Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 43 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 62 post(s) |
Intentional Concord Bringer
Evil Rotten Bastards
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:15:00 -
[211] - Quote
After reading, re-reading and then re-reading the dev blog, then reading all the comments... I think I understand these changes and largely agree with much of what others have already noted. I do, however, wish to add data points and recommendations to be considered.
First, I've been playing Eve since beta. My oldest current toon is from 2005. In the 10 years I've been playing, I've amassed a startlingly large collection of BPOs of which the vast majority of them are researched to the point of ridiculousness. There have been several good reasons for doing this. Despite diminishing returns, the ME curve did allow for increased profits for, say, a 100ME researched frigate blueprint vs. a 10ME researched blueprint. Not a ton, but the collection taken as a whole multiplied by how often I make stuff adds up to a lot of extra ISK per year. PE (now TE, finally lol) allowed me to manufacture them more quickly than my competitors with lower PE. And finally, BPCs with higher ME/PE sell for more and sell more readily than those with lower ME/PE values.
All of these combined to make investing large amounts of time into research and copying worthwhile. As someone who has spent 9+ years of his life maximizing the potential of his BPO collection, changing the system to only require ten levels to reach maximum production efficiency is a bit of a butthurt... I won't lie. This effectively means that one of my central gameplay joys is now almost entirely moot. Given the state of my BPOs I fully expect 99% of them will still be perfect ME/TE after the change, but I loose a substantial competitive advantage in the market post change, since now every Tom, **** and Harry player can reach perfection much more quickly than it took for me and anyone who already has at least 10ME invested in the vast majority of prints will generally seem to end up with a perfect print, post change.
I agree that the time (and isk) investment in building that collection and researching it as it is should be compensated in some way. I like both the idea of a) being given RU's much in the same way SP are given when skills are removed - this covers the time aspect pretty well and would allow me to further improve my collection as new prints are added to the game, and the idea of b) marking the BPO's with their old ME/PE levels, giving them collectors value which covers the isk invested aspect pretty well too. So, I vote for both as a good compromise to compensate for both time and isk investment. Granted, 'collectible' prints might not be a lucrative market now or ever, but it leaves the door open to at least add some additional value to those blueprints vs any purchased and researched after the change. It also leaves the dark side of New Eden alone where nefarious sellers can still convince the unsuspecting players with more ISK than brains that it's a better print than another, etc. even though it is not at that point.
I'd also like to cast some doubt on the T2 production changes. I also concur that anyone who was either lucky enough to get one in the lottery (which I didn't - full disclosure) or rich enough to buy one from someone desperate enough to sell one (which I ain't, lol) already have significant advantages over invention. Any changes to T2 BPOs should, therefore, be considered more internally before making the change. If it were up to me, I'd leave them alone and give the advantage to the inventors - as it was meant to be before the folly of introducing T2 BPOs to the game in such a limited way, which it only took about a year IIRC for CCP to figure out was a bad move and we've all had to live with it since. So, I'd consider giving the BPO owner no advantage while rewarding the BPC inventor some additional advantage over the BPO. Right now, invention isn't really that rewarding in and of itself. There's a lot of time and isk investment on the part of the inventor and a high failure rate despite maxed skills and decryptors, so the advantage should go to the inventor, not the BPO owner in this case, I feel. That's my 2 cents on that.
Having made all those points, I must contend that this is a good overall change to research for the future of the game. Industry hasn't been iterated on in a loooooong time, aside from introducing PI, new BPOs to research and toys to build. This change, coupled with the other changes I've read about so far, are a welcome change to the industry ecosystem of New Eden and despite being directly adversely affected by the changes, I agree it is something that has to be done.
Now... about those modular POSs we've been asking for since 2006... (sorry, had to be done).
Thanks CCP Greyscale - I appreciate the dev blog post, the responses given in the comments and all the hard work you guys are doing to iterate on the industry side of the game.
As an aside... you know what else I'd really like to see happen in summer 2014? Open up the stations, let us build the bars and strip joints and supply the beef and water, the spirits and tobacco consumables they need. Let us populate them with civilians, tourists, janitors and the like. Let us in dangit... I'm tired of looking at myself in the mirror and I want to have yet another avenue for manufacturing, research and PI. The original plan for that was awesome sauce for us indy types... too bad CCP fux0r3d it all up with NEX. :(
Posted with a trashy forum alt. |
Adellle Nadair
Nuclear Midnight Initiative Associates
70
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:18:00 -
[212] - Quote
The reduction of ME to a 10 rank system overly simplifies a complex system, that is complex for a very good reason. Eve is a complicated and complex game, the ME system as it currently exists is easily understandable as a system of diminishing returns. Changing this system to a 10 rank system causes a lot more issues than it solves and it reduces player choice.
The amount of time invested to bring a ME to perfect isn't actually changing. The difference is that now to research up a single level will take a lot longer. This means that research slots and character research/invent/copy slots will be filled for longer periods of time. This reduces player choice.
Currently I can choose to research 3 or 4 ME on a BS blueprint, knowing that it will only improve my bpo very slightly. But that gradually, over time, I can improve it, choosing to research other bpos as I need to or want to depending on what is happening in game or how my short term goals are changing. With the changes this amount of choice will be impossible. There is no way to partially research the long research jobs.
The ME system currently isn't broken. Industry in eve is complex, and should be complex because eve itself is complex. The ME system is complex because it allows for players to choose how much they want to invest. More over it allows them to invest partially and get a result (if even a very small result) for their investment. But, most importantly, it is an easy to understand system. The proposed changes create a system that looks simpler but actually just reduces player choices without adding any benefit to the game.
I suggest that you immediately scrap this change to ME. Instead, create a better UI on blueprints to show reduction on return for investment. You could add a section that shows what perfect ME would be and how long it would take to attain that. This would give the clarity of information you are trying to attain. Please do not make this change, reducing player choices and reducing the variety that eve needs.
|
Nalha Saldana
DEAD JESTERS The Harlequin's
795
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:18:00 -
[213] - Quote
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. |
Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:22:00 -
[214] - 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. |
Matthew
BloodStar Technologies
11
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:23:00 -
[215] - Quote
Copying Times Part 2
Having looked into the numbers in more detail, I'm not sure the figures on copying times in the Dev Blog stack up at all. If anyone can see anything I've done wrong in the below, please do point it out!
The dev blog states that T1 blueprints take 20x longer to copy than to build, and T2 blueprints take 100x longer. These are the figures you get if you take the ratio of the researchCopyTime and productionTime columns from the invBlueprintTypes table in the static data dump.
However, this ignores the fact that these numbers relate to completely different things. The productionTime column gives the time taken to manufacture 1 run of the item. The researchCopyTime column gives the time taken to copy a blueprint that contains half the number of runs given by maxProductionLimit.
So what this is actually saying for most Tech 1 modules is "It takes 20x as long to produce a 150-run copy as it does to manufacture 1 run". The actual impact varies item-by-item due to the differing max-runs.
If you calculate the times run-for-fun, for most T1 modules, drones, ammo etc, it is already significantly faster to make a copy compared to manufacturing. The exceptions seem to be T1 ships (33% - 4x longer to copy), T2 (around 2-4x longer to copy), starbase structures (8x longer to copy). Capital stuff seems to go to about 20x longer to copy.
If the proposal is to set researchCopyTime=productionTime, then this would be a massive buff to copying, but one that would be somewhat unevenly applied, as its impact on the actual run-for-run timings would be significantly distorted by the variation in max-runs.
If the poposal is to set the run-for-run times to be equal, then this will be a massive nerf to all T1 except ships, with huge impacts on invention. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
426
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:24:00 -
[216] - Quote
ok, read through both new blogs...exhausting! From a relatively new player to invention etc these changes will make it less daunting for newer players to S&I to make headway. Be interesting to see how this pans out but POS will still be important for copying/researching/inventing I think.
On a side note you have no idea how hard I had to resist reformatting Querns SQL query :D |
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
728
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:38:00 -
[217] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Yes you may need to do some flying around. So basically you move the clickfest from the industry ui to the overview ui .
Remove insurance. |
Abla Tive
Serpent.Sisters.of.Eve
50
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:44:00 -
[218] - Quote
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? |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
2815
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:48:00 -
[219] - Quote
Jackie Fisher wrote:So if I have a cap ship BPO I'll be able to make c. 3 times as many copies from it as I do now in a similar time frame? If so a massive crash in higher end BPCs coming.
Yup. I made that comment earlier. That nice little cottage industry of selling high quality capital ship and component BPC's just got wiped out, unless demand for capital ships triples overnight.
I made a few hundred million every month creating 3 different cap ship BPC's, as well as a bunch of 5 run cap component BPC's.
That just got ruined. Most people viewed Orwell's writings as a warning. The harper regime and the goons treat them as a guidebook. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3138
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:50:00 -
[220] - Quote
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?
0.75 multiplier. for regular labs So 33% faster. 0.65 for advanced labs (which have 3 slots, rather than 1) 53% faster)
And we have a further 5% modifier coming (if I remember a devpost correctly) Steve Ronuken for CSM 9! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4236322 http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
|
tiewan
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:51:00 -
[221] - Quote
Even though I have spent time researching blueprints to higher levels than probably needed. I don't feel too badly about it.
