|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 56 post(s) |
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
4231
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
Industry plays a central role in EVE Online and thus the developers have put their focus on improving the whole industry landscape in New Eden - the user interface, game mechanics, features, accessibility ... just everything gets examined, polished and reworked.
CCP Ytterbium comes with news of massive changes in EVE Online's Industry in Summer 2014 and beyond.
Read all about these suggestions and ideas in CCP Ytterbium's latest dev blog Building better Worlds.
Please all reply with your constructive feedback, thank you! CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager |
|
|
CCP FoxFour
C C P C C P Alliance
3035
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
:D Summer is going to be an interesting time! CCP FoxFour // Game Designer // @regnerba
|
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
558
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:42:00 -
[3] - Quote
Dat screenshot CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
9659
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:44:00 -
[4] - Quote
It's happening! Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
CCP RubberBAND
CCP Engineering Corp CCP Engineering Alliance
273
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:47:00 -
[5] - Quote
We've been dying to talk about these changes and can't wait for your feedback. Feel free to poke me on: Twitter |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3275
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:48:00 -
[6] - Quote
Aelisha wrote:How will this affect Outposts in null-sec? Will they retain slot cap or gain some other feature?
We've plans for this, and this will be mentioned in the job cost scaling blog. |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3275
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
MailDeadDrop wrote:Question: Will existing stacks of R.A.M. and R.Db be multiplied by 100 to compensate for the changes?
MDD
Yes indeed. |
|
|
CCP Lebowski
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
92
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:55:00 -
[8] - Quote
This stuff is awesome, and I don't even industry! Great job folks! CCP Lebowski | EVE Quality Assurance | Team Five-0
https://twitter.com/ccp_lebowski |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3276
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:58:00 -
[9] - Quote
Garth of Izar wrote:how does this effect locked down BPOs? Can't lock down at a POS AFAIK
Yes, we had a look at that as well. Allowing people to lock blueprints down in Starbases with current vote / lock mechanics would not be a good idea, so it won't be possible for now. |
|
|
CCP RubberBAND
CCP Engineering Corp CCP Engineering Alliance
273
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 14:58:00 -
[10] - Quote
Aerieth wrote:I am not seeing the market group icon screen shot and instead am only seeing a duplicate of the removal of Extra Materials screen shot?
Only me or issue?
Not just you, we are looking into this. Feel free to poke me on: Twitter |
|
|
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
4231
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:04:00 -
[11] - Quote
Aerieth wrote:I am not seeing the market group icon screen shot and instead am only seeing a duplicate of the removal of Extra Materials screen shot?
Only me or issue? Thank you for the notification, this (and a typo) has been fixed now. CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager |
|
|
CCP Phantom
C C P C C P Alliance
4232
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:16:00 -
[12] - Quote
Please refrain from personal attacks, trolling and off topic posts - thank you. CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager |
|
|
CCP RubberBAND
CCP Engineering Corp CCP Engineering Alliance
273
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:26:00 -
[13] - Quote
Kitty Bear wrote:CCP RubberBAND wrote:We've been dying to talk about these changes and can't wait for your feedback. Moving away from a fixed npc pricing structure like this appears to be a good thing. Actually on reflection, I see that it should drive players to re-distribute themselves and their possessions to less centralised locations. Ships could die, possessions could be lost, this is all good. on an un-related note .... Can the same thing be done to trading in general with regard to sales taxes and broker fees ?
A couple of the follow up blogs should elaborate on this, but yes, the idea is that there is a more dynamic spread of players invested in Industry which should lead to a more interesting and dynamic landscape.
Sales tax and broker fees are a completely separate system, not something within scope of these changes though certainly an interesting idea. Feel free to poke me on: Twitter |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3277
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:41:00 -
[14] - Quote
Xaniff wrote: 2. I predict there will be even more abandoned POSes out hogging all the spaces next to the moons. There needs to be some mechanic for these to be abandoned and destroyed in a reasonable amount of time after running out of fuel and failing to be maintained (like the secure containers that are lost, whether they hold goods or not).
Yeah, that's a good point, we'll note that one down. |
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2013
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:44:00 -
[15] - Quote
Aliventi wrote:Quote:Reduce copy time on all blueprints to be less time consuming than manufacturing something out of it. This gives the option to use blueprint copies to build items at Starbases without risking the original. Any chance this would also apply to T2 BPOs? Right now it takes longer to make a copy than to just manufacture from the BPO. It would be a great way for a new market to spring up around T2 BPO BPCs and make it easier for new people to get in to T2 manufacturing without having to get in to invention.
That's the current plan, yes.
Weaselior wrote:also, w/r/t this: Quote:Reduce copy time on all blueprints to be less time consuming than manufacturing something out of it. This gives the option to use blueprint copies to build items at Starbases without risking the original. will you be looking at runs as well? for example, bpcs of capital ship components are hilariously useless as they're capped at 5 runs, so you need to reinstall every eight hours or so if you wanted to use them, a huge slowdown unless you can reinstall like clockwork
This is now on my to-fix list :) |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
560
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:49:00 -
[16] - Quote
Yinmatook wrote:With these Industry changes and now the requirement to place your BPO/BPC out in the POS, I certainly hope that the game client will be able to see what you have out there (you know, like with the Corportation->Assets->Search interface).
Yes the new blueprint browser will show you all blueprints in stations or assembly arrays etc. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
560
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:50:00 -
[17] - Quote
probag Bear wrote:Quote:Remove the ability for players to use stations to safely store their blueprints without putting them at risk in Starbase structures. Players will still be able to start their jobs remotely (via the use of Supply Chain Management and Scientific Networking skills), but will now have to move their blueprints directly into the starbase structures that require it, like other materials. My chief complaint: I have about 25,000 blueprints and blueprint copies and more than a half-dozen POSes. The only reason I can deal with such a quagmire is because of stations and containers. Currently, in order to produce a specific item, all I have to do is go to a certain station, open a certain container, and move some of its contents to the station floor. Under this new system, judging by the way you phrase it ("like other materials"), I would need to do one of two things: 1. Let all my blueprints pile up in various POS arrays, and thus have to scroll through at least hundreds of items every time I start a job. 2. Store all my blueprints in nice organized containers as I do now, and thus every time I start a job be forced to go to every one of my POSes, individually open every single POS array I'm using, scroll to the right container, and remove a simple handful of blueprints each time. #2 would be a lot more clicks, a lot of downtime as I warp between POSes, and in general a lot of annoyance. Even if the S&I interface is revamped to where I don't need to click the exact same 8 spots on my screen 10 times for every character I own, the amount of time wasted by clunky game mechanics would still increase significantly. Long story short, when you work on your filtering mechanisms, please keep in mind that many of us manage more than a single POS and definitely more than just a handful of arrays, cycle through several dozen blueprint types rather than only producing Megathrons, and in general go to extremes that you, Developers, may not expect.
You will be able to see all your blueprints in assembly arrays etc and remotely start jobs from containers, so that should cover your use case.
EDIT: There is also a nice search / filter interface, you will get some time on SiSi to give us feedback on how this works before we go live too. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3278
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:53:00 -
[18] - Quote
Maximus Andendare wrote:This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets?
The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
560
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:55:00 -
[19] - Quote
Squelch wrote:H3llHound wrote: One RAM now will become 100 RAM after the patch.
Where did you see this? The only thing I see in the Devblog is: Multiply number of R.AM. and R.Db. given for each run of their respective blueprint by 100. Multiply all R.A.M. and R.Db. job requirements by 100, then further multiply that number by the old damage per run percentage.That doesn't mention existing stocks.
Confirming this means existing stock including in market orders, contracts etc CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
9659
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 15:55:00 -
[20] - Quote
penifSMASH wrote:How will cost scaling affect industry in conquerable stations? Will there be unlimited manufacturing/research/etc slots like in npc stations? If so will the station owner still be able to set costs of running jobs
Grarr Dexx wrote:Will there be fees for building in 0.0 or can they just set them all to 0? Is there going to be any point to building anything outside of 0.0?
The cost scaling will affect all build/research locations, including conquerable stations and outposts. All slot limitations are being removed everywhere in EVE, and locations that formerly had slot bonuses will receive other bonuses instead. More info on that will be in future blogs.
Station owners will be able to set part of the cost of running jobs (in the form of taxes), but other parts of the cost will be out of the owner's control. Costs will not ever be able to be set to 0. Again, more info on this will be available in the upcoming blogs. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
9663
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:06:00 -
[21] - Quote
penifSMASH wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:penifSMASH wrote:How will cost scaling affect industry in conquerable stations? Will there be unlimited manufacturing/research/etc slots like in npc stations? If so will the station owner still be able to set costs of running jobs Grarr Dexx wrote:Will there be fees for building in 0.0 or can they just set them all to 0? Is there going to be any point to building anything outside of 0.0? The cost scaling will affect all build/research locations, including conquerable stations and outposts. All slot limitations are being removed everywhere in EVE, and locations that formerly had slot bonuses will receive other bonuses instead. More info on that will be in future blogs. Station owners will be able to set part of the cost of running jobs (in the form of taxes), but other parts of the cost will be out of the owner's control. Costs will not ever be able to be set to zero. Again, more info on this will be available in the upcoming blogs. Where does this mysterious cost go to? Currently, market taxes, clone costs, industry costs and any fees that are station related go to the corp that owns the conquerable.
The taxes go to the corp that owns the station, the scaling costs (more info will be coming in a future blog) are sunk out of the game. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
9663
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:07:00 -
[22] - Quote
Aareya wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:penifSMASH wrote:How will cost scaling affect industry in conquerable stations? Will there be unlimited manufacturing/research/etc slots like in npc stations? If so will the station owner still be able to set costs of running jobs Grarr Dexx wrote:Will there be fees for building in 0.0 or can they just set them all to 0? Is there going to be any point to building anything outside of 0.0? The cost scaling will affect all build/research locations, including conquerable stations and outposts. All slot limitations are being removed everywhere in EVE, and locations that formerly had slot bonuses will receive other bonuses instead. More info on that will be in future blogs. The industry outpost upgrades to null sec outposts (particularly, the Amarr ones) primarily focus on the increase of industry slots. With the removal of slot limitation, will you be altering the bonuses involved with these outpost upgrades? Yes. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
9664
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:15:00 -
[23] - Quote
Slappy Andven wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Xaniff wrote: 2. I predict there will be even more abandoned POSes out hogging all the spaces next to the moons. There needs to be some mechanic for these to be abandoned and destroyed in a reasonable amount of time after running out of fuel and failing to be maintained (like the secure containers that are lost, whether they hold goods or not).
Yeah, that's a good point, we'll note that one down. I get the horrible sensation that you think these changes are all good and positive. They are not. The reaction from industrialists that lead to all those abandoned towers will have serious negative effects on the market as well. What will you do when those of us who build things decide it's not worth it anymore and decide to say screw it, we're not building things? Will you just start seeding the market like on Singularity? These changes seem focused on driving up risk for poor return on the reward side. The inability to lock down and safeguard blueprints in a corporate hangar in a station means one thing, and one thing only: You're taking assets that we have spent years and years building, and giving us complete crap in return. Why even bother playing the game with changes like this?
We're not removing the ability to lock down blueprints in your station. You can still lock down as before and build, research and copy using the infinite slots in the station. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
CCP SoniClover
C C P C C P Alliance
557
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:27:00 -
[24] - Quote
Calorn Marthor wrote:Vincent Athena wrote:About being able to anchor POSes anywhere in high sec: Does that mean the very high security systems will become available? For example, right now you cannot anchor a POS in a 1.0 system. Will that change? Can someone answer this one please? Will we be able to set up towers in 0.8+ sec?
You will be able to anchor towers in any system in hi sec, except systems that are restricted, like rookie systems and trade hubs like Jita. This is the same restricted list as the one that applies to POCOs for instance. |
|
|
CCP RubberBAND
CCP Engineering Corp CCP Engineering Alliance
279
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:29:00 -
[25] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Oh, and one more thing: I might have missed it but will the Gǣcongestion chargesGǥ count up per activity or in total? And/or will it be split by the actual installation? In other words, will my manufacturing be more expensive because I'm in a station that sees a lot of ME research? Or will my ME research become more expensive because I'm using a lab array that already holds a bajillion invention jobs (but if I pick lab #2, I won't have to pay that tax)? Or is it rather the case in both examples that my manufacturing is only made more expensive by other manufacturing and my ME by other ME jobs, both of them happening in the exact same installation that I'm using? GǪor should I wait for the fifth blog before asking?
Should probably wait. To your previous post, the UI is going to reduce the number of clicks required to both install and preview/adjust a job to almost none. Our goal was driven by the idea that we want both batch and single blueprint job installation to be painless but fun. I don't want to spoil the next few blogs so I will leave it at that.
As to the cost scaling based on activity in a system, I will simply say that you should notice the impact on cost of working in a busy system, but the blog should go into all the detail you need. Feel free to poke me on: Twitter |
|
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
2016
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:32:00 -
[26] - Quote
Virtutis Sahasranama wrote:I have a feeling that the answers to this might be a wait if that indication about the costs blog earlier is correct, but right now almost all outpost upgrade paths are related to increasing slots in the outpost. These changes look as though they are going to throw that out the window. Given the reprocessing changes as well and changes to station base refining, does that mean we will get an outpost blog at some point clarifying all the changes to upgrades and outpost changes?
Yes :) |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
566
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:40:00 -
[27] - Quote
Freelancer117 wrote:And the obvious question has to be asked ofc, will the industry changes be tied into CREST ?
We will at the very least be updating the static export with new blueprint data, and I'll try and get this out to devs before the release. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3292
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:45:00 -
[28] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:When you say "14% of cost" as the max slot fee, what does that mean for research jobs? That only makes sense for manufacturing.
Research will have specific ways around that, which will be explained in the proper blog |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3297
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:12:00 -
[29] - Quote
Quazal Atreides wrote:Can i ask my quetsions again!
How big will the RAMs be given they are 100x more required per bpc!.
conider
Anshar requires 40 ram if you saying that this will be multiplied by 100 and then .95 (the damage per run) we will be talking about 3800 ram per anshar run And at 4m3 per one that will require 15200m3
Can i please have an answer on this
Finally what will happen to our existing ram will the all be multiplied by 100x
Good point as well. We'll have a look at volumes and keep you posted if we do any change.
And regarding existing RAM / RDB, yes, they'll be multiplied by 100. |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
570
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:24:00 -
[30] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets? The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job. And can I get an answer in that regard to my question? How are we supposed to compare stations in regard to the different cost levels without ferrying the stuff around? Or have you also not thought this through?
You will be able to get a quote from a station you are not at, with a blueprint you don't even own. More details to follow in the UI blog. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
572
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:30:00 -
[31] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote:Canenald wrote:Sounds to me like manufacturing and research is about to be dumbed down. Yeah, just like the creation of a GUI dumbed down computer use. Hell, now EVERONE will be able to do it... sheesh.
We talk a lot about good and bad complexity within the team. A fair portion of the industry changes are pretty clear examples of removing bad complexity, while still keeping the interesting problems for players to solve.
Some of the changes are also centered around cleaning up years of legacy code, freeing us up to better iterate on the feature and do more sexy looking UI CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
574
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:39:00 -
[32] - Quote
Knug LiDi wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets? The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job. That's nice - BUT - I want to know this cost BEFORE I transport materials to a particular station. I.e. the cost amount need to be reflected in the information about that station. And, of course, it is dynamic. This is necessary. Trial and error trying to find cheap manufacturing while carrying materials is stupid. If the rate is dynamic, it needs to be on the equivalent of a market, so players have the intel to decide how far/how much. Doing this while carrying good is idiotic. Flying to 50 stations to determine a value that may change before I get back is wrong. Let me view the local 'market' for manufacturing just like a can examine the market for ore. Then I will make market decisions
You will be able to request a quote from a station before a) going there b) moving materials and even c) purchasing the blueprint. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
574
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:39:00 -
[33] - Quote
Lors Dornick wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Ranger 1 wrote:Canenald wrote:Sounds to me like manufacturing and research is about to be dumbed down. Yeah, just like the creation of a GUI dumbed down computer use. Hell, now EVERONE will be able to do it... sheesh. We talk a lot about good and bad complexity within the team. A fair portion of the industry changes are pretty clear examples of removing bad complexity, while still keeping the interesting problems for players to solve. Some of the changes are also centered around cleaning up years of legacy code, freeing us up to better iterate on the feature and do more sexy looking UI Success in industry should be about knowing what to build, how, where, when, sourced from where and sold at the right place and at the right time. Edit: and for the right price. It should never be about to be able to stand or navigate a stupid UI.
This. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Arrow
C C P C C P Alliance
501
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:45:00 -
[34] - Quote
We will be publishing a dedicated blog specifically for the UI of the Industry window where we go into more details about what the final player experience will be. Stay tuned! CCP Arrow-á-á|-á Game Design Director -á|-á-áEVE Online -á|-á-á@CCP_Arrow |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
577
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:59:00 -
[35] - Quote
Knug LiDi wrote:CCP Nullarbor wrote:Knug LiDi wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Maximus Andendare wrote:This may be in the cost scaling blog, but will the 0-14% cost increase be reflected in the UI in some way, or will we have to learn this from our spreadsheets? The new UI will show you the accurate price before you actually install the job. That's nice - BUT - I want to know this cost BEFORE I transport materials to a particular station. I.e. the cost amount need to be reflected in the information about that station. And, of course, it is dynamic. This is necessary. Trial and error trying to find cheap manufacturing while carrying materials is stupid. If the rate is dynamic, it needs to be on the equivalent of a market, so players have the intel to decide how far/how much. Doing this while carrying good is idiotic. Flying to 50 stations to determine a value that may change before I get back is wrong. Let me view the local 'market' for manufacturing just like a can examine the market for ore. Then I will make market decisions You will be able to request a quote from a station before a) going there b) moving materials and even c) purchasing the blueprint. Singular quote system will be very slow. Can we not have a region-wide response to the same query? These values should be calculated (daily?) and stored for recall. This could be similar to the contract market. Give me a table of choices ! Just like shopping for mission agents.
You will also get a list of locations you can install the job in the region with a way to compare their relative pricing. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1148
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 19:15:00 -
[36] - Quote
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.
The Rules: 7. Use of profanity is prohibited.
The use of profanity is prohibited on the EVE Online forums. This includes the partial masking of letters using numbers or alternate symbols, and any attempts at bypassing the profanity filter. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
589
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 20:38:00 -
[37] - Quote
DoAsYouAreBid wrote:Quote:Allow Starbases to be anchored anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirements (minus some protected solar systems, like Jita or new player starting systems of course). Anywhere? What does that mean? In a safe? At the Sun? 1000km off a station? I know it's a stupid question but that needs tidying up or clarifying. D-Scan will become a useless worthless piece of cack if pos can be placed anywhere
No, they still need to be anchored at moons. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
589
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 20:41:00 -
[38] - Quote
Halia Thorak wrote:I have a couple of questions and comments about the changes, but over all the look really good.
Firstly how do you intend to address invention and the to make it less clunky without totally breaking it with these changes. In the current pos system if I can't run jobs remotely from a station I need to go to a POS to run the jobs which locks down a toon to the system as the cycle times are only 1.25 hours, do you intend to streamline this?
Secondly I think that a hard cap of 14% is faaaar to low, the fee's as they stand right now are a joke compared to the cost of fueling a pos per slot. The current prices even at 500% its almost equal the cost per hour to run a job in a reasonably fit pos.
Lastly while we're changing copying times I'd like to see T2 BPO copy times remain where they are, if they become more viable then invention you will likely see that system in its current state fizzle out really really quickly. People who got lucky in the T2 BPO lottery already have piles of money, there is absolutely no need to line their pockets even more (imo they should all be done away with to make it fair but oh the rivers that would be cried if you did that).
You will be able to install invention jobs remotely. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1150
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 09:47:00 -
[39] - Quote
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3347
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 11:55:00 -
[40] - Quote
Querns wrote:I thought of a potential gotcha: Will POS assembly modules also have their slots removed? Will you be able to, e.g., run an infinite number of ammo jobs from a single ammo assembly array?
Yes, slots are being removed on everything, however, cost scaling will still be applicable to Starbases as well. Please wait for the appropriate blog for more details. |
|
|
|
CCP Nullarbor
C C P C C P Alliance
620
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 14:36:00 -
[41] - Quote
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:can we turn off the new interface and use the old one that we all know and love/hate?
No, but we may be able to offer some counselling CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3348
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 15:10:00 -
[42] - Quote
sci0gon wrote:ccp confirmation required.
when this change goes live will the bpos that were in the middle of production at the time be relocated to any pos mods that the production was started in or will it continue to export back to its locked down status in the station?
also is there the possibility that you guys may complete all build jobs on the server to free up the bpos so that the players can have peace of mind during the update that they are safely in the station and will have to decide after that whether or not they wish to continue to build in a pos or stick to station building?
also will there be any other purpose to high standings than what is in the game currently?
The issue regarding how to migrate blueprints using starbase when the expansion hits has been noted. We'll update this thread when we have more information about this. |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3348
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 15:55:00 -
[43] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:I've looked through every dev post and still not seen this answered yet.
Are the extra materials going to be considered the base materials now with wastage added on? I'm not quite sure how this is going to work with invented T2 BPCs, as some T2 ship BPCs for example will end up requiring multiple T1 ships to construct. Is this working as intended?
If so then T2 items will be requiring more materials, unless you are lucky enough to own a fully researched T2 BPO. So again, another buff for T2 BPO holders.
All extra materials are turned into regular materials, that will indeed be now affected by skills and waste. Except for Tech I ships and items, as such:
- You should never see a Paladin require 2 Apocalypses to build
- You should never see a Large shield Extender II require 0.75 Large Shield Extender I to build
|
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3351
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 15:56:00 -
[44] - Quote
Max Kolonko wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Querns wrote:I thought of a potential gotcha: Will POS assembly modules also have their slots removed? Will you be able to, e.g., run an infinite number of ammo jobs from a single ammo assembly array? Yes, slots are being removed on everything, however, cost scaling will still be applicable to Starbases as well. Please wait for the appropriate blog for more details. Wait, what?! So what is my incentive to pay 300 000 000 isk a month for fuel if i still have to pay for production slots????
Starbases will have reduced tax cost next to NPC station, and mobile labs / assembly array will have more efficient ME / PE lines. |
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
9687
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 16:46:00 -
[45] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Max Kolonko wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Querns wrote:I thought of a potential gotcha: Will POS assembly modules also have their slots removed? Will you be able to, e.g., run an infinite number of ammo jobs from a single ammo assembly array? Yes, slots are being removed on everything, however, cost scaling will still be applicable to Starbases as well. Please wait for the appropriate blog for more details. Wait, what?! So what is my incentive to pay 300 000 000 isk a month for fuel if i still have to pay for production slots???? Starbases will have reduced tax cost next to NPC station, and mobile labs / assembly array will have more efficient ME / PE lines. How do you know, unless someone on the CSM or CCP told you? Why don't you give us the precise information, since you already know it and are making market moves to maximize profit?
Never change Dinsdale, never change. <3 Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1152
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 20:25:00 -
[46] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!
The Rules: 3. Ranting is prohibited.
A rant is a post that is often filled with angry and counterproductive comments. A free exchange of ideas is essential to building a strong sense of community and is helpful in development of the game and community. Rants are disruptive, and incite flaming and trolling. Please post your thoughts in a concise and clear manner while avoiding going off on rambling tangents.
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
7. Use of profanity is prohibited.
The use of profanity is prohibited on the EVE Online forums. This includes the partial masking of letters using numbers or alternate symbols, and any attempts at bypassing the profanity filter.
26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.
30. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.
CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, GÇ£outingGÇ¥ of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties. Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1154
|
Posted - 2014.04.16 21:46:00 -
[47] - Quote
I will just leave this here... ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1161
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 22:49:00 -
[48] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.
ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1176
|
Posted - 2014.04.21 14:53:00 -
[49] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.
ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1197
|
Posted - 2014.04.24 22:20:00 -
[50] - Quote
thread temporarily locked for some cleaning. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3366
|
Posted - 2014.04.25 12:08:00 -
[51] - Quote
Update!
- All R.A.M. and R.Db. volume has been reduced from 4m3 to 0.04m3 to accommodate for their new required numbers.
- All Starbase Assembly arrays now have a 5% material reduction cost for all manufacturing jobs - except for the Capital Ship Array.
- All Starbase Mobile Laboratories have a further 5% time reduction for all research jobs - except for Reverse Engineering Laboratory.
- Blueprints that use the remote starbase feature before summer hits, but that are delivered after the summer release will automatically be moved back at the original station (not the starbase) location. This is a one-time only move to make sure current jobs are not screwed by the changes.
Example:
- BobTheClever installs Megathron Blueprint in Dodixie NPC station and use his corporation Starbase to research ME on it right now. Estimated delivery date is after the summer release. When he delivers the research ME job, the researched Megathorn blueprint will delivered back at the NPC station.
|
|
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1204
|
Posted - 2014.04.26 00:13:00 -
[52] - Quote
I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3381
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:58:00 -
[53] - Quote
Another update.
Assembly Arrays:
- Material reduction from all Assembly Arrays has been reduced from 5% to 2%.
- Advanced Assembly arrays material waste has been removed. They used to have 10% material waste, they now have 2% material reduction like the regular Assembly Arrays.
- We are considering increasing cargohold on Assembly Arrays, more updates as we get them.
Laboratories:
More details on what's happening to them since slots are going away.
Mobile labs:
- Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.7 (was 0.75)
- Time multiplier for Research TE: 0.7 (was 0.75)
- Time multiplier for copying: 0.7 (was 0.75)
- Time multiplier for invention: 0.45 (was 0.5)
Advanced Mobile labs:
- Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.75 (was 0.75)
- Time multiplier for copying: 0.6 (was 0.75)
- Time multiplier for invention: 0.5 (was 0.5)
Hyasyoda mobile labs:
- Time multiplier for Research ME: 0.65 (was 0.75)
- Time multiplier for Research TE: 0.65 (was 0.75)
- Time multiplier for invention: 0.4 (was 0.5)
|
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3381
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:05:00 -
[54] - Quote
Querns wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Another update. Hyasyoda mobile labs:
- Time multiplier for invention: 0.4 (was 0.5)
Kerblammo! This time multiplier is equivalent to a Tier 3 Caldari Outpost upgrade. That's an additional 40b we don't have to spend while upgrading our space, so thanks for that.
Arrrrgg
DELETE ALL THE OUTPOSTS!
More seriously: will balance time on Hyasoyda lab for that not to happen. Probably tune it down to 0.43 or leave it at 0.45. |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3384
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:18:00 -
[55] - Quote
Querns wrote:Darn -- I was seriously thanking you for reducing our outpost upgrade costs :V But yeah, that is a good idea.
I checked the viability of Starbases copy lines versus Gallente Outposts, but completely forgot about Invention versus Caldari Outposts.
Outposts have to have a small advantage next to the cost, which was a good point, even if unintentional
Also people, listing use cases of which Starbase structures have too small cargoholds next to everyday practical use will help a lot in the balancing, so please keep that coming.
EDIT: fixed invention time multiplier on Hyasodiaaarrwhatever mobile laboratory to 0.45 in the previous post. |
|
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3404
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 14:08:00 -
[56] - Quote
Moved discussion to Starbase Structure changes to the Feature and Ideas discussion for clarity, please go there if you have comments on that particular field.
Thanks for your time. |
|
|
|
|