Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 .. 19 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 70 post(s) |
Tripple Cripple
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.02 10:10:00 -
[511] - Quote
Noticed on Sisi that the build time on the Orca and the Dreads are the same now. About 17 days before skills. That is an increase of 2-3 days for a dread so not a big deal. The Orca that is not a real capital more of an in between BS and Capital gets the same treatment and goes from 7 days build time to 17 days. Is this intentional? |
sten mattson
Virtus Crusade Curatores Veritatis Alliance
72
|
Posted - 2014.07.06 05:05:00 -
[512] - Quote
chages look good for the most part.
one big problem though for those who use BPOs as a corp resource:
as of right now corp theft is not really a problem since the BPO can be locked inside a station and you can still use the bpo for jobs in a POS eg copy - ME/TE - manufacturing.
with the new changes , you will have to first move the BPOs to the pos, and i have no problem with this. But you will also have to move them to the specific facility for the job- i.e you need to put the BPO in the ship assembly to build a ship from the BPO, or the BPO needs to be in the design lab to get copied.
what this means is that these blueprints cant be locked and saved from corp theft with these new changes since they will be needed for different things.
what i propose is that the blueprints still need to be brought to the actual POS, but only need to be in any hangar in the POS to be used for all facilities inside the POS.
i.e: all BPOs are locked inside the corp hangar array, and can be used for copying in the design lab or used for manufacturing in the assembly arrays. IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!! |
Kukihara Akachi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 12:57:00 -
[513] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Ealon Musque wrote:Loraine Gess wrote:[quote=Ealon Musque] Is your point that one can get around the "chunkiness" issue by running batches of multiple Archons (in this case) in one production run? Archon Bill of Materials: Capital Drone Bay......................... 44 Capital Armor Plates.................... 11 Capital Capacitor Battery............. 11 Capital Power Generator............. 11 Capital Jump Drive....................... 11 Capital Ship Maintenance Bay.... 11 Capital Corporate Hangar Bay.....11 all other components....................<10 ... So, to summarize, ME0-9 saves you a total of 3 Drone Bays (the cheapest components), whereas ME10 alone saves 7 different components. This is the "chunkiness effect". Yup, there is some weirdness in this sort of thing, and there's not really a good obvious solution if we want to keep per-job rounding (which we generally do). I'll try and make time to have another look at this later.
Any news on this, as this is really opposite to the whole idea of diminishing returns and steady progress in research? I just checked Moros blueprints, and per level you get the following saving of components:
0->1 = components saved: 0 1->2 = components saved: 0 2->3 = components saved: 0 3->4 = components saved: 6 (65 million saved) 4->5 = components saved: 2 (17 million saved) 5->6 = components saved: 2 (22 million saved) 6->7 = components saved: 3 (34.4 million saved) 7->8 = components saved: 3 (30.1 million saved) 8->9 = components saved: 0 9->10 = components saved: 6 (64.2 million saved)
Firstly, this is screwed because all those ME6 blueprints, that were researched to perfect ME, are no longer perfect ME. What's perfect already should remain perfect after the changes. (In case of Moros, that used to be ME6.)
Secondly, and more importantly, it's screwed because it's completely against what this industry revamp was supposed to do in terms of consistency, intuitiveness, and opaqueness. The original devblog stated that the changes introduce "a fixed number of researchable levels with identical bonuses but increasing research time." (that's direct quote). That's exactly not happening now. The same devblog also talked about making it more intuitive and transparent - quite the opposite here, too! In this case, the changes fail to do what they were supposed to do: to give a "pretty clear system that is easy to wrap your head around, works for pretty much everything". |
Alexander McKeon
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
66
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 20:24:00 -
[514] - Quote
I just checked the .csv, and the copy time for all R.A.M types is 25% longer than their build time, contrary to the stated plan; is this one of those intended special cases? I can't thing of a good reason for it to be one. |
Ealon Musque
Veldspar Industries Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.10 06:45:00 -
[515] - Quote
Kukihara Akachi wrote:I just checked Moros blueprints, and per level you get the following saving of components:
0->1 = components saved: 0 1->2 = components saved: 0 2->3 = components saved: 0 3->4 = components saved: 6 (65 million saved) 4->5 = components saved: 2 (17 million saved) 5->6 = components saved: 2 (22 million saved) 6->7 = components saved: 3 (34.4 million saved) 7->8 = components saved: 3 (30.1 million saved) 8->9 = components saved: 0 9->10 = components saved: 6 (64.2 million saved)
Firstly, this is screwed because all those ME6 blueprints, that were researched to perfect ME, are no longer perfect ME. What's perfect already should remain perfect after the changes. (In case of Moros, that used to be ME6.)
Secondly, and more importantly, it's screwed because it's completely against what this industry revamp was supposed to do in terms of consistency, intuitiveness, and opaqueness. The original devblog stated that the changes introduce "a fixed number of researchable levels with identical bonuses but increasing research time." (that's direct quote). That's exactly not happening now. The same devblog also talked about making it more intuitive and transparent - quite the opposite here, too! In this case, the changes fail to do what they were supposed to do: to give a "pretty clear system that is easy to wrap your head around, works for pretty much everything".
Yeah, this is not good. Thanks for following up on my initial post about this. Looking forward to hearing how this will be tackled. |
Kukihara Akachi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
15
|
Posted - 2014.07.10 08:18:00 -
[516] - Quote
Ealon Musque wrote:Yeah, this is not good. Thanks for following up on my initial post about this. Looking forward to hearing how this will be tackled.
My initial fix to this would be to do the same thing they did to fuel blocks: divide the construction parts size by 1/10 and multiply their number needed by 10.
But there's still the problem that our perfect ME blueprints are no longer perfect. That's definitely not cool. |
Andrew Indy
Four Pillar Production Headshot Gaming
91
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 04:29:00 -
[517] - Quote
I'm personally not a fan of having my Multi Month ME Blueprints converted into 5 minute jobs. I invested the time to get them to crazy levels to get a slight advantage and now any old fool can get up to my level with almost no effort (assuming they have 10 ME before the change).
PS, I wish I had research my Archon to 10 before I noticed the change :(. |
Ealon Musque
Veldspar Industries Brave Collective
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.12 00:11:00 -
[518] - Quote
Kukihara Akachi wrote:Ealon Musque wrote:Yeah, this is not good. Thanks for following up on my initial post about this. Looking forward to hearing how this will be tackled. My initial fix to this would be to do the same thing they did to fuel blocks: divide the construction parts size by 1/10 and multiply their number needed by 10.
I think I agree. Simplest solution. |
Shahai Shintaro
Caldari Colonial Defense Ministry Templis CALSF
49
|
Posted - 2014.07.14 19:06:00 -
[519] - Quote
There any update with this or do we still need to bulk build caps to be back to what we currently have? |
Kukihara Akachi
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 06:16:00 -
[520] - Quote
No, it seems that they'll just do it like this. |
|
Steijn
Quay Industries
541
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 08:34:00 -
[521] - Quote
meh, ignore, will fall on deaf ears. |
Ealon Musque
Veldspar Industries Brave Collective
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 09:28:00 -
[522] - Quote
Probably ran out of time to consider it this time around. And most likely will not mess with it later. So yeah. |
Electrified Circuits
Fault Line Industries Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.16 21:38:00 -
[523] - Quote
2 Cents for Capital consideration |
Laura Belle
The Scope Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2014.07.17 18:37:00 -
[524] - Quote
I don't like the invention change! in fact I hate it!
In short - you gonna take the whole market up.
1st of all, a question, if u gonna make the production material cost 50% higher and ME0 has -10 waste.. how exactly its ending in (1.5/1.091) 37.5% higher and not 65.5% (1.5*1.091) higher?
now, to put the long version of my opinion on the table. going with the 37.5%, that means that per excelence - if comparing to now, each ME0 BPC will give production cost equal to -2.75ME nowadays.
ok, but unlike now when we can negate it with decryptor back to -20 waste, we'll be able to take off the price only 3% so 1.375*.97 = ~1.334 times a perfect BPC give now
comparing to the 1.2 we have now we're talking on a raise of 11% in production cost (1.334/1.2) and there is NO way cheaper decryptors can negate such a raise).
|
Electrified Circuits
Fault Line Industries Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
17
|
Posted - 2014.07.18 11:45:00 -
[525] - Quote
Laura I wouldn't worry about that , tech 2 prices will simply just go up as we have seen already. (what you make it for and the effort put in usually equates its worth provided the market demand is there)
The real problem with invention at the moment is decryptors are practically useless even in big ships they are not that great.
But, ccp have said invention is the next iteration so it will happen soon |
Sigras
Conglomo
823
|
Posted - 2014.07.20 23:36:00 -
[526] - Quote
Hold on, I just ran the numbers once more, and comparing a ME -1 BPC (before) to an ME +5 BPC (after) Im seeing a 13.48% increase... And that's after using the best team on SISI and in a POS array.
I knew there was going to be some increase but 13.48% ... wow...
Is this intentional? an increase of > 13% on all T2 inventables who's demand exceeds T2 BPO production capabilities? |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3542
|
Posted - 2014.07.21 00:18:00 -
[527] - Quote
Sigras wrote:Hold on, I just ran the numbers once more, and comparing a ME -1 BPC (before) to an ME +5 BPC (after) Im seeing a 13.48% increase... And that's after using the best team on SISI and in a POS array.
I knew there was going to be some increase but 13.48% ... wow...
Is this intentional? an increase of > 13% on all T2 inventables who's demand exceeds T2 BPO production capabilities? Should be noted: T2 BPOs are affected worse than BPCs.
Those things which didn't use decryptors before will be pretty unaffected. Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Sigras
Conglomo
823
|
Posted - 2014.07.21 04:43:00 -
[528] - Quote
Oh, I see what you mean... ok cool... yeah now that I think about it there was really no other way to make it work. |
Slave Miner
Adrenaline Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.21 21:15:00 -
[529] - Quote
I have a question regarding invented rigs. I've been doing invention on rigs and logged in to the test server to get an idea of what the changes are and was shocked to find that my -3 ME invented BPC's were converted to (what is currently) -4 ME effectively doubling the production costs of the rigs.
Furthermore I've been experiementing on the test server to see if there was a way to improve the wastage to no avail (currently setting up a POS to see if the cost basis can be reduced).
Was this intentional? It's going to greatly destabilize the rig market to have an over night 2x cost basis increase on T2 rigs (the cheapest of t2 rigs will cost as much as ships). |
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
163
|
Posted - 2014.07.21 22:23:00 -
[530] - Quote
Sable Moran wrote:Yeah, me too. But I'm a bit worried if CCP is expecting too much. Will people really pick up industry? Even after these changes it still is tedious spreadsheet work with lots of clicking and even more moving parts than before.
Free market will ensure that supply and demand converge, given that pricing is set by the players. |
|
G'Shad
Weatherlight Fleetworks
6
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 15:40:00 -
[531] - Quote
As a cap builder, I have one thing to say . . .f*** me for not stocking up on finished ships before this. The build cost (perfect blue prints) has gone up significantly. Still adjusting the excel file, but it looks like it could be a 15-20% increase over yesterday.
Second thing of note: What the hell is with the order the materials are in. Not minerals not listed alphabetically, components on Cap BPOs not in any understandable order. What the hell? This does not look like an improvement, just sloppy. |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3290
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 16:10:00 -
[532] - Quote
G'Shad wrote:As a cap builder, I have one thing to say . . .f*** me for not stocking up on finished ships before this. The build cost (perfect blue prints) has gone up significantly. Still adjusting the excel file, but it looks like it could be a 15-20% increase over yesterday.
Second thing of note: What the hell is with the order the materials are in. Not minerals not listed alphabetically, components on Cap BPOs not in any understandable order. What the hell? This does not look like an improvement, just sloppy.
Welcome to Crius, where no option to **** off the customer base was not exercised. |
Jaden Soniel
Almalexia Inc.
5
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 16:48:00 -
[533] - Quote
okay, so I'm changing my excel sheet and i find the following:
I look at the industry UI with a T2 Co Processor selected. It has -4% time efficiency. It says the following things regarding the time it take to produce a single module:
Skills -24% Blueprint time efficiency -4% Facility -25% (I'm looking at this in a tower) Industry lvl 5 Advanced Industry lvl 5
So from what I'm getting from this is that the time it takes to make under these conditions is time -53%. Witch should equal 21 minutes 21 seconds according to the UI. I look at the same blueprint show info and it says: time per run 39 minutes. But if I negate -53% i get 18 minutes and 19.8 seconds.
Or looking at this another way: Blueprint show info time per run 39 minutes. Industry UI time per run 21 mins 21 sec, witch comes after -53%. If i divide 21 mins and 21 sec with 39 mins i get 54.74%.
So where does the difference coming from? Am i missing something? |
Slave Miner
Adrenaline Enterprises
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 17:26:00 -
[534] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:G'Shad wrote:As a cap builder, I have one thing to say . . .f*** me for not stocking up on finished ships before this. The build cost (perfect blue prints) has gone up significantly. Still adjusting the excel file, but it looks like it could be a 15-20% increase over yesterday.
Second thing of note: What the hell is with the order the materials are in. Not minerals not listed alphabetically, components on Cap BPOs not in any understandable order. What the hell? This does not look like an improvement, just sloppy. Welcome to Crius, where no option to **** off the customer base was not exercised.
We were caught somewhat off guard as well, our cost base doubled over night on small rigs. We ended up scrambling to research and produce everything we could in the past two days to cushion the transition.
There were also unexpected increases in base material requirements (that is to say, they upped the original requirements). Example, we used .15% of ram to produce a single unit of a small hyperspatial velocity rig, now the requirement is 2 units which is a 6.66~ multiple increase in base material requirements. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
3556
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 18:03:00 -
[535] - Quote
Slave Miner wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:G'Shad wrote:As a cap builder, I have one thing to say . . .f*** me for not stocking up on finished ships before this. The build cost (perfect blue prints) has gone up significantly. Still adjusting the excel file, but it looks like it could be a 15-20% increase over yesterday.
Second thing of note: What the hell is with the order the materials are in. Not minerals not listed alphabetically, components on Cap BPOs not in any understandable order. What the hell? This does not look like an improvement, just sloppy. Welcome to Crius, where no option to **** off the customer base was not exercised. We were caught somewhat off guard as well, our cost base doubled over night on small rigs. We ended up scrambling to research and produce everything we could in the past two days to cushion the transition. There were also unexpected increases in base material requirements (that is to say, they upped the original requirements). Example, we used .15% of ram to produce a single unit of a small hyperspatial velocity rig, now the requirement is 2 units which is a 6.66~ multiple increase in base material requirements.
Remember,.rig production output has been increased by 100 times. And rig stockpiles.
So it's actually a significant decrease. As that would have come out at 15 Woo! CSM 9! http://fuzzwork.enterprises/ Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter |
Oma Lorche
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
7
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 19:12:00 -
[536] - Quote
WIth 14h invention time for simplest modules you eliminated reason to produce modules at all. You can do now only 1 invention cycle a day instead of many. What is the point? I don't see reason for people to make those items at all. There must be some basic return if you decide to produce for example light ion blaster. Now you cannot invent enough to keep production slots busy. IInvention time is longer then production time. Thats wrong surely!
|
erdrickjr
30plus Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 21:19:00 -
[537] - Quote
Went to research a fighter bpo today and it cost me 108 mil to get to 9 and 360+mil to get to 10 WTF. Don't think the bpo costed that much. Then go to frigates and there like 1.7 mil to get to lv9.
Think the pricing needs work or they are really trying to take isk out of game
Plus side other bpos turned to perfect. |
Kale Freeman
Dirt 'n' Glitter I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
29
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 09:13:00 -
[538] - Quote
Oma Lorche wrote: WIth 14h invention time for simplest modules you eliminated reason to produce modules at all. You can do now only 1 invention cycle a day instead of many. What is the point? I don't see reason for people to make those items at all. There must be some basic return if you decide to produce for example light ion blaster. Now you cannot invent enough to keep production slots busy. IInvention time is longer then production time. Thats wrong surely!
Is that in a POS? |
Komi Toran
Paragon Trust The Bastion
141
|
Posted - 2014.07.23 09:21:00 -
[539] - Quote
Jaden Soniel wrote:So from what I'm getting from this is that the time it takes to make under these conditions is time -53%. You should be getting -45.28%, because you multiply the modifiers, not add. |
Anthar Thebess
644
|
Posted - 2014.08.08 12:16:00 -
[540] - Quote
Increase Time needed for constructing supercapitals , as current skills allow them to be constructed faster. We really don't need more supers. Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption Support Needed : Faction Crystal Changes |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 .. 19 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |