Wednesday 30 April 2014

Dev Blog: The price of change

We're hoping to broadly maintain the current balance of manufacturing between hisec, lowsec, nullsec and w-space with these changes.  Nullsec manufacture will receive additional buffs later. (Foo Comment - and others: Really?  What is that you are smoking?  Can I have some?)
This is post 2 of 2 today, the first one relating to the last dev post on research.  All of my blog posts relating to these changes can be found at 'Summer' 2014 release

We have a new formula to learn : Run cost = (price of output) * square root(fraction of global job hours) * (team cost) * (facility reduction) * (starbase reduction) * 0.99^(hours already run) * (FW reduction) * (outpost upgrade reduction)

CCP mockup image from the dev blog.  All numbers are placeholders

Base cost will be the same everywhere in a given system. (Foo note: Dont bother puting POS up in busy systems)

Price of output is based on killmail value (also used in bounty/fw payouts).

For the purpose of pricing jobs, blueprints will be assumed to be 2% of whatever they build (Foo: Huh?)

Fraction of job hours is a 28 day rolling average; Square root is to increase spread between busy and empty systems.

Team costs will modify this. TBA.  (Foo comment: I assume we will get some benefit out of this but no idea what yet)

Facility reduction NPC stations will have a range of multipliers between 0.95 and 0.98
Building things in Nonni will have a mulitpler of 0.48, halving this cost (Foo question: Why?)

Hours already run Multi runs get a small discount

FW reduction/ Outpost upgrade reduction: upgrades give a beneficial cost multiplier instead of a number of slots.

For each level of FW upgrade in a system, you'll get an additional 0.9x multiplier to job prices for manufacturing and industry, so level 5 gives a 0.59049x multiplier on top of everything else.
For each previously-slot-improving outpost research upgrade, you'll similarly get a 0.9x multiplier to research job prices.

 (Foo note: this looks like a better buff for FW at least)

Taxes : NPC stations have 10% tax.  Player structures might be able to have corp tax. (Foo note: without this tax, it will be hard to justify POS based manufacture corps.  Not impossible, just hard)

Wrap up: Worst system for manufacture is 15% in Saisio. Jita currently is 4%
The new job installation pricing system is fundamental and takes into consideration many things such as Factional Warfare bonus, discounts from having multiple stations in the system, discounts on multiple runs and more.

Please all read CCP Greyscale's latest blog The Price of Change!

Feedback, constructive discussions and comments are most welcome here. Please remember that this is a big step for Industry in New Eden and that your constructive feedback counts and can make a difference!
Greyscale, these numbers are fascinating! However many people may still fear nullsec will pay low costs while highsec me I'll be high everywhere! Can you post numbers on how many systems in highsec see no activity at all so as to demonstrate how much people may he able to find low cost operating locations? (Foo note: Thanks mynna for the leading question)
Q: I do not understand the pricing for research: What's the output price?
A: The "output price" where the output is a blueprint is treated as being 2% of the value of whatever the blueprint produces. It's buried in a paragraph halfway down, that probably could've been clearer.

Q: mynna's question on low cost systems
A: As it happens, I have those numbers to hand :)

In the snapshot the examples are based on, 38.9% of hisec systems have no activity at all.

We're almost certainly going to introduce a minimum activity "cap" so prices don't become 0, but it's looking like being somewhere around 0.0001% of global activity.

In this snapshot, 754 of the 1212 hisec systems have any activity at all, and will be floored at the minimum activity cap, another 7 hisec systems have a non-zero amount of activity that's still below the cap. Another 127 systems are below 1% of build cost, 179 are between 1% and 2%, 187 between 2% and 3%, 110 between 3% and 4%, 74 between 4% and 5%, leaving the remaining 70 above 5%.

Q: Those with offices have an advantage?
A: Some people will get lucky on offices; that's just the luck of the draw and we aren't planning on any "compensation" there. Generally though, the systems that are good for building after the change tended to be good for building before the change.

Q: Why use lowsec?
A: Low sec uses the same fee structure as hisec, yes. Well-positioned lowsec systems (eg near Jita) will, we expect, be less popular than nearby hisec systems, and thus cheaper. This doesn't require any special consideration.

Q: When I have 2 100 run BPC's will the overtime bonus be cumulative?
A: The over-time bonus is just per job; two separate BPCs require two separate jobs.

Q: Nullsec bonuses so small?  Trouble understanding the numbers (Foo note: so am I at first glance, but I will read and digest slowly)
A:  Just out of interest, why? AFAIK this is the first solid info we've given on how the pricing will work, the first time we've mentioned nullsec at all, and there's a paragraph right at the top saying "we're not trying to change the hisec/nullsec balance". Where's the assumption we were going to incentivize nullsec coming from?

A: We're probably revisiting the starbase numbers in the near future, which should alleviate at least some of this concern I hope.

Q: For research upgrades: do both invention and research slots get pooled (so 1x research slot upgrade 1x invention slot upgrade = .81 modifier for both types of jobs) or is it individual (1x and 1x means .9 modifier for both)?
A:  Yes, they should be pooled, as we're only tracking a single research multiplier.

Q: So the taxes introduced for jobs, are they affected by the skills based around tax reductions?
A: Probably not in the initial release, we might revisit this though.

A:  Starbases are either immune to, or have owner-set, taxes, so that's 10% reduced job installation cost right off the bat.

We are looking at various bonuses to starbase structures to give them some oomph.

We are looking at the Hyasyoda lab to make sure it's still useful.

We would *like* to have bonuses for having multiple labs/assembly arrays at the same tower, but it may not be feasible immediately due to the somewhat arcane state of the starbase code.

