| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 62 post(s) |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 16:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
Just want to point out, using BPC's won't be preferred over most BPO's unless we can stack them to run more than the max runs at a time. Right now I can only build 20 t1 cruisers, for example, from a BPC job at once, regardless of copy speed that is still the limiting factor.
This is good news for inventors though - making t2 modules from BPO's will remain an arduous affair. They will start needing personal outposts or have to risk putting them in POS to avoid costs to produce at scale. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 17:31:00 -
[2] - Quote
Aryth wrote:MailDeadDrop wrote:I get a strange feeling when I see players (Weasilor, Aryth, ElectronHerd Askulf, etc.) having a better understanding of the economics than the Devs. It's a partly warm feeling, partly sick feeling.
Also, Eve Online's economics still make it the best game. Thank you CCP.
MDD I do wish we were more public sometimes around what we do to the economy as I think it would draw a totally new type of player in. Then the paranoia kicks in. Ah well.
Reading about the FW thing on SA was the thing that perked my interest, as a matter of fact.
altrue wrote:
Yeah but an industry rewamp would still be a good opportunity to get rid of these T2 BPOs...
The real way to handle these isn't to get rid rather reduce their impact. If one t2 bpo can produce 1000 of a particular module a week, but 100,000 are traded a week, it affects for 1% of the volume and you can largely forget about it. The issue is if a bpo can produce 10, 20 or even 50% of the volume of an item and there are literally hundreds of examples where this is the case. Capping TE on T2 BPO's would be a good start, but wouldn't even begin to get to the point where it is worth inventing a lot of things. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 17:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
Myxx wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: "Have to" why? ME 6 translates to ~8.6%, which we're rounding up to 9% in the new system. What else has changed that suddenly makes researching further necessary?
I think I hear DUST calling for your help. Being serious now, tl;dr: Old system made sense in that the scale was a curve in regards to how much further research was worth. New system is flat and each level is worth pretty much the same before it (in effect). You are actually simply adding waste to things that were pretty much done being researched. Ie, .1% waste under current becomes 1%. Its annoying and more than a little ****** on your end. All I'm really saying is that I think you had another really bad idea and should've left well enough alone.
What is wrong with waste if everybody has waste? |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 17:58:00 -
[4] - Quote
Zakarumit CZ wrote:Bad Bobby wrote:Seith Kali wrote:The real way to handle these isn't to get rid rather reduce their impact. If one t2 bpo can produce 1000 of a particular module a week, but 100,000 are traded a week, it affects for 1% of the volume and you can largely forget about it. The issue is if a bpo can produce 10, 20 or even 50% of the volume of an item and there are literally hundreds of examples where this is the case. Capping TE on T2 BPO's would be a good start, but wouldn't even begin to get to the point where it is worth inventing a lot of things. It would be far better to improve all the unpopular T2 products, so that people actually use them all in reasonable volume. That way there would be sufficient space for the T2 BPO owners and a reasonable number of inventors in every market. This seems to be the approach that has been taken by the balance team, so if we give them some time the "problem" will get solved. This will not stop people hating on eachother out of ignorance, prejudice and envy. But those issues are somewhat out of scope. Exactly. CCP should search for items where T2 BPOs dominate market and rebalance the items, so people actually use them. No need to touch prints at all.
That is ridiculous. The same number of ships will continue to need the same number of modules, moving around which ones will only happen at the expense of others.
How many T2 BPOs do you have exactly? |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 18:21:00 -
[5] - Quote
T2 BPO's can stay, why not? They just shouldn't be able to have a monopoly on any particular market. The tricky way is to nerf their output until they hold value but invention utterly overshadows them in all cases. The easy way is to at least not buff them. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 18:35:00 -
[6] - Quote
Irin Fidard wrote:Can we please also get increased max runs on capitals like Orca and Freighters ?
Now I can make jobs for a month with 6 orcas or 2 freighters. (more on pos) It is much more clicking and flying arround if I have to produce from one run BPCs.
Oh and are you saying my ME 12 Charon BPO will be perfect after patch ? saving me the remaining research time ? great!
I mentioned this problem already. You can't solve that without making T2 BPO production even more convenient than it already is. Take your pick. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:22:00 -
[7] - Quote
Nalha Saldana wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:My understanding of the T2 market is that individual items tend to be either completely BPO-dominated or largely invention dominated. In principle I totally recognize that increased supply of cheaper goods can have an impact, but in practice there are (as I understand it) very few cases where this *actually* matters. This is dangerous and no safe for future developments, you should make stable changes that makes sense in the long run. I would rather see a something big, like dropping the bomb and removing t2 BPOs to make industry more fun for more people.
