|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |

JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
120
|
Posted - 2016.10.10 17:56:43 -
[1] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:e penalties to the citadel. Such as extended vulnerability window for the citadel, or increased damage applied.
I really don't understand why we are not encouraged to put an Engineering Complex a couple of hundred kilometers from a Citadel and make little space cities.[/quote]
Because the Missile / Bomb mechanics work on there only being one of them able to hit a target. |

JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
120
|
Posted - 2016.10.11 10:42:15 -
[2] - Quote
One of the biggest issues here, imho, is the imbalanced scaling.
Fuel Costs - a manu/research service module on a Raitaru is extremely limited by the rig selection, while the same modules on a Sotiyo cost the same to run, but are both more flexible, and will be supporting a lot more jobs. I think reducing the service module base fuel costs (e.g. by a factor of 5), and putting a multiplier on larger structures might fix this (e.g. 2x for Azbel, 5x for Sotiyo).
System Cost Index - a Sotiyo, as the pinnacle of manufacturing services, should rightly attract a lot of jobs. But the System Cost Index very quickly penalises this concentration of activity. I realise bonuses to System Cost Index might be tied to other infrastructure in the future, but shouldn't there be a modest scaling benefit tied to the size of Engineering Complex - to slightly offset the concentration of jobs?
|

JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
120
|
Posted - 2016.10.11 10:45:08 -
[3] - Quote
Vald Tegor wrote:Actually, Dev Blog wrote:This means that there will be some benefits from placing Engineering Complexes in the same solar system as an outpost (especially an Amarr outpost), as well as placing them into highsec systems with large numbers of NPC stations. Engineering Complexes themselves will have no impact on the system cost index multiplier (just like starbases). Not only will you benefit from banding together to share resources, having people move their activity from the stations in system to your facility will DROP the cost for everyone.
I think you misurnderstand the intent. Jobs at Starbase still ramp up the System Cost Index, but Starbases do not provide any bonuses to how that scales - unlike, say, some Outpost bonuses.
|

JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
120
|
Posted - 2016.10.11 10:59:56 -
[4] - Quote
Is there an L-Set rig that applies bonuses to Capital SHIP construction? If so, which one? |

JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
127
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 11:23:41 -
[5] - Quote
It's been a few days, and I've read a lot... but I still can't get my head around the fundamental game design here.
CCP invested in a mechanic to push industry away from concentrations in single systems, using the System Cost Index introduced in Crius (July 2014). ...wait a year ...wait two years CCP invest in a (long-awaited) mechanic to replace Starbases with Citadels, with the promise of changes to Industry in Citadel (April 2016). ...wait almost 6 months CCP introduce Engineering Complexes with a cost profile designed to reward industry concentrating in structures more valuable, arguably more vulnerable, and certainly with just as frustrating (though different) inflexibility than the Starbases they replaced.
You can see why industrialists feel there's no coherent approach to developing this area.
Upwell Consortium promised "industrialists of New Eden - big and small" a new home in the stars. For all the flashy advertising, it's just another empty corporate promise.
/JTK |

JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
127
|
Posted - 2016.10.14 22:23:17 -
[6] - Quote
Obil Que wrote:
Or...
for the last part
CCP introduces Engineerig Complexes to correct the imbalanced cost/benefit ratio of the POS which currently provides enormous benefit in a single structure for minimal cost relative to that benefit. Players now have choices to make other than which low index system to drop the stick which include the option to use common structures or go it alone with the corresponding risks.
There is nothing about this that forces anyone to congregate into fewer and fewer systems. All the POS owners in a given system could band together and create a single EC to provide higher bonuses, lower taxes, and not change the system index one bit.
If anything, the current system, with its cheap, easily moved, wardec avoiding and strongly beneficial structures has artificially influenced the spread of industry by not providing any real choice or consequence. By adding a wider risk/reward balance, CCP is adding enough variables into the equation to actually realize the intent of the index system.
I'm not someone who has a problem with the costs. Asset safety in HS mean the risk there is probably about the same - where before you lost whatever was stored, plus bpos, etc in jobs, you now lose just the expensive structure. I think that's ok.
I'm certainly not using the language of "forced" - but I see what you mean about pilots now having to make a choice, but that brings it all back to my other (much earlier) post about how this scales, Medium, to Large, to X-L ECs. It seems there's no evident operating cost benefit to running a niche operation.
Certainly thought provoking. I'm looking forward to Fozzie's follow up.
/JTK |

JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
127
|
Posted - 2016.10.18 23:25:00 -
[7] - Quote
Just been playing about with these on SiSi... I don't think they are set up, beyond basic graphics and vun timers.
Notes: 1) Docked a carrier at an Azbel. 2) Can't fit any "Citadel" weapons to the ECs - no Jams, no Neuts, no Signal Amps. 3) Tethering doesn't work 4) Rigs aren't up yet - which may be a very promising sign. 5) The models are beautiful - way better than the citadels imho - with massive cargo docks, loading bays, etc. 6) Adjusted fuel requirements for the Industrial services are much more reasonable.
=) |

JTK Fotheringham
Merchants Trade Consortium The Last Chancers.
133
|
Posted - 2016.11.08 22:38:08 -
[8] - Quote
Are the fuel costs going back to 20/30/40 - or was that an omission?
/JTK |
|
|
|