I am actually really happy ccp is taken a 10 level approach and wish they had done it long ago.
As for the T2 BPO topic..
I think people like to make it a bigger issue than it is.
Over time I am sure very slowly they will be reduced in numbers without ccp needing to do anything. There will always be an unwise person from time to time who decides to move one to another station only to get blown up and have it destroyed.
And there is always people who log off one day only to never return. Either because they want to or maybe they die.. it happens. |
Hirogenale
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:52:00 -
[222] - Quote
I'm not really a fan of a static level system. In the current System you are able to create BPC's, produce from them while, send the BPO back into research for a few ME-levels and repeat (at a few Items at least, if the Copy/Manufacturing time relation gets fixed anyways it would get more common, resulting in more production from BPC's) With only 10 levels of research and the high duration of the last 2 levels that basically becomes useless.
I'd suggest getting away from ME as well as a Level-system, simply going to a System based on the % improvement. That means instead of saying i want to research 10 ME levels that give me an additional benefit I'd have to calculate, or saying i want to skill 1 static level i have no influence on an option, that allows to research to a given % improvement. For example from 8% to 8.34%, with increasing timerequirements the higher you get. Optional to that there could also be an option to do it time-based, you could say i want to research for 23 days and 12 hours becouse then I need new copys or whatever, how far does that get me? (the interface should of course show that while typing or even show precalculated values for likely steps)
That would be a clear system, you immediately see the wastage without any other needed numbers, it allows a huge flexibility and, with good copy/manufacturing time relation could make production from BPC's more common. It would also allow, that the values of the current System could be used without making high researched BPO's pointless.
I think it would be good if it would still be impossile to reach 10%, just get very close to it, basically use the same curve thats used currently, just flattened out a bit. BPO's could simply be capped at the %-level, where all materials are at the minimal possible Amount.
In my opinion a System based on that concept would be both easy to use and understand as well as still flexible for the hardcore-industrialists |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
426
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 19:54:00 -
[223] - Quote
Sooooo, what's the new market deliveries folder in station for hi-tech items? |
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust
400
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:02:00 -
[224] - Quote
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. |
Madfranco
Eightfold Arrow Bounty Hunter Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:02:00 -
[225] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Madfranco wrote:Edit: Greyscale answered to the edited-out part while i posted it
Could you please allow batching (or some kind of stacking at BPC level) of invented BPC, or at least increse the minimummaximum number of some classes of BPC (rigs for example, small ones especially)?
Having to log multiple times in the day to restart production of some T2 items even when you use the max run decriptor is imho a flawed mechanic.....
And this may even relate to some research jobs, i would really like the batching system used in the actual copy sistem to be estended to production and invention, at least for the shorter run items, as long as i frontload the components.... Blueprint stats are easy to adjust. You want longer max runs on T1 rigs?
I'm bad at writing...
What i was asking for is if it would be possible to batch jobs from multiple BPCs, because actually some BPOs have too few max runs on their BPCs (see Capital parts BPOs), some invented T2 BPCs (E.G.: 8 runs T2 small rig job completion time is 20h at a POS array currently) have similar "tendencies" of forcing you to log multiple times a day to "click" if you want to manifacture from them.
Even if the new UI sistem fixed a part of the clickspam, you still have to "fight" against the ui if you have to log multiple times a day to queue jobs, given the fact that i just have to log in to click, the materials were already there.
Maybe this is more a UI related problem but you would kill all bird with one stone if you could use multiple BPCs (T1 and T2) to do a job as long as those BPCs had the same ME/TE stats, and you frontload all the materials as usual (more capital is tied up for a longer time, there's the tradeoff for a longer batch).
I guess some of you have short runs BPCs leftover they dont have time to slot in their production cycles due to having to relog multiple times a day...
This could be expanded even to invention when invention jobs are just that short: "why do i have to relog each 3 hours to queue jobs? Can't you just do it 8 times in a row as long as i frontload all materials ?"
Meh, even improved the UI will still be a mess to fight against...
|
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
158
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:03:00 -
[226] - Quote
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.
|
Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:03:00 -
[227] - 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. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21386
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:04:00 -
[228] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:I would love for someone to go through and give the intersection of high sec systems that offer the complete package of ME, TE, copying, and invention services. Here you go. There are about 200 systems that match those criteria. 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. |
Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:06:00 -
[229] - 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. |
Kithran
96
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:09:00 -
[230] - Quote
Seith Kali wrote: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.