Q: Will system modifiers be available as universe map overlays?
A: We're working on good solutions for conveying this sort of information, yes :)

Q:  Are you guys planning to add factory services to every station if the idea is to be able to "spread" the manufacturing load across the cluster?
A:  Not immediately, no, although if we find it's a balance problem we may change this.

Q:  NPC tax is 10%, but of what?
A: It's a 1.1x multiplier at the end of the formula, so 10% of the job fees.
A:  We're scaling higher levels of ME/TE research based on how much longer they take than level 1 (linear relationship). High levels on high-rank blueprints may cost *large* amounts of money, and you may want to shop around extensively before committing one of those.
Q: Related question: how is this formula resolving the market value of rarely sold (e.g. components) items and never sold (supercaps)? Is it using market prices or is it doing a sort of 'base cost' off the minerals?
A: It will likely be per-run, so a 50-run copy becomes 100%, yes. Research costs scale at higher levels though, so it probably swings back a bit there.

Market costs are all done using the system that is used for killmail pricing (and thus used for FW LP payouts), which should have reasonable values for most things already. Some newer items aren't being properly calculated on TQ right now, but we're fixing that.
It's not going to break the cost calculations. The valuation for unstable items like the ones you mention is very conservative, but that's fine. It might not show very accurate values for these items, but they will have values that make sense for the industry cost calculation. And manipulating the price on the 'real' market will only have minimal effect.
You will be able to compare "relative" cost of each industry facility in the region. Have a look here:
Q:  Could you elaborate more about the ME skill change?
A: We've not 100% pinned this down yet, it's on my to-do list :)

A: Every station gives some level of discount.

I'll have a look at invention BPC costs

I believe the existing speed multipliers for starbase structures are still in place, Ytterbium is looking at them atm.

A: All stations get the cost bonuses from all stations in the system, it's not a per-station thing.

A: The full 5% bonus is a *lot* of money, and in any case is somewhat overshadowed currently by the Minmatar reprocessing bonus. We're not super-concerned about the balance here just yet.

I'll see what can be done about the standings.

I believe industry implants should still work, yes.

A: Jita would hit 10% of build cost aaaat... somewhere around 2% of global activity. It's at 0.39% in the snapshot I have. 5x increase in job hours would do it. 15% is around 5%, 20% is at 8%.

A: WORKFORCE COSTS, ie job installation costs, are paid at starbases. This is not a "tax", it's the cost of labor, which goes up in busy systems as you'd expect.

TAXES, the additional 1.1x multiplier to your workforce costs, are not paid at starbases.
A: We don't have major concerns in going beyond "perfect" ME any more, provided we don't end up giving more than 50% discount and taking it below the reprocessing cap. So, yes, you can get "super-perfect" production with this system.
Q: Currently outpost owners have the ability to restrict some or all of the slots to ensure they're open for corp projects.
A: We are still looking at this actually, but yes there will be the ability to set some restrictions per facility instead of per assembly line which you used to do.

Q: some items are not being priced properly
A: It should be noted that we don't desperately care whether the numbers are "accurate", so long as they're a) the right order of magnitude and b) not easy to manipulate up and down by large amounts. So long as they stay consistent, everyone building that product has the same base cost so there's a level playing field.

A: We were originally looking at a volume-based system, but IIRC we decided there were too many weird relationships for it to really make sense.
It's not going to break the cost calculations. The valuation for unstable items like the ones you mention is very conservative, but that's fine. It might not show very accurate values for these items, but they will have values that make sense for the industry cost calculation. And manipulating the price on the 'real' market will only have minimal effect.

As with all these posts, I point to the all the dev items.  For this one,

Tuesday 29 April 2014

Dev Blogs: Research

  • A change to the way Production Efficiency research works; now in 10 steps, with ever increasing times per step.  
  • There will be some 'refund' of PE time (similar to a training queue bonus)
  • A change of name from Production Efficiency to Material Efficiency (maybe; some comments suggest rethinking this)
  • No more Extra materials
  • The existing Material Efficiency skill is being re-purposed (TBA)
  • Some tweaks in numbers.  (To make unresearched BPO's more expensive to build from but we get that back with researched BPO's?)
  • An easier to explain ME process (but retaining the very long time for perfect rule.)
  • No blueprint will be harmed by this process - well apart from time efficiency nerf on fuel block BP's.  This means that some less researched BP's will have 'caught up' to your perfectly researched BP's.

This is post 1 of 2 today.  I will come back to this post and others in a day or two to chase up on the latest dev posts.
With Summer 2014 we are introducing major changes to Industry in EVE Online; this includes blueprints and research.

The maybe biggest change is the introduction of a ten-step system to blueprint research and a cap of maximum 10 research steps at both material and time research. Of course currently research blueprints will be transitioned accordingly. Additionally the base copy time of blueprints will be the same as the base manufacturing time.

Read all about these exciting improvement and changes in CCP Greyscale's latest blog Researching, the Future!

We most welcome your constructive feedback.
Q: Research in progress will be likewise converted
A: Yes

Q: Adjusting the maximum number of runs on Cap Component BPC's
A: Yes

Q: Researching a battleship to max ME will take 180d
A: Yes (feedback sought)

Q: Already Perfect BP's (eg small rigs);  Research wont do anything for these?
A: Essentially, yes. Where there's no saving to be had even at 10% reduction, the research doesn't do anything. There's no obvious solution to this, other than capping max level on a per-blueprint level, which probably causes more problems than it solves.

Q: Regarding the maxruns, please do NOT change the current effective limits on BPOs. Currently we can install unlimited number of jobs from maxrun BPOs as far as it fits into 30d
A: Can you explain more clearly what a bad change would be here? I think I understand the situation you're describing but I'm not sure what the thing you're worried about is. Would kicking the maxruns number up be a bad thing?

Q: ... If  I have a BP that is currently perfect at ME4, will I need to re-research it?
A: If it's perfect currently, it'll be perfect after the change without further research. ME4 currently gives you an 8% waste reduction, so it'll be converted to ME 8% in the new system. If it was effectively perfect at ME4 before, it'll be effectively perfect at ME 8% after.

Am I explaining this clearly enough?

A: confirming
Current ME2 = future ME 6%
Current ME3 = future ME 7%
Current ME4 = future ME 8%

A: Yes, starbase modules should now be researchable as we're getting rid of extra materials
We're working out a solution for research jobs in progress right now, with the same broad goals as other blueprints, ie everything you have in research should end up as good or better after the change.

Q: Can BPC's be sold directly on market?
A: Unfortunately no, we aren't quite at that point yet. We'd have to have a separate DB type for every combination of ME and TE research, which proliferates our blueprint count rather badly (ie 100x more blueprints).

A: We're not planning on letting any BPCs be researched right now, and we don't have a concrete plan in place regarding the future of T2 BPOs right now.

A: I'd have to make a public-ready spreadsheet for this, and honestly it's probably easier for you to do it yourselves :) Take the current ME research time in seconds, divide by 6000, and that's the rank for that blueprint.

A: Right, because we don't know what you'd want - which is why we're asking! We could just come up with something and say "this is what we're doing", but without having a clear understanding of what people like you would actually find fair compensation for long-researched blueprints we'd just be stabbing in the dark.
Plans if invent-to-sell expands: nothing concrete, it would depend on what exactly happened, where things settled and how much of a problem we felt it was. The potential problem with this outcome is that the invention market crashes - the concern isn't that players are smart, it's worry that they might be opposite ;)

We're very un-keen on making any blueprints worse as a result of this change, that feels far more painful than "wasted time" and a better blueprint.

Time credit is something we could investigate, although it potentially requires a lot of work to allow you to cash it in.
... The stations that do have copy facilities will no longer be capped. Yes you may need to do some flying around.
Blueprint stats are easy to adjust. You want longer max runs on T1 rigs?

(Regarding internal spreadsheet)
I have one but it's a bit of a mess as it's got all kinds of misc math scattered all over it :/ With the info in the data dump it's pretty easy to calculate it though, I'm sure someone will be along shortly with a complete reference.

(Can someone be along shortly with a complete reference?)

Q ... it's only module bpos that are used in invention where you have to be careful about increasing max run size
A: Yeah ok, gotcha. We'll keep an eye on this.
Q: T2 BPO are OP. Nerf T2 BPO. The world is ending (Foo's comment : I may have paraphrased more than normal; and no I dont own T2 BPO's)
A:  It's a 6.25% throughput increase on the BPO, assuming you were building from BPOs rather than copies before (ie, you're not insane). It makes slightly more profit per hour but doesn't change the profit per unit at all. It doesn't seem like it's obviously going to kill off invention as a result.
Problems with this:
- If the table you're suggesting is the old->new translation, a bunch of people get screwed because their blueprints just got way worse (ME5 currently gives a 5% reduction)
- Without changing the base build costs at all, this means a 10% reduction in all build costs because we're no longer using waste
- If we do change the base build costs to current base+waste, all build costs decrease by 1% at max ME; not a huge issue but it's changing the balance math

The reason the changeover is complex is because the current system is complex, and we need to jump through a bunch of hoops to force it into a simpler system without messing with the balance too much.
I thiiiiiink that jobs lasting more than 30 days are fine provided they're single-run. Certainly that works for manufacturing, otherwise it'd be impossible to build titans already. In any case, we're going to make sure that long single-run jobs work fine :)

As to people with ME10 Titan BPOs, that's ~4 years of research time under the current system. I'll go check if any exist, but I doubt it.

All dev/csm/gm posts on this

Dev Blog : industry UI

  • Less unneccessary clicking
  • No batching of jobs (yet)
  • Prettier UI.
  • POS based industry will still will need everything in the arrays, but can be in containers.
Edit: Gah, I had plans to put some polish on this, but info is coming out too quick.  A good problem to have.

I have some plans about testing this as an interested group as soon as it hits SISI.  Some of the manufacturers who have blogged about these changes already know me.  Some will  be reading this blog for the first time.  Regardless, we should test as a group on SISI to test the boundaries of what happens when too many pilots share a station/POS.  If you are interested, leave a comment or evemail Dotoo Foo.

Blue posts from first 7 pages.  I will create a new post soon once the thread has settled down.  For those of us that care, add your comments to the forum posts now.

Due to the enormous amount of improvements and changes we are preparing, we release a series of blogs instead of one massive crazy huge blog.

More information will be published in the next blogs before Fanfest.

The idea is that the system will remember all settings for a blueprint, so if you set up 1 Scorch M BPC, all subsequent blueprints of this type will default to the last submitted job settings.

So you set up the first blueprint, then just hit submit on the subsequent BPCs because everything is set to go.

The plan is to have this on Singularity in the week following Fanfest.

To elaborate a bit on the core thoughts around the UX of this window, all interactions will be very to the point and within this one window, there are no extra windows or confirmation steps. You visualize, modify, start and deliver jobs all within this same window.

Also everything will have tooltips if you need additional clarification or information about any element in the UI.
The essential information will be there at all times, but things that are only needed as an additional clarification will be in a tooltip.

Give us specific examples about what information should be displayed at all times that you feel is missing.

We will have to nail down the details once it goes to Singularity. The idea however is that, it remembers the settings based on the last submitted job. If you are submitting a BPC of the same type with less runs, then it goes to the max number of runs based on availability of materials.

If you try and submit a BPC with more runs it should go to the max runs dependent on the materials available.

A Task Model is the first step of brainstorming where we start very broad term and then scope things down. This Task Model was done to allow us to explore high level concepts which we have since then iterated on quite heavily. It's there to show our methods rather than give an accurate idea of what's coming.

If you mean the cost bar on the Installations tab, then that is providing an average relative price between the different facilities but as you will find out in a later blog the exact cost for installing jobs is going to vary based on both the activity and the blueprint being used.
Q: Timeline for more information
A: This week.

Just to elaborate on a few things, here is a section from the blog that judging from the feedback needs to be clarified more to the point:

Interactions should be efficient and meaningful

Any interaction in the Industry UI should be a gameplay-related decision done by the player instead of the player farming through confirmation windows and checkboxes. We wanted to strip out any unnecessary interaction unless it had specific purpose for the task at hand, whether that is changing actual input materials or output destination or simply adding more runs to a job. We added multiple ways to efficiently add count on runs (using keyboard shortcuts or direct manipulation on a value slider around the selected blueprint). Speed was another important factor and players will be able to start jobs super quickly and get instant updates on values when tinkering with job runs.

The TL;DR of this section is:

    The system will be smart, it will auto apply all needed materials when you on click a blueprint (you don't have to drag).
    The system will automatically go to the max runs supported by the blueprint if you have enough requirements, or go up to the amount it can handle with the requirements you have.
    Speed was one of our BIG goals, this is much much much faster than before.
    The system persists any settings so if you click another blueprint, it goes to the same settings as the one before it.
    You will be able to re-submit past jobs with a single click.

Yes, you will be able to build using materials and blueprints inside containers in a POS or in a station. The materials and the blueprint however must be in the correct assembly array.    (Foo note: sigh; there goes my dreams of PHA based POS research)

Q: Allowing POS based users to filter region wide station installations
A: Good point, we'll see about adding it again. A lot of the filter options are completely open for debate.

Q: remembering what division are being used.
A: It will remember between sessions.

Q: "You will be able to re-submit past jobs with a single click. "  How far back does this extend?
We're hoping to have a 3 month history, we still need to do some performance testing on this.

Q: Who gets the notification about completed corporate jobs?  Is it possible to disable this notification?
A: People who have access to deliver it, and yes disabling them will be possible however the notification feature will be coming in a point release later.

We have been playing around with the idea of batch installing jobs, however the speed of submitting new jobs or resubmitting old ones may mean we just don't need the added complexity that batching creates. When this hits SiSi we'll be looking for feedback on exactly this.
Question regarding UI lag.

This depends a little bit on your internet connection, swapping activity or blueprint will require a remote call in the background, however you no longer need to click a fetch quote button and we are optimizing this checking as much as possible to keep the interface snappy. A lot of the validation is now performed client side to help achieve this.
Q: Will it treat the pos as one big storage?
A: This requires a POS rework and so no this will not happen for the summer release, but we agree that would be preferable.  (Foo note; ARRRRGGGG!!!!!!!!!, sob sob, sigh.  I understand but .... I need cheese for my whine)
This has not changed from before, you need to have your materials in the assembly array already.

However I have poked CCP Ytterbium about whether we could increase their capacity anyway and he is going to take a look. However we can't make any promises on this.

Comment: Include text labels for all materials, please. Remember how you had to go back on the pretty but nondescript weapon icons? Same goes here. Immediate recognition > pretty graphics.

Good point, we had a discussion about this today and are brainstorming some ideas to get a quick spreadsheets style shopping list.
If you double click a blueprint it will open in the new Industry UI, after which you can pick the activity to perform. It will display which activities are available for this blueprint and which are not.
Comment: ... could you also brainstorm some ideas to get an “export to CSV” button in there?

Yeah we are discussing this, or a copy to clipboard + paste in excel option for example.

Yes you can manufacture from a container provided all of your materials are in that container.
For now you will need 10 quick clicks, the interface can be used with the keyboard now so click down arrow, and then enter to submit. Down and submit. etc
Comment: So, we have to create high sec alt corps for protect our BPOs, then produce copies and ship them to null sec.... just becasue CCP didn't what to add a "pick location" to the new UI screen.
A: That's not why, but it is a nice side effect. (Foo comment : hear hear)
The plan is to move the estimated input cost into a tooltip.

We felt having multiple ISK values on the screen ran the risk of people accidentally assuming it was a cost that needed to be paid.
We have some designs for how a batch system would work but it does add more complexity to the UI in order to explain what a batch is and whether or not you can submit it / how much it costs etc. We are going to see how efficient the UI can be without it and then re-assess if it is worth trying to add some additional helpers in for mass producers.

If the difference is 10 seconds vs 3 seconds to fill your characters quota of industry jobs though then I'm not as worried about the time it takes. It is still a significant improvement over the current UI.

This is not the last discussion we will have about this feature request though.
Thank you, we will make sure to spend more time on having accurate information in the content within our mockups in the future. This mockup was mainly used to define layout and show what UI elements are different between Reverse Engineering and other activities. The client screenshots had more accurate content in them. (Foo Comment : I read this as "too much qq, so next time less information, and more slowly")
Thank you all for your feedback, I am collecting everything into a list which the team will look at and give input on regarding solutions and iterations. I will report back with the results but it might have to be after Fanfest though.  (Foo Comment : So long, thanks for all the fish; I've had a gutful already)

For all up to date info:

Sunday 27 April 2014

Jita singed

Jita burns has finally occurred. shows a lot of ship losses.  Most of these are ganker ships rather than gankee.

This year, I wanted to take part in Jita burns, to see its impacts first hand.

I insured my Obelisk to platinum, got into an empty pod, put a double wrapped civilian gattling gun into my cargo hold and autopiloted into Jita.

Then I waited, waited, and waited some more.  It is really hard to get ganked

I autopiloted into Jita 4/4 in my Obelisk.  I autopiloted back into Perimiter.  Turned around and flew back to Jita.  I did this many times.

A couple of times I was contacted, and was offered the 'opportunity' to pay between 100M and 500M to get a 'pass' to not be ganked.  Given the purpose of this was to be ganked, the answers were variations of the following:
  • I am not at any risk
  • All talk, no action
  • Na, nothing of consequence will happen
In Jita local, I offered a  service where I would take goods from Jita into Perimiter.  I did get one bite asking for my prices; my comment was that I had no idea; the purpose was to attract the 'wrong' attention.

I started manually warping 20k to gates and slowboating.

I did get several bumps, and the odd pot shot (immediately concorded and kill rights obtained).

After several hours, I was finally ganked in my freighter; 90+ catalysts, and a couple of frigates with points were committed.  No wonder it takes so long to be ganked; co-ordinating that many players takes effort.

There have been a few freighters ganked that I wanted to get close to with ECM based alts boats, but it is hard to be in the right place at the right time.  I have been out of range of most of the ganks. I think I managed to get a few ECM's in but on a fleet of 100 it does not make much difference.  What I think will work better is an ECM burst with the possibility of taking out 10 or 15 ships.  But again, getting at a suitable range seems to be hard; I am often a 100k from the tank, and it's over in 30 seconds.  An ECM burst is only available to pilots willing to be Concorded themselves.

There have been some truly overvalued ships that have been destroyed as part of Jita burns, lists some of the currently 11b freighter/JF kills.

I have tried to get ganked on my Orca; but no takers so far.  At one point I was even orbiting the Permiter gate in Jita while making food for the (first life) family, and came back to fireworks being shot at my ship, I think by another blogger.

Orca's seem to be off this year's Jita Burns menu.

I have found the experience interesting.  There is nothing like knowing first hand what it takes for ganks to occur of some of these ships.  I already have experience of T1 industrials, and wormhole ganks, but this is the first time I have been involved in a highsec 'tough' ship gank.

Given how difficult it was to be ganked during Jita burns, and my general cargo carrying guidelines, I am far less worried about flying my freighters AFK than I used to be.

Tuesday 22 April 2014

Building Better Worlds - some thoughts.

This is a speculative post, based on insufficient information.  As such it should be short, but it isn't.

The shakeup.

Industry is getting a very big shakeup.
  1. Any industry feature must have an actual gameplay attached to it in order to exist
  2. Any industry feature must be balanced around our risk versus reward philosophy
  3. Any industry feature must be easily understandable and visible to our player base
We have already had a post about:
Industry slots are going to be removed, replaced with a sliding cost scale (between 0% and 14% of the base item cost) depending on how busy the station is.

There will be simplified rules; removing extra material and damage per job.

We have been offered a hint of upcoming changes "... we have not mentioned invention or reverse engineering. That is because we could not schedule them for summer and as such are pushed to be done next in line ..."

Some POS changes

  • Allow Starbases to be anchored (almost) anywhere in high-security space and without standing requirement.
  • To use a BP in a POS, the BP must be in that POS, just like any other material
  • Players will still be able to start their jobs remotely (via relevant skills).
  • Improved Mobile Laboratories and Assembly Arrays to compensate for such risk, numbers TBA.
  • Reduced copy time on all blueprints, Will now be less time consuming than manufacturing something out of it.

We will be getting posts about:

  • Industry UI
  • Research
  • Job cost scaling
  • Teams

Our experience and hopes with POS.

Historically, we ran highsec POS for primarily for research slots, but also manufacture on the side.  We are not doing that at the moment because most of our pilots are either wormhole based or in faction warfare.

However, one of our pilots used to make a lot of T2 items in our POS, due to the faster manufacturing time.  If I recall correctly, he was using the Component Assembly Array, to have his manufacturing done in 3/4 of the NPC station time.

This POS based manufacture was profitable for our manufacturer, even after the fuel costs were taken into account.

I expect that a lot of POS being put up for compression.  However the compression time will be instant, so this will leave highsec POS idle most of the time.

Also we have been told that Mobile Labs and Assembly Arrays will be improved to compensate for this risk.  We should be able to use BPC's more and BPO's less.

All the above mean that I see more POS based manufacturing.  This in turn means that visibly busy highsec POS may become the target for wardecs.  Ensure your POS has anchored defences that will be needed at some stage.  Put aside the ISK required for mercenary defence.

As a POS based wormhole corp, these changes may be a significant buff to our play style.

It is my prayer that CCP have started to touch sufficiently on POS code to allow this that some of the other things we need will also come.  I decline to get too hopeful.

Mining, and it's impact on manufacturing.

I see the majority of mining remaining in highsec; there is simply too much AFK mining that is currently done in highsec, with a volume that I don't see occurring in any other space. 

Compression seems to have been nerfed about 25%.  The costs involved in skilling up all those jump freighters to move the existsing demand let alone the new demand from manufacturing in null should, in the short term at least, limit the amount of manufacturing being moved to null.

CSM comments

The CSM are closer to the CCP decision makers than the rest of us.  That is their role. If you want different opinions on the CSM, you should be more involved.

Ripard Teg is of the opinion that we will be moving our manufacturers into null sec renter corps. "low-sec capital producers are particularly annoyed".

Ali Aris said  The new industry system looks great"

Trebour Daehdoow also approves.

Summary (or TLDR)

I expect that clever manufacturers will come up with alternatives. A lot will be in nullsec.  Others will be in POS.

Those manufacturers that are a little tired will leave manufacturing or possibly even Eve itself.  New manufacturers will take their place.

Pos fuel, and probably most manufactured goods will have a price spike, until miners and manufactures adjust to fill the gaps.


I have trawled my way through the 70+ pages forum comments so you don't have to.

Instant compression was from search for "The stats for the Compression Array are below"

Improved POS slots was from, search for "Improve Mobile Laboratories and Assembly Arrays".

An overview of dev answers to common questions 

Individual CCP responses - some of which will be duplicates of above.
  • Allowing people to lock blueprints down in Starbases with current vote / lock mechanics would not be a good idea, so it won't be possible for now.
  • On even more abandoned (or place holding) POS "Yeah, that's a good point, we'll note that one down."
  • On reducing the copy time for T2 BPO's. "That's the current plan, yes."
  • The idea is that there is a more dynamic spread of players invested in Industry which should lead to a more interesting and dynamic landscape.
  • Question: Can the same thing be done to trading in general with regard to sales taxes and broker fees?
    Answer : Sales tax and broker fees are a completely separate system, not something within scope of these changes though certainly an interesting idea.
  • Yes the new blueprint browser will show you all blueprints in stations or assembly arrays etc.
  • You will be able to see all your blueprints in assembly arrays etc and remotely start jobs from containers, so that should cover your use case.
  • There is also a nice search / filter interface, you will get some time on SiSi to give us feedback on how this works before we go live too.

  • The cost scaling will affect all build/research locations, including conquerable stations and outposts. All slot limitations are being removed everywhere in EVE, and locations that formerly had slot bonuses will receive other bonuses instead. More info on that will be in future blogs.
  • (Conquerable?) Station owners will be able to set part of the cost of running jobs (in the form of taxes), but other parts of the cost will be out of the owner's control. Costs will not ever be able to be set to zero. Again, more info on this will be available in the upcoming blogs.
  • The taxes go to the corp that owns the station, the scaling costs (more info will be coming in a future blog) are sunk out of the game.
  • Question: The industry outpost upgrades to null sec outposts (particularly, the Amarr ones) primarily focus on the increase of industry slots. With the removal of slot limitation, will you be altering the bonuses involved with these outpost upgrades?
    Answer: Yes
  • We're not removing the ability to lock down blueprints in your station. You can still lock down as before and build, research and copy using the infinite slots in the station. (Foo note : i.e. not POS)
  • You will be able to anchor towers in any system in hi sec, except systems that are restricted, like rookie systems and trade hubs like Jita. This is the same restricted list as the one that applies to POCOs for instance.
  • ... The UI is going to reduce the number of clicks required to both install and preview/adjust a job to almost none. Our goal was driven by the idea that we want both batch and single blueprint job installation to be painless but fun. I don't want to spoil the next few blogs so I will leave it at that.
  • As to the cost scaling based on activity in a system, I will simply say that you should notice the impact on cost of working in a busy system, but the (future) blog should go into all the detail you need.
  • Question: How big will the RAMs be given they are 100x more required per bpc
    Answer:  We'll have a look at volumes and keep you posted if we do any change.
  • Regarding existing RAM / RDB, yes, they'll be multiplied by 100.
  • You will be able to get a quote from a station you are not at, with a blueprint you don't even own.
  • We talk a lot about good and bad complexity within the team. A fair portion of the industry changes are pretty clear examples of removing bad complexity, while still keeping the interesting problems for players to solve.
  • Some of the changes are also centered around cleaning up years of legacy code, freeing us up to better iterate on the feature and do more sexy looking UI

  • You will also get a list of locations you can install the job in the region with a way to compare their relative pricing.
  • POS still need to be anchored at moons.

  • You will be able to install (POS?) invention jobs remotely.
  • Question regarding BPO's based jobs in progress when the release goes live.
    Answer: The issue regarding how to migrate blueprints using starbase when the expansion hits has been noted. We'll update this thread when we have more information about this.
  • All extra materials are turned into regular materials, that will indeed be now affected by skills and waste. Except for Tech I ships and items, as such:
    • You should never see a Paladin require 2 Apocalypses to build
    • You should never see a Large shield Extender II require 0.75 Large Shield Extender I to build
  • Starbases will have reduced tax cost next to NPC station, and mobile labs / assembly array will have more efficient ME / PE lines.

All Dev, GM and CSM comments on this post can be found at

Wednesday 16 April 2014

Jita not burning yet

Over the last few years, the CFC 'hosted' a Jita Burns event, where thousands of ships were destroyed in a short timespan.

I also had rumours, some of them published, that Jita burn is about to start, (and some unconfirmed sources claiming that it should have started days ago).
There is plenty of propaganda from both pro and anti goon forces.  Read the above posts.  Even more interesting is how earnest some of the comments are, especially the 'we will crush you if you do "X". 

For me the biggest impact is ... nothing. I will continue to do what I already do.  I don't AFK into Jita, or through Niarja or Uedama (or theoretically any 0.5 system).  Instead, if I want to AFK fly a ship, I will autopilot into a station just this side of the 'dangerous' system.  I don't put too much cargo (or even expensive fittings) on any AFK ship.  Where I am uncomfortable, I fly those ships at keyboard.

I have lost ships when autopiloting before,  the one that sticks in my memory was a covops scanning frigate.  My cargo hold was empty so I asked the ganker why I was targeted.  I was obviously auto-piloting, but had a Sisters of Eve launcher and 8 sister probes worth some in a thinly tanked frigate.  The former offended the ganker and the latter made the gank profitable.  The advice I was given was don't autopilot.  Instead I learned not to autopilot in a ship that could be profitably ganked.

The best advice I have for hauling expensive cargo in highsec is don't do it unless you have to, or at least follow hauling corporation rules. (which I have used) or (which I have not yet) both have rules that protect both the goods owners and the goods haulers.  

Red frog suggest a maximum collateral of 1B for a freighter.   This means that you should not haul more than 1B of goods in a freighter. My rough feeling is about 50M for an Iteron Mk V (depending very much on fittings, with figures somewhat supported by Agony Unleashed ).  An Orca can have a better tank than a freighter, so (properly fit) can be used to haul higher value, smaller items.

I primarily haul my own goods to the nearest highsec entrance, and will haul items I need to our wormholes.  This needs hauling now, and even 12 hours most likely means that I have missed my entrance.

Before I could fly my current ships, I was known to haul 100M of fuel in an Iteron Mk V, but never away from keyboard, with liberal use of instawarp bookmarks and scouted routes, and always at keyboard.  With a choice of both Orca and Obelisk, those days are now thankfully (mostly) over.  (I might still occasionally be known to fly such loads, but don't tell the gankers that)

If you do haul your own goods in highsec, set the autopilot for your destination to check for 0.5 systems.  I prefer not to autopilot in 0.5 or in trade hub systems (setting the autopilot to a station still en-route but just short of your destination.

Never haul with a pilot in a wardec (and even drop corp if you have to).  Make liberal use of fast aligning bookmarks.

With the allegedly up and coming "Jita burns" (smoulders?  smokes? whimpers?) event it is worth paying additional attention to ship kill statistics.

Dotlan will show a spike very quickly when any such event occurs, eg There is not yet a spike.

Jita : Ship Kills Last 48h

Alternatively, from ingame:  Map, Star Map - Stars/Statistics/Ships destroyed in the last hour (or 24 hours)

Choose the timeframe you are interested in.

Jita isn't burning yet

Jita burns historically claims to threaten all haulers; but really concentrates on profitable ganks.  This makes sense; someone has to pay for those ganking ships.  Jita burns is also not just one system, but potentially any trade hub and/or commonly travelled 0.5 system.

If you do get caught in a gank (during an event or otherwise) in a ship that is not defensible, choose a 'celestial' object (moon, planet, customs office), align to it and start spamming 'warp to' even before your ship is dead.  Once you are in warp, immediately choose yet another destination and warp immediately upon leaving your first warp.  Bonus points if your default distance is 70k or 100k.  This will greatly improve your chances of pod survival.

The latest rumour I have read is that Jita burns will start 26 April 2014.   While it make sense, being after the CSM vote (no point in rousing the highsec community during voting season), this is still merely a rumour, to be taken under advisement.

Finally the one concession I will make during a Jita burns event. Once it is confirmed it that such an event has started, I will swap to an implant-less clone on hauling pilots that I know will want to go to Jita.

Monday 14 April 2014

700 plex up for grabs

Plex currently are at a historical high.  Great for those spend cash and sell plex on market; less great for those that buy plex in game. 

Some suspect that CCP manipulate plex prices.  In my opinion (humble or otherwise), they do.

To add a floor to plex prices, new uses of plex created.  Most recently, ships skins were added, but so was multi character training. CCP knows how many plex have been converted to skins, but I suspect its a few.

CCP add plex to the markets via sales and now special events.

CCP have an event to award 700 Plex across 16 pilots (link).  These Plex have been confiscated from banned accounts.

To get your share of the Plex, you need to find the target (following to do so), and do one of the following:
  • Top Damage, or
  • Final Blow on either ship or pod, or
  • Contract the relevant corpse back to Hikemi Korrado, or
  • Top damage by ship class, from frigate to battleship.
Events will be across scattered timezones:
April 13 – 17:00 UTC
April 14 – 11:30 UTC
April 15 – 18:00 UTC
April 16 – 14:00 UTC
April 17 – 20:00 UTC
April 19 – 02:00 UTC
April 19 – 22:00 UTC

Many claim that Pandemic Legion won the first day (in lowsec).  Second day is in highsec. Stnadard 'crimewatch' rules will hold.  Organise for your highsec remote repairers to be in fleet.

Some Q&A;

The targets, flown by CCP staff, are rumoured flying Wyverns, even in highsec. Rumor has it that CCP historically omni tank.   This is not a safe event.  Offgrid boosters will be brought.  Defensive logistics, neuts, ECM all make sense (but also make you more likely to be a target).  Bring friends; your competitors will be.

During the first event, CCP announced the name of the target, the relevant constellation and the total bounty (40 Plex).  Apparently all prizes went to Pandemic Legion.

This event, in isolation, will not make a long term difference to the plex market.  There are already many plex traded in Jita, 700 is a symbolic drop, possibly enough to pop a bubble, but not to make a long term difference.

Those concerned with flying safely need not apply; for this event, fly dangerous.

Thursday 10 April 2014

Vote already, vote often

The CSM vote is our opportunity to suggest who should represent our various game styles.

CCP listens to to the CSM.  Sometimes we wish they would listen more.  Very occasionally I wish CCP would listen to the CSM less, but that is merely because we didn't get enough of my type of candidate on it.  Think of voting as your opportunity to participate in Eve's Meta game.

Vote often.  There is an improvement on the vote process from last year for those of us with multiple accounts.  Once your browser has registered a vote, the next account you log in presents by default your last account's voting preference (which you can change if you want).  This makes voting on your (far too many) alt accounts very easy.

The voting system means that every vote counts.  Vote for who you want with a clean conscience, and apply preferences to those candidates you would settle for.  You have 14 candidates you can put on your vote (out of 36), and if you do fill out the 14, then your vote will end up with someone you respect.[1].  I also follow elections as one of my 'first life' hobbies, and it is very easy to find examples where elections are decided by a few hundred votes (Denison which I am familiar with and this list which needed a web search)

If too many voters also like your first choice, then any 'overflow' will flow to your second preference.  Similarly if your first choice is not  popular with others, it will flow to another more popular candidate; providing you have not let it 'expire' by not having enough candidates.

