EVE Search - Sticky:Dev blog: Starbase changes for Crius

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:Dev blog: Starbase changes for Crius

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 10 post(s)
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 34	Posted - 2014.06.17 00:03:00 - [1] - Quote Hmm... Completely Removing Empire Standings for POS operation - Makes about as much sense as having Hun villages deep in the Roman Empire while they are at war Now we have to pay to use our own equipment? Sorry stupid idea, why pay 'Taxes' or "hire' to run jobs in high-sec you have to have a 'lease' per hour while tower is online, if a man-power aspect is so wanted have appropriate "livestock" group required in the structure's build just like in Outposts Removal of remote from office in system - wow apparently CCP totally wants to disregard technologies that predate their own company's existence in the real world in their virtual one Many of the additions are intriguing and make sense, however making the game universe less logical (or intelligent) to add complexity and/or change to it is counter intuitive. Also the new S&I interface as of the last time I was on SIsi is mainly window dressing (soon as recheck it and find proper place for feedback to that I will go into detail there). My disappointment is every increasing. Truth be told, first and last items won't affect me one iota, I already have characters and corporations that can anchor in high-sec in 2 empires. I am irked on principle. So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 34	Posted - 2014.06.17 02:01:00 - [2] - Quote I say the devs, content producers, etc be required to be sober during entire planning and development of releases, apparently Icelandic brew are affecting their judgement So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 34	Posted - 2014.06.17 02:05:00 - [3] - Quote FaeVerite wrote: CCP Phantom wrote: With Crius, the next EVE Online release to be published on July 22nd, major changes will come to Industry and with that you will also see tweaks and changes related to player-owned starbases (POS). A brief overview of the most important changes: Reprocessing POS Arrays will change and be more efficient Compression Arrays will be introduced Other industry related Arrays (eg. for research, invention and manufacturing) will receive a bonus for each additionally similar structure anchored at the same POS Faction standing requirements to anchor POS are removed Starbase Defense Management skill requires only Anchoring 4 instead of Anchoring 5 Much more information and all the details are available in CCP Ytterbium's latest dev blog Starbase changes for Crius. So despite many pages from a large group of industrial players informing CCP this was a bad idea and players canceling subscriptions, CCP intends to ignore a large group of players to placate a small group that the industrial players actually enable. Bad Business Plan. Good Luck with maintaining a game or company when your customers leave. Apparently yes, So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 34	Posted - 2014.06.17 12:14:00 - [4] - Quote In regards to POS S&I these things would have made more sense: Relaxing not removal of empire standing Leaving hard caps in place for arrays/labs, but make the non-specific lab's slots universal but keeping modifiers per lab Adding centralized material silos for arrays to draw from Secure link surcharge for using BPs from a corporate hangar POS changes that make at least some sense: Compression arrays Changes to Refining Arrays including removal of sec requirements POS S&I changes that are counter intuitive or plain stupid Adding superfluous job charges Scaling of jobs ran disconnected from a set capacity of a structure Making labs bonus modifiers instead of actually being what their intended application Additional nuisance changes. If the POS changes are related to general S&I and the unified interface and station changes I say too bad. As programmers and game designers it is YOUR job to make it work logically and reasonably in both iterations, not pass on complications and poor design to us the consumer. Excessive cost volatility in aspects of S&I dependent on what a corporation in game deploys and maintains is unacceptable. The whole S&I system is getting a complete make over I fail to see why it is acceptable for it to be done in a less than optimal manner taking into the account of differing dynamics of station and POS based operations, not to mention future possibilities considering the flexibility inherent to the mobile structure model. So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 34	Posted - 2014.06.17 16:46:00 - [5] - Quote Loraine Gess wrote: cellestron wrote: Removing the standings requirements without making any other changes to POS mechanics/requirements is a horrible idea. Now any large corp or alliance can go around and wardec smaller corps, kill their POS and then "grief" the site by putting up an offline POS they never intend to use. They could literally put up hundreds and then hide behind the sheer cost of warrdeccing them to hold the spots. There needs to be some barrier, limit or challenge to erecting a POS in high sec unless your idea of an "industry change" is having to join a large alliance or coalition to keep your POS (sound familiar?). Or having entire solar systems filled with offline control towers. The offline control tower problem is bad enough now and really needs to be addressed anyway. I don't want running a POS in high sec to be risk free. But I don't want the "POS ownership" landscape in High Sec looking like an SOV map either. At the very least please at least consider buffing the POS defenses to make them more defendable by small active corps before you make this change. What prevented this in the current system? The will of a large player to sit on an alt with good standings? You think an entity that *** billions a month per r64 moon is intimidated by this stupid, nonsensical, useless requirement? Can't mine or otherwise do moon goo in High-sec so not only is retort invalid, it is a clear indication individuals either not understanding how POS's work in high-sec currently and planned in next release or blatantly trying to confuse the under informed. On a related note regarding the last part of previous statement, I have no qualms about directly calling out Goonswarm involving at least some of the member corps actions in high-sec where they enter into high for the purpose of pirating soft targets. Frankly speaking if an alliance willing to operate contrary and by game mechanics criminally in a section of space the war declaration only gives them a heads up, not a proper pursuit of defense or recompense. I don't particularly have a thing against goons but I am tired of their PR dept on forums telling everyone else how high-sec should be more like null (I will give them major credit for both their real knowledge of the game AND the way they spin things like politicians) So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be CRAZY** Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 36	Posted - 2014.06.18 12:39:00 - [6] - Quote Couple more thoughts, some may be refined previous mentioned ideas. "Abandoned" High-sec towers - the Low & Null operators are being completely truthful when they say taking out an idle tower with sub-capitals is slow. Even though it might be entertaining on a slow day to cull them, I think a more automated method would make sense in High-sec. In fact there is already a mechanic in place to be modeled after: the