| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 21 post(s) |

Lady Aesir
Ghost Recon Inc
9
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 09:23:00 -
[301] - Quote
Quadpush wrote:I've got a question: what will be the difference of different races POSes (eg. Caldari, Gallente etc.)? Currently they differ in the CPU/PWG and it affects the number of labs/arrays you can online. In summer all POSes will be equal or do they get any racial differences? They would have to be different or everyone would use the one with the cheapest available fuel.
|

Belinda HwaFang
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
8
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 09:26:00 -
[302] - Quote
Greetings.
I notice that the Experimental Laboratory is conspicuous in its absence in this thread.
Does this mean that all stats on it are staying the same and that I can run as many concurrent reversing jobs on it as I have skills for (with the removal of slots)?
Thanks,
Fang |

Sigras
Conglomo
758
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 09:58:00 -
[303] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote: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.) 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. Please tell me that "Blueprints" was in there by accident... Otherwise we could get some sort of crazy rounding issue where you need to research an already "perfect" BPO to get a better yield for a long run.
Im just assuming that there is another CEILING() function on BPs for their base material requirements before teams and facilities are factored in... right? |

Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 12:13:00 -
[304] - Quote
Why would it be a bad thing for ME10 to always be the real perfect? |
|

CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
3469

|
Posted - 2014.05.09 12:18:00 -
[305] - Quote
Belinda HwaFang wrote:Greetings.
I notice that the Experimental Laboratory is conspicuous in its absence in this thread.
Does this mean that all stats on it are staying the same and that I can run as many concurrent reversing jobs on it as I have skills for (with the removal of slots)?
Thanks,
Fang
Indeed, the Experimental Lab is not changing at all. |
|

MailDeadDrop
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
313
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 13:03:00 -
[306] - Quote
CCP Ytterbium wrote:Belinda HwaFang wrote:Greetings.
I notice that the Experimental Laboratory is conspicuous in its absence in this thread.
Does this mean that all stats on it are staying the same and that I can run as many concurrent reversing jobs on it as I have skills for (with the removal of slots)?
Thanks,
Fang Indeed, the Experimental Lab is not changing at all. All the interesting points in the thread and *that* is the one you choose to respond to?         
MDD |

Plug in Baby
Crouching Woman Hidden Cucumber
215
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 13:29:00 -
[307] - Quote
Will there be a lowsec capital component assembly array as mentioned at Fanfest? This is not a forum alt, this is a forum main. |

Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
40
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 15:38:00 -
[308] - Quote
Plug in Baby wrote:Will there be a lowsec capital component assembly array as mentioned at Fanfest?
MAYBE
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4557072#post4557072
But, if Greyscale is working on it, will take at least 3 balance passes before it doesn't suck |

Ranamar
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
57
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 15:46:00 -
[309] - Quote
TBF, it's an important clarification.
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. |

Marsan
220
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 17:59:00 -
[310] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Marsan wrote: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? Yes but Research Labs and Hyasyoda Labs require BPOs to do anything. You won't be able to tell if they are copying a BPO, but you will know if they are researching a BPO. This is true, however: 1. Invention requires copies, so it's reasonable to assume that an inventor is copying BPOs to fund his own invention. 2. 3/4 of the research jobs require a BPO meaning there is no way to split the activities up that doesnt guarantee BPOs are in one or the other.
I suspect a lot of people will simply make BPCs in station for safety sake for any BPO of any real value as copying in station appears to still be pretty cheap, and fast for most items. BPOs are unlike most items in Eve. If my ship explodes or gets stolen I can generally just buy a new one. If I lose a BPO it might take months to fully research another. Even if I'm willing to buy one I may have trouble finding one researched to my desired level and for a reasonable price. Former forum cheerleader CCP, now just a grumpy small portion of the community. |

Proton Power
Evolution Northern Coalition.
17
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 18:23:00 -
[311] - Quote
Seems like a lot of change has happend due to this thread, but I have yet to see any updates on the Component Assembly Array numbers.
While the increase is nice, its not enough.... At current numbers you can build about 100 components (10 days worth) and thats it due to its limited size. So for me and many others we ahve to install multiple jobs because it won't allow us to build any decent sized batch, and then on top of this you have to move minreals around for every single job install. With the current increase it does up the build batch to about 15 days or gives more play room for 10 day batches, but I still have to move minerals every job install.
Please Re-Look into this. |

Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 19:24:00 -
[312] - 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. |

Ranamar
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
57
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 19:46:00 -
[313] - Quote
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. |

Korthan Doshu
Hedion University Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 21:27:00 -
[314] - 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. |

Arronicus
Ravens' Nest Outlaw Horizon.
954
|
Posted - 2014.05.09 22:34:00 -
[315] - Quote
Ranamar wrote:TBF, it's an important clarification. 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.
This was answered, it may be per run to start with, but they are intent on shifting it to per job, for the 2% savings, anyhow. I think one of the devs said they even have it working for the summer expansion already, to be job. |

Sigras
Conglomo
759
|
Posted - 2014.05.10 02:37:00 -
[316] - Quote
Marsan wrote:Sigras wrote:1. Invention requires copies, so it's reasonable to assume that an inventor is copying BPOs to fund his own invention. 2. 3/4 of the research jobs require a BPO meaning there is no way to split the activities up that doesnt guarantee BPOs are in one or the other. I suspect a lot of people will simply make BPCs in station for safety sake for any BPO of any real value as copying in station appears to still be pretty cheap, and fast for most items. BPOs are unlike most items in Eve. If my ship explodes or gets stolen I can generally just buy a new one. If I lose a BPO it might take months to fully research another. Even if I'm willing to buy one I may have trouble finding one researched to my desired level and for a reasonable price. This still doesnt fix the issue that there is no logical way to split up the research operations that doesnt leave one lab with only BPO research. |

Xindi Kraid
Priano Trans-Stellar State Services Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
749
|
Posted - 2014.05.10 03:03:00 -
[317] - Quote
So what incentive is there to use a hyasyoda lab? At the moment it seems to be straight up inferior, which kind of sucks.
Bad Bobby wrote:CCP Ytterbium wrote: Component Assembly Array: from 1,000,000 m3 to 1,500,000 m3.
I don't think this is sufficient. Is there any particular issue you are trying to avoid by keeping the storage on these arrays small? Wouldn't it be better just to make them big enough so that they aren't a massive pain to use? What they really need to do is just give the tower a corporate hangar and remove the corp hangar from all the other POS modules and instead replace them with a bonus to the tower's capacity. That could help solve the problem of not enough space in any one module while another has too much. Granted it does mean you stop being able to separate stuff by structure and tab, so organization suffers. |

Grigori Annunaki
39
|
Posted - 2014.05.10 05:42:00 -
[318] - Quote
Xindi Kraid wrote:What they really need to do is just give the tower a corporate hangar and remove the corp hangar from all the other POS modules and instead replace them with a bonus to the tower's capacity. That could help solve the problem of not enough space in any one module while another has too much. Granted it does mean you stop being able to separate stuff by structure and tab, so organization suffers. What they really need to do is make all the anchorable modules into pluggable addons for the POS. Then, they could share storage, support PI-style component routing, etc. A much more elegant design. |

NEONOVUS
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
842
|
Posted - 2014.05.10 12:34:00 -
[319] - Quote
Grigori Annunaki wrote:Xindi Kraid wrote:What they really need to do is just give the tower a corporate hangar and remove the corp hangar from all the other POS modules and instead replace them with a bonus to the tower's capacity. That could help solve the problem of not enough space in any one module while another has too much. Granted it does mean you stop being able to separate stuff by structure and tab, so organization suffers. What they really need to do is make all the anchorable modules into pluggable addons for the POS. Then, they could share storage, support PI-style component routing, etc. A much more elegant design. But, that's a dream for another time. If its so easy lets see some mock code here Me, Im going to go make pong and see if I can control it woth some accelerameters |

Xindi Kraid
Priano Trans-Stellar State Services Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
752
|
Posted - 2014.05.10 16:56:00 -
[320] - Quote
Grigori Annunaki wrote:Xindi Kraid wrote:What they really need to do is just give the tower a corporate hangar and remove the corp hangar from all the other POS modules and instead replace them with a bonus to the tower's capacity. That could help solve the problem of not enough space in any one module while another has too much. Granted it does mean you stop being able to separate stuff by structure and tab, so organization suffers. What they really need to do is make all the anchorable modules into pluggable addons for the POS. Then, they could share storage, support PI-style component routing, etc. A much more elegant design. But, that's a dream for another time. Indeed, I hope the final outcome for POSes is modular structures we can dock in with the various modules adding geometry to the tower itself rather than just floating in space and all the things they do being centralized.
I think that's a ways off though, POSes are in a bad place and fixing them will take a lot of time and work, and that change also requires quite a lot of art assets as well as code.
In the mean time small changes to fix corporate roles and my suggestion to centralize usage improve POSes a little in the mean time. |

Proton Power
Evolution Northern Coalition.
19
|
Posted - 2014.05.10 22:08:00 -
[321] - Quote
Proton Power wrote:Seems like a lot of change has happend due to this thread, but I have yet to see any updates on the Component Assembly Array numbers.
While the increase is nice, its not enough.... At current numbers you can build about 100 components (10 days worth) and thats it due to its limited size. So for me and many others we ahve to install multiple jobs because it won't allow us to build any decent sized batch, and then on top of this you have to move minreals around for every single job install. With the current increase it does up the build batch to about 15 days or gives more play room for 10 day batches, but I still have to move minerals every job install.
Please Re-Look into this.
Any answers to this yet.
I can not grasp how the array that builds the largest items (other than ships) gets the smallest boost... |

Nalha Saldana
DEAD JESTERS The Harlequin's
800
|
Posted - 2014.05.10 23:51:00 -
[322] - Quote
You want people to build from BPC instead of BPOs but at the same time you remove copy slots from the standard research labs? Makes no sense. |

Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
401
|
Posted - 2014.05.11 14:55:00 -
[323] - Quote
CCP Nullarbor wrote: 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.
I'm all for CEIL() for positive ME, however for negative ME this leads to strange results, where something that cost 1 unit of something for ME-1% costs two units of something. This puts T2 BPO owners once again at big advantage.
Using either Round() or Floor() to counter this will also cause problems as shown below:
Floor() 2 jobs, each 1 run of BPC ME-4%, basic cost 15 units of something gives us 2*Floor(15*1*1,04)=30 1 jobs, for 2 run of BPC ME-4%, basic cost 15 units of something gives us 1*Floor(15*2*1,04)=31
This shows that in some edge cases its better to run two jobs thatn 1 job for two runs
Round() 2 jobs, each 1 run of BPC ME-4%, basic cost 10 units of something gives us 2*Floor(10*1*1,04)=20 1 jobs, for 2 run of BPC ME-4%, basic cost 10 units of something gives us 1*Floor(10*2*1,04)=21
Same as above but shows up on diffrent parameters
Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |

Babbet Bunny
State War Academy Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2014.05.11 16:44:00 -
[324] - Quote
Another question about rounding:
When converting from the old base will ROUND(), FLOOR() or CEIL() be used?
If ROUND() is used all starting materials are about the same as 10 previous 10% waste.
If FLOOR() is used then some items will save components.
If CEIL() then the materials for all items will increase.
|

Alexei Stryker
Steiners Erben Die Konkurrenz
3
|
Posted - 2014.05.12 12:23:00 -
[325] - Quote
Spectre Wraith wrote:These are all very good changes, however, let me reiterate the one thing that is almost universally wanted/requested, and that is....
MODULAR STARBASES!!
There was a thread created years back of this very idea, including CAD/3d models of what this would be like, and ever since, has probably been the most requested/wanted for starbases.
Requested since 2007 |

Lochiel
Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation
2
|
Posted - 2014.05.12 18:37:00 -
[326] - Quote
Any thoughts of changing POS's to be more inline with their outpost counter parts? Normalize PG/CPU. Amarr get production bonus, Caldari get research bonus, Minmatar get Refining/compression/Jump-Bridge bonus, Gallente keep their bonus to silo size?
Right now it seems that you use Gallente for reactions, Caldari for everything else, and Minmatar/Amarr if getting those fuels is easier. |

Soldarius
Deadman W0nderland Test Alliance Please Ignore
678
|
Posted - 2014.05.12 20:26:00 -
[327] - Quote
With the pushing back of Indy changes to Crius, will the POS changes also be pushed back? Yes/no/partly? GÇ£I personally refuse to help AAA take space from itself so it can become an even shittier version of itselfGÇ¥
-Grath Telkin, 2014. |

Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
42
|
Posted - 2014.05.12 22:02:00 -
[328] - Quote
Soldarius wrote:With the pushing back of Indy changes to Crius, will the POS changes also be pushed back? Yes/no/partly?
read the comments on the forum thread linked on the dev blog for the change to the schedule
It is a mess and not sure what parts you are askign about
99% of pos stuff got moved back - not sure if any pos stuff is coming jun 3rd |

DeDes
Oberon Incorporated RAZOR Alliance
47
|
Posted - 2014.05.12 22:39:00 -
[329] - Quote
Re: Corporate Hangar Arrays: from 1,400,000 m3 to 3,000,000 m3.
Nice but the idea is about 3 years too late.
When you changed corp hangers to be inaccessible during reinforcement timers and afterwards while shields are below 50% you made using corporate hangers one of the most dangerous ways to store stuff in towers. Smart people have found other safer ways.
|

Celly S
Concord Attraction Services The Ditanian Alliance
270
|
Posted - 2014.05.14 13:34:00 -
[330] - Quote
Oxide Ammar wrote:Azami Nevinyrall wrote:Can we get another option to remove abandoned POSs, besides a wardec and 8 hours of pew pew? It's strange post to come from RvB that bashing POS being considered as service you provide, but anyway..they said in the Fanfest (it was answer to question like yours) they will be making CONCORD to fire at any offline POS with no charter in its cargo to clear up the moon for anyone to use them.
I find this to be rather amusing... Imagine someone who forgot to fuel up their POS and had some sort of issue that prevented them from doing so for an extended period of time? All of the pilots flocked around that pos waiting for the thing to go pop and all the arrays to un-anchor/drop loot/ect ect.
LOL
I'm sure that the police will have a grace period where they will not attack the POS and the owners will have an opportunity to restock it, but no idea how long that might be as I didn't hear that part of fanfest.
o/ Celly Smunt Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or be singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |