|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 21 post(s) |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.05.05 16:23:00 -
[1] - Quote
Two things:
1. Hate to be a pita, but can we get a solid statement whether these (or slight tweaks to the numbers here) are the only changes coming on June 3? There's only a month left and some of us need to plan for the transition including POS setup, how many AMLs/MLs we'll need, etc..
2. I just want to reiterate that the lack of slots completely obliterates the function of MLs and AMLs as we know them today. Shaving a little bit of time off of them doesn't change that. That said, people will still use them for convenience or on the off chance the time savings facilitate a particular workflow (especially where people want to do long jobs and are okay risking the BPO). This leads to the problem of the useless AML. There are very few situations where the slight extra copy time will justify sinking money in an AML rather than an ML. Make the AML truly advanced by giving it ME and taking away invention from MLs. |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 00:12:00 -
[2] - Quote
LHA Tarawa wrote:Lephia DeGrande wrote:An actually thread about POS improvements?! Is end of Time near!? With unlimited slots in high stations for .7% higher cost, on average, they have removed the reason to have a high sec POS. This is an absolute fail attempt to give a POS some value. The June changes, as announced, are AFU on so many levels. It is going to take sooooo much longer to get a sub-1% waste BPO post update than the planned change at update, that it is likely to cause the same kind of hate amoung new players that is seen from T2 BPOs. The unlimited slots at a single POS assembly array is game breaking. The unlimited slots in station kills the reason to have a POS, and these changes do nothing to bring that back. 100 million for a small POS. 2% lower material cost? You have to turn 5 billion a month for the 2% savings to cover the cost of fuel, FOR A SMALL.... and then there is the risk and hassle of having the POS that means you have to turn more than that. Seriously, they need to take a break, ask for an extra month, and do it right. This is not close to "right".
Not exactly. Savings on manufacturing and the better ISK/hr on manufacturing jobs makes that the key reason for a highsec POS. If you're not ready to throw up a small tower with a single array of each kind you need, you're probably going to be leaving money on the table.
That said, unlimited slots is fundamentally against how these arrays work right now. But the answer--I've come to accept--is not to introduce slots through a backdoor like costs for too many jobs at one array. That would just nuke much of the remaining hope for the highsec POS.
Let's face it. The prevalence of highsec POSs today stems almost completely from the lack of copy and ME slots at stations. Take that away, and people have to do the hard work of justifying the time savings on assembly arrays, then maybe keeping the AML/ML for convenience.
CCP may not have thought these consequences through. But the truth is that it's here. |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 03:06:00 -
[3] - Quote
NEONOVUS wrote:When you say 2% bonus is that a 2% reduction in materials out right so 100=98 Or Is that a +2% new me bonus? Or is it equal now?
Those should be the same thing now. |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.05.06 17:10:00 -
[4] - Quote
Marsan wrote:PS- Also it's a horrible idea to have a structure solely for researching BPOs. Anchoring a Research Lab is basically saying I have a BPO in the POS please siege me.
This. Make MLs do something like ME/copy and AMLs something like PE/invent or MLs are going to collapse.
Hyasyodas are also kinda bad on this system. |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 17:55:00 -
[5] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote:Sigras wrote:I have two questions regarding how the 2% ME discount is calculated.
1. it is 2% and not 2 ME levels right? Just confirming because if not you've just condemned all invention to only ever be done in 0.0 amarr factory stations...
2. is the 2% calculated per job or per run?
I realize that in most cases #2 makes absolutely no difference, but think about manufacturing Small CCCs or even medium CCCs... a 2% discount per run is not going to help either of those products at all, but a 2% discount per job certainly could
TL;DR is the 2% discount calculated ROUNDUP(RequiredMaterial * 0.98) * NumberOfJobs or is it calculated ROUNDUP(RequiredMaterial * NumberOfJobs * 0.98)? The bonus is a 2% material discount, not ME level since that's going away in the new system. The material reduction is applied per run last I checked, but we have plans to apply it to the whole job, so that blueprints with small amount of components also benefit from it. Not sure if we can squeeze this for summer though, going to ask around - thanks for the reminder. Oh god, can't believe I missed this. Material discounts at job rather than run level would be a major, major change. (I like it. But it would require a rework of a whole bunch of tools to take run numbers into account as well. And I'm not /sure/ about how it affects bpc vs bpo. I'm generally in favor.)
+1. Cool bonus, but please let the math be doable for non-programmer excel warriors. |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.07 22:49:00 -
[6] - Quote
MailDeadDrop wrote:If Research Labs and Hyasyoda Labs can *only* work on blueprint originals (since they only offer ME and TE services), then having them on a POS is a big flashing "SHOOT ME!" sign. Can I have big flashing "SHOOT ME!" signs on ships carrying BPOs, too, without any sort of effort?
A thousand times this. Please split up invention and research so that both arrays are needed and people can't be sure about BPOs in POS.
It's the difference between no MLs and some MLs. |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 01:43:00 -
[7] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Korthan Doshu wrote:MailDeadDrop wrote:If Research Labs and Hyasyoda Labs can *only* work on blueprint originals (since they only offer ME and TE services), then having them on a POS is a big flashing "SHOOT ME!" sign. Can I have big flashing "SHOOT ME!" signs on ships carrying BPOs, too, without any sort of effort? A thousand times this. Please split up invention and research so that both arrays are needed and people can't be sure about BPOs in POS. It's the difference between no MLs and some MLs. Guys... both arrays mean that there are potentially BPOs in the POS Unless you've devised some clever way to copy without a BPO?
Nobody should be doing invention with anything other than ME0/PE0 BPOs. But if you're using researched BPOs to copy from your POS, well...duly noted. |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 14:54:00 -
[8] - Quote
Marcus Iunius Brutus wrote:Max Kolonko wrote:[quote=Marcus Iunius Brutus]Wait - does it mean what i think this means?
I have bpo that need 10 pieces of tritanium I get it to me5% so single run still needs 10*trit Will 2 run job require 20 or 19 units if trit? Roundup(10*.95)*2=20 Or Roundup(10*2*.95)=19
Yes, 2 jobs will require 19 pieces of trit. And BTW it's Round not Roundup.
How do we know it's round() and not roundup()? I didn't catch a definitive statement... |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.08 17:47:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Korthan Doshu wrote:Marcus Iunius Brutus wrote:[quote=Max Kolonko]Yes, 2 jobs will require 19 pieces of trit.
And BTW it's Round not Roundup. How do we know it's round() and not roundup()? I didn't catch a definitive statement... There's also the option that it's rounddown(). I believe that's been mentioned in another context in the research blog thread. So round is misleading, we will be doing a CEIL() aka rounding up. If you need 14.1 after all the runs and material efficiency is multiplied out then it will be 15.
Let me just say that I think this is imminently reasonable and not a cluster. |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 12:13:00 -
[10] - Quote
Why would it be a bad thing for ME10 to always be the real perfect? |
|
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 19:24:00 -
[11] - Quote
Ranamar wrote:That said, I'd really like an answer about whether ME is calculated per-run or per-job, because it makes a big difference on low-material-count many-runs-per-day things like small rigs.
RTFT, you would have seen this post:
CCP Nullarbor wrote:Confirming the new Industry will not do any material rounding until AFTER we multiply by the number of runs, meaning material efficiency discounts due to facility / teams / skills / blueprints / whatever may produce slightly better results with multiple runs. |
Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 21:27:00 -
[12] - Quote
Ranamar wrote:Korthan Doshu wrote:Ranamar wrote:That said, I'd really like an answer about whether ME is calculated per-run or per-job, because it makes a big difference on low-material-count many-runs-per-day things like small rigs. RTFT, you would have seen this post: CCP Nullarbor wrote:Confirming the new Industry will not do any material rounding until AFTER we multiply by the number of runs, meaning material efficiency discounts due to facility / teams / skills / blueprints / whatever may produce slightly better results with multiple runs. I saw that, but, given all the confusion surrounding it, I wasn't certain that he was actually making sure they were all in. I dunno; I remember it being less clear than that statement. If that really is the case, it's time to research a bunch of T1 small rig blueprints.
Yes. |
|
|
|