decay of anchored containers after 30 days of inactivity. So I would venture a suggestion that once a tower goes idle for over 30 days that the empire it is in impounds the tower, arrays, and all materials contained (similar to items in offices when you don't make your rent payment). A neat twist would be after a prolonged period of impound the empire would sell the standard items on the market at current price and auction off via a contract the individual faction and T2 items in the closest station, off course that is more of wishful idea on my part. Factory and Labs - Considering POS structures are in space, the most expensive thing a space based structure to maintain is life support systems which logically would mean, particularly in factories, that automation via AI and robotics would be the standard not the exception. In regards to labs it would be very much the same unless dealing with biologicals. So the whole premise of having a human based workforce at an array is illogical and counter intuitive also completely destroying the idea of labor cost at them. Further ruining the whole labor cost premise is the operation of POS arrays in a wormhole, considering the labor force would have to be brought in by capsuleers in the first place. Removal of Remote from office BPs - Many have been focused on the security aspect of this issue, however with the advent of using prints from containers it is almost a moot point as long as the prints are locked in an audit container with the contents viewable they still can be used. However my argument against it is that it is quite possible for a corporation particularly with this new scaling nonsense at POS'es have multiples in a given system possible one for research and another or 2 for manufacturing due to multiple array bonuses and PG/CPU limits. Moving around prints in that example graphically shows the issues involving decentralization of prints, particularly major hurdles in group workflow and cooperation. The arguments for this change are flimsy at best. least valid is risk versus reward statement, further more in my testing of the new UI it doesn't have any apparent reason to force the change in and unto itself. This particular aspect of S&I worked, made sense in application, and doesn't make sense in removal. So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 36	Posted - 2014.06.18 16:31:00 - [7] - Quote Ideally POS arrays would maintain a fixed limit in concurrent jobs and not be affected by scalability as well as the mobile labs having a fixed slot amount with bonuses appropriate for the type of lab but not specific slots for individual tasks (i.e. ME, TE, Copy and Invention). Understandably it would require a moderate amount of complexity under the new UI interface to implement but nothing more dramatic than a programming paradigm similar to using interfaces and overloading classes in C++/C# at least I perceive it in that manner. With all the major improvements pending in the next release, the sticking points are very significant and quite frankly are change for the sake of change or catering to some sort of ideology contrary to what is viable for any person or group that plays Eve for entertainment primarily not as an obsessive hobby / second job. I really like to hear something from someone who actually knows in the development process Why and What to these points: Why the blanket removal of standings in anchoring POS's, when an encroachment model makes more sense. Why remove remote from office when it, contrary to many claims, does not add significant or in high-sec virtually no risk vs. reward benefits. Why add labor costs / taxes to POS activities (other than an arbitrary currency sink) since the working model and logical extrapolations would dictate, labor forces in particular, are not valid. As an informed and thinking consumer I just can not accept "Because it was easier" or anything similar. So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 36	Posted - 2014.06.18 21:17:00 - [8] - Quote Interesting tidbit: It only took 6 days between the opening of the feedback forum thread on Sisi to the probably firm commitment of "features" announcement in a DevBlog and this feedback thread. Additional tidbit, that I honestly had overlooked in my continued crusade against the removal of "Remote from corporate office" campaign. Corporations that had previously used the mechanic to do their research at a POS due to the gridlock at stations in primarily ME and Copying in addition to the higher costs of having an office at a S&I station are out of luck. To put it simply any corporation that wants to use a station for anything in the S&I workflow will have to pay the significantly higher office rentals with those stations which will be compounded by the further demand for those office slots and the limited amount of office slots at stations. It is obvious those factors are going to virtually destroy new corporation start ups in S&I field while having zero impact on individuals (nor should it) So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 36	Posted - 2014.06.19 22:59:00 - [9] - Quote The only change I have seen regarding S&I involving POS's that makes any sort of sense is the Compression Arrays. The obvious benefit of compressing isotope bearing empire ice into null jumps immediately to mind. Only thing these arrays stomp on are the Rorqual, which even stripped of the feature still has others to offset the loss in the mean time. As for anchoring I say give a little relief to those who struggle with standings issue open .5 space. A total removal is flat out stupid based on various arguments from different perspectives. Pretty much everything else POS related seems to be inspired by Wile E. Coyote with equal effectiveness in catching the Roadrunner. (Which is zip) So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 36	Posted - 2014.06.20 04:14:00 - [10] - Quote Noticed some are mistaking terms or impending changes: Some clarification: Remote Jobs - a job started in any system other than the one where the blueprint physically AND S&I facility resides, (station or POS array/lab) *Remote from Office* - the ability to have a blueprint physically in a station office rented to a corporation and use POS arrays in the same corporation's POS or Alliance POS'es that allow member use, only works in the system where BOTH the office AND the POS array located Remote Jobs will still work post deployment, Remote from Office is being removed entirely. Best case scenario would be having the blueprints in the Corporate Hangar Array at the POS and arrays/labs could use from there, however I have not seen any mention of this, nor wish to imply that is what will be the case post deployment. Post deployment stations with S&I facilities will not have limited slots but scaling costs. For manufacturing and research on the corporate level it will require a corporation to have an office at those stations with the blueprint physically there, however if a corporation can not afford to maintain an office (or there is no available offices to rent) it can not use the station's S&I facilities (and likely be forced to set a POS to do any S&I). The office requirement does not apply to individuals. End of unbiased clarification --- Opinionated Summation: While there are many good aspects pending it the deployment, the whole of it will make the use of Starbases(POS) either extremely annoying or very impractical. Quite possibly without exaggerating, gank the smaller industrialists to nigh extinction. So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!

Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 36	Posted - 2014.06.20 07:19:00 - [11] - Quote Pic'n dor wrote: Please no stacking of tens of pos mods... make them upgradable (like iHUBS or whatever) Please increase BPC run limit on cap size BPC (5run on cap part bpo, that's hardly 12h of jobs..) I agree max run limits are insanely low. Something not capital level but does show the lack of thought in some limits: Nanite Repair Paste max runs 5, units produced per run 10; print used to exhaustion produces 50 units of product, manufacturing time 4m * 5 runs = 20min, copy time base at 4min And of course adding scaling to a POS is well dumb, for reasons why read previous posts by myself and others making the argument against it. So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 41	Posted - 2014.06.22 08:19:00 - [12] - Quote Over 90% of the expansion's projected content as given reeks, whole dynamic is ganked. Sadly I'd rather deal with the existing issues even the check boxes that sometimes do opposite of what you expect and dated interface. So let me whip out the ole crystal ball (which is gonna be needed for every spreadsheet and planning program to function... where do you find an API to a mystical device that divines the future use at a system that could vary hour by hour and day by day?" Hmm... it shows many industrial and research types going solo, working with a corp would be too annoying not due to the corp's fault but the new and improved mechanics. Single use only (not by choice either) POSes cluttered with to dozens of the same lab or array type. A very enticing chance of misplacing prints (now where did I put the BPO is it in the office at this station maybe the station 3 systems over, maybe it is in the research POS, nope not there maybe it is in the manufacturing POS wait it isn't there either alright WTH is the print... maybe Bob has it, nah he swears he doesn't have it) Ah savor the ever so sweet satire and not so subtle suffering of all who have to contend with this mess. Is it too late to rename the next release to Loki it seems much more in his arena? However, not to be completely negative some things make perfect sense and couple would conditionally Compression Array - It has tremendous potential for all security systems Use prints from a container - Long over due New UI - needs some major tweaking but the ability to see at a glance have vs need for a job is awesome I'm sure there are maybe 2 or so I forgot, but most of it is absurd complexity where it need not exist. Complexity for flexibility and/or process control great, otherwise sorry back to the drawing board. So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 42	Posted - 2014.06.28 06:59:00 - [13] - Quote Understandably it is a PITA to write and maintain code for two paths reaching the same destination, that said... Station and Starbase (POS) S&I operate on fundamentally different premises, it is easy to go "black box" tech with stations and the new system makes perfect sense in that area. On the flip side it doesn't with POS arrays & labs, the have finite volume, mass, and control specs all very tangible things considering they are built, launched, etc etc by players. Many of the additions seem more geared for a grad student's thesis or a professor testing his/her pet theory than to make a game more enjoyable or intuitive. It is one thing to dabble in the virtual market much like real day traders it is however unrealistic to expect players to 'chase the dragon' from system to system to shave some costs off S&I jobs, it is too tiresome to be sustained for all but the most regimental groups. So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!
Flay Nardieu Forgotten Union of Knackered Tradesfolk Universal Rockstars 45	Posted - 2014.08.02 08:57:00 - [14] - Quote My POS work as ended on this and alts, this account is not getting renewed nor are the other accounts I have. No more paying real world money feeding PLEX into the system to fund my accounts and subsidize my pursuits in Eve. People can say what they want I'm boycotting EVE maybe CCP will get the hint, They screwed industry some are too hooked on the kool-aide to care. Already got the email 'reminding' me to renew my accounts just waiting for the cancellation survey Simple consumer pragmatism I'm not paying for something if I don't find it entertaining/useful. So minimum 3 mouth hiatus (sadly I have to wait for couple to pass on this account since it was renewed quarterly) So adieu o7 So... I am a carebear, Really?-á Ok.... I'll be *CRAZY* Bear then!

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,06s, ref 20250627/0012
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

bitcoin: 1CHRiBBArqpw5Yz7x5KS2RRtN5ubEn5gF

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.