|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 62 post(s) |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1351
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 15:46:00 -
[1] - Quote
This is big. Very big. Very very big.
Gonna need some time for an educated comment GRRR Goons |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1351
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
Alright, there is only one thing about the changes that I really don't like
Bpos should be better than bpcs. Maybe only a few percent. But there should some kind reward for building from a bpo in a pos.
For small stuff the improvement is already there. Building from a bpo essentially means less effort. But for bigger stuff that changes rather quickly. GRRR Goons |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1351
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:39:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Gilbaron wrote:Alright, there is only one thing about the changes that I really don't like
Bpos should be better than bpcs. Maybe only a few percent. But there should some kind reward for building from a bpo in a pos.
For small stuff the improvement is already there. Building from a bpo essentially means less effort. But for bigger stuff that changes rather quickly. You can react more rapidly to changing market conditions and go direct to manufacture rather than having to maintain a constant backlog of BPCs.
Having a big backlog of bpcs enables faster reaction to a changing market.
Bpos only make things easier to maintain. That's fine for ammo and t1 modules which are usually cheap and don't need much research anyway. You can easily justify putting these in a pos for the benefit.
but it's not so fine for battlecruisers and anything bigger. Those bpos will never see a pos after undergoing research. And even the research part will likely take place in an outpost.
I want to see pos being killed for the bpos they contain. GRRR Goons |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1387
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 17:52:00 -
[4] - Quote
Quote:We're currently leaning heavily towards calculating ME for the job as a whole, not per-run, probably with a limiter that requires every run always consumes at least one of every material (to prevent 9 apocs -> 10 paladins shenanigans).
that would be a really nice change, offers some very interesting optimisation options when considering job length. you may or may not have to adjust some material requirements to make sure that overall material consumption remains the same. the numbers can quickly ad up towards some significant changes for certain items, mainly capital ships, POS mods and T2 components. luckily, you have won some additional time by delaying the release
good to see you are working on adding POS mods to the stuff that can me made in a POS. would be the first time that i can say that i made an actual impact on the game by telling the devs about something :D GRRR Goons |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1387
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 18:07:00 -
[5] - Quote
Quote:We are currently of a mind to shift invented BPCs so they have positive (or at worst 0) ME and TE figures. This a) prevents the removal of extra materials giving invention an extra-hard kick, and in particular b) prevents every invented T2 item from requiring two of the relevant T1 items (due to always rounding up materials). This will probably put all invented BPCs in the 1-5% ME/2-10% TE range, with decryptors adjusted to match. We may adjust T2 build costs upwards across the board to put the net T2 resource usage roughly where it is currently, so we don't end up nerfing the demand for T2 components. (This obviously also serves to close the gap somewhat between invention and T2 BPOs; this is not a goal here but it's an acceptable side-effect.)
If i understood this right it's a rather massive T2 BPO nerf.
if you want to touch T2 BPOs you should NOT touch their profitability. touch the impact they have on the market. GRRR Goons |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1387
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 22:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
Reasons why Invention is inconvenient:
1. clickfest 2. clickfest 3. clickfest 4. optimisation. in order to make a lot of money from invention you need to optimize a lot of things. copying, invention and building all run on different timers and quite a lof of thinking is required to reduce downtime on your slots (character wise).
the interface changes you have planned will drastically reduce the amount of clicking necessary to start an invention job. that is very very convenient and will probably increase the amount of people that are willing to actually get involved with invention. it will also potentially change their behaviour, especially the use of meta items (expected price drop because of the refining changes for quite a few of them combined with easy usage) that change by itself will increase supply without increasing demand and therefore decrease prices
most modules run on 30 minute invention timers. change that to 20 hours and you will make a LOT of people VERY happy. But be careful not to increase the amount of BPCs that can be produced with that kind of job by the same factor.
time x40 bpcs x6
that should put invention in a situation where you can expect an active inventor to produce the same amount of T2 BPCs per day. at the same time, all those who don't like restarting jobs every 30 minutes will be able to produce more. that is significant for the market but probably won't cause a massive crash. some people may move from ships to modules which is good for the ships market.
please keep in mind that ~20 hour timers are awesome (start jobs at the end of a play session so that they are ready at the beginning of the next)
tl;dr
increased invention times ? yes please massively increased supply of T2 BPCs ? nope GRRR Goons |
|
|
|