Copy time of t2 bpc's has been buffed but I suspect time per unit for producing using t2 bpc at a pos while copying at a station should be roughly the same as producing remotely from a station now.
You would be able to produce more either directly from the bpo at a pos or more still by copying the bpo at a pos and then producing from the resulting bpcs at a cost but at far higher risk than before |
|
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
158
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:11:00 -
[231] - Quote
Seith Kali wrote: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.
More intell? I love that idea. I remember a number of years ago when updating intelligence tools was talked about. I am still waiting.
I am not sure if the risk vs reward is well balanced, but there is risk when undocking. |
Bad Bobby
Bring Me Sunshine In Tea We Trust
400
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:12:00 -
[232] - Quote
Seith Kali wrote: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. They will have to copy at a NPC station to reduce the risk, which means that the copy speed limits their production. |
Morrighaan
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:13:00 -
[233] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Jackie Fisher wrote:So if I have a cap ship BPO I'll be able to make c. 3 times as many copies from it as I do now in a similar time frame? If so a massive crash in higher end BPCs coming. Yup. I made that comment earlier. That nice little cottage industry of selling high quality capital ship and component BPC's just got wiped out, unless demand for capital ships triples overnight. I made a few hundred million every month creating 3 different cap ship BPC's, as well as a bunch of 5 run cap component BPC's. That just got ruined.
This indeed is very troubling as it not only seriously impacts income for some of us, but also crashes return on investment for high-end BPOs. |
Lady Storm
Sierra Five-Oh
1
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:17:00 -
[234] - Quote
Can someone who is better at math explain to me how this is going to effect my capital prints (both components and hulls) The way im reading it, is all the component bpo anything above 10 in the current system is going to be wasted pre-patch as they will just get converted to the new system?
Am I wrong in this thinking? |
Seith Kali
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:17:00 -
[235] - 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? |
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
158
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:17:00 -
[236] - Quote
tiewan wrote:As for the T2 BPO topic..
I think people like to make it a bigger issue than it is.
Over time I am sure very slowly they will be reduced in numbers without ccp needing to do anything.
Yes they will slowly be lost over time. That means that so long as the remaining T2 BPOs don't increase their production they will continue to lose their hold on the market. This is why I would like to see T2s not increase in productive power (without an increase in risk). |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
152
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:19:00 -
[237] - Quote
Weaselior wrote:man i gotta say this is a VAST improvement: no longer will we have to explain to people that a bpo that's ME200 is basically the same as one that's ME 20, not 10x better. I will have to do the math though on how best to exploit the changeover :v: Although I agree, in a way, having people research BPO's to ME 100 when only ME 10 was necessary, was a kind of tax on stupidity which I approved of.
I think this quote from the blog sums up the changes very well.
'difficult to understand without wrapping your head around some reasonably non-trivial math, which adds fairly substantially to the mental barrier of entry for industry and generally makes the system more opaque than it really needs to be.'
I quite liked the fact that you had to wrap your head around a bit of maths, (although I wouldn't call it that complex), to get into industry and research.
Also homogenising the research times is another dumbing down of industry, as people no longer need to use their brains to work out whether and particular items bottleneck is copy, invention, or manufacture time.
I will have to see how these changes play out though, but I hope we can maintain or even enhance some of the complexities of industry. Being able to find efficiency in supply chains is what separates the small fry from the big boys. If everything is homogenised, this process becomes too easy.
Despite those concerns, I approve of the changes though. Looking forward to seeing how all this industry related stuff is going to play out this summer.
One thing I'd like to suggest, is improve the industrial ships for use in null or low sec. If you really want to open up the game then it needs to be much more viable to mine in null or low. The Rorqual should be essential for any null sec mining fleet, and provide benefits which make mining in null sec viable. The proc and skiff are already well on the way to filling this role. And hopefully another mining ship will be on the way if everyone's theories about a T2 Venture are correct. |
Gilbaron
Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda
1351
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:20:00 -
[238] - 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 |
Kadl
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
158
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:21:00 -
[239] - Quote
Lady Storm wrote:Can someone who is better at math explain to me how this is going to effect my capital prints (both components and hulls) The way im reading it, is all the component bpo anything above 10 in the current system is going to be wasted pre-patch as they will just get converted to the new system?
Am I wrong in this thinking?
Greyscale's first suggestion seems like your synopsis.
Greyscale is open to alternative suggestions (and I gave him mine). So there may be modifications in some way or another.
After everything is settled we will have Material Levels going from -4 to 10 on all of the BPOs we are using. Material Levels will also mean something different. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
21387
|
Posted - 2014.04.28 20:22:00 -
[240] - Quote
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. 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. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 43 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |