What kinds of benefits do teams give? Can I save on Materials cost when manufacturing? Or is it still only fiddling around with job costs and production times?

The Industry in EVE Online will be revamped with the Crius release on July 22nd. Industry gameplay will be made more interesting and will offer the chance for higher profits due to a dynamic industry landscape. New NPC worker teams give a bonus to manufacturing duration or material requirements as explained in previous blogs.

CCP SoniClover explains in his latest blog improvements to the Industry interface, additions to the Starmap and goes into details of Team specialization. Inform yourself about all these new Industry features and especially NPC worker Teams in CCP SoniClover's latest dev blog Teams and Revamp of Industry in EVE Online.

What is happening to decryptors?? There seems to be very little information on them...

We made a few small changes to starbases:
GÇó We removed the standing restrictions for deploying starbases in hi-sec.
GÇó We added a minimum corp age of 7 days for deploying starbases.
GÇó We added a factor where multiple structures modify job cost for related jobs, for example multiple labs reduce cost for research jobs (in the POS only of course). The maximum cost reduction ranges from 15% for capital manufacturing to 27% for small ship manufacturing.

Does this mean you are going to tax me for researching at a POS as well as making me fuel the POS? What is the point of a high sec POS if there is no benefit to having a POS.

Secondly, no Narrow specialization for Jump Freighters?

Love that first line "offer the chance for higher profits".
Yup, if you don't mind living in null sec.
"Oh, you are a high sec player, never mind that statement about higher profits."

Installation cost is not tax. POS manufacturing is free from the additional 10% NPC tax that is added to installation costs. It also gets a 2% material benefit with the assembly arrays.

Having teams per system instead of private makes absolutely no sense, unless you live in conquerable null sec in which case it would be equal to private.

That's all.

Teams can work on all jobs in a system. And the bids are pooled at a system level. So folks in, say, highsec, get the benefit of shared bidding.

Can somebody point me to a post explaining what problem was solved by introducing teams and the bidding mechanic?
Was there not enough competition?
I can't imagine there were complaints that industrial entrepeneurs were staying too long in the same location.

It's not a problem being solved. It's another knob to twiddle in industry.

The cost mechanic acts to push people apart.

The teams act to pull them together (especially at corporation levels)

It's not a problem being solved. It's another knob to twiddle in industry.

The cost mechanic acts to push people apart.

The teams act to pull them together (especially at corporation levels)

Can you answer if more than one team work in a single system im super confused

It's not a problem being solved. It's another knob to twiddle in industry.

The cost mechanic acts to push people apart.

The teams act to pull them together (especially at corporation levels)

The best specialists will go to the CFC/N3PL blocks for building capitals and modules for their fleets while their member alliances (fidelas constas, nulli, etc) pull in the 2nd best... all paid by massive amounts of rent ISK. Rents go up too because now they offer teams as incentives - and the cold war cycle continues.

Meanwhile Faction war areas, rich industrialists, and dedicated shipyards either move get the left-leftovers. Low Sec pirates might use teams as a draw for easy prey.

In all cases (except maybe in Providence - save us Chribba!) the teams look like a gift to ISK heavy populations. Loyal casual players that work solo (for years now) are left out pretty much.

Is there a counter view to this?

It would be stupid for people to bid in that way. So much isk to do it.

Not every activity in EVE should be just as efficient solo as it is in groups?

In addition, many items currently profitable to build are not confined to the category of capital ships and parts, etc. There are also a number of well organized, wealthy high sec groups who will be able to pour a lot of isk into teams that benefit their own industrialists.

Plus, if less people do industry as a result of the changes, it only gets more profitable for those who do. On the other hand, if more people do industry, then ways of specializing, such as teams, becomes more beneficial. Seems win/win

There are a lot of problems with null/sov, but this doesn't seem like one of them...

It's not a problem being solved. It's another knob to twiddle in industry.

The cost mechanic acts to push people apart.

The teams act to pull them together (especially at corporation levels)

Yup, I understand it is another knob to twiddle.
And the push/pull part was also made clear in the devblog.

The question still remains : why was this introduced?
People were playing the game in a way not intended by the designers?
Not enough dynamism in the market?
Simply introducing extra complexity for complexities sake can't be it.
And if the answer is : cooperate with other players or stay out of the market, then WTF?

I'm just surprised that there is no outcry against CCP's plan to require 50 of the small arrays to be online to get max bonus and can only imagine it is because sisi is still bugged to give max bonus to just 1.

That or people are just so tired of this already they've stopped caring about the game.

I'm just surprised that there is no outcry against CCP's plan to require 50 of the small arrays to be online to get max bonus and can only imagine it is because sisi is still bugged to give max bonus to just 1.

That or people are just so tired of this already they've stopped caring about the game.

Personally I can't believe they insist on implementing this. It got a really poor reception the first time. I was hoping they may have fine tuned it, especially with the delay. Yet here we are with the same nonsense.

you should know better than that, this is ccp we are talking about. If the thread didn't get over 100 pages of complaints in F&I they don't change

Why?

Teams can work on all jobs in a system. And the bids are pooled at a system level. So folks in, say, highsec, get the benefit of shared bidding.

Installation cost is not tax. POS manufacturing is free from the additional 10% NPC tax that is added to installation costs. It also gets a 2% material benefit with the assembly arrays.

