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) |
Ruric Thyase
Star Frontiers Test Alliance Please Ignore
25
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:07:00 -
[211] - Quote
What about altering the role of Supply Chain Management?
That way people can still keep their BPOs where they are presently, but if they train that skill then they can initiate the build in a station with less activity and not pay the full 14% (for example).
|
Quazal Atreides
StarTrucks
15
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:07:00 -
[212] - Quote
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 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... |
Allison A'vani
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
69
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:07:00 -
[213] - Quote
- Didn't realize you were talking about BPCs in a POS- |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6898
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:08:00 -
[214] - Quote
Allison A'vani wrote:Actually, most module BPOs with decent PE/ME research are worth quite a bit more than 20m. yeah except we're talking about copies, not bpos Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
145
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:08:00 -
[215] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Querns wrote:On a related note:
The removal of standings for anchoring POS makes it trivial to evade destruction of your POS. Right now, if you want to move your POS to a new corporation upon wardec, it takes seven (7) days for standings to promulgate to the corporation's standings. This had the effect of severely limiting the amount of "POS cycling" that could occur. With the removal of standings from the equation, it is now a reasonable response, upon being wardecced, to create a new corporation, unanchor the POS under wardec, and sit on the moon in question in a cloaked industrial sitting in the new, unwardecced corporation, ready to anchor a new pos when the old one comes up.
I suggest that a new corporation be required to wait seven (7) days before being eligible to anchor a new pos. This brings the new era in line with the convoluted, yet functional system that exists today. This is a good idea and should get implemented.
So an industrialist needs a spare corporation in reserve? I am not sure your suggestion addresses the claimed problem. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6898
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:10:00 -
[216] - Quote
Kadl wrote: So an industrialist needs a spare corporation in reserve? I am not sure your suggestion addresses the problem.
tying up an alt makes it at least require a mediocum of planning to trivially avoid wardecs
i would still be irritated at the ease but it would be a vast improvement you must admit Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
288
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:11:00 -
[217] - Quote
Kadl wrote:Weaselior wrote:Querns wrote:On a related note:
The removal of standings for anchoring POS makes it trivial to evade destruction of your POS. Right now, if you want to move your POS to a new corporation upon wardec, it takes seven (7) days for standings to promulgate to the corporation's standings. This had the effect of severely limiting the amount of "POS cycling" that could occur. With the removal of standings from the equation, it is now a reasonable response, upon being wardecced, to create a new corporation, unanchor the POS under wardec, and sit on the moon in question in a cloaked industrial sitting in the new, unwardecced corporation, ready to anchor a new pos when the old one comes up.
I suggest that a new corporation be required to wait seven (7) days before being eligible to anchor a new pos. This brings the new era in line with the convoluted, yet functional system that exists today. This is a good idea and should get implemented. So an industrialist needs a spare corporation in reserve? I am not sure your suggestion addresses the problem. It would work once, then if they were wardecced again, they'd be screwed. This is similar to how the system works today.
How many character slots are you willing to dedicate to new refugee corporations? This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Benny Ohu
Beneath the Ashes Margin of Silence
2905
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:11:00 -
[218] - Quote
Death Ryder wrote:my question to CCP Ytterbium is this....
ARE YOU A FREAKING IDIOT...
your little improvements will turn high sec into a war zone and bring production across eve to a standstill in no time what so ever as the greifer CCP so fondly coddle up to begin destroying pos's left right and center in a damn orgy of wankerness... the future of highsec is... sticky |
gifter Penken
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:12:00 -
[219] - Quote
Again we will see that you can not force people to play stupid.
PvPers keep demanding that rules be changed to make it easier to kill, get stuff.
Once again, all that will happen is that the potential easy targets will alter their play style in a way that means it is still not easy to kill them or get their stuff.
Blueprints have to be at a POS? Okay. We'll create a 1 person, 6 alt corp in high sec, with a large POS with a gazillion hardeners. All we will do with it is crank out BPCs from the BPOs. You'd need hundreds of battleships for a whole day to crack the POS.
Then we will jump the copies out to low/null.
You cannot make us play in a way that makes it easy to kill us and take our stuff. All you can do is make us change our play style, or simply stop playing.
I am getting so sick and tired of the PvPers whining.. oh, change this, or change that... then it would be easy to kill the non-PvPers, or change this so it is easier to get their expensive stuff. WRONG!!!! Change this or that, and we will just adapt our play. We are never going to play a game where we exist to be easy targets for the PvPers. EVER!
People are not going to be putting 10s or 100s of billion of ISK worth of PBOs into corporate POSes, unless is it an alt corp of just their alts.
Removing the ability to leave the BPO at the station and build/research from it at the POS is a stupid, stupid, stupid change, that creates hastle for the industrialist, and WILL NOT achieve the intended purpose of putting the BPOs at risk, because industrialists are not stupid enough to do things that would put those BPOs at risk.
You can't make us play stupid!!!! |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3297
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:12:00 -
[220] - 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. |
|
|
Adellle Nadair
Nuclear Midnight Initiative Associates
26
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:13:00 -
[221] - Quote
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.
Sadly most manufacturing profit comes to an average of about 5% of the value of the item. This means that depending on the usage of the station, it is entirely possible for the profit to be completely lost. Can we please have a graph and numbers to show exactly how this scaling works? For those of us who actually do large amounts of manufacturing, being able to reasonably predict production cost is essential. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
382
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:14:00 -
[222] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Weaselior wrote:Riela Tanal wrote:You need take access in a corp array in order to build, if you have those roles you can simply steal the bpo. This can be solved by making copies but some bpo copes are still worth a lot of isk and can be still stolen. what ones are worth more than like 20m isk besides supercaps 10 Run BPO BS, BPC, Dread/Carrier BPC, T2 BPC ... shall I continue? under 10m, like 20-50m, under 10m except probably jf and blops and marauders which run at most like 100m so yes, please continue proving bpcs are simply not a real theft target
Rofl... when was the last time you had a look at full run BS and Cap BPC? And a lot of the T2 BPC for BLOPS/HAC/CS/JF (ofc) are worth more than 20M and if stored in numbers in a POS for production very well a juicy target in addition to the other billions in materials in the POS for the production and invention. |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2721
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:14:00 -
[223] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote: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. Land rush!
LAND RUSH!!!! http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Grendell
Technologies Unlimited Superior Eve Engineering
861
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:14:00 -
[224] - Quote
I really hope you address the blueprint voting/lockdown system before making the slot changes. Allow a sort of emergency quick vote or something when the starbase gets attacked or reinforced.
|
Canenald
Rubella Solaris Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:15:00 -
[225] - Quote
Sounds to me like manufacturing and research is about to be dumbed down. |
Slappy Andven
A.C.M.E. Construction Inc. Criminal Minds
22
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:15:00 -
[226] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:Riela Tanal wrote:You need take access in a corp array in order to build, if you have those roles you can simply steal the bpo. This can be solved by making copies but some bpo copes are still worth a lot of isk and can be still stolen. what ones are worth more than like 20m isk besides supercaps
Researched to the level most of us have them at? A LOT of them. Normal cap parts, subcap ships, even some rigs. You are ignoring how long it takes to research these things.
---á Slappy Andven CEO A.C.M.E. Construction, Inc.
|
Boltorano
Devious Chemicals
70
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:16:00 -
[227] - Quote
JITAALT808 wrote:I'm not happy that my faction standings that I worked so hard for are now useless. Did you guys give any thought to the effects on mission runners who were making a business out of POS standings? Or to mission runners in general? Basically, standings are worthless at this point. In effect, they are nothing more than a penalty on those with bad standings, as there is only one remaining benefit -- access to L4s for faction standings of 5+. All other standings above that number are quite literally useless save for the bonus bpc's (big whoop) and a reduction in taxes for trading (also big whoop for everyone but serious traders).
I appreciate that you've taken advantage of emergent gameplay and found yourself a niche way to make ISK. That said, sometimes changes should be made for the greater good of all. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20762
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:16:00 -
[228] - Quote
Adellle Nadair wrote:Sadly most manufacturing profit comes to an average of about 5% of the value of the item. This means that depending on the usage of the station, it is entirely possible for the profit to be completely lost. Can we please have a graph and numbers to show exactly how this scaling works? For those of us who actually do large amounts of manufacturing, being able to reasonably predict production cost is essential. It'll be in blog #5, according to the GÇ£big planGÇ¥ section. 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. |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
382
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:16:00 -
[229] - Quote
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? |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6898
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:17:00 -
[230] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Rofl... when was the last time you had a look at full run BS and Cap BPC? And a lot of the T2 BPC for BLOPS/HAC/CS/JF (ofc) are worth more than 20M and if stored in numbers in a POS for production very well a juicy target in addition to the other billions in materials in the POS for the production and invention. bs bpcs have been under a million a run for like half a decade
when it comes to sticking ENOUGH 20m t2 bpcs in a pos to become a theft target: who cares, you're leaving more stuff in there that's a much better theft target like, say, the materials for those ships or the finished ships themselves
until then you keep them in an audit can or the like, it is incredibly trivial to secure your bpcs if you insist on having a theft-worthy amount and it is mind-boggling this simple problem it takes thirty seconds to reason out a solution to has people crying for a change Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
|
Imiarr Timshae
Funny Men In Funny Hats
181
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:18:00 -
[231] - Quote
It's interesting to see that CCP have decided to make the summer expansion not a patch expansion or a content expansion but are actively killing ingame professions.
30-40% reduction in loot reprocessing is very harmful to salvagers. Limitless station research slots is fatal to highsec researchers who use POS. No standings requirement to anchor POS is fatal to people who boost standings for POS deployment.
That's two professions dead and a third drastically nerfed right there.
I wonder what the logic is behind this. TSCA - Free 3rd Party & Collateral Holding Service - POS Deployment Corp Sale/Boosting |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5574
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:19:00 -
[232] - Quote
Xaniff wrote:1. Please say those new images in the blueprint Get Info aren't here to stay. I rather like the text-driven tabs.
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).
3. If there's no lockdown available for blueprints, that's going to seriously up the risk of hauling out stuff like capital component BPOs to the station that are pretty much required non-stop in ship production.
4. While you're redoing the arrays and research facilities, could you add in folders or some sort of container so we can better sort through whose stuff is whose instead of having to rely on a complicated shell game of corporate divisions? Edit: Though judging by that screenshot, it looks like that might have already been considered. I don't think the lock down change is going to be much of an issue. If they are reducing copy time you will simply spit out BPC's to do your manufacturing from.
Now creating those BPC's might have some issues from that standpoint in research POS"s, unless you want to do all of your bpc creation strictly at NPC stations or Outposts.
I'm pretty sure the time consumed with the current voting process to lock/unlock BP's is the main factor they are worried about... because if your POS comes under attack you would not have enough time to go through this process to get your BP's out of harms way before the POS goes into reinforced. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6898
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:19:00 -
[233] - Quote
Grendell wrote:I really hope you address the blueprint voting/lockdown system before making the slot changes. Allow a sort of emergency quick vote or something when the starbase gets attacked or reinforced.
unneeded: you can't lock a bpo in a pos even with this
the only use would be to make it even easier to corp-hop to avoid wardecs by moving your station bpos which isn't something we should be encouraging i think Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Disadvantaged Persons Outreach Division:
"We hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Enteron Anabente
Provisional Provisions
21
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:20:00 -
[234] - Quote
Enteron Anabente wrote:I would encourage you to reconsider the copy times change on T2 BPOs. Making copy times shorter than build times on those BPOs is de facto making them even better money printers than (some of them, at least) already are--if a T2 BPO owner used to be able to manufacture 10 items per day, now he will be able to manufacture 12 per day at essentially the same unit cost (yes, I just made those numbers up). This pushes small-scale T2 producers who rely on invention out of business, since the supply from the cheaper T2 BPOs will be increasing.
TL;DR: making copying times shorter than production times for T2 BPOs will concentrate more wealth in the hands of already-wealthy people and hurt small-scale industrialists. Please don't do it.
Can I at least get acknowledgement that a dev saw this, please? |
Adellle Nadair
Nuclear Midnight Initiative Associates
26
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:20:00 -
[235] - Quote
David Magnus wrote:I sincerely hope that you have fully thought through the BPO changes.
Having to move BPOs around and not being able to leave them locked down, or lock them down in a POS is an open invitation to corp theft.
Removing the usefulness of this basic protection will only encourage people to make 1-man corps and discourage anyone from working together once they have any BPO of significant value. BPOs are one of the only assets that have lasting, significant, and appreciating value. You may think think that adjusting the risk/reward on these will spark more gameplay, but it will only encourage people to play solo.
Agreed. |
gifter Penken
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:21:00 -
[236] - Quote
The issue with needing faction standing to place a high sec tower is that it is based on all members of the corp. It is very, very hard to get all members of a corp to all agree to grind up their stansdings. This means people have to leave corp for a couple days.
To me, the better fix, rather than removing the need for corp standing, would be to change it from "all members" to just the CEO. Or, perhaps a "top 20%" of corp members are counted toward corp standing.
As for it taking months, or even a month... I've been able to grind standing to 7.0-8.0 in a week. Tutorials like 6 times, SoE, tags, COSMOS missions. It is not that hard.
Grinding corp standings for perfect refine was much more difficult than faction standing.
Querns wrote:Weaselior wrote:Riela Tanal wrote:You need take access in a corp array in order to build, if you have those roles you can simply steal the bpo. This can be solved by making copies but some bpo copes are still worth a lot of isk and can be still stolen. what ones are worth more than like 20m isk besides supercaps T2 BPOs. To that, I say just remove T2 BPOs.
Agreed!
Turn all the existing T2BPOs into BPCs with like 10 years worth of runs.
That would allow CCP to fix invention (that intentionally sucks just to maintain T2BPO value), and give new players to eventually, some decade, be able to compete on equal footing.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
288
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:22:00 -
[237] - Quote
Honestly, any situation in which the potential for theft increases is a good thing for eve. Trust being a weak link is one of the things that makes Eve great, and makes it actually stand out from other games in the same market. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Elena Thiesant
Sun Micro Systems
1323
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:23:00 -
[238] - 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..
Remotely start jobs from BPs which are in containers? Please say that wasn't a mis-type, That alone will make so much difference.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20762
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:23:00 -
[239] - Quote
Imiarr Timshae wrote:It's interesting to see that CCP have decided to make the summer expansion not a patch expansion or a content expansion but are actively killing ingame professions.
30-40% reduction in loot reprocessing is very harmful to salvagers. Limitless station research slots is fatal to highsec researchers who use POS. No standings requirement to anchor POS is fatal to people who boost standings for POS deployment.
That's two professions dead and a third drastically nerfed right there.
I wonder what the logic is behind this. Well, for one, salvagers don't care about loot reprocessing GÇö they care about salvage. Highsec researchers can still use POSes, only now it'll be for cost reasons rather than availability reasons. That leaves the third one, which was an idiotic mechanic to begin with, so if that profession dies a horrible death, it's a worth-while sacrifice for the greater good. 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. |
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
5574
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 17:23:00 -
[240] - Quote
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. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base. |
|
|
|
|
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 |