Fun != Profitable. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:03:00 -
[8] - Quote
Bad Bobby wrote:Abla Tive wrote:I am not fully familiar with POS's, but I seem to recall that you could copy faster on a POS than on a station.
This speed up was non trivial as I recall.
For a T2 BPO owner, would it now make sense to run a POS to make copies (albeit at the cost of daily log ins to make sure that you have not been dec'd)
Would this impact the market? Many people that produce from T2 BPOs do so at a POS already, so they are already getting that productivity bonus. It looks to me like these changes will reduce T2 BPO output overall because more people will choose the simplicity and safety of NPC station production over the risk, cost and complexity of POS production.
They would, if BPC copy time wasn't receiving a huge buff for T2 BPOs. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:06:00 -
[9] - Quote
Kadl wrote:Abla Tive wrote:I am not fully familiar with POS's, but I seem to recall that you could copy faster on a POS than on a station.
This speed up was non trivial as I recall.
For a T2 BPO owner, would it now make sense to run a POS to make copies (albeit at the cost of daily log ins to make sure that you have not been dec'd)
Would this impact the market? Yes it can impact the market. Advanced Mobile Laboratory x0.65 of copy speed Perhaps some people will put their T2 BPOs in POSes. That is risk, and may result in it being destroyed. T2 BPOs are worth a bit of a hunt.
If we could get cargo scanners for pos modules and assembly arrays + labs dropped loot then it would be an issue. As it stands your far more likely to spend hundreds of man hours bashing High Sec pos's for t1 bpcs as you are anything juicy. Frankly even for a couple of battleship BPO's it isn't worth it.
If we get some way of kicking out serious DPS in highsec, the story changes. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:17:00 -
[10] - Quote
Bad Bobby wrote: They will have to copy at a NPC station to reduce the risk, which means that the copy speed limits their production.
So far we have no indication that copy speed is getting bonuses anywhere, Pos or other wise. As long as copy speed is faster or equal to production speed per run, production speed will be the bottleneck for T2 BPO production. I ask you again, how many do you have? |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:28:00 -
[11] - Quote
A general rebalance of BPC max runs wouldn't go amiss at all. Capping T2 BPO's max runs at the number of runs achieved from an invented BPC without decyptor could be an interesting twist in the tale... Death by clickfest and inconvenient build lengths . |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:44:00 -
[12] - Quote
I hear a vested interest goes a long way too. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 16:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
There are really, really few examples of items where ME100 is worth having over current ME15 or so. If you needed ME100 battleship BPOs to compete in the T1 market, for example, T1 would be as impenetrable as T2 bpo markets. T1 would be only accessible to those who have invested an enormous amount of isk with a really poor ROI.
It shouldn't be this way, Greyscale has got the new ME levels pretty good in my opinion. T1 should be accessible for new industrialists, with highsec guys progressing on to T2 or T3 as they grow and moving to more dangerous space if they want to pursue capitals.
Current ME/PE10 doesn't tie a t1 subcap BPO up for years locking new players out. The proposed transition looks pretty good to me on this level. If a player has an over-researched BPO that was a poor decision to begin with, at least now others won't be tricked into making the same mistake.
TL;DR Good scaling, greyscale. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:01:00 -
[14] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote: It is evident you haven't understood how ME will work in the new system.
Firstly, I have. Secondly, reducing the barrier to entry for T1 at the BPO level is an excellent change in my opinion. I'm sorry your ME100 raven won't realise the ROI you envisaged. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:25:00 -
[15] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote:Seith Kali wrote:Medalyn Isis wrote: It is evident you haven't understood how ME will work in the new system.
Firstly, I have. Secondly, reducing the barrier to entry for T1 at the BPO level is an excellent change in my opinion. I'm sorry your ME100 raven won't realise the ROI you envisaged. It would make no difference to the barrier to entry as can be seen in the posts below.
Of course it would. If 10 became perfect then all the BPO's where the optimal is greater than 10 less investment will be necessary. This will be offset somewhat but the research time changes, but from the hints we have seen of teams we will be able to buy big advantages there.
Massively researching T1 BPOs has never been an intelligent choice, the fact so many players were foolish enough to do so indicates two things. Firstly they don't think things through correctly, reducing credibility of their protests on this issue. Secondly, the system was confusing enough to make it look like a good idea to a number of people.
These changes do not hurt them, they simply don't put players who made smarter research choices at a disadvantage. If my set of ME 14 cruiser BPOs became redundant because of the whining of the vocal few, I would be terribly upset. There are an awful lot of people who DID make good research choices and hurting the relative value of their BPO's because of people like you trying to justify your foolishness is ridiculous. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 17:31:00 -
[16] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:Weaselior wrote:Regan Rotineque wrote:adding another voice to the 100 lvl idea - tjis would allow much more flexibility in terms of conversion and create far fewer 'perfect' scenarios, and at the same time reward those who invested additional time to 'market shape' their BPO collection for the purposes of selling bpc's or bpc kits. these people are idiots and should not be rewarded for their idioticy Way to put apples and oranges together. One thing is how the stuff will be implemented (complex or simple) another is how to deal with current BPOs. It was not an act of idiocy to have very pristine BPOs for those who were strong in the BPC copies markets. I have all ME500+ capital component BPOs and other BPOs have taken 2 years to research to be the best of all on the market. This was a long term investment, we had no "preadvice" our investments would be worth zero " :because: ". How CCP will deal with this (in a simple or complex manner) is not related with the simple fact that people invested in stuff for a result and now the result is being deleted.
Your BPOs will still be the most valuable, but ME500 on capital components is just ridiculous. The extra cost of your BPCs over ME32 ones would have been an equally poor investment for your customer, I expect. Either way one of the pair of you were losing and that sucks. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 18:08:00 -
[17] - Quote
That guys ME500 capital component BPOs will still be some 6 months researched past perfect. Poor guy.  |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 18:14:00 -
[18] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote: Yeah, that's fair. I'll think about this some more.
The issue here may be that the scaling gets a little out of hand at the high end: I'm not sure there's any gameplay benefit to having research times measured in decades for anything in-game. I think you should look at adjusting the curves or times for the high-end bpos (basically capital and above) if you want to fix this sort of problem.
If you switch to a 100 point system combined with copy speed improvements, it's not unthinkable to have high end bpos researching for a lot of the time and still realising benefits. Decades for the last 10 points is crazy though, agreed.
|

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2014.04.29 19:52:00 -
[19] - Quote
Medalyn Isis wrote: 2. Players who have highly researched BPOs will get their current BPOs value better reflected after the change.
No it won't. It will just mean there are an additional 9 ME levels between 9 and 10. The only BPOs it remotely affects are supers, titans and capitals at a push because, as you say, you will be able to do the top few bits without locking em down for years. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 10:06:00 -
[20] - Quote
People need to stop trying to meta this into a way to recoup their losses on months or years of over research.
If you have a cap component ME500 BPO, regardless of what you can sell BPC's for you would have made far more over all selling ME34 BPCs the whole time you were doing the following 466 ME levels regardless of the pitiful price difference you were able to scam out of people due to either them nor you or both understanding how ME reduction has worked previously.
I'd wager a lot of the people posting about this issue are realising their mistakes and crying, seeing this as an opportunity CCP will give them something for their folly. Just stop it, grow up and move on. |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 10:22:00 -
[21] - Quote
We could have made trillions if the T2 BPO copy speed wasn't addressed, you should be greatfull  |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2014.04.30 21:11:00 -
[22] - Quote
With all the other ME bonuses we are getting through teams and pos bonus changes, 10% cap looks far more reasonable. Miners have to make something, or who would we gank. Right? Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privalage.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
15
|
Posted - 2014.05.02 06:43:00 -
[23] - Quote
The 100 point system people keep talking about is simply interpolating an additional 9 steps between each of the current 10 steps, 10% ME bonus is still the cap. The only thing 100 points change is allowing you to incrementally research the last 1% rather than having to do the whole thing at once if you choose to.
It all seems pretty good to me. The only argument for a 100 point system is so that, with the copy bonuses, people can keep improving their supercaptials while still meeting production demand for them.
CCP needs to bear in mind that the copy changes double super capital BPO efficacy as well as T2. This isn't such an issue, but selling super BPCs was a viable sub-profession previously and it will suffer.
Greyscale, to address the copy on T2 BPO issue, how about a third set of skills/BPO stats? Copy speed? You could give us an 'advanced science' skill and allow BPOs copy speed to be researched. By capping the effectiveness or even the application of this on T2 BPOs you can keep them in line, whilst making copy speed improvements a choice up to the player.
Those of us who don't value over-research would have dedicated invention BPOs that only have copy speed trained, for example.
You could do something similar with max-runs, giving those who want to sell Supercap BPCs more choices with how they research and enhancing the currently cut-and-dry decision of "am I building 1 titan, get a BPC. Will I build 2? Get a BPO sell it later". Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privalage.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
19
|
Posted - 2014.05.03 16:05:00 -
[24] - Quote
"Blue print experience" "100 point system" all that crap just takes us further away from having things like stackable BPCs and a proper blueprint trading system.
Stop whining over >1% for your little egos and look at the bigger picture. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
36
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 13:30:00 -
[25] - Quote
Quintessen wrote: If I remember correctly, you mentioned that you were a code architect -- I may have misread.
Code architect? Read clueless grad student trying to big up their resume. Continue to ignore. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
36
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 13:42:00 -
[26] - Quote
Safe to say his research hasn't passed peer review at any rate. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
36
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 18:46:00 -
[27] - Quote
You can save BPC copying as a profession by introducing copy-speed research and re-scaling TE to make it far more relevant.
Maintain the base copy-speed on everything as it is, and have it reach the desired value at Copy Level 10. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
36
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 19:22:00 -
[28] - Quote
As a programmer, I think you may have a type error in your IQ value. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
36
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 19:28:00 -
[29] - Quote
Ronny Hugo wrote: What do you mean by saving copying as a profession? Everyone will be using copies! Even the ones who own the BPOs will use BPCs.
The only way everyone will use BPCs is if the max runs is increased dramatically where it is important (component bpos, many many ships). Copying titans and stuff could still be viable if the base rate of copy speed is left untouched. People wishing to persue copying as a profession will have the option to research copy speed maintaining the niche profession to the few that wish to do it. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
36
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 19:34:00 -
[30] - Quote
He did. Did you know he is a computer programmer too? Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
38
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 20:15:00 -
[31] - Quote
LHA Tarawa wrote: In addition to thinking the best feature is how people are being screwed over, the sumary of your argument for the current release is insults.
The sumary of your argument is 'I have an IQ of 140'. Back to twiddling with your wordpress blog mr programmer. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
38
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 20:21:00 -
[32] - Quote
DireNecessity wrote: With ME research now actually topping out (and assuming I understand Seith Kali correctly), blueprint copy sellers could have two new avenues of competition to pursue: TE polishing (still a quality competition) and copy speed research (a quantity competition).
Yeah, close. TE needs a buff though in my opinion. I've posted about that in this thread too. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
39
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 06:52:00 -
[33] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:really, all people need to do is ask themselves, do I believe the guy who says "The complexity of ME research did not come from understanding 10% * 1/2, 10% * 1/3, 10% * 1/4... " (a formula I'm sure 99% of people reading this thread do not know) actually is advocating for newbies who might be confused when they don't get 5% off when their one small rig build doesn't give them back .8 of an armor plate but who will intuitively understand and love...that forumula?
I, un-ironically, had no idea how it worked until it was going away. I can't be the only one. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
40
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 20:27:00 -
[34] - Quote
If I was an undergrad programmer dipping my toes into my first ever fizzbuzz like mr programmer over there I'd probably scratching my head over a bit of simple rounding too. Except it isn't complicated so I guess 140 isn't nearly enough IQs.
Please stop derailing this thread with your issues with basic integer math. I can recommend some excellent literature on the subject if you need it. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
41
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 21:16:00 -
[35] - Quote
ElectronHerd Askulf wrote: Now that I've written up some code for the new world, I've run into this as well. This rounding waste in the case of a Jaguar adds up to somewhere around 700,000 isk for a build from components. Given the profit from that build would be about 2 million, that's significant.
The key thing you are missing is that the cost changes for everybody. If jaguars build cost changes, the price of jaguars changes. This isn't a problem. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
42
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 21:57:00 -
[36] - Quote
LHA's entire problem with this patch is, because he is struggling with his SQL homework, he assumes greyscale finds it as challenging as he does. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
42
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 22:23:00 -
[37] - Quote
Darin Vanar wrote:Seith Kali wrote:LHA's entire problem with this patch is, because he is struggling with his SQL homework, he assumes greyscale finds it as challenging as he does. Math doesn't lie. It cannot be embellished with grandiose statements of importance. This patch is broken on arrival. That's just a fact from even a casual look at the numbers. LHA dissected the proposed changes brilliantly and illustrated how ridiculous the "new numbers" will be in practice. He did so without personal attacks, slandering anyone, or bringing into question their intellect to even post in this thread. I hope you two are getting ready for the thread lock again.
We wouldn't need a thread lock if you would just state your (wrong) opinion and leave it without resorting to parachute posting the same drivel over pages with multiple alts. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
47
|
Posted - 2014.05.11 07:43:00 -
[38] - Quote
Chill out. No one had perfect titans before, no one will now. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
54
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 20:28:00 -
[39] - Quote
LHA Tarawa wrote: I've paid for my time, and since I'm not playing EVE Online do to cloaky camper, I'm choosing to use the time I've paid for to play EVE Offline.
I wonder what software company would employ someone to post all day on an 'offline' forum. Please stop drowning out constructive feedback with your white-noise nonsense. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
54
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 20:47:00 -
[40] - Quote
Working the customer service phones for amazon doesn't make you a qualified developer. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
55
|
Posted - 2014.05.13 22:07:00 -
[41] - Quote
Meladyn's comments are pretty spot on really. I'm sure there will be another thread for invention when the time comes, a decryptor rebalance is another issue. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
55
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 06:00:00 -
[42] - Quote
Megumi Miura wrote: 6. If BPO compensation is given then compensate the right thing. Compensate the cost advantage (e.g. 0.00258%) they would loose not the time (e.g. 2+ weeks) they thought it was worth.
Agreed. Any 'compensation' shouldn't give them more of an advantage that years of selfishly clogging up research lines did. Rather it should just be some dismally irrelevant plumage bonus that they wouldn't recognise as such anyway. Have their BPOs produce shiny BPCs like Pokemon cards or some such crap. 'Best on the market' indeed... Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
56
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 10:17:00 -
[43] - Quote
Alexander McKeon wrote:Megumi Miura wrote:6. If BPO compensation is given then compensate the right thing. Compensate the cost advantage (e.g. 0.00258%) they would loose not the time (e.g. 2+ weeks) they thought it was worth. Comparing ME 10 to ME 50, it's a .706% savings. If you're building an Abaddon, that works out to ~1.5m ISK / hull at current mineral prices. Plenty of folks build battleships by the dozens. If you're making 20 hulls per day, a 25m / day cost advantage over your competition is worth spending extra research time. Stop pulling numbers from the +ªther, get your spreadsheets out and look at how much isk a .7% cost advantage translates to when the true scale of production is taken into account, and you'll understand why many, many BPOs in this game are researched past ME 10.
50 is ludicrously over researched and 10 is currently under-researched. No one is going to be building battleships with ME10, so it is a crap comparison. Try a sensible value like comparing current ME 14 and 50.
Then remember that everyone with an ME 14 BPO will have a perfect one in the new system. Picking current ME 10 as the rounding value really doesn't impact current blueprint collections, it is just as good of a number to pick as any.
Even if CCP went for ME14 as the rounding base, the only people it would affect are those researching now for the round up as every other BPO being produced with is going to be at or above optimal. It really doesn't matter if it is 10 or 14 for those people, there is plenty of time to get 14 on any sub-capital and capitals are all perfect long before 14 anyway.
It really is just semantics. No one is hurt by this except the people that thought an ME50 battleship bpo is worth more than an ME15 one. Anyone know knows better will have an ME 15 one and doesn't care.
The fact we even need to discuss this is just building the case for what an excellent set of changes these are. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
58
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 15:17:00 -
[44] - Quote
I think you should run your copy and paste ranting threw a spell checker. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
59
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 17:51:00 -
[45] - Quote
Not really sure why it matters if it is 10 or 17, its just petty semantics. Even at 17 his ME 50 battleship is nearly three times over researched.
There is still plenty of time to research subcaps to 17 so it doesn't stop people who would want to try to benefit from it particularly.
In fact the only reason you would make it 17 instead of 10 is to give all the people with large numbers of sensible mid-teen BPO's a load of pointless work to do in order to continue producing immediately after patch day. It is just not that big of a deal. 10 is just low enough not to be particularly disruptive to people with sensibly researched BPO collections and just high enough to not give people time to churn out large numbers of 'perfect' battleships and things.
It really isn't that big of a deal. Theres nothing wrong with choosing 10, 12, 17, whatever. Lower is just less disruptive. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
59
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 18:02:00 -
[46] - Quote
Honestly, you sound like the kind of person who should get into the T2 BPO trade. I hear a few are going cheap... Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
59
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 11:20:00 -
[47] - Quote
Great response Greyscale. On account of your quality posting we would be delighted to offer you a position within the CFC, welcome aboard. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
63
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 11:54:00 -
[48] - Quote
Charlie Nonoke wrote:Am I right in assuming, right now, any BPO researched past ME 10 and PE 10 will effectively be treated as a "perfect" BPO post patch? They would instantly become perfect Stage10, 10% ME and 20% TE reduction BPOs?
Does it mean right now, If i want to buy a BPO I should look for ME/PE 10 ones so they instantly become perfect BPOs post patch?
So my ME:100 and PE:75 Stabber BPO essentially becomes ME/TE 10?
More or less. ME100 and PE 75 is a crazy amount of research, but 10 makes a good middle ground. It is slightly under optimal for ships and way, way over optimal for a wide number of long-researching modules - cynos capital modules etc.
As a little tl;dr of the thread for people concerned by this;
Realistically speaking, the number of BPO's that can enter the game at ME/TE10 before patch day is limited by the number of slots / the number of research capable characters, so people trying to 'get in early' it isn't a massive problem even in the medium term.
10 has the advantage of being low enough for most people not to feel like they *have* to do anything to their BPO collections to not lose out, as they will be mostly perfect already.
The majority (read: entirety) of the tears in this thread come from people who have spent a ludicrous amount of time researching blueprints past optimal and feel entitled to some form of remuneration - despite the fact that in real terms they got nothing for all this research already aside from the satisfaction of levelling up their 'Pok+¬mon cards'.
There is an argument for increasing the cut-off beyond current level 10's but each additional level increases the number of blueprints that would need to be researched beyond current optimal levels to be rounded to future perfect, creating more 'losers' and less 'winners'. 10 is as good a number as any to choose - personally I see no advantage in changing the scale for the rounding. It really doesn't matter beyond the first couple of months, get over it.
All this is basically short-sighted whining about what is basically a small detail of the broader changes. The future system avoids tricking people into thinking these research levels will be worth it. Combined with Teams and Slot cost scaling 10% ME reduction will only be even necessary in the busiest systems, smaller guys will be just fine with less ME in smaller systems with less cost scaling. Big guys are going to want 10/10 to shift the volumes they are working with in the busiest Hubs, little guys may be fine with 5-9% ME working in smaller hubs.
All in all, personally, I think it is brilliant. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
65
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 20:29:00 -
[49] - Quote
Let's have a look at just how mis-informed you are shall we.
LHA Tarawa wrote: Some people have a life outside EVE. They log in for a couple hours, a couple times a week. They are not really interested in the hassles that come from being in a mega alliance.
Think about the number of accounts vs. the online numbers. 300K accounts and 20K online. 6.7% online at any given time? That is a lot of casual players.
Pre-change, even the casual player could compete. Buy a BPO and research it to perfect, or close enough.
For a start, there are 38k on right this second. Secondly perfect, or optimal? In which research slots exactly? Think about why these questions need to be asked and yes, the fact they do is the problem being addressed here.
LHA Tarawa wrote: Put up a mineral buy order in a trade hub, come back days later to see it filled. Move the minerals a couple jumps and put in a build job, come back days later to see it completed. Move the items a couple jumps to trade hub, put up a sell oder, and wait for days for people to buy your stuff.
What part of that is changing? Now casual players will be able to seek greater margins by producing locally to where they mine and mission, further from the hubs dominated by the hardcore players.
LHA Tarawa wrote: This sort of casual player is a HUGE chunk of CCP's revenue, and this industry overhaul destroys them.
Please tell me precisely how big of a chunk, where this data is published and how it destroys them?
LHA Tarawa wrote: There was no special advantage to being part of a mega alliance.
Minimum price is going to be set by hardcore null bears and mega alliances that control the teams. If you're not one of those, you will not be able to obtain minimum production price which sets market, and therefore, will not be able to manufacture at a profit.
So why bother putting the effort in to create and hold a mega alliance? Why be an industrialist outside of high sec at all? That is yet another problem that is being addressed marvellously. And yes, it is a massive problem.
Teams are bought per system, the busiest hubs are gonna have tonnes of them. Organised players will be able to afford to take a thin slice of them, but buying the entire lot is madness. There is no way we have the man power to produce Jita level volumes of everything without the entirety of highsec producers packing up shop and moving to null. To produce the top 10 frigates by volume per day in Jita alone requires 200 lines of manufacturing.
LHA Tarawa wrote: I get that the mega alliances like these changes that squeeze the casual players out of the game. I'm just not sure it is such a great thing for CCP, or the game, or the casual players that being in the bulk of CCP's revenue. With these industrial changes, blob warfare comes to manufacturing..
Based on what, exactly? Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
66
|
Posted - 2014.05.15 21:54:00 -
[50] - Quote
Your nonsensical gibbering is utterly unintelligible. You are getting wronger and 'wrongerer' (presumably this is the kind of gibberish phrase you comprehend) with every post and frankly you should go back and read the dev blogs again.
For the sake of picking any particular example of where you are utterly wrong, let us look at this one.
LHA Tarawa wrote: A big corp, with 1000 industrial players, with 3 accounts each, 3 toons each, 9 jobs each = 81,000 concurrent jobs, all with instant start. And with unlimited lines, hypothetically, all 81K concurrent jobs could be running from a single small POS, in a system with no station services, that has been loaded up with all the best teams.
The best teams are going to give a -2.5% material broad advantage + a 5% narrow advantage making a 7.5% total material advantage.
From the scaling blog...
Quote: Manufacturing: The largest run price we generated from the snapshot we took was 15% of build cost in Saisio. 10th place is Juunigaishi at 8%, while 50th is Kakakela at 5%. Jita is in 106th place, at 4%.
So right then and there our 7.5% advantage will be down to a -7.5% loss by cramming everyone into the same system, but it doesn't end there.
From the teams blog...
Quote: How much extra cost a specialized team demands depends on the overall efficiency of the team. The extra salary is a percentage that comes on top of the normal salary cost. The percentage can range from +2% to +18%.
15 * 1.18 = 17.7 so by even using the team at all we are down to a negative ME of -9.7%.
Some advantage... Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
67
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 18:38:00 -
[51] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Another thing to think about - if we mess with the invention math so we can kick max run counts up without breaking a bunch of things (including making sure we scale job time correctly against output runs), does the potentially large increase in practical invention throughput risk breaking the market? If you could put in 24 hours' worth of invention in one go, are we going to see a destructive glut of T2 BPC supply?
Depends if you care about the current margins. Yeah modules will get worse margins than now but many are greater than 50% purely down to the effort involved. If you ask me there's a trick we are missing here.What if invention speed was tied to run counts somewhat?
Greater run counts = longer invention speed and vice versa. Give options for players to chase rapid churn through high effort and allow low effort to work too.
I'd do some maths for you but it is lovely outside. Maybe Monday. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
67
|
Posted - 2014.05.16 18:49:00 -
[52] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Seith Kali wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:
Another thing to think about - if we mess with the invention math so we can kick max run counts up without breaking a bunch of things (including making sure we scale job time correctly against output runs), does the potentially large increase in practical invention throughput risk breaking the market? If you could put in 24 hours' worth of invention in one go, are we going to see a destructive glut of T2 BPC supply?
Depends if you care about the current margins. Yeah modules will get worse margins than now but many are greater than 50% purely down to the effort involved. If you ask me there's a trick we are missing here.What if invention speed was tied to run counts somewhat? Greater run counts = longer invention speed and vice versa. Give options for players to chase rapid churn through high effort and allow low effort to work too. I'd do some maths for you but it is lovely outside. Maybe Monday. Yeah, I think we would have to do that. Probably if we went down this road we would define invention time per-run.
It will give you some interesting new variables when you come to do the datacore rebalance in the autumn too  Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
87
|
Posted - 2014.05.30 12:36:00 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote: Pretty much this. We are unhappy with the status quo, but we are not sure what changes we are going to make right now.
Module teiricide and allowing us to build named modules in some manner could decimate many of the problematic modules if cunningly balanced, if considering potential sources of inspiration for iterative devaluing  Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |

Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
119
|
Posted - 2014.07.14 20:13:00 -
[54] - Quote
Dramaticus wrote: I think I love you so what am I so afraid of?
Probably the grey and scaly part of the process. Apprentice Goonswarm Economic Warfare Consultant - Drowning in entitlement and privilege.-á |
| |
|