Thanks for the counter.

Based on what Steve Ronuken wrote above - I see now what CCP might be trying to do.

Give reigns of the economy to nullsec. Allow them to manipulate prices by hiring in all teams that have to do with so and so. section of markets.

What a ****** up mess. Once again a CSM has proven to be worthless.

Edit: Since I see someone is putting up information for accounting. 2 POS's down, 1 Cap line down, 2 accounts expiring. From the number of POS mod's flooding into Jita looks like a flood to me....

And if the answer is : cooperate with other players or stay out of the market, then WTF?

If you suggest that groups will spring up like incursion groups, you are sadly mistaken, because there is still massive competition and lack of cohesiveness even amongst incursion groups operating in a small amount of systems.

Work together.

Or pick up your operation and move around Empire all the time chasing the teams for your production line vs avoiding the high demand systems with elevated costs.

As observed elsewhere in the numerous prior comments in related devblogs, the NASH index / effect / phenomena, whereby the most expensive producer of an item sets the market price will have the downstream effect of devaluing the game time played by the user who engages in an activity that produces isk.

Gave me a good laugh. In EVE, the person with the lowest production cost sets the price, not the other way around. And not even that is true in all cases because there are trolls, arbitrarily de- or increasing prices.

"Work together" said the spider to the fly. Lol. Back in the days of yore, there were extensive (well some) high sec industrial alliances banding together to share resources (POSes) and costs. One can see the game logic in the pos modules including the lab modules. Of course, these were attractive war dec targets and one doesn't see cooperative high sec alliances anymore. There is more incentive NOT to do this than to do this. High sec is broken and 0.0 alliances profit from changes such as these.

Banding together post 7/22 will be more the same. I speculate that 'Burn Jita' is but an initial variation on a theme because now there is an additional incentive to grief high sec beyond just the ability to shut down mining. Or, perhaps it will be more like a Marmite thing with high sec industrial types permanently dec'd with their systems camped? Perhaps, we just need to flip some terms around and call "high sec" "lower sec". Maybe we can change war decs to allow the dropping of caps in high sec?

Risk is good and makes for fun, but arbitrarily changing the rules to favor the view ... well there's what you say and what you do. One will have a bigger impact than the other.

Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.


(If your entire vision of your place in this game is as hapless hopeless prey, why do you play? Plenty of people have achieved things in this game by nutting up and taking their chances. They delt with the same problems. But you doom yourself because you won't even try.)

I don't know why people are so against these changes. These changes should make industry much more dynamic. Might have to actually break out a spreadsheet or calculator again.

More things to learn and figure out. Good times ahead. Who knows I might become an industry pirate, floating from system to system, taking advantage of the great bonuses.

For all of you whining like the world is coming to an end, have you actually done the math? It's really not that bad - and definitely nothing like what the more ridiculous of naysayers are spouting.

Couple of clues:
- many of the modifiers in this industry overhaul are to job cost, and not ME, which is a relatively small fraction of the total cost.
- I already have to move stations every once in a while cause right now the finite number of lines gets used up and I don't want to have to wait 7 days to manufacture 2 jumps from jita when 3 will do
- Usage of teams can be stretched to almost 2 months for many things made (depending on run times and number of runs possible)
- stuff made in nullsec will still have to be transported to highsec, and that cost is not trivial

Conjecture and heresay are useless. If you have some numbers to back up your claims, post em.. else go fiddle with Excel some.

It's not a problem being solved. It's another knob to twiddle in industry.

The cost mechanic acts to push people apart.

The teams act to pull them together (especially at corporation levels)

The best specialists will go to the CFC/N3PL blocks for building capitals and modules for their fleets while their member alliances (fidelas constas, nulli, etc) pull in the 2nd best... all paid by massive amounts of rent ISK. Rents go up too because now they offer teams as incentives - and the cold war cycle continues.

Meanwhile Faction war areas, rich industrialists, and dedicated shipyards either move get the left-leftovers. Low Sec pirates might use teams as a draw for easy prey.

In all cases (except maybe in Providence - save us Chribba!) the teams look like a gift to ISK heavy populations. Loyal casual players that work solo (for years now) are left out pretty much.

Is there a counter view to this?

This is what I dont understand - so 2 pressures (one to move away from others, the other to move together). This is a hopeless balance that constantly shifts. Who wants to risk assets chasing this balance? There must be come scenario I'm not seeing

Sorry to be negative about this.

I suggest you use teams to reward NRDS areas of the game (and NPC nullsec too). NBSI areas of nullsec are not risky areas. Then it makes sense - risk v reward.

Can teams be hired to wormhole systems? Is the industrial intel displayed for kspace systems on the map available anywhere for wormhole systems? Can I see what teams are available/were hired to wormholes that I do not have a structure in?

I'm just surprised that there is no outcry against CCP's plan to require 50 of the small arrays to be online to get max bonus and can only imagine it is because sisi is still bugged to give max bonus to just 1.

That or people are just so tired of this already they've stopped caring about the game.

Yes, you can hire to wormhole systems. We do have a solution for how we're exposing this through the API/CREST, I believe, but the people who know what that solution is aren't at their desks right now.

So we will need a third party tool to get this information that is not accessable via in-game means. Really? Just after taking NPC kills away for exactly that reasoning? Please tell I missunderstood that.

Gave me a good laugh. In EVE, the person with the lowest production cost sets the price, not the other way around. And not even that is true in all cases because there are trolls, arbitrarily de- or increasing prices.

The person who manufactures the modules at the lowest price, which satisfies the market's requirements sets the price.

If I can make 100 things at 1 isk each, but the market requires 10,000 (in the time it takes me to make the next 100), I don't set the price. The people who make the rest of the 10,000 do.

That's why T2 BPOs (in the current system) only make invention unprofitable in a very small number of markets, where they're able to fufil the whole market by themselves.

Hi everyone,

Update on multiple-structure bonuses for starbases.
...

The only substantial downside to this is that it makes it much easier to weaponize an industry tower, so we are considering upping lab/array fitting costs substantially in a later release. We likely will not do this in Crius itself as people will need time to reconfigure their setups.
...
-Greyscale

We added API support, giving third party tools the data required for active teams, teams in auction and so on.

We added filtering options in the starmap, allowing players to filter by industry activity and cost. This helps greatly in giving players an overview of what is happening where.

This concerns me somewhat. We currently run multiple lab slots because of pilot demand, but we also run weaponised POS with industry on the side. Crazy wormhole industrialists I know, but we do exist.

I fully expect that a highsec POS would be able to do more with a smaller POS due to relying on Concord for initial defense (at least until the wardecs happen.

I also would understand a mild increase in cpu/power grid for modules. I will no longer be running as many labs as I do now, so doubling (or even a little more) the requirements does make sense.

Please be aware that the primary use of LSAA's for many wormhole corps is secure storage and not ship building.
Doubling the fitting requirements LSAA's (without creating a very large corp hanger array as an option) may cause some forum angst.

ThatGÇÖs it for Team Super Friends. This might actually be the last dev blog from Super Friends, as the team will no longer exist with the same member composition as a result of some changes to better facilitate the new frequent release cadence. Some members have joined other teams and some have joined a new team. While Super Friends might be done, you can still expect to hear more from all of us in the future and we will be keeping a close eye on all things related to industry.

Hisec industry has more than enough money to dominate the market in teams. Leveraging this will require more co-operation and collaboration than currently exists. We're pretty hopeful that, once the initial shock of change has worn off, at least one system in hisec will realize this and lead the way for everyone else, leading hisec industry to be a much more casually collaborative activity, which we think adds a lot of value for all those players. This doesn't require a huge amount of formal co-operation, just an agreement on what teams you want to target and how much everyone is willing to chip in.

We will be keeping an eye on this, and if it ends up not working out and hisec industry remains completely resistant to any kind of social interaction with other players, we'll revisit this.

Hi everyone,

Update on multiple-structure bonuses for starbases.

We've just had another discussion about this system as-implemented, and based on your feedback, the technical challenges involved in implementing it in a fully user-friendly way, and the somewhat limited upsides of the feature, we've decided to cut it from Crius.

Having multiple starbase structures of the same type at a starbase will no longer grant you any bonus above those inherent in the structure itself

The only substantial downside to this is that it makes it much easier to weaponize an industry tower, so we are considering upping lab/array fitting costs substantially in a later release. We likely will not do this in Crius itself as people will need time to reconfigure their setups.

We are looking into what we can do to mitigate the expected glut of labs resulting from this change; more info as we work through this process :)

Thanks for all your feedback,
-Greyscale

Does this mean you are going to tax me for researching at a POS as well as making me fuel the POS? What is the point of a high sec POS if there is no benefit to having a POS. The first time a subscriber loses multi-billion ISK BPO that they have spent months or years researching, that person will probably cease subscribing to this game and walk away. If you want to kill the game, just shut down the servers.

Installation cost is not tax. POS manufacturing is free from the additional 10% NPC tax that is added to installation costs. It also gets a 2% material benefit with the assembly arrays.

What a load of round spherical objects. (I am of course referring to planets, honest).

Your making empire industry into a full time job and as I have said many times before I have a full time job and other interests, eve is secondary and should be a bit of fun for an hour or two here and there.

5 accounts now suspended, 3 POS are down and a **** load of assets to dispose of when I can be arsed.

Eve is now for meta gamers, there is no place for casual players. Nerf after nerf and bloody nerf.

Player count continues to drop, Dust is a disaster / joke and new games coming on-line over the next 6 months and this is how CCP want to compete.

The CSM who have worked on this have their own agenda which is to basically screw high sec but I guess that's what you get when you have block votes and lemmings voting.

I am not so vain as to admit these changes may work, pigs may fly and England may win the World Cup in 4 years. I fear though that the decline in Eve is not related to industry although I suspect 1000's of industry accounts are already mothballed with more to follow. Eve is just to old, the gap between old and new is immense and too many people just enjoy killing noobs rather than helping. We were happy for noobs to use our locked down BPO's and access the POS to build stuff. That's no longer possible due to the changes. The changes to industry wont fix anything, simply make for more targets.

There has been an outcry over this issue with many people pointing out how bad a concept it is. Unfortunately CCP Greyscale has said to not have this idea would be 'boring' & 'uninteresting' and will not hear a word against the concept or entertain any other ideas such as additional skillbooks to learn to receive additional tax bonuses at POSes.

The term "out of touch" seems to be getting louder.

This concerns me somewhat. We currently run multiple lab slots because of pilot demand, but we also run weaponised POS with industry on the side. Crazy wormhole industrialists I know, but we do exist.

I fully expect that a highsec POS would be able to do more with a smaller POS due to relying on Concord for initial defense (at least until the wardecs happen.

I also would understand a mild increase in cpu/power grid for modules. I will no longer be running as many labs as I do now, so doubling (or even a little more) the requirements does make sense.

Please be aware that the primary use of LSAA's for many wormhole corps is secure storage and not ship building.
Doubling the fitting requirements LSAA's (without creating a very large corp hanger array as an option) may cause some forum angst.

Teams can work on all jobs in a system.

We will be keeping an eye on this, and if it ends up not working out and hisec industry remains completely resistant to any kind of social interaction with other players, we'll revisit this.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

Edit: Since I see someone is putting up information for accounting. 2 POS's down, 1 Cap line down, 2 accounts expiring. From the number of POS mod's flooding into Jita looks like a flood to me....

We added filtering options in the starmap, allowing players to filter by industry activity and cost.

Good info, thanks. We will of course consult further before we change anything :)

This is news?

CCP doesn't want ANYTHING to be a benefit in high sec.

CCP doesn't want anybody (including noobs) in high sec.

CCP does hates highsec.

Heh - so the pharmacists at Osco Drugs can also work simultaneously at Walgreens fulfilling prescriptions!

Then the **** CCP should shut down HighSec POINT

I'm getting more and more disgusted with EvE.

I am a casual gamer with EvE and these changes will NOT make me more dedicated. In fact, I no longer recommend EvE to people.

I am a solo player. I don't have to time (due to RL pressures) or the inclination (I want to relax, not over-stress) to play as CCP is trying to force us to.

I am a miner and a builder. BOTH of these occupations have been drastically altered by CCP in recent "Updates". Modifying the way I play enough to SURVIVE in the new system REQUIRED I had to start a new character. It will take MONTHS for that character to skill up to the level of play my earlier characters enjoyed in the prior, "non-Upgraded" system.

Unlike other players, I don't have the funds, computer, or inclination to run multiple accounts (alts). I use one computer, run one character, on one account.

That account expires in November. Take a guess if it will be renewed. Of course, CCP doesn't care.

Will you make maximum profit as a casual player? Unlikely, but I have yet to see any indication from these changes that even a casual player will not be able to find a way to exist and be successful in the game. If anything, the changes seem to me to allow more options for the casual player to be successful, not less, by improving the process of industry to be less time consuming leaving you more time to fiddle with what really matters, competing on the market. There are enough points of cost in the system (not just materials and time) that there will be more flexibility now for people to meet at the same cost through different configurations. Currently, either you make it with the least waste in the least time or you don't succeed and that is almost impossible for a new player to do...

Can somebody point me to a post explaining what problem was solved by introducing teams and the bidding mechanic?
Was there not enough competition?
I can't imagine there were complaints that industrial entrepeneurs were staying too long in the same location.

....hisec industry remains completely resistant to any kind of social interaction with other players...

Think of them as management teams.

An idea.Lets say a low-sec capital builders alliance spends 5b to hire the best team for their system and their capital ship building needs.Not only they give out information on what they are producing and where but whats to stop mercs spending 50m to wardec them and take down their pos or demand a suitable payment to leave them alone.

Imo ccp I think teams may need to go as well if you don't want massive amount of carebear tears.

That seems like quite an insult but insightful as to your opinion of current high sec industrialists.

Fair criticism. "Remains" there should say "turns out to be". Insult (and implied underlying opinion) not at all intended(/accurate), apologies if anyone is upset by my poor choice of words.

Fair criticism. "Remains" there should say "turns out to be". Insult (and implied underlying opinion) not at all intended(/accurate), apologies if anyone is upset by my poor choice of words.

Fair criticism. "Remains" there should say "turns out to be". Insult (and implied underlying opinion) not at all intended(/accurate), apologies if anyone is upset by my poor choice of words.

Fair criticism. "Remains" there should say "turns out to be". Insult (and implied underlying opinion) not at all intended(/accurate), apologies if anyone is upset by my poor choice of words.

Consider WHY highsec industry is uninterested in social interaction and if the patch changes anything in that regards. Extrapolating from my experiences, the reasons would be:

1.) Being in an industrial highsec corp is painting a bulls eye on your back. Unless you take significant care not to be noticed, you have to expect many one-sided wardecs coming your way. Ways of dealing with this problem (out of corp haulers, remote managing of installation) exist, but are very deterring especially for new players, making it difficult for new industrial corps to grow.

2.) Sharing industry-related resources (like a POS) requires either massive trust or loads of micromanaging in horrible menus. Making mistakes is very likely to expose corp resources to theft or destruction. This kind of gameplay is encouraged by CCP and you guys wonder why industrialists prefer not to dive in this mess but prefer to stick to themselves?

3.) People willing to be cog 745 of 986 in a massive corp have their place made for them in null-sec; in contrast, small null-sec corps are unable to provide the stability required by industrialists. If I'd be willing to join some a corp with the number of members required to influence developments (like the deployment of teams) on a large scale, I'd make a significantly larger profit by joining renter-corp 3325 in the blue donut... This problem will only become more compounded once the nullsec landlords decide to increase the number of renters by wrecking the highsec industry...

I welcome more complex industry. Many posters seem to forget that EVE is not a casual game and that industry is PVP.

Until Crius, industry was very simple, especially T1 production: calculate mineral costs and compare with sell price. Done. That was all the decision making. Then just sort blueprints by isk per hour and you can go on autopilot forever.

Crius industry will be more interesting and a spreadsheet probably won't be able to find the best strategy. And even if they do, it won't stay the best strategy for long.


- Finally highsec industrialists have a reason to work together. It doesn't have to be difficult: you just have to find a few others who build the same item you do and bid on teams for that product in the same system.

Consider WHY highsec industry is uninterested in social interaction and if the patch changes anything in that regards. Extrapolating from my experiences, the reasons would be:

1.) Being in an industrial highsec corp is painting a bulls eye on your back. Unless you take significant care not to be noticed, you have to expect many one-sided wardecs coming your way. Ways of dealing with this problem (out of corp haulers, remote managing of installation) exist, but are very deterring especially for new players, making it difficult for new industrial corps to grow.

2.) Sharing industry-related resources (like a POS) requires either massive trust or loads of micromanaging in horrible menus. Making mistakes is very likely to expose corp resources to theft or destruction. This kind of gameplay is encouraged by CCP and you guys wonder why industrialists prefer not to dive in this mess but prefer to stick to themselves?

3.) People willing to be cog 745 of 986 in a massive corp have their place made for them in null-sec; in contrast, small null-sec corps are unable to provide the stability required by industrialists. If I'd be willing to join some a corp with the number of members required to influence developments (like the deployment of teams) on a large scale, I'd make a significantly larger profit by joining renter-corp 3325 in the blue donut... This problem will only become more compounded once the nullsec landlords decide to increase the number of renters by wrecking the highsec industry...

Are the unnecessarily tedious elements gone? TBD. It's ironic you speculate that spreadsheets won't find the answer because so much of these changes involve an attempt to apply a statistical model to a problem that happened on a server we don't utilize (China). So there are references to visionary futures but fixing problems with the distribution of the Chinese player base thru their universe by pounding the Chinese peg through the non-Chinese hole is ... irrational.

It seems to me the main folks at CCP had given up playing the game years ago.

From what I have seen in just my 15 months of playing, CCP in now more interested in flexing the power they have over the players.

I welcome more complex industry. Many posters seem to forget that EVE is not a casual game and that industry is PVP.

Until Crius, industry was very simple, especially T1 production: calculate mineral costs and compare with sell price. Done. That was all the decision making. Then just sort blueprints by isk per hour and you can go on autopilot forever.

Crius industry will be more interesting and a spreadsheet probably won't be able to find the best strategy. And even if they do, it won't stay the best strategy for long.

- I highly doubt that it will be worth it for nullsec producers to ship low-end minerals to nullsec, build stuff and then ship it back to Jita. Teams won't make enough of a difference to make it worth that.

- There are lots of highsec players with deep pockets that could win the bidding war for teams. Yes, nullsec industry cartels are probably best suited to win, but they won't bother if it isn't worth it (see point above).

- Changing location and adapting to changing costs isn't hard for a highsec industrialist without a POS. It is very cheap and can be done in half an hour. Get a covert ops ship and carry your blueprints over. Ship the next load of minerals to the new location. Done. Doing this once or twice a month is no too much to ask.

- Making industry more complicated doesn't make it more difficult for you, it makes it more difficult for other players as well. Have some confidence! You can now outsmart your competitors.

- Many things became simpler as well (ME and PE, interface and more). Now you can focus on fighting competition instead of the game.

- If you're super casual you can still just build wherever and whatever. With the "minerals I mine are free" mindset you'll make a profit all the time!

- Finally highsec industrialists have a reason to work together. It doesn't have to be difficult: you just have to find a few others who build the same item you do and bid on teams for that product in the same system.

So how to resolve the contradictions. If Eve industry is PVP (refer back to NASH) then why force producers in the same chain to cooperate? Industry is not simple now, but the complexity is not *obvious*, meaning the game does not give feedback like say WOW does before you attempt to undertake some discouraged activity. The complexity that exists is discovered. The reward is in the discovery - i.e., use of consumables matched to the tier of production you're doing and so forth. So, complexity is not new. The UI eye candy is. Simpler fixes would have been to see who his hogging up a station slot so you can war dec them. Why not give me advantages for perfecting a manufacturing chain, thus making me competitive against (not with) my competitors? Huge disconnect as the changes have been evangelized so far.

Are the unnecessarily tedious elements gone? TBD. It's ironic you speculate that spreadsheets won't find the answer because so much of these changes involve an attempt to apply a statistical model to a problem that happened on a server we don't utilize (China). So there are references to visionary futures but fixing problems with the distribution of the Chinese player base thru their universe by pounding the Chinese peg through the non-Chinese hole is ... irrational.

There were incentives to work together before but the disincentives have since dwarfed the incentives. Coercing a paid subscriber base vs incenting them is also a bit irrational. A reasonable vision for industry should be based on war where ships get blown up quickly and need to be replaced. We have 0.0 interests incented not to wage war, and a high sec production base that is unstable. Kill sov, attach proportionate consequences for high sec griefing, do away with or really substantially change alliance models and industry will become cooperative along more organic lines.

See, this is why we can never have nice things! CCP codes them away! (sorry been wanting to bust that out, definitely not usually true).

Complexity could have come in less volatile forms. If the main advantage of teams, POS structures, nullsec etc. had been increased production speed, industrialists would still have been forced to choose whether e.g. a 20% increase in productivity (and thus in profit per time) would have justified a move to a new system.

However, when the difference ends up being a %-value of the items being produced, it can easily shift the balance to the point where moving is no choice because you're current setup can't produce at a cost below the market value. If this happens occasionally it's ok, if this happens frequently it becomes a major frustration.

My primary concern is the speed with which new modifiers to production cost are introduced; the shifting cost based on utilization alone seems difficult enough to predict, with the additional outpost, POS and Team modifiers, I'm not convinced the whole system will not blow up in some unexpected and exiting way that screws highsec industrialists royally.

The benefits of a more volatile system is that it takes much longer to reach an equilibrium and it can be disrupted more easily. That makes for a more active gameplay for industrialists and less passive ISK making. At the moment you can set up your system once and keep producing the same thing for months. With the new system you'll need to adjust more often.

Highsec is an unorganzied mess. CCP's vision of organized highsec gameplay is "mailing lists and out of game tools". Meanwhile null blocs are counting, inventarizing and labeling their matches in a neat and orderly fashion. Guess who'll be lighting up the volatile system & who will burn?

IDK how this has become "a thing" in people's minds, but all I can do is repeat that the details of activity on specific servers had *no impact* on the decision-making. I mentioned Serenity in the blog because it highlights one of the reasons why we consider self-balancing systems to be good design: they do not need to make assumptions about behavior patterns, and in the case where you have multiple environments with different behavior patterns, the fact that it works seamlessly in both is an upside. The reason we went with a self-balancing system, though, is not "because China", it's because it's good design, and at no point in the process leading to the decision to take this route did anyone mention TQ, Serenity or their respective hosting countries to the best of my knowledge.

Highsec is an unorganzied mess. CCP's vision of organized highsec gameplay is "mailing lists and out of game tools". Meanwhile null blocs are counting, inventarizing and labeling their matches in a neat and orderly fashion. Guess who'll be lighting up the volatile system & who will burn?

Well, that wasn't a productive post on my part. So, to be productive, I'd be a lot less ancious if there were some "worst case" calculations regarding the differences that could be caused by stacking the new effects instead of the cute little "everything is average nowadays abadon"...

So how to resolve the contradictions. If Eve industry is PVP (refer back to NASH) then why force producers in the same chain to cooperate?

PvP != solo PvP. Everyone complains about "the blob". What is a blob other than a group of players acting in concert? Why is it then that industry and market PvP (in the mind of the high-sec player) is only a solo game? I guarantee you (see above) that those "evil" nullsec cartels don't view the game that way and act accordingly. Once again, nothing is preventing players in any space from acting that way.

Highsec and nullsec play the same game with the same tools. How is it then that nullsec is, in your mind, a vastly organized machine waiting to stomp out all other producers and highsec is a bumbling mess that can't find it's backside with two hands? Is it because the players in those nullsec have made decisions that benefit themselves that involve being cooperative? There is no secret sauce here. If only there was a way for highsec players to act like nullsec players....

It's mainly because nullsec players (those relevant to the discussion) don't mind being part of coalitions with > 1000 members. Personally, I dislike being part of any organization so large that I can't remember the reallife names of everyone in teamspeak. That attitude will get me nowhere in the entities that play SOV games; fine, EvE has enough other things I can do. Right now, highsec industry is one of them. After this patch? I'm not sure that this will still be the case.

Wall of text.

People may not like the infusion of choice but it is hard to deny that it is more dynamic and interesting gameply over the bacon button style industry that exists today.

I feel compelled to correct some misconceptions regarding nulsec.




Nulsec is not going to destroy hisec manufacturing with their "advantages." They would have to import massive amounts of minerals from hisec to nulsec (jf fuel usage is going up 50% in case you forgot) make the stuff, then ship it back to hisec. The import/export costs alone could easily offset any ME/team/tax advantages.


If your response to Crius is to rage-quit, then you are giving the "nulsec cartels" the biggest advantage they could possibly hope for; less competition.

But what that boils down to is that you are choosing to be solo, to not organize, to not take advantage of group resources, and to do it all on your own. Should EVE be an environment where your choice has no consequence, where there is no difference in potential capability between someone who chooses to be solo vs. someone who chooses to be part of a large organization? Is it not a natural conclusion that the organized group would outperform the individual? In the current state of industry, it is far more, as you said, equal between solo and group because there is very little a group can do to influence cost short of operating at a scale the solo producer may not be able to. With the Crius industry changes, there is a distinct piece of the puzzle where organized groups can influence part of the cost model. Interestingly, solo players can take full advantage of this by exercising their increased mobility and working in the same spaces the large groups are (in reference to teams here). I find it a very interesting dynamic because it, quite simply, boils back down to choice. You can choose to take advantage of the resources available to you (materials, research, location, and even available teams) or you can choose not to but ultimately your level of success is determined more by your choices and less by a simple material calculation as it is today.

People may not like the infusion of choice but it is hard to deny that it is more dynamic and interesting gameply over the bacon button style industry that exists today.

I feel compelled to correct some misconceptions regarding nulsec.

Every person in a coalition is part of an alliance. Every person in that alliance is part of a corp. The size and composition of players within your corp is entirely up to your corp's leadership team, and to a certain extent its members.

Being part of an alliance or coalition does not require and usually is not about everyone being close personal friends irl, though this certainly does happen. Its more about having a common identity and purpose within the game environment. Being friends irl can help that small core group to identify with each other. But if you refuse to be a part of something in eve because you don't know everyone in that entity's rl identity, you are severely restricting your gaming experience.

I have done industry in hisec, losec, nulsec, and w-space. None of these changes are going to break anything. Don't need those labs anymore? Melt them down (preferably before Crius goes live) and build something with the PI. Or sell it.

Don't want to sell the labs or reprocessed P4s because PI cheap right now? No problem. So buy up those cheap P4s and make something profitable. There are always opportunities if you just look for them.

Industry in Eve as well as irl is not static. Things change. When things change, move away from unprofitable products and move into profitable ones. Your flexibility is nearly unlimited within any major production group. All you need is blueprints and materials.

If you don't want to work with the teams, don't. They are not mandatory. You can choose to use the "no effect/cost" default team and build as you always have. You will have no bonuses and may not be as profitable or competitive as someone that is.

Once someone with deep pockets decides to set up in a system, they should have regularly good teams in system. You can co locate and sponge off of them. The benefit is you get the team for nothing. But you have to spend time/isk moving. Or not. Again. Your choice. It balances out.

Team locations will be publicly known. There will be a lot of people moving things around early in Crius once the teams start getting auctioned out. The high-value teams (those with overlapping specialties) will get bought by the systems with the deepest pockets. But because they are the best, they will end up costing more, thus biting into profits more. Lesser teams will cost less. It all balances out.

Nulsec is not going to destroy hisec manufacturing with their "advantages." They would have to import massive amounts of minerals from hisec to nulsec (jf fuel usage is going up 50% in case you forgot) make the stuff, then ship it back to hisec. The import/export costs alone could easily offset any ME/team/tax advantages.

If anyone thinks this is untrue, I challenge you to bust out the spreadsheets and do an actual cost analysis on something. Feel free to substitute mineral prices for compressed ore prices, since compressed ores have not been readily available in hisec.

If your response to Crius is to rage-quit, then you are giving the "nulsec cartels" the biggest advantage they could possibly hope for; less competition.

Please tell us all how much a team will cost so we can run this analysis.

A typical null sec cartel industrialist will be buying T2 raw materials local,

yeah, right.

The test server is there for you.

For whomever is counting...

1 POS coming down (maybe 2), 2 accounts expiring this week.

That account expires in November. Take a guess if it will be renewed. Of course, CCP doesn't care.

5 accounts now suspended, 3 POS are down and a **** load of assets to dispose of when I can be arsed.

Let me get this straight...you actually believe that cartels will take all their moon goo, and PI products, convert them into T2 intermediate products, ship ALL of them to Jita, only to turn around and head to Jita to buy these products off the market.

No one is that gullible to believe that bullshit.

But while we are on the subject of numbers, please do prance on over there and figure out for yourself how a hound costs +17% to produce from the exact same blueprint I have today. I am sure that will go over real well once the people crying about PLEX prices figure it out.

If your response to Crius is to rage-quit, then you are giving the "nulsec cartels" the biggest advantage they could possibly hope for; less competition.

Let me get this straight...you actually believe that cartels will take all their moon goo, and PI products, convert them into T2 intermediate products, ship ALL of them to Jita, only to turn around and head to Jita to buy these products off the market.

No one is that gullible to believe that bullshit.

the benefit for T2 module and ship manufacturing is minimal and probably not worth the effort in many cases.

where did you get the 9% for the upgraded amarr outpost from ?

i thought it was 5%

3 x 1% from the plant or factory upgrade

2 x 1% from the other one

your math is weird.

amarr outpost: 5% material reduction
non-npc station: no NPC tax (which is not 10% of the product price, but a 10% increased job cost. that is much less than it sounds like)


you should go and read this again:


http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/the-price-of-change/

The most important thing in this new system is how the basecost distribution ends up; that on its own is something I'd see like to see in action without the various other changes thrown in. I really doubt anyone, including CCP knows how the meta will in up in that regard, so adding even more new stuff (e.g. Teams) on top of that seems unreasonably risky to me.

Yeah, because of all the fun you can have while killing a pos in highsec for a few hundred million in bpos.


This is how to adapt your pos:

Offline unnecessary arrays and Labs, online hardeners, jammers and guns.

The job base cost is based on the value of the item produced, with jobcost = itemvalue* sqrt(fraction of global job hours) thing. This is modified by a crapload of things; stations in the system, quality of the stations, number of stations, FW status. Now, two factors are relevant:

Basecost: How will the basecost differ between highsec where everyone has access to all factories vs. nullsec where factory access can be controled?
This depends on how the distribution of working hours will stabilize. In the snapshot, the basecost in a "semi-active" highsec system was 5%, while the worst nullsec system started at 4%. Further statistical data is rare; however, I'd expect the average nullsec basecost to end up anywhere between 50% and 10% of the highsec basecost. Assume 50% and the math pans out friendlier than in my initial example, assume 10% and it ends up worse.

Modifiers: By how much can the base cost be reduced by multipliers, including the mentioned NPC tax?
Building in an amarr factory outpost brings the same jobcost reduction as building in the "best of the best" highsec system Nonni, (.5 times costmultiplier for the amarr outpost, .48 (nonni) + 1.1 (npc tax) = .52). The salespitch example ends up with a 0.825 multiplier (.75 system * 1.1 NPC tax).

Summing effects up
Summing nullsec effects and comparing to the "average example", nullsec pays between 30% and 6% of the highsec job costs. The highsec costs for the salespitch example ends up at 3.8% of the itemvalue (7.6mio for a 200mio abadon). For the sake of the argument I'll stick with that, though I'd expect that value to end up closer to 5% due to the resulting new metagame. Nullsec can save between 70% and 94% of that, resulting in a cost difference of 2.5%-3.5% of the itemvalue.

Approximate itemvalue = (1+profit%) * mat value and for items with a profitmargin of 20%-50% you end up with additional costs of 3-5% mat value. This cost difference scales with the profit margin of the items produced.

The most important thing in this new system is how the basecost distribution ends up; that on its own is something I'd see like to see in action without the various other changes thrown in. I really doubt anyone, including CCP knows how the meta will in up in that regard, so adding even more new stuff (e.g. Teams) on top of that seems unreasonably risky to me.

Yes but unless I missed the part where infinite pos's were going to be accommodated in a single system then the spots are going to be at a premium in a manufacturing system. I think the profit for the merc will come from the person who pays them to clear a spot rather than from the contents of the pos.

'manufacturing system'

You do know there are significant benefits to not clustering?

Push/pull is the paradigm. Reasons to come together (mostly teams). Reasons to stay apart.

'manufacturing system'

You do know there are significant benefits to not clustering?

Push/pull is the paradigm. Reasons to come together (mostly teams). Reasons to stay apart.

You are also aware that people will not pull up stakes every month chasing lowest cost areas. They will simply quit.

H

The only substantial downside to this is that it makes it much easier to weaponize an industry tower, so we are considering upping lab/array fitting costs substantially in a later release. We likely will not do this in Crius itself as people will need time to reconfigure their setups.

...

Thanks for all your feedback,
-Greyscale

Hi everyone,

Update on multiple-structure bonuses for starbases.

We've just had another discussion about this system as-implemented, and based on your feedback, the technical challenges involved in implementing it in a fully user-friendly way, and the somewhat limited upsides of the feature, we've decided to cut it from Crius.

Having multiple starbase structures of the same type at a starbase will no longer grant you any bonus above those inherent in the structure itself

The only substantial downside to this is that it makes it much easier to weaponize an industry tower, so we are considering upping lab/array fitting costs substantially in a later release. We likely will not do this in Crius itself as people will need time to reconfigure their setups.

We are looking into what we can do to mitigate the expected glut of labs resulting from this change; more info as we work through this process :)

Thanks for all your feedback,
-Greyscale

'manufacturing system'

You do know there are significant benefits to not clustering?

Push/pull is the paradigm. Reasons to come together (mostly teams). Reasons to stay apart.

Bear in mind:

Build costs on SiSi are not really valid.

Build costs are a result of a function of how many minutes of build happen in a system, against how many happen overall.

On Sisi, that second number is /tiny/, so anything you do is likely to be a major fraction of them.

On TQ, it's not going to be like that. 2.5 billion minutes over the course of 28 days.

On TQ, it's not going to be like that. 2.5 billion minutes over the course of 28 days.

When?

Bear in mind:

Build costs on SiSi are not really valid.

Build costs are a result of a function of how many minutes of build happen in a system, against how many happen overall.

On Sisi, that second number is /tiny/, so anything you do is likely to be a major fraction of them.

On TQ, it's not going to be like that. 2.5 billion minutes over the course of 28 days.

But i thought CCP said the cost was going to be 'capped' at 14% or some such. It would seem that no matter what the ratio, if there was a cap, as CCP seemed to say there was, having terribad activity ratio would just place it at the cap, no further.

And this seems like it is several steps past a 14% cap.

Teams and the team market are bad and unnecessary complexity added to industry.

This raises the bar of entry into industry.

Agreed.

I can't get on Singularity suddenly, launcher says it is unknown, while Eve_Offline says it is up.
But anyway, the fact that I am seeing a slot cost of 61 million ANYWHERE is insane, and something is badly broken.

And this thing goes live now in 10 days, and how many days before they lock down the code?

Oh, and you can bet that the cartels are ordering all industry stopped in their planned industrial hubs, and have been doing that for weeks now, to get the activity index to the minimum, before they begin highly controlled operations.

High sec cannot do that, and is utterly screwed.

Seeing the changes to the cost of installing a job and seeing that the time of the job is not a involved variable in it... can I assume that the only purpose to use teams that reduce production time (TE) is to manufacture faster?

Thanks in advance.