free Ripley Weaver! |

Achanjati
Royal Amarr Science Institute
13
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 17:06:00 -
[104] - Quote
@CCP_Arrow: Is there an ending date for the survey? Will the results be published? Just to compare my personal views with the views of others. |

Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2232
|
Posted - 2014.02.09 23:15:00 -
[105] - Quote
Why bother CCP? You already know the answers to these questions, and what the "solution" will be.
Anything you do will be co-opted by the null sec cartels in their insidious crusade to turn high sec into an economic wasteland to enhance their own null sec income streams. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |

Rashnu Gorbani
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2014.02.10 09:39:00 -
[106] - Quote
Some of the questions are a bit worrying indeed. Others just hard to understand. To the 'easy' or 'hard' part I answered either easy or didn't try. It's easy after you understand it and have some experience with it, just as with everything else. I mainly do solo work because I want to be independent. Coop could mean I have to schedule my RL to work together with people and I don't want that. I also want to be able to take a week or two leave whenever I need to, without screwing up anyone else. My part of the coop is through market and that's fine. I'm also fine with having some possibilities for more coop play, as long as it's not forced on me in any way (as in, don't nerf solo S&I just let people that enjoy working together have more tools for that). |

Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1742
|
Posted - 2014.02.14 04:32:00 -
[107] - Quote
Industry doesn't need any substantive changes regarding the basic mechanics of what gets built from what and how. What it desparately needs a quality of life improvements. Alarmclocking for invention jobs, gobs of drop down menus, dozens of clicks for selecting the installation and other options, its just terrible. Nothing fundamental needs to change, except maybe to further incentivize actually producing in low/null vs importing everything.
A little would go a long way, but its just another (core) feature CCP has left untouched for 6+ years.
Get rid of dropdown menus. They are cancer.
Zifrian wrote:Basically though, while one can do T2 production 'solo' most people truly don't. I don't know of anyone that has a full moon mat production chain to build an Ishtar for instance. Same with cap production, most people don't mine mats for a super solo. So in a way, the market is coop gameplay currently.
This is a good thing?
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Why bother CCP? You already know the answers to these questions, and what the "solution" will be.
Anything you do will be co-opted by the null sec cartels in their insidious crusade to turn high sec into an economic wasteland to enhance their own null sec income streams.
take your pills, chicken little. Can you not even come up with an original opinion on a subject when directly asked for it? "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |

Azrael Dinn
Imperial Mechanics Mildly Intoxicated
228
|
Posted - 2014.02.23 07:03:00 -
[108] - Quote
I was thinking while I was responding to the survey that would it be possible to see what the players whant after you have finnished studying the survey?
I know I can get the details from reading the forums but they are different in a way so a nice chart or two would be nice  After centuries of debating and justifying... Break Cloaks tm |

Prince Volcae
Reaper Tech Inc. 9th Company
2
|
Posted - 2014.03.04 18:38:00 -
[109] - Quote
Redue Pi we should be able to build cities not just simple colony! Add asteroid and mood colonies too! De la mesure dont nous mesurons les autres nous serons mesur+¬s. |

Zappity
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
831
|
Posted - 2014.03.05 21:20:00 -
[110] - Quote
305 clicks to do a typical T2 module production run with a 10 slot character (copying, invention and manufacturing), not including the logistics. Just appalling. I tried this on my work computer which has stupid RSI monitoring software installed and it went mad. It even gave me a little angry face in the task bar! Great fun.
CCP, you should be ashamed for leaving this for so long without even small quality of life improvements. Even if we can't batch install jobs, just remembering the last input would be an enormous help. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
|

Markku Laaksonen
EVE University Ivy League
373
|
Posted - 2014.03.07 01:51:00 -
[111] - Quote
What ever came of this? DUST 514 Recruit Code - https://dust514.com/recruit/zluCyb/
EVE Buddy Invite - https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=047203f1-4124-42a1-b36f-39ca8ae5d6e2&action=buddy
|

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
3666
|
Posted - 2014.03.12 18:43:00 -
[112] - Quote
Markku Laaksonen wrote:What ever came of this?
How did I not notice this until now!!!
Reduce the click fest. Give us batch jobs to install 10 similar jobs on 10 lines simultaneously.
Give us a "remember settings" check box that autopopulates fields with number of copies, copies per run, number of runs, etc". You know, like traders have a remember settings for setting up market orders!
Give us a "favorites list" that we can add installations too. That way we don't have to look at all the possible facilities within a region or system when finding an installation to utilize, but can instantly narrow our search to a few select stations!
|

Batelle
HOMELE55
2230
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 16:11:00 -
[113] - Quote
let us set the source materials location and then dynamically populate the "quote" window as we adjust the number of runs or other parameters. It needs to be sliders, not dropdown menus that require a click for recalculating every adjustment. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |

Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
2838
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 16:26:00 -
[114] - Quote
Batelle wrote:let us set the source materials location and then dynamically populate the "quote" window as we adjust the number of runs or other parameters. It needs to be sliders, not dropdown menus that require a click for recalculating every adjustment.
That's the very reason that I got into Eve 3rd party development. The other blueprint calculators worked, but they took more 'work' to use than I liked, when you wanted to change things.
So I added sliders. Then just kept on adding things to make it one screen that could do almost anything. Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4236322 http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |

a newbie
Dissidence Dawn C.L.O.N.E.
43
|
Posted - 2014.03.15 07:01:00 -
[115] - Quote
If its been mentioned before then consider it support.
I would like to see manufacturing in chained commands. We have skills that denote our ability to mass produce, yet we are still micromanaging it.
If I am going to manufacture something requiring a lot of components, I should be able to dump it all into a single build command. Give us an option to string something like a capital ship or complex things with a single build order with all required components. Have the base build time as time spent manually building each component, if a player instead batch builds, have it take something like 10% longer or such.
The increase in time could be explained as if you hired a job foreman to manage it from start to finish so it wouldn't reflect as much benefit from your skills since your doing it hands off.
*******
I also like the idea of reducing the amount of clicks in industrial interfaces.
********
An extreme annoyance of mine at the moment is I should NOT be able to create a harvesting job without giving the harvester an output. If the output link drops it should pause the harvester. I had an entire week that was basically wasted. I setup my planets, triple checked the setup and that all raw materials were defined to a container, with basic processors ready. I come back 3 days later and only 1 of my planets was forwarding any resources from the harvester. All the best part of the yield gone.
Annoyed and frustrated, I reset all the raw resource feeds and hit submit, triple checked it again. Come back 1 day later and this time every single harvester was without a location to send its resources. It took me a few more days to get everything where it should be and it happened a third time later on.
The system has too many clicks as many mentioned before, and components shouldn't work when you have logical issues such as an input with no output. Don't get me wrong, I like PI but its a pain.
********
I should be able to quick find PI facilities on the planet through a list of facilities built, maybe with its current blueprint or timers in a graphical interface or column?
There is more but I cant think of them right now. ...um.. fire? |

Prince Volcae
Plundering Penguins
3
|
Posted - 2014.03.16 08:45:00 -
[116] - Quote
We should be able to build cities on planets! Not just the usual PI! Like have building cities as modules that give bonuses to production. Like even things like population of the colonies, how happy they are, or if they are sick, etc could effect production! It'd be cool and even make the game more personalized! De la mesure dont nous mesurons les autres nous serons mesur+¬s. |

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
3703
|
Posted - 2014.03.17 16:57:00 -
[117] - Quote
I would like the line-usage costs at all NPC stations to be increased 100 fold. I've created a thread to detail some of the results:
Why? To bring the cost of station S&I inline with the operational costs of POS fuel usage.
What will this do? encourage more players to utilize POS's for S&I. creates a nice new isk sink (~1 trillion per month) which could be put to use boosting other risky activity.
What will this mean for the average consumer? They will pay roughly 5% more for their goods.
What will this do to the S&I Player? It increases the operational costs, but that'll be passed on to the consumer. It makes POS S&I a little more profitable, but POS's S&I activities are far riskier, subject to wardecs and the loss of your POS bases. |

SpaceSaft
Sub Par. Beacon Light Alliance
50
|
Posted - 2014.03.20 14:18:00 -
[118] - Quote
Today I once again looked for industry slots in highsec.
Can you please provide unlimited slots and scale the costs associated with them according to demand? Right now it's just looking at 60 day timers... Besides that I also hold the opinion that CCP should make a PC version for Dust 514. |

Dealth Striker
Striker Ltd
29
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 15:58:00 -
[119] - Quote
FYI A survey can ask about gender and age but it has to have an out for not wanting to give it This survey of course does not. Striker Out!! |

Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation Abyss Alliance
482
|
Posted - 2014.04.02 15:56:00 -
[120] - Quote
Survey completed - 8 years playing, about 50 / 50 PVP and industry and I've done it all pretty much with the exception of Outpost plopping (though I know how it is done).
The complexity of S&I is great in some areas such as PI production chains, but terrible in other areas - Extra materials, POS silo linking and POS in general, T3 productions, combat booster production and all the governing rules and (lack of) up to date information quickly spring to mind. The main issue is not the complexity but the isolation of 90% of industrial tasks from the rest of Eve's core gameplay.
I'd like to see a dramatic shift in S&I from being a risk free, isolated, in station activity, to refocusing on bringing all the activity BACK to asteroid belts.
My greatest feature requests are for deployable facilities that are set up either personally / corporate or alliance to manufacture, research, refine/reprocess, PI production facilities, and protect mining (with a low HP forcefield) within belts.
The principle of making these facilities targets of small gangs (with small weapons ~ as defined by ultra low sig radius structures) and at risk from *delaying or slowing* the job progress, and making belts the hive of activity they should be.
This new feature would not replace existing mechanics, but it should provide a significant advantage over 'safe' production to mitigate the risks involved. Some Asteroid Belt based facilities I'd like to see:
GÇó T2 BPO labs - These would be capable of consuming a T1 BPO, and via a VERY long term production job such as 3-6 to 12 months that requires constant input of RDBs, Scientists and other materials to keep pace - eventually produces the relevant T2 BPO. GÇó PI Process Facility - A Facility capable of performing Basic or Advanced PI production chains but at much higher volumes, at slower speeds, with the potential for being 'Raided' and siphoned. GÇó A T3 Forcefield facility - A 15km radius forcefield of Low HP (circa 10k with only 50m Signature radius), Capable of slotting 6 subsystems each capable of 33% resistance to effectively allow 99% resistance to two damage selectable types, which stops people outside from targetting, and stop people inside from warping, jumpdriving or microjumping. This would be a mining retreat, that would allow people to actually mine in low or nullsec. Would also require ability to Interdict with bubbles in low and highsec belts. I'd like to see upto 3 of these anchorable within 10km of eachother to potentially provide an elliptical field stretching the length of a belt. GÇó A slow but efficient refinery for miners to refine Ore locally then feed directly it into production facilities (also in belts)
By taking whole production chains and putting them at risk and in belts, it gives PVPers a direct focus but much as the new deployable 'yurt' personal hangers - that by their prevalence and how common they would be, give them a form of protection by sheer numbers. Of course it also promotes active defense and active industrial participation if these facilities require regular support to keep them churning.
This is just a post to provide CCP with food for thought based on what I think would be good for the game. It is not an open idea for public critique - so I will not be entering pointless public discussion of my ideas which I'm sure many people will dislike and disagree with.
If there is significant interest or support I'd consider taking my conceptual ideas and refining them and posting a proper Feature request on the ideas forum.
Thanks, Vyk. |
|

Shiti Dama
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2014.04.06 19:51:00 -
[121] - Quote
Why should I have to spend precious time outside the game reading about something that should be fun to do in the game. This is what needs fixing in my opinion, clarity withing the game, so that we play, not read wikis and blogs and what not..... |

Antihrist Pripravnik
T-AFK and counting
208
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 07:04:00 -
[122] - Quote
Shiti Dama wrote:Why should I have to spend precious time outside the game reading about something that should be fun to do in the game. This is what needs fixing in my opinion, clarity withing the game, so that we play, not read wikis and blogs and what not.....
Spending time learning, reading about and mastering any hobby is inseparable part of the hobby. Sure, the industry needs a bit of UI love, but you should always expect to learn some information about it. It's time: Disconnect PLEX to AUR conversion.You can read more details at the "Features & Ideas" forum thread here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4439504#post4439504Please support if you like the idea or post the downsides if you don't. |

Neus
Taurus Quantum Technologies Taurus Quantum Dynamics
27
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 08:20:00 -
[123] - Quote
The transfer of PI materials into a planet you have perm. colonized with Advanced factories or teir'd production would help.
PI visual could be a bit more visually appeasing, but not at all the biggest of issues. |

Muestereate
Minions LLC
294
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 20:11:00 -
[124] - Quote
T2 production facilities, instead of all the individual assemblies, components etc, with just a couple clicks raw materials go in the top and a finished product comes out. POS based so its at risk. I'm talking everything, prints datacores interfaces moongoo mins, the works. It would need to deliver a lot of info on requirements and whats still needed to start production but The whole ball of wax basically as a way to get rid of the click-fest. efficiencies and times and and additional skills I haven't thought about yet. But since we now apparently have the ability to create deployable objects, why not? |

AFK Hauler
State War Academy
999
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 01:19:00 -
[125] - Quote
So I took the survey and I don't remember anything about removing the standing requirement to anchor a POS...
I do remember talking about the crappy invention path tho, but that's because I put it in the comments.
The survey was seriously lacking in depth as compared to the dev blog on the upcoming changes. |

M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
566
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 13:56:00 -
[126] - Quote
Frickin Rhino wrote:Save PI Configurations like you can save fittings, but rather than by ship or class, by planet type... allow corp PI configs too. This will make peeps with 5+ accounts not want to rip their eyeballs out when moving and setting up 30 new planets.
This. PI needs a total UI overhaul because every time I move I want to set my computer on fire, it's awful... How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |

M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
566
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 13:59:00 -
[127] - Quote
Xurr wrote:Hey CCP,
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want 150bil in BPOs stolen.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want my jobs to be canceled for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want them to be able to shoot my freighters for the lulz.
I'm not going to co-operate with others because I don't want the fuel dumped out of my POS for the lulz.
Because roles are hard...
Actually roles are hard, so I can't make jokes there, but I don't think that's changing until POSs, so SoonGäó How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |

Zeera Tomb-Raider
Card Shark Industries
13
|
Posted - 2014.04.18 20:06:00 -
[128] - Quote
POs standings rec for players and not corp.player that own POs can set pos acces to other corp members.and ceo cant do a **** if his not the 1 setting it up.
|

Agent BBB
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha TOGETHER WE STAND
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 21:21:00 -
[129] - Quote
Now you will not be able to research with the BPO in the station also the only thing still worth to research and copy ( long and expensive BPOs like capitals/supercapitals ) will only last a few days to copy. Like the market was not already saturated with BPCs for ships too expensive to build or too nerfed to use. A titan or a supercarrier BPC will most likely go down in price to under a dread/carrier one.
like research was not already nerfed to almost useless. |

knowsitall
Adeptus iNdustry and Logistics Silent Eviction
22
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 12:37:00 -
[130] - Quote
Some things i posted elsewhere
2 edge cases that need to be considered https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=337307#_ga=1.155602428.630265646.1371725581
Are you happy to increase (buff) the amount of goods a tech 2 BPO can create. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=339727&find=unread
Regards
Knowsitall |
|

Ubat Batuk
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
147
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 13:30:00 -
[131] - Quote
Currently the big issues for me are:
- Too many skills to train - Lots of stuff need to be sourced but have no clue where to find it, as it is not on the market or contracts - When at the end you manage to produce something, it's a lot more expensive than buying it on the market
I think in view of the above it would beneficial if:
- The game is simplified - There are more rewards for the profession - More guidance is provided - Put in place a mechanism to reduce speculation - Allow Rorquals in High sec for major operations to be conducted there - Increase defence mechanisms for miners in low sec and below
|

Kblackjack54
Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance
122
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 18:38:00 -
[132] - Quote
Fancy Graphics Detract From Player Achievment.
KEEP IT SIMPLE......MAKE IT WORK.......PUT YOUR CRAYONS BACK IN YOUR SCHOOL BAG ALONG WITH YOUR EGO.
Players are not interested in fancy GUI menus, all they want is a simple method of achieving the result required.
So what is really required,
The materials you need and have already.
The Skills you need and have already (high light those that will bring benefit from improvement).
And check boxes to tell the Gui how many you actually want to produce, and were you want them placed when there done.
Distracting fancy graphical blingy things do not really do this, they just hide info that players really need, Eye candy looks nice to you on paper but in reality is of very little value to us players.
The Character choice screen is an example, Bright, Busy, and quite frankly an eyesore, latest iteration, much better, toned down and far more pleasant to look at.
P.I. another one, a marathon click fest just to get to the PoCo in the first place, far better a simple check box next to each planet entry for the PoCo, left click to warp direct, right click to choose a distance.
Again keep it simple.....Make it work.....For the players please. |

Noreiran Nardieu
Silvereyes Elite Corp. Tiger Cats
0
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 04:40:00 -
[133] - Quote
I just finished watching the Fanfest keynote on industry and I'm a bit confused at what CCP's aim is.
They want to encourage more people to get into industry by increasing the complexity of the process? Now you have to deal with "special teams" if you want to have the best industrial edge?
The reason why people don't get into industry is because it's impossible to make a profit unless you have dang near max skills and enormous capital. There are a few key factors to industry, your skills, your BPO levels, how you get your materials, how you manufacture it, and how you sell it.
There are no changes to the skill requirements to start industry.
BPO levels are possibly easier to attain now that you don't need to own your own POS just to research a BPO (previously limited due to research slots). This one was a HUGE capital sink because somehow you had to build your own POS or join a corp that is trustworthy enough to not screw with your blueprints.
Acquiring materials is more difficult for those who mine their own minerals now because of the need for absolutely maxed skills and a stupidly expensive implant (which I can only imagine to get even more expensive with increased demand). Sure you can just buy your minerals off of the market, but that's one less avenue that people will be using.
The new changes to POS manufacturing arrays now mean that you have to own a POS, or even more difficult, own a POS in low sec to get the best profit margin. So basically, again unless you are in an industrial corp, good luck getting this perk without having a huge sum of ISK to start.
Selling the end product still requires decent business skills to not lose a fair chunk of your profit margin to broker fees. (Yay, leveling skills)
So more now than ever it is more difficult to get into industry. I don't understand CCP's idea that increasing the required capital and higher entry skill levels are going to entice people to get into industry. If you are just starting manufacturing, if run the math, you know that with low skills and buying your materials off the market will net in a negative total profit. That is, it costs more to produce the item than you can possibly sell it for on the market because there are so many other people who have those maxed skills, maxed BPO's, and the capital to start their own manufacturing lines. To complicate matters, there are now special teams that will cause you to have to relocate your operations because it wasn't difficult enough to get into manufacturing...
Honestly, who says, yes I want to spend the next several months of skill training time so that I might be able to start having a positive profit margin when manufacturing? Alternatively, you could spend a bit of time on combat skills which let you pvp and make stupid amounts of ISK by ratting for an hour and in the process make more than a starting industrialist makes in a month.
So I ask the question, this is supposed to entice people into starting industry HOW? |

