Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 56 post(s) |

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20757
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:12:00 -
[121] - Quote
Oh, and one more thing: I might have missed it but will the GÇ£congestion chargesGÇ¥ count up per activity or in total? In other words, will my manufacturing be more expensive because I'm in a system that sees a lot of ME research? GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |

Grarr Dexx
Snuff Box
356
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:12:00 -
[122] - 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.
An offering to the god of balance. |

Ydnari
Estrale Frontiers Project Wildfire
311
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:13:00 -
[123] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote: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. Will their volume be divided by 100? They are already quite bulky. -- |

Slappy Andven
A.C.M.E. Construction Inc. Criminal Minds
21
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:14:00 -
[124] - Quote
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?
---á Slappy Andven CEO Proletariat Projects, Inc. Executor, SoulWing Alliance |

Quazal Atreides
StarTrucks
14
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:14:00 -
[125] - Quote
how are RAMs going to work?
In your example you said 60 rams for 1 invuln field BPC - that is 240m3 of space per BPC
You woudl need a freighter load of RAMS just for a batch of t2 ship production?
Also,
How / or will standings have an impact on the build / research cost in stations, so tied into the same mechanics as sales tax you can reduce tax by skills? or, is the base cost a flat rate and cannot be reduced.! If this it he case then the hoursand hours people spend doing mission for nothing but standings would be pointless Still the only person to offer corp creation free of charge. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=35634#post35634 Created over 200 was 3rd on the all time corporation job history on eve-board. This service is in stasis due to personal game time... |
|

CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
9664

|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:15:00 -
[126] - 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/ |
|

Ralph King-Griffin
Var Foundation inc.
762
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:16:00 -
[127] - Quote
Im really impressed with this, verry cool changes.
the things being addressed here are pretty much why i don't build anything in eve.
"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)"
mwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!! Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼a«£¦¬¦P¦¬a«£Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼ -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-áIf In Doubt....Do....Excessively. Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼a«£¦¬¦P¦¬a«£Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼Gû¼
|

Nimminnas Vibeke
Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative
1
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:18:00 -
[128] - Quote
In short say good bye:
- Research service corp/alliances - Premade corp with high standings buisness - High value BPO copy buisness
Say hello:
- Unlimited slots posibility
Next are be office? Am i missed something?
|

Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
285
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:18:00 -
[129] - 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?
Not really.
These changes are about tilting the game in the direction it's supposed to be tilted -- you must endure risk for reward. A significant portion of the changes in Rubicon and in the new expansion are in the removal of low-to-no risk activities such as reprocessing, research, and manufacturing.
That being said, if you do wish to eliminate risk, you can still utilize station-based RAM lines. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |

Callic Veratar
597
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:18:00 -
[130] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: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.
It's almost like this is adding risk if players want free researching...  |

Grarr Dexx
Snuff Box
357
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:19:00 -
[131] - Quote
While we're talking about unavoidable costs in 0.0 stations, is there a reason repairs can be set to 0? Who is paying the guys patching up your ships? What about the materials needed to bring back structural integrity? It makes no sense. |

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
382
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:19:00 -
[132] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: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.
But they are in the POS... for research ... and production ... and invention ...  |

Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2721
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:19:00 -
[133] - Quote
I have an idea about "placeholder" POSes. Change the rule to:
A moon may have any number of POSes anchored. But only one can be on-line at any time.
Now if I anchor a POS but do not fuel it, anyone else can still put up theirs and turn it on, making mine useless. If I forget to fuel my POS someone else can take advantage and turn on theirs, and I'm out of luck. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |

probag Bear
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
15
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:20:00 -
[134] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote: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.
Thanks for the quick response. Remotely starting jobs from containers would deal with most of that problem; that mechanic is not currently available was all. |

Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1335
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:20:00 -
[135] - Quote
sweet baby jesus GRRR Goons |

Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Disturbed Acquaintance
1260
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:20:00 -
[136] - 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?
if I read the blog correctly
only the systems listed on the rookie systems page will be out of bounds (and places like Jita .. Jita was mentioned specifically too.) |

Dominus Alterai
Explorer Corps Disavowed.
84
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:21:00 -
[137] - Quote
So, a few questions for clarification:
If there are no longer slot limitations, what is the point of the Hyasyoda lab? If slots are no longer limited and cost more ISK instead, will slots in a mobile lab also cost ISK (if so, who will be paid)? When will we FINALLY be able to rent out slots in our towers to random people (a "feature" that hasn't been available since the introduction of POS structures)? Illigitimate son of Korako "The Rabbit" Kosakami.
Ship miner/corpse collector extrordinaire. |

Callic Veratar
597
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:22:00 -
[138] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:I have an idea about "placeholder" POSes. Change the rule to:
A moon may have any number of POSes anchored. But only one can be on-line at any time.
Now if I anchor a POS but do not fuel it, anyone else can still put up theirs and turn it on, making mine useless. If I forget to fuel my POS someone else can take advantage and turn on theirs, and I'm out of luck.
Decent idea. I also like the possibility of allowing it to be hacked and unanchored if left unpowered for a month or more. The two together would make POS ownership slow, but competitive. |

Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
285
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:22:00 -
[139] - Quote
I'm not even really sure what all you folks are upset about WRT the removal of lockdown BPO research and manufacturing. In highsec, you have to be wardecced before your POSes can come under attack. You get 24 hours notice to cancel jobs, pull up stakes, and flee to a new corporation. With the removal of standings requirements, it is trivial to cycle your corporation and keep your moon. If anything, it's becoming EASIER to mitigate this risk. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |

Allison A'vani
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
67
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:22:00 -
[140] - Quote
Slappy Andven wrote:
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?
BPOs are suppose to be like PLEX or rare items, they are investments. Literally no one who is remotely intelligent is ever going to use a POS for copying after this change. The risk is too extreme. Sure, I keep around 1 - 2B in materials in my manufacturing POS, but my 10 - 15B worth of BPOs will never ever be taken to a POS. Why would I ever make such a risk? Unless you bring the copy time on Advanced Labs down to something obscene like .10 multiplier or give 10x the copy yield, then NO ONE is EVER going to copy at a POS ever again. |

Nemo Sokarad
Tribal Mist Mildly Sober
16
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:23:00 -
[141] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: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.
The good thing about locking down your BPOs atm is that everyone in your corp can use them to produce in your POS, after the patch you would have to unlock a multi billion BPO, bring it to a pos and lock it again and hope that noone gains starbase operator and fueler roles (which you usually need to do anything relevant in a POS) and messes with the POS by offlineing it and then shooting the hangar or the laboratory.
|

Benny Ohu
Beneath the Ashes Margin of Silence
2902
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:23:00 -
[142] - Quote
this is what i've been looking forwards to for a while, i'm very happy with this
@kitty bear, Calorn Marthor, Vincent Athena, the list of systems you can't do PI in might be a good indicator as to where you won't be able to erect a starbase? |

Tikktokk Tokkzikk
S T R A T C O M Critical-Mass
166
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:23:00 -
[143] - Quote
Are we going to see any changes to mining in lowsec and wormhole space anytime soon? |

Boltorano
Devious Chemicals
66
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:25:00 -
[144] - Quote
I would LOVE to see the office cap removed with this sort of pricing scale put in. Far too many factory stations in lowsec sit idle because nullsec entities have bought up all the offices to make midpoint cynos easier. |

Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
145
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:25:00 -
[145] - Quote
In general I like the basic ideas being worked on. Providing flexible increasing costs for high sec is great. I am curious about the teams mentioned for the last blog, and wonder if that is a crucial piece to understanding how everything else will work. I can imagine a new game concept called teams which completely changes how all of these changes are viewed. For that reason I think the comments on these changes may have limited importance and usefulness. Still I want to mention some quick issues which may appear.
1) Abandoned POSes - We need some mechanism to remove abandoned POSes easier. 2) Tech 2 BPOS - Improving the stats (like copy speed) will make the more used putting additional pressure on all of the inventors working on similar products. 3) Land rush for Higher Security locations 1.0...
|

Callic Veratar
597
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:25:00 -
[146] - Quote
Allison A'vani wrote:NO ONE is EVER going to copy at a POS ever again.
YOU won't. Others will. They will lose high ME/PE BPOs. |

Slappy Andven
A.C.M.E. Construction Inc. Criminal Minds
21
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:26:00 -
[147] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: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.
This response is at best disingenuous. The vast majority of people locking down blueprints for use in a POS are in stations that don't have those slots. In short, this change screws the VAST majority of us without recourse.
---á Slappy Andven CEO Proletariat Projects, Inc. Executor, SoulWing Alliance |
|

CCP SoniClover
C C P C C P Alliance
557

|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:27:00 -
[148] - 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. |
|

Benny Ohu
Beneath the Ashes Margin of Silence
2902
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:27:00 -
[149] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:this is what i've been looking forwards to for a while, i'm very happy with this
@kitty bear, Calorn Marthor, Vincent Athena, the list of systems you can't do PI in might be a good indicator as to where you won't be able to erect a starbase? was it planetary interaction or something else that had restricted systems :S
e: there we go |

Boltorano
Devious Chemicals
67
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 16:28:00 -
[150] - Quote
Slappy Andven wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote: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. This response is at best disingenuous. The vast majority of people locking down blueprints for use in a POS are in stations that don't have those slots. In short, this change screws the VAST majority of us without recourse.
Lucky for you, slots will soon be available at the nearest station that provides those services. And you won't even need standings to anchor a POS there! |
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 72 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |