Further more the current invention output is highly depending on online time. With one invention cycle every 1:15 hour you get 2 to 3 on an average evening if you don't wander of in another region. If you increase this time to something between 3 and 7 hours many players won't manage to get more than one cycle each evening. That would greatly nerf the output of invention. I would suggest if you touch this times consider increasing the output runs. I would be fine with the invention taking 12 hours but the result is not a 10 run copy but a 50 run copy. But that starts to go deep into invention cost balance soon and might be out of scope. And therefore I would even suggest to keep the current invention times until you redo the hole invention thing. I will stop here for now on that subject.



Sounds good, it is always helpful if there is a solid pattern to follow if you want to explain something to someone else. I would suggest the T1 item bpo as the base line while T2 and later Meta-level BPs go with a meta modifier. Currently that would be t2 item takes 5 times of a t1 item.

But those are the obvious ones. Is cost scaling a part of this GÇ£dataGÇ¥? Is the BPO rank part of the installation cost and / or the team cost? A rank 10 item is harder to build than a rank 1 so it would be reasonable if the workforce gets more expensive with BPO rank.

Greyscale, just to bounce this off someone whose responding and actively thinking about industry....

Is CCP happy with the way drugs work? These do not appear to have been touched in several years.

Eg, is there going to be a balancing pass made against them and/or are there plans for more specialized boosters?

I like making them, but they are an incredible nuisance due to how horrible the pos interface is for chaining the reactions. And how it is just annoying to get them into highsec.

Personally I'd like to see more variety and specialization like with implants that do some of the same things but some really different things.

Like mining / science / industry specific boosters.

Further, its' really hard to source materials and bpcs for drugs due to how certain components only appear in certain constellations. At least please make it regional, or not at all location based like with what was done to moon materials.


Overall I like the changes. I think. But to repeat myself, we definitely need to see them on sisi becuase eve has a lot of moving parts and y'all are tweaking a lot of them.

One other thing is the difference between blue prints that get invented and ones that don't

These don't need to worry about max runs
Cap Components
T2 cap components
shuttles
containers
Carriers
dreads
orca
rorqual
there are probably others...


These do:
anythign that gets invented
Also, balancing a max run bpc for invention to the times, or maybe doing away with the requirement for max run. Maybe making the size factor in so max run isn't always required

CCP Greyscale, what will happen with copy time of superweapon (AKA DD) BPs?
They have 40h manufacture time and 1month, 1days and 6h copy time (you per single run stat) .

It is capital module same like for example XL gun Dual 1000mm Railgun which has 20h manufacturing time but 1day 13.5h copy time. When we are at it, I hope XL gun will get copy time reduction also.

Greyscale

will you write another dev blog when you have the second iteration about the Industry changes coming in Crius?
it is hard for a Industry newbie like me to follow all those forum posts.

POS arrays are composed of extra materials only. Will these be changed to standard materials and effected by ME changes?

Thank you,

BB

Would it be possible to get some sample data to play with to give better feedback. I'm really interested in making copy/build times a multiple of the ranks you proposed however its much easier for you to pull a nice organised table of this data for different BPOs straight from the DB than it is for us to pull it manually.

Even if its 20 ships and modules across different classes giving build times and copy times we can really help give much better input with some data that we can play around with in excel. If there's a database dump anywhere of all of this static data somewhere we can manipulate even better just point the right general direction.

I think the blueprint data is in the SDE, but I could be wrong. Regardless, I'll see what I can do about dumping out what I have once the spreadsheet is in a good state. Right now, I'm working on assigning ranks to stuff like structures so I can math everything at once.

I think the blueprint data is in the SDE, but I could be wrong. Regardless, I'll see what I can do about dumping out what I have once the spreadsheet is in a good state. Right now, I'm working on assigning ranks to stuff like structures so I can math everything at once.

Do we know what will happen to blueprints that are partway though a remote POS research job, when the changes are implemented?

[..]

I think character specialisation is a good thing. I want to be "elite" and that implies that not everyone and their mother have been willing to put 20m skill points into it to get the best out of it. You're already doing this with refining, for which I'm currently specialising one character. I think it should be the same with manufacture and invention.

[...]

I like the consistency but I do have a concern and that is time investment in specialism to get the best or be the most productive. I feel there's not enough of this. Some items do require some time investment in skilling (some T2, like Covert Ops Cloaks) and A LOT of slot time investment in copying. For example copying the prototype cloak 3 x max runs takes well over 20 days (with a 5% copy time implant at a POS). If you reduce copy down to build time but don't increase skill requirements, absolutely anyone will be able to do it with minimal character specialisation.

I think character specialisation is a good thing. I want to be "elite" and that implies that not everyone and their mother have been willing to put 20m skill points into it to get the best out of it. You're already doing this with refining, for which I'm currently specialising one character. I think it should be the same with manufacture and invention.

Also, obligatory take T2 BPOs out of the game comment.

Yup, aware of this :) Max run stuff is a pain, probably not being changed in Crius

Firstly, these proposed changes will drastically change the decryptor market.

Personal interest statement on this feedback: given that I am sitting on hundreds, maybe thousands of Symmetry decryptors (and low double figures of the much more expensive and soon to be nearly worthless Process decryptors), I can live with this :). Doesn't mean I think it's a good change, but it will definitely make me billions.

I started making this table for myself, but I might as well post it too. Concerning decryptors:

With one major assumption, current decryptor benefits can be boiled down to just 2 values: their effect on material requirements, and their effect on the ideal invention time per manufacturing time ratio. The major assumption is that T2 manufacturers seek to optimize their invention time to manufacturing time ratio, so as to not leave a bunch of slots chronically under-used.

Another assumption that just simplifies calculations is to take the ratio of ProductivityModifier/BaseProductionTime as 0.2. This is the case for 738 out of 766 inventable T2 blueprints, and is also the value Devs are using as a standard. ["while for negative TE we're subtracting 1 and multiplying by 20"]. Similarly, the waste factor is taken to be a constant 10.

And finally, for the sake of pretty numbers, the material requirement modifier is given as a simple multiplier. In practice, this effect can vary wildly from item to item due to rounding; a particular high-volume item I'm acquainted with has the exact same material requirements at -2 and -1 ME, which moves pressure off accelerants and onto symmetries.

That given, have a 9-line CSV.
Tiny Pastebin CSV

All the modifiers are with respect to the "base" -4 / -4 inventable BPC.
Volume is the estimated daily volume bought from sell orders, averaged over the last 30 days. It's there for reference, as is price.


A tad too drowsy to make any thought-out comments on the data. From a quick glance, I'm surprised that Optimized Augmentation is actually that good. If it had drop rates closer to that of Accelerants, it would be very useful.

Skills are a different problem that'll be tackled at a later date.

This is a proposal to get rid of "efficiency" stats entirely (ME, PE)
and use "waste" stats instead ("material waste", "time waste").
Because waste is what actually matters. Stop using a proxy.