Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 56 post(s) |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
559
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 09:57:00 -
[1] - Quote
Regarding the following bullet point from the recent industry dev blog,
Quote:"Copy time on all blueprints is going to be slightly shorter than the time required to build from that blueprint, providing a low(er) risk option to build at POS for those who wish to do so."
, does this mean that blueprints that at the moment take a very long time to copy are going to have that time reduced, for example some mining crystals (E.g. Arkonor) take an age to copy (as you must if you want to invent with them) compared to the length of time it takes to actually build one, or does it mean that manufacturing time is going to be increased to more closely match the copy time? |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
559
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 11:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
What? Did someone just say scaling taxes apply to POS owners? Really? My manufacturing and research at the POS I'm paying 450m a month in fuel to run... is going to be taxed? |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
559
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 12:25:00 -
[3] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Victoria Sin wrote:What? Did someone just say scaling taxes apply to POS owners? Really? My manufacturing and research at the POS I'm paying 450m a month in fuel to run... is going to be taxed?
Or do you mean starting a job on the station floor, not at the actual POS? Scaling costs will apply to all, just think of it as overhead on machine refits/repairs/scaling up plant lines etc.
No. I'm thinking of it as a tax on manufacturing in high sec, additional to the existing cost I already incur running a POS and one I cannot escape even with several highly skilled characters. |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
559
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 12:32:00 -
[4] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Or increased maintenance costs on automated systems, just like factories in rl...things aren't magically made from goods, they are processed and that carries inherent overheads no matter where you do it. CCP could model this by making manufacture jobs consume mechanical parts and robotics per run, test cultures, bacteria, Water cooled CPU etc for research runs. This would simply add complexity though (Unless the super whizzy GUI will deal with the nastiness).
My factory is completely automated. All of the things necessary to make it run and maintain it are included in the "fuel block". Remember how all of that stuff was combined into a block to make running a POS less of a pain in the butt?
|

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
559
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 12:40:00 -
[5] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: I was just making an example case for why, but it stands to reason that the more you push the factory the more it'll cost in maintenance overheads. Would you rather this be a tax for simplicity or shipping more fuel blocks which as you say contain all the goodies required for maintenance etc...and as far as I know stations are almost always manned in some way or another. We just don't list crew as it would over-complicate things. A fully automated system will fail at some piont no matter how good it is. The more complexthe system, the more failures. Squishy humans will always be required to a degree
It was CCP who changed POSs to use the same amount of fuel regardless of which modules you had onlined there, not me. As far as I'm concerned, 28,800 fuel blocks a month on a large POS is already covering everything I can fit on it. If they want to *reduce* my fuel cost if I offline modules, fine I have no problem with that. Otherwise, just piling on even more costs will have a single effect on me as a small business owner: I'll take down the POS and not bother building any more.
|

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
559
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 12:50:00 -
[6] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: I'm new to POS management and will be setting one up just as soon as I can so I'm thinking CCP expect this will balance out...and less profit is better than no profit so many people will consider quitting then just carry on as is and accept it.. Also I would expect that your POS would still manufacture the same amount after the release as it does now without incurring costs. I *think* the change is that if you stack more jobs onto a lab than its optimal rating it will incur the stacking costs per extra job. This is yet to be made clear in a future blog though.
As a side note I only just earned the standings required to stand up a POS but am not concerned about the time this has taken due to the other benefits from having done so. I have no issue with dropping the standings requirement but would like to see it have some impact in some way on the whole S&I area to benefit those who have gone through the grind.
Well, in the absence of any clarity we surely can't draw any conclusions. Specifically it isn't clear how R&D and manufacturing at POS's is affected by all of this. |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
560
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 13:04:00 -
[7] - Quote
Firvain wrote:
But it isnt tax, thats what you are wrong about.
A factory can churn out 50 jobs per day at cost X what is now. But said factory in teh future can churn out 100 jobs at cost Y, but no one said it cant do just 50 jobs at cost X still. Just when you get over the amount it is ment for scaling cost should come into play.
No point in getting all angry and huffpuff abou tthese changes when we only have half of the info. Look forward to that next devblog where they'll go more in detail about that scaling cost and how it works exactly.
if 50 jobs turn into cost Y and not stay at cost X, then sure go ahead and be all angry lol
I don't see anywhere that the costs of manufacturing are going to be the same. I see them scaling with how popular the factory is. But what isn't clear to me is whether a POS assembly array is classed as a "factory" for the purposes of said costs. If it is, how is the cost to be calculated? I'm going to be taxed for running jobs in my own factory?
I don't know what your other point is. At the moment I churn out 50 jobs a day at cost 50X. After the expansion, I will still churn out 50 jobs a day but my cost will be 50X + tY, where Y is some scaling function and t is the current job number. I have no idea and I don't think CCP do either. |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
561
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 13:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
Banko Mato wrote: Except that your additional cost of tY might well turn out to be zero (or near zero) for the same number of jobs your POS can currently handle. With the benefit, that you can install even more jobs, but then your tY will indeed increase. Right now however all this is speculation until CCP releases exact numbers ;)
As a business person, I don't like uncertainty. Whether or not my current or planned run is profitable depends to a large extent upon certain costs I know I'm going to incur. For me the cost is crystallised when I actually buy the moon goo or components or minerals. Everything else is fixed. But now it seems CCP are going to introduce a variable cost factor I have no way of predicting. It's really quite obnoxious. |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
561
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 13:40:00 -
[9] - Quote
Ranger 1 wrote: Well, we know that the exact cost will be shown before you run the job. What we don't know if if you can put together "hypothetical" manufacturing runs to see what the cost would be.
Of course they aren't going to do that, no. It's developer effort. I will be able to see what the current cost is for a manufacturing slot but what am I supposed to do if it's now too high? Move my stuff - move my POS, what? How often am I supposed to do this? I have hundreds of containers with BPCs in, are CCP going to make it easier to move my business from one system to the next? Are they going to make it safer? Of course they aren't.
|

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
561
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 13:58:00 -
[10] - Quote
LHA Tarawa wrote: PvPers need to be content to go PvP against other players that want to PvP. You are never going to get industrialists to play in a way that makes them easy kills for PvPers.
CCP could even things up by allowing us industrialists to fit tracking devices to the items we make and/or to booby-trap them so they random explode, taking out the player with them. Otherwise, Indy PvP is Indy PvP, same but different. We PvP on price, efficiency, cost, market manipulation.
|

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
562
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 14:08:00 -
[11] - Quote
Firvain wrote: you can, they said so in a post
For a single run, yes. But the costs will scale if you put on, say, 20 or 40 runs at the same time, as one often does. Is that cost predictable?
Another problem I have: If slots are being removed, are they being retained at POS's? If not, how is that going to work?
So much confusion. But from what I've read so far it's going to make the whole business intensely annoying to manage. |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
577
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 19:47:00 -
[12] - Quote
Weaselior wrote: hell both you and i lose out way more on this pos safety thing than any of this rabble
For a guy who spends most of his spare time suicide ganking miners in high sec, I'm surprised.
|

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
577
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 20:09:00 -
[13] - Quote
Querns wrote:Victoria Sin wrote:Weaselior wrote: hell both you and i lose out way more on this pos safety thing than any of this rabble
For a guy who spends most of his spare time suicide ganking miners in high sec, I'm surprised. It may surprise you that even nullsec dwellers such as me and my colleagues are invested in industry. Probably more than most people in this thread, come to think of it.
It doesn't surprise me but as you own large tracts of null you'd be very interested in making it more profitable from a production point of view and HS less so. You don't care all that much. You can take it or leave it. But until I've seen all of the dev blogs and got a broader view of exactly how everything is going to fit together, it's impossible to say whether any of us have a dog in this race or not.
Just remember that taxes change behaviour: You either go and try to find somewhere you'll get taxed less or you just stop doing the thing that's being taxed - you divest, so to speak. I might personally choose the latter. There's an optimal point beyond which an aspect of the game goes from being an interesting little hobby to a pain in the buttox. I don't know if CCP intend to cross that line with this expansion. |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
578
|
Posted - 2014.04.17 20:58:00 -
[14] - Quote
Radgette wrote: So we know there is going to be a new "tax" added to ALL pos use, were just waiting on how much.
Depending on the the numbers, it might be better to manufacture and research at an NPC station than suffer the costs of a POS. If it's less than 450m a month (I've already written off the cost of the POS and POS modules), then that'll work out OK I suppose. But with CCP, every silver lining tends to have a cloud. Somewhere...
With this I imagine producing in volume which in any other marketplace would reduce your costs, might actually increase them in Eve. This would be completely counter-intuitive and unrealistic as an economic model. |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
580
|
Posted - 2014.04.18 10:00:00 -
[15] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote:We need an API for querying the tax scaling of stations.
Yes. Otherwise the tools we've written to help us manage our production, which CCP don't provide (grrr) won't be accurate.  |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
580
|
Posted - 2014.04.18 10:02:00 -
[16] - Quote
Althalus Stenory wrote:for ore compression only in POS (when will we be able to contract courier from station to POS ?)
As far as I know, you'll still be able to compress it in a Rorqual, not just a POS. Presumably you do need a POS to park the Rorqual whilst it compresses, but otherwise it's what I'm doing today, so no change there.
|

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
580
|
Posted - 2014.04.18 15:21:00 -
[17] - Quote
Soldarius wrote: You can't possibly be that ignorant about import/export costs. Do you have any idea how much it costs to move that many (or any realistic amount) of DCIIs from nulsec to hisec?
I do. It's pointless building them there right now. The local markets are too small for high volume. What's interesting in this discussion, however, is the left wing thinking: This industry is struggling so in order to even the playing field we're going to impose a tax on those that are a success. That's basically what you're suggesting here. I see this all the time in government policies. It's how you wreck industries they were once thriving and impose higher costs on consumers.
|

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
581
|
Posted - 2014.04.19 18:46:00 -
[18] - Quote
Weaselior wrote: left wing economic thinking is demonstrably empirically superior to right-wing thinking though you are clearly a poor economic thinker of any stripe
Yes. Just go and try to buy a pint of milk in Venezuela or a loaf of bread in North Korea and you'll feel some embarrassment for the comment you've posted here. |

Victoria Sin
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
582
|
Posted - 2014.04.19 23:07:00 -
[19] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote: yeah, everyone knows venezuela has been using the metric system for ninety-nine years. jeez, read a book, victoria
I have no idea what you're talking about and I'm not sure you do either. |
|
|