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation RONA Directorate
899
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 07:10:00 -
[134] - Quote
Have invention be better. Can we have some bpcs that come out with a positive ME? |

LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
1036
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 15:48:00 -
[135] - Quote
Obsidian Hawk wrote:Have invention be better. Can we have some bpcs that come out with a positive ME?
Actually... yeah. It wasn't originally planned, but break enough stuff, and eventually you accidentally get around to breaking everything.
Shall we recap the thrashing being done in the Industry changes?
Infinite lines. Instead of converting hard cap on concurrent jobs per facility to soft-cap with fees for going over on a facility by facility basis, they completely removed the concept of concurrent jobs and just made cost be based on total solar system usage, with stupid complexity in figuring out discounts for multiple-facilities.
But what to do with the bonuses for facilities/outpost upgrade that granted extra lines. Oh, Material need reductions of 2% for POS and 5% for Outpost.
Research complexity. Convert to whole % reductions in need instead of fractional reductions of added on waste.
Where x is an INT, round(round(x * 1.111) * 0.9) = x ALWAYS.
At upgrade, increase base need by ratio of 1.1111, convert fractional % waste BPOs to whole % reduction BPOs.
Hey, can we get "better than old perfect" by combining research and ME reductions for facility? Ummmm.... didn't think it through, but sure, why not?
OOOPS, break!!!!!!!... Where x = 4, round(round(x * 1.111) * 0.9) = 3. A 25% reduction from that extra 5% reduction.
Hmmmm... HACK. Let's make it always round up. Okay...... That fixes 4, but.... Where x = 5, ciel(round(x * 1.111) * 0.85) = 6
There is no way to get back down to 5...
Oh, let's just round to the job instead of the run. SO... if we do a 3-run job of billion ISK ships, we get closer to the old needs.
OH, but what about T2? If I used to need 1 T1 ship per run, now, I may need 9 per run of 10.. or even more stupidly, 2 for a run of 1 due to negative PE from invention.
More hacks.... max(batch rounded need, run) to ensure you always need 1. AND hack get rid of the -40% ME on invented BPC.
Decryptors? Hanges to total T2 component demand from better invented T2 BPCs? Not sure yet. Trying to come up with more not-thought-through last minute hacks to fix the breaks caused by the last not-thought-through last minute hacks, that were needed to fix the breaks from the previous not-thought-through hacks....
All to try to save what was: 1) Poorly designed move to infinite concurrent jobs per facility. 2) Ill advised change to research, that appeared simple enough at the high level, but is game breaking in the details.
And don't get me started on "teams". Huge mega alliances buy special advantages that small corps will never be able to afford, allowing the mega alliances to dominate and dooming small, casual players. |

Driven
Qantium Superior Eve Engineering
27
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 22:01:00 -
[136] - Quote
Mega Alliances are scooping up all the POCOs and surfing on free ISK due to the high taxes.
1) Eliminate POCO taxes
2) Create a POS array that allows you to produce PI level 3 and better using that instead of on a planet.
Let people have alternatives - like you did with Alchemy - and then we don't get held hostage to artificially imposed barriers.
Thanks
D |

Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
1186
|
Posted - 2014.05.17 21:12:00 -
[137] - Quote
Only 5 years too late......
CCP: "We know what's best for the game, so you can't have any options....." |

Darth Bladius
16
|
Posted - 2014.05.31 18:05:00 -
[138] - Quote
Done. I hope it was worth my time. |

Droidyk
Maniacal Miners INC No Safe Haven
72
|
Posted - 2014.06.02 08:35:00 -
[139] - Quote
edit. |

Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
692
|
Posted - 2014.06.03 17:30:00 -
[140] - Quote
Zeera Tomb-Raider wrote:POs standings rec for players and not corp.player that own POs can set pos acces to other corp members.and ceo cant do a **** if his not the 1 setting it up.
You have no clue what you're talking about. CEO has total and complete control of everything.
GÇ£I personally refuse to help AAA take space from itself so it can become an even shittier version of itselfGÇ¥
-Grath Telkin, 2014. |
|

AnotherUseless Alt
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
26
|
Posted - 2014.06.04 21:48:00 -
[141] - Quote
"Your opinion matters..."
Wasn't April 1st a few months ago? "Self help is all in your head" |

AnotherUseless Alt
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
38
|
Posted - 2014.06.04 21:48:13 -
[142] - Quote
"Your opinion matters..."
Wasn't April 1st a few months ago?
"Self help is all in your head"
|

KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
594
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 18:42:00 -
[143] - Quote
This survey done yet? It's occupying a sticky spot and I see the meter maid rounding the corner again.... CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff
|

KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
797
|
Posted - 2014.06.05 18:42:06 -
[144] - Quote
This survey done yet? It's occupying a sticky spot and I see the meter maid rounding the corner again....
CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff
CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
|

ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
133
|
Posted - 2014.07.01 22:16:00 -
[145] - Quote
I think that the refining nerf is a huge mistake. You already have had an accelerated problem with mudflation since incursions released in which all of a players time is spent earning server created isk.
You changed drone compounds which were 100% player isk to bounty payouts which are 100% server created isk.
You've nerfed loot drops repeatedly and come out with ships and mods to make scooping up loots quicker which again means a higher percentage of time in game spent earning server isk versus player isk.
These industry changes as they are being sold is largely just a mechanic intended to force non-PvP indy players into null like lemmings to the slaughter.
I think you need to look at the Provi game play and get rid of passive incomes especially moon goo. If you want more players in null you need to make it so that all income from null needs to be active and make it so that the most profitable way for a corp to operate their space is to attract more players and have it get used. Currently the mechanics for isk making are to lock down as much null as possible and make it as empty, unfriendly and inhospitable as possible.
I'm not really sure why you want to introduce this expansion which will only encourage people to lock down null even harder and then try and force people into that unfriendly environment and then think it's a type of gameplay that will attract more people. |

ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
207
|
Posted - 2014.07.01 22:16:05 -
[146] - Quote
I think that the refining nerf is a huge mistake. You already have had an accelerated problem with mudflation since incursions released in which all of a players time is spent earning server created isk.
You changed drone compounds which were 100% player isk to bounty payouts which are 100% server created isk.
You've nerfed loot drops repeatedly and come out with ships and mods to make scooping up loots quicker which again means a higher percentage of time in game spent earning server isk versus player isk.
These industry changes as they are being sold is largely just a mechanic intended to force non-PvP indy players into null like lemmings to the slaughter.
I think you need to look at the Provi game play and get rid of passive incomes especially moon goo. If you want more players in null you need to make it so that all income from null needs to be active and make it so that the most profitable way for a corp to operate their space is to attract more players and have it get used. Currently the mechanics for isk making are to lock down as much null as possible and make it as empty, unfriendly and inhospitable as possible.
I'm not really sure why you want to introduce this expansion which will only encourage people to lock down null even harder and then try and force people into that unfriendly environment and then think it's a type of gameplay that will attract more people. |

Anthar Thebess
590
|
Posted - 2014.07.14 14:04:00 -
[147] - Quote
Reason for refining and reprocessing nerf is simple. More income to miners -> more AFK mining in higsec -> more mining accounts.
Currently CCP actions managed to reduce active player base to levels i 2008, we will see what focusing on industry will "yeld" them in the long term.
Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption |

Anthar Thebess
780
|
Posted - 2014.07.14 14:04:18 -
[148] - Quote
Reason for refining and reprocessing nerf is simple. More income to miners -> more AFK mining in higsec -> more mining accounts.
Currently CCP actions managed to reduce active player base to levels i 2008, we will see what focusing on industry will "yeld" them in the long term.
New Gate Connections in EVE!
Support idea for new gates that will make some more places to thrive.
|

Tennej
LoTax POCO Company of HiSEC
14
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 05:39:00 -
[149] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Reason for refining and reprocessing nerf is simple. More income to miners -> more AFK mining in higsec -> more mining accounts.
Currently CCP actions managed to reduce active player base to levels i 2008, we will see what focusing on industry will "yeld" them in the long term.
Yep.... I've dropped all 3 of extra my mining accounts......
|

Tennej
LoTax POCO Company of HiSEC
77
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 05:39:05 -
[150] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Reason for refining and reprocessing nerf is simple. More income to miners -> more AFK mining in higsec -> more mining accounts.
Currently CCP actions managed to reduce active player base to levels i 2008, we will see what focusing on industry will "yeld" them in the long term.
Yep.... I've dropped all 3 of extra my mining accounts......
You Miners think you have it so damn tough.-á When I first started playing we didnt even have mining lasers.-á You had to fly close to an asteroid.....pop a hatch and gnaw at it with your teeth.-á-á - Bitter Vet
|
|

Laura Belle
The Scope Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 18:16:00 -
[151] - Quote
I don't like the invention change! in fact I hate it!
In short - you gonna take the whole market up.
1st of all, a question, if u gonna make the production material cost 50% higher and ME0 has -10 waste.. how exactly its ending in (1.5/1.091) 37.5% higher and not 65.5% (1.5*1.091) higher?
now, to put the long version of my opinion on the table. going with the 37.5%, that means that per excelence - if comparing to now, each ME0 BPC will give production cost equal to -2.75ME nowadays.
ok, but unlike now when we can negate it with decryptor back to -20 waste, we'll be able to take off the price only 3% so 1.375*.97 = ~1.334 times a perfect BPC give now
comparing to the 1.2 we have now we're talking on a raise of 11% in production cost (1.334/1.2) and there is NO way cheaper decryptors can negate such a raise).
|

Laura Belle
The Scope Gallente Federation
18
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 18:16:52 -
[152] - Quote
I don't like the invention change! in fact I hate it!
In short - you gonna take the whole market up.
1st of all, a question, if u gonna make the production material cost 50% higher and ME0 has -10 waste.. how exactly its ending in (1.5/1.091) 37.5% higher and not 65.5% (1.5*1.091) higher?
now, to put the long version of my opinion on the table. going with the 37.5%, that means that per excelence - if comparing to now, each ME0 BPC will give production cost equal to -2.75ME nowadays.
ok, but unlike now when we can negate it with decryptor back to -20 waste, we'll be able to take off the price only 3% so 1.375*.97 = ~1.334 times a perfect BPC give now
comparing to the 1.2 we have now we're talking on a raise of 11% in production cost (1.334/1.2) and there is NO way cheaper decryptors can negate such a raise).
|

Sentenced 1989
Quantum Anomaly Corporation
71
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:05:00 -
[153] - Quote
Add ME/TE preview
You can't see ME/TE requirements if you don't have a BPO at that level, that's kinda pointless. Especially for example if you already have the BPO but it's in manufacture already, you can't check what you need to buy for next run on the same blueprint. You have to go to 3rd party websites or use contacts to find replica of ME/TE levels you want to check and then right click to use in industry to get general idea.
So suggestion, on manufacture screen add preview button where you can change ME/TE levels and see how materials react so we can eliminate the need to minimize game to find answers somewhere else
|

Sentenced 1989
Quantum Anomaly Corporation
118
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:05:18 -
[154] - Quote
Add ME/TE preview
You can't see ME/TE requirements if you don't have a BPO at that level, that's kinda pointless. Especially for example if you already have the BPO but it's in manufacture already, you can't check what you need to buy for next run on the same blueprint. You have to go to 3rd party websites or use contacts to find replica of ME/TE levels you want to check and then right click to use in industry to get general idea.
So suggestion, on manufacture screen add preview button where you can change ME/TE levels and see how materials react so we can eliminate the need to minimize game to find answers somewhere else
The Incursion Guild
QA Combat Analyze
Incursion Layout Builder
|

ACY GTMI
Veerhouven Group Veerhouven Group Alliance
92
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 04:05:00 -
[155] - Quote
Team 'Game Of Drones'? That says it all. Location: Currently circling the toilet bowl that is Eve.
-áProud member of the 6%ers. |

ACY GTMI
Veerhouven Group Veerhouven Group Alliance
99
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 04:05:21 -
[156] - Quote
Team 'Game Of Drones'? That says it all. |

Kiwinoob
Perkone Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 07:55:00 -
[157] - Quote
Well the survey is closed but hopefully suggestions are still being accepted.
With the changes to null sec travel there is more of a push for indy to head out into null, which is great but pointless for T1 modules as people would be mad to fit them. It would be nice to have some way of producing named modules so that we could actually produce items that were relevant.
If you had an optional additive component in manufacturing (like decryptors but lets call them 'bananas' for clarity) that gave a chance of the module being named (better 'bananas' = better chance for named) then there would be much more demand for T1 module production in null sec.
It would also be nice to see rats drop less named modules and more 'bananas'. The end result would be a similar availability of named modules but it would be player driven instead of just a drop which means more fun to be spread around. |

Kiwinoob
Perkone Caldari State
27
|
Posted - 2014.10.08 07:55:53 -
[158] - Quote
Well the survey is closed but hopefully suggestions are still being accepted.
With the changes to null sec travel there is more of a push for indy to head out into null, which is great but pointless for T1 modules as people would be mad to fit them. It would be nice to have some way of producing named modules so that we could actually produce items that were relevant.
If you had an optional additive component in manufacturing (like decryptors but lets call them 'bananas' for clarity) that gave a chance of the module being named (better 'bananas' = better chance for named) then there would be much more demand for T1 module production in null sec.
It would also be nice to see rats drop less named modules and more 'bananas'. The end result would be a similar availability of named modules but it would be player driven instead of just a drop which means more fun to be spread around.
Devs are nothing more than machines that turn coffee into code.
The quality of the-ácode is inversly proportional to the quality of the coffee.
|

Satan's Spawn
Satan's Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 11:43:47 -
[159] - Quote
Have to say, this whole redesign of production is a game changer.
To be able to build a business model around these fluctuating variables is ludicrous.
Aside from that, far to many clicks, it doesn't even remeber the last use destination.
Manufacture worked far better before. It wasn't broken, don't try and fix it. Total waste of development money. Aside from the window lag issue which slows down the whole process. Right click, build, right click build, worked so much better.
The whole team thing - inventor of that idea needs to be shot. This whole thing will see me try it for a few weeks more, before I hang up my coat and stop paying fees. Yeah, there'll be enough people who will make profit in game sure, but real money fee base will fall. Great move. Just 'cos fees have been going up, doesn't mean they can't come down.
Oh, and don't get me started on how much time (real) and finances in game have been spent resarching ME on POS over the years, etc for it all to mean pretty much squat now.
This is the worst move I've seen in EVE. Period. While this toon is not a Beta player, the person behind him is. And I'm also the biggest advocator of adapt and survive. This, however, is not a survival issue. It's a "I can't be bothered with it" issue. And that means I stop paying for it.
Hey ho ... next few weeks will be key. but already it's too unmanagable and annoying on a daily level. |

True Sight
Deep Freeze Industries
259
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 14:36:29 -
[160] - Quote
Mr Arrow,
I have a rather unique and interesting suggestion that is quite creative and provides significant benefits (Huge ISK Sink, New Player Retention, Old Player Retention, Increased real-world income for CCP) which maintains eves complexity whilst removing some complications in relation to Industry, blueprints and manufacturing and would love to share this with you (it is quite detailed and given freely by me as a fan). |
|

Milla Goodpussy
Federal Navy Academy
71
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:08:46 -
[161] - Quote
True Sight wrote:Mr Arrow,
I have a rather unique and interesting suggestion that is quite creative and provides significant benefits (Huge ISK Sink, New Player Retention, Old Player Retention, Increased real-world income for CCP) which maintains eves complexity whilst removing some complications in relation to Industry, blueprints and manufacturing and would love to share this with you (it is quite detailed and given freely by me as a fan).
ccp didn't take any suggestion regarding the invention changes. they lied thru their friggin heads about taking feedback from the community..so now they're forcing the changes come next Tuesday.
thanks a lot ccp for you provide more reason to stop paying to play this mess. |

Owen Levanth
Sagittarius Unlimited Exploration
327
|
Posted - 2014.10.29 16:41:57 -
[162] - Quote
Milla Goodpussy wrote:True Sight wrote:Mr Arrow,
I have a rather unique and interesting suggestion that is quite creative and provides significant benefits (Huge ISK Sink, New Player Retention, Old Player Retention, Increased real-world income for CCP) which maintains eves complexity whilst removing some complications in relation to Industry, blueprints and manufacturing and would love to share this with you (it is quite detailed and given freely by me as a fan). ccp didn't take any suggestion regarding the invention changes. they lied thru their friggin heads about taking feedback from the community..so now they're forcing the changes come next Tuesday. thanks a lot ccp for you provide more reason to stop paying to play this mess.
The irony here is most of the changes in industry and invention are things I indeed wanted, which my feedback made clear.
Apparently CCP prefers my feedback to yours.  |

DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
33302
|
Posted - 2014.10.30 01:35:12 -
[163] - Quote
CCP Arrow wrote:Hey everyone. Team Game of Drones is doing extensive investigation and discovery work for Science & Industry in EVE (referred to as S&I) as a part of a larger effort of getting insight into the current player preferences and user behavior related to S&I. Please take the survey and help us improve the game - Your opinion matters! http://industry.questionpro.com Fly safe, @CCP_Arrow
Quote:This Survey has been deactivated by the owner.
Thread is now obsolete and needs to be locked.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|

Decian Cor
Trust Doesn't Rust Triumvirate.
185
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 01:09:38 -
[164] - Quote
It would be extremely nice to see one of these for other issues and facets of the game (Sov, Exploration, WHs, etc).
I feel like it would derive more useful answers and opinions from the community than the drivel you usually see posted by people on here.
[u]Unfiltered for the masses.[/u]
http://imgur.com/mzSl1Ie
|

Serene Repose
1581
|
Posted - 2014.10.31 03:07:39 -
[165] - Quote
People really don't like pressing buttons. It's laborious, don't yah know?
I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á
|

fishsniffer dinglberry
Slave Traders
0
|
Posted - 2014.11.04 02:15:32 -
[166] - Quote
Liner Xiandra wrote:Please rip out all the tabular presented data, my out of game calculators already are enough to cope with. (my out of game tools are also giving me an advantage over the average player, so please don't dumb it down enough to make me lose my edge  ) I think S&I could be well served if it was represented as industrial process diagrams, (work your ISIS magic please) which you could configure to do: - N runs of Product - run for N amount of time - run continuously; and use your pos modules/station hangers as hoppers that you could top off if needed. (drag & drop material to a hopper and it will 'install the job') Eliminating manual selection of production lines in the process. And try to sort out the needed corporate roles in the process. Alliance level access, renting out production facilities, proper access management. I'd like to cooperate my builds with corp members, but setting up restricted access between various corp members is a major headache if not impossible; and it stops me from recruiting new players.
Yes I agree with this guy I made a pos in high sec with the idea of renting out my assembly arrays and discovered the mechanic doesn't allow that without opening a massive security issue by giving them factory manager. Just seems ludicrous its either give them the master key in blueprint running or deny all access. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page] |