Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Crius] Starbase feedback

First post First post
Author
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#201 - 2014-06-27 13:17:38 UTC
I anchored tower in .4. Online intesive refine array and for life of me cannot acces it. I am. Ceo. This know issue?
#202 - 2014-06-27 13:38:11 UTC
Dun Bar wrote:
I anchored tower in .4. Online intesive refine array and for life of me cannot acces it. I am. Ceo. This know issue?

Working as intended (i.e. badly).

MDD
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#203 - 2014-06-27 15:16:14 UTC
Dun Bar wrote:
I anchored tower in .4. Online intesive refine array and for life of me cannot acces it. I am. Ceo. This know issue?



Put the ore in the array. Right click the ore. refine.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Test Alliance Please Ignore
#204 - 2014-06-27 15:53:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Dun Bar
After today's patch, I can now access the array. woot wootBig smile
The Bastion
#205 - 2014-06-28 03:20:09 UTC
Laendra wrote:
Something seems to be missing. There is no Access right-click (context) menu for the reprocessing arrays.



Fixed now, thanks!
League of Unaligned Master Pilots
#206 - 2014-06-28 11:27:31 UTC
i think the bonus for multiple assembly array/labs is broken. I have 4 design labs anchored and online but only one lab will be calculated for the time bonus. There are also 4 assembly arrays anchored and online wich are not really used. Only one assembly will be used to calculate the time bonus. Also there is a 25% Material reduction from facility..... a little but much i think ;)
Killswitch Alliance
#207 - 2014-06-28 11:47:30 UTC
Two things: 1) Given that multiple assembly arrays of the same type now effectively 'pool' together and get a stacking bonus, would it be possible to 'pol' their hanger capacity together too? If I've got (heaven forbid this ever really happens...) 50 ammo assembly arrays, I have 50 individual assembly array listings which will take forever to scroll through to find the right ones.

What would be nice is that I get a single entry for 'ammo assembly arrays' and have the hanger capacity of the single array entry increase proportionately with each additional assembly array added. Would be nice if Hanger Arrays worked like this too.

2) It'd be really nice if I could set job input/output from anywhere in the starbase doing the work, instead of it having to be in one of the actual arrays. Since we can juggle inventory around a starbase easily, it kinda makes sense to do it this way.

Love the changes regardless! Lots of cool stuff for a production egghead like myself! (-:

Cheers,
Caldari State
#208 - 2014-06-30 12:35:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Gundarson
I havent tested this yet (will tonight). Can the following be changed (if it has been, great, if not please do so.

* Allow Starbase Fuel Technician (the role), have the ability to online and offline (but not unanchor), the three type of refinery arrays, all silo's, all reactors.

* Allow Starbase Fuel Technican (the role), have the ability to both ADD and REMOVE ores, gas, refined products from Refinery Arrays and All SIlos. Could you doublecheck that the role can't remove Fuel or Stront from the Starbase?

OR add a new Role, Refinery Technician, that gives access to onlining, offlining Reactors, All Silo's, and all Refinery/compression arrays, but not unanchoring (that would probably work better than Fuel Technician).

Issue outlined here. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=1264994

I will update this once tested. TY.
Goonswarm Federation
#209 - 2014-06-30 22:17:43 UTC
Gundarson wrote:
I havent tested this yet (will tonight). Can the following be changed (if it has been, great, if not please do so.

* Allow Starbase Fuel Technician (the role), have the ability to online and offline (but not unanchor), the three type of refinery arrays, all silo's, all reactors.

* Allow Starbase Fuel Technican (the role), have the ability to both ADD and REMOVE ores, gas, refined products from Refinery Arrays and All SIlos. Could you doublecheck that the role can't remove Fuel or Stront from the Starbase?

OR add a new Role, Refinery Technician, that gives access to onlining, offlining Reactors, All Silo's, and all Refinery/compression arrays, but not unanchoring (that would probably work better than Fuel Technician).

Issue outlined here. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=1264994

I will update this once tested. TY.


You can already do most of this, in a fashion.

http://i.imgur.com/RkgI6tR.png

The View and Take options can be set on a per mod basis, and allow four levels of access: Starbase Config, Technician, Corp or Alliance access to either view/add contents to a stucture, and take it.

You can restrict Online, Anchor, Offline and Unanchor in the same way, although not per mod. All we really need are the online and offline options added to the main listing, so Silos and the like can be offlined by Fuel Techs but the tower can't.
#210 - 2014-07-02 14:10:38 UTC
Logged on to SiSi this morning (EST) and anchored a POS to try the new research interface. After stumbling around a bit to understand that the "Use Blueprint" button was what I needed, everything worked smoothly. I put the BP into the research array, hit "Use Blueprint" and the interface came up. Queued up a few jobs and away they went.

Overall, I'm very impressed. Next I want to try remote researching, etc.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs

#211 - 2014-07-03 12:32:17 UTC
Did some math and test on SiSi.
NOTE: all number and analysis are based on the fact that test server cost values are close to tranquility. Data from new crest endpoint and actual testing. Hope math is right, did it on a traffic jam......

TL;DR: staking arrays on pos are insignificant. New skill may be too.

Cenario: 3 hisec system close to a big trade hub with very distinct install cost (manufacturing):
System A (Itamo): 10% * base product
System B (New Caldari): 2.7% * base product
System C (Obanen): 0.1% * base product

You want people to move to C type of systems, right? Nice, but if you are building 1B on products / day it will take years to justify the costs of an extra array.

Math (For System C ):
1 equipment array = 1B * 0.0995% = 995k
2 equipment arrays = 1B * 0.099% = 990k
Would you invest 30M for an 5k per day economy (over 15 years to get 30M)?

Math (For System B):
1 equipment array = 1B * 2.6865% = 26.865M
2 equipment arrays = 1B * 2.673% = 26.730M
Would you invest 30M for an 135k per day economy (over 200days to get 30M)?

Note: I didn't even consider multiple runs effect so it's even worse....

I don't know what you plan to do with the skill, but it'll have the same effect because there are space with very low install costs and we dont need further reduction. Even if you spend 10B/day you wont need extra arrays if you are in a good system.

People would be amazed by how many systems are like C. I didn't have time to compile all data, but right now there are over 1000 systems on Empire Space (hisec and lowsec) that are equal OR BETTER than System C (best hisec I found has 0.0834% install cost). Around 800 systems are worse than C. System A is an outlier as it is the WORST system for manufacture right now.

Conclusion:
Give arrays a better bonus! Remove skill and give us our points back. =)
Arrays: extra X ME/array? Or bigger bonus. People with POS will move to systems like C. System like B will be for people that produce on npc stations do i think is safe to double current bonus....
Material Efficiency skill: someone suggested a bonus for teams... not a bad idea?
Blinky Red Brotherhood
#212 - 2014-07-04 07:47:55 UTC
Hello everyone

i was yesterday on the testserver to play with the new industry-UI on POS, now i have a few questions

to get the bonus for multiple structures on a pos, i need to set up more than 1 lab (for example), thats fine and usfull

but now, why i need to move all the stuff around from lab to assambly array for example to build?
are the the job costs calculated per lab or per pos? if they are calculatet per lab/assambly array, why?

is it usefull to make it possible that you can set up a corporate hangar and build from that?

so that the pos works more like a station, so that i also can set up a personal hangar and build out from it, and don't have a need for posrights?

if you make it like that, so its not nessesary to give the labs / Assambly arrays any cargo space, the only set up the ability and the bonus for the hole pos-construct, what you can make!

C C P Alliance
#213 - 2014-07-04 10:06:40 UTC
Rust Connor wrote:
Did some math and test on SiSi.
NOTE: all number and analysis are based on the fact that test server cost values are close to tranquility. Data from new crest endpoint and actual testing. Hope math is right, did it on a traffic jam......

TL;DR: staking arrays on pos are insignificant. New skill may be too.

Cenario: 3 hisec system close to a big trade hub with very distinct install cost (manufacturing):
System A (Itamo): 10% * base product
System B (New Caldari): 2.7% * base product
System C (Obanen): 0.1% * base product

You want people to move to C type of systems, right? Nice, but if you are building 1B on products / day it will take years to justify the costs of an extra array.

Math (For System C ):
1 equipment array = 1B * 0.0995% = 995k
2 equipment arrays = 1B * 0.099% = 990k
Would you invest 30M for an 5k per day economy (over 15 years to get 30M)?

Math (For System B):
1 equipment array = 1B * 2.6865% = 26.865M
2 equipment arrays = 1B * 2.673% = 26.730M
Would you invest 30M for an 135k per day economy (over 200days to get 30M)?

Note: I didn't even consider multiple runs effect so it's even worse....

I don't know what you plan to do with the skill, but it'll have the same effect because there are space with very low install costs and we dont need further reduction. Even if you spend 10B/day you wont need extra arrays if you are in a good system.

People would be amazed by how many systems are like C. I didn't have time to compile all data, but right now there are over 1000 systems on Empire Space (hisec and lowsec) that are equal OR BETTER than System C (best hisec I found has 0.0834% install cost). Around 800 systems are worse than C. System A is an outlier as it is the WORST system for manufacture right now.

Conclusion:
Give arrays a better bonus! Remove skill and give us our points back. =)
Arrays: extra X ME/array? Or bigger bonus. People with POS will move to systems like C. System like B will be for people that produce on npc stations do i think is safe to double current bonus....
Material Efficiency skill: someone suggested a bonus for teams... not a bad idea?


It's not hugely surprising to me that the effect is relatively small, it's not supposed to be particularly powerful :) We want to see how player behavior shakes out in practice before we change things further, but it's something we need to keep an eye on after release, yes.
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#214 - 2014-07-04 11:21:17 UTC
Rust Connor wrote:

Math (For System C ):
1 equipment array = 1B * 0.0995% = 995k
2 equipment arrays = 1B * 0.099% = 990k
Would you invest 30M for an 5k per day economy (over 15 years to get 30M)?

Math (For System B):
1 equipment array = 1B * 2.6865% = 26.865M
2 equipment arrays = 1B * 2.673% = 26.730M
Would you invest 30M for an 135k per day economy (over 200days to get 30M)?



Welcome to why many of us see T2 BPOs as a bad investment Blink And that's before the coming changes.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter

Goonswarm Federation
#215 - 2014-07-04 22:18:25 UTC
Rust Connor wrote:
People would be amazed by how many systems are like C. I didn't have time to compile all data, but right now there are over 1000 systems on Empire Space (hisec and lowsec) that are equal OR BETTER than System C (best hisec I found has 0.0834% install cost). Around 800 systems are worse than C. System A is an outlier as it is the WORST system for manufacture right now.


I'm sure they would be, what people don't seem to get with regards to large cost advantages elsewhere (mainly nullsec) is that the nature of nullsec means industry there will still be concentrated by necessity and thus may actually wind up having higher base costs before & even after multipliers come into play, whereas there are hundreds of systems in highsec that currently see little to use for production because there's no reason, no advantage, to go and build there. It's going to be very interesting to see how the costs in nullsec vs highsec actually wind up settling out as a result.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

DARKNESS.
#216 - 2014-07-06 08:08:20 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Rust Connor wrote:
People would be amazed by how many systems are like C. I didn't have time to compile all data, but right now there are over 1000 systems on Empire Space (hisec and lowsec) that are equal OR BETTER than System C (best hisec I found has 0.0834% install cost). Around 800 systems are worse than C. System A is an outlier as it is the WORST system for manufacture right now.


I'm sure they would be, what people don't seem to get with regards to large cost advantages elsewhere (mainly nullsec) is that the nature of nullsec means industry there will still be concentrated by necessity and thus may actually wind up having higher base costs before & even after multipliers come into play, whereas there are hundreds of systems in highsec that currently see little to use for production because there's no reason, no advantage, to go and build there. It's going to be very interesting to see how the costs in nullsec vs highsec actually wind up settling out as a result.


There's also little reason to go there after the patch. Your gained profits are either consumed by the transport cost or die on the way to gankers. Roll

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

#217 - 2014-07-06 09:34:44 UTC  |  Edited by: KanashiiKami
i said this in another thread.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4775223#post4775223

re POS.

there should be a limiting mechanism in place. maybe the limit scales with level to operate anchoring. anchor 5, max deployable 3 POS etc

an alliance of 1000 pilots can deploy 1000 POS in a 1000 moon system
so can a single pilot who converted alot of cash into ISK


adiitional idea
when POS/outpost is destroyed, it leaves a wreck that decompose over time 72hrs. and nobody can setup anything in its place until the wreck decomposes completely. adding this to the SOV mechanism, each sov claiming system must have 3 POS active before a TCU can be activated...

WUT ???

#218 - 2014-07-07 15:50:38 UTC
I tried out the new mobile refinery at a POS in hisec. Some observations:

1. Thank you for giving it a base 52% instead of the base 50% of an NPC station. Between that, lower taxes, and the option to put it in a low-volume system guaranteed to have low install costs, this could give some real advantage to refining at a POS as opposed to refining at an NPC station. However, the POS structure is currently not taking skills into account, which means it will never be anywhere remotely useful in empire space. I believe that skills are supposed to be taken into account before release day, but can someone confirm?

2. Currently, when refining in an NPC station, you select "Reprocess" on the material in question and a window opens up that gives you lots of useful information, including your yield, and how your yield is calculated. When refining in a POS structure, you select "Reprocess" on the material in question and it immediately refines without giving you any of the information. Can you please add this chunk of UI from NPC stations to the POS refinery structures? It'd be nice to know what I'm getting before I get it, not to mention how my skills are applying.

3. Currently you have to be within 3000m of a refinery structure to use it, even though you can access it's contents from much further away. Is this intended? It'd be really nice if the "access" and "use" ranges were the same.

Thanks for the work CCP. I'm really looking forward to these changes.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs

#219 - 2014-07-07 21:44:57 UTC
I can answer your question 2 as I asked the same myself and it seems the code for a POS is both old and so convoluted if the UI was added it would cause grown men and women to cry and all POS’s in the game to implode and vanish in a puff of pixels.

So for the time being no it won’t be added.

"You wait - time passes, Thorin sits down and starts singing about gold." from The Hobbit on ZX Spectrum 1982.

ChaosTheory.
#220 - 2014-07-08 19:58:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Smugest Sniper
mynnna wrote:
Rust Connor wrote:
People would be amazed by how many systems are like C. I didn't have time to compile all data, but right now there are over 1000 systems on Empire Space (hisec and lowsec) that are equal OR BETTER than System C (best hisec I found has 0.0834% install cost). Around 800 systems are worse than C. System A is an outlier as it is the WORST system for manufacture right now.


I'm sure they would be, what people don't seem to get with regards to large cost advantages elsewhere (mainly nullsec) is that the nature of nullsec means industry there will still be concentrated by necessity and thus may actually wind up having higher base costs before & even after multipliers come into play, whereas there are hundreds of systems in highsec that currently see little to use for production because there's no reason, no advantage, to go and build there. It's going to be very interesting to see how the costs in nullsec vs highsec actually wind up settling out as a result.


Actually as a Indy operator in null for years this is not going to be as much an issue as presumed.

Almost all renter space is free and open, granted Market hubs will be crowded, but people with large jump capacities and production in more islolated locations will make this a non-factor for most of the industry done in null and high-sec.

Production will see a spreading effect, with perhaps a few leeches here and there on big indy groups who buy a team in high-sec.

If you are doing indy in null you want 3 core factors.

-Isolation and safety
-Resource availability
-ease of access to market points.

Null will have more of this than anywhere else in game.

SoV is generally secure, there are many unused systems, and with jump ships you can deliver goods with relative ease.

Production facilities can be put anywhere, in fact i wonder how much this will affect the Providence region in terms of spreading manufacturing capacity and cost. I could build a PoS on a barren moon in a pipe system, load it with manufacturing mods(or not), and **** out capitals or what ever I want at the lowest possible cost.

So if this just so happens to be 1 jump from my target market, so much the better for me. or one Carrier etc load from my target market it's irrelevant.

Logistics is now going to become even more crucial and demanded as a service. I foresee a big demand for people wanting to build Manufacturing stations in null, coupled with courier services on an alliance level.

Also Mynna do you want a copy of the indy mail I'm working on and have mentioned on the SA thread :3

E: as to the safety in non concentrated areas if you recall an area in outer passage where my former corp put 250km of bubbles on the in-gate and sat off around 150 with sniper rohks and maelstroms, you can make any dead end pocket very very very unattractive for invaders to **** with.

That's all we need as to the whole industrial corps taking care of themselves.
Forum Jump