A lot of what the CSM does is covered by a 'non disclosure agreement'.  We never will be able to know everything.  The CSM takes players concerns to CCP, even before players know to be concerned.  Some things that the CSM has been involved in:
  • SMA's dropping loot again (to my personal disappointment but it makes a lot of hunters happy)
  • Somer Blink
  • The debate about whether K162 signatures should be delayed and how that works is from our 2 WH candidates.
  • The specialised cargo holds in T1 industrials was driven by our CSM.
  • The implementation of some of the siphon units.
  • ESS using loyalty points.
  • A certain bonus room incident.
Who missed out last time?  Lowsec was not represented, and didn't get many changes.

I don't always agree with the CSM, and other games use other mechanisms to feed information to the development groups, but for Eve, to get your playstyle buffed, you want players who represent you on the CSM.  Those that show up get to make the decisions. Voting is a simple way of 'showing up'.

Vote early.  Vote often.

For more information about candidates,  look at

For more information on the technicalities, please read

[1] Yes it is theoretically possible with only 14 votes that your vote may 'expire', but last year 99% of votes were 'used' by the 8th choice.

Foo's CSM 9 recommendations

Vote early.  Vote often (once per account you have). 

This means that if you have 8 accounts, I would like to see you vote 8 times.  I know the UI is not the best, deal with it.

I have taken a mixture of sources for this list, listening to many of the interviews, as well as reading their jita park posts, blogs and other blogger recommendations.

I do not need to agree with everything someone has said to recommend them.  Candidates will be more likely to be promoted if I have sufficient information about them, from any of the above sources.  Sufficient nullsec candidates from large powerblocs will get in regardless of my recommendation so do not need additional promotion.

Each candidate has a brief reason why they are where they are. "+" or "-" means I like that reason (or not).

Top Tier :
  • Steve Ronuken. +Out of game tools.  If you ever want to use any out of game tool (Eve Central, evemon, EFT, pyfa, anything) you want Steve on the CSM.
  • Proclus Diadochu.  +Wormhole
  • James Arget. +Wormhole + CSM8 support role +No/restricted delayed k162 - Decide earlier.
  • Corbexx. +Wormhole 
  • Sugar Kyle. +Lowsec +Market +Blogger +PVP

Middle Tier:
  • Ali Aras : +Merc, +CSM 8 very active 
  • Riverini : +EveNews24 -Null
  • Psianh Auvyander +Merc
  • corebloodbrothers : -Null but +NRDS(provi) 
  • Mike Azariah : +CSM8 +Highsec (otherwise under represented)
  • Asayanami Dei +Wormhole -No legacy of capsuleer interview 
  • Psycotic Monk : +Someone to represent 'them'
Lower Tier:
  • Matias Otero : +BraveNewbies -AlreadyHasVotes
  • Mangala Solaris : +RVB -RVB

Candidates info at
Other suggestions for voting :

There are other worthy candidates.  I have my bias, and respect that others have their own bias.

Just vote at

Thursday 3 April 2014

Recent dev posts on Contracts and Drones

There are a couple of dev posts that I wish to shout out.

CCP wants feedback on the contract system.  As someone who tried producing mid level BPC's for sale, and gave up due to the limits of the contract system, I can only endorse a desire to improve this. If you have ever tried contracts, now is the time to offer the wisdom of your opinions.

It is no real secret that the only boats I can currently fly are the Epithal and Dominix. (This is an oversimplification - but not by much.) 

Drones are being rebalanced.  T2 Gardes are being nerfed 7% raw DPS (9% if you only have Gallente Drone IV), but picking up a bit of tracking.  Other races drones are being buffed, but ... nothing will replace that lost DPS for sentry drones (maybe the new faction Drone Damage Amp?) 

Heavy drones will be slightly less painful to use on large targets if you want to get up close and personal.  I will also see what might happen if we change our C4 sleeper tactics from ranged warpins to dropping on top of them with heavy drones.  The concept of moving while we fight might be interesting.

TLDR; The gap between best and worst are being shrunk by buffing the new drone pilot and nerfing the Gallente Sentry T2 user. 

I wont pretend to understand the intricacies of carrier ship changes yet, I was reading that there were calls for 2 Damage Control Units, when the calls instead were for something to do with Drone Control Units; both being DCU.

Yes Van, you called it.  The goons should be pleased that their campaign against drones has paid dividends (as Van said it would).  Reducing drone assist earlier was not enough, so now we just nerf the T2 sentry drones. 

I will probably stop whining when I train t2 large guns and AWU 5.  Maybe.

Tuesday 1 April 2014

Low sec PI empire

I am referring to Sugar Kyle's(1) Public POCO Project

Sugar has gotten herself a POCOpire where she is offering insanely good PI tax rates, even to the general public. Lowsec extraction PI is better than highsec PI, and her general public taxes she is currently offering will be cheaper than the best highsec has to offer.  For manufacturing planets, access to market, and low taxes are all that matter.

The one drawback may be for the TCS POCOpire, the taxes may be too low, and the planets may become over extracted.  Wormhole PI extraction is superior (2), and if you want better PI extraction options, come and join a Foo wormhole PI corp. The Foo corps also have an option for a fixed rate per moth rather than ongoing taxes.

As an open response to Sugar's post, and because blogger comments are fine for short responses, please find my long winded essay below.

For me, my blog has been a net positive experience.  We have been attacked in part because of it.  Our defenders also came due to connections from my blog.  Many recruits to the corp have also joined because of my blog, and knowing who I am.  Yes we will be attacked again, but I feel blogging is a net positive(3)

Blogging is egotistical. So is journalism, yet we still read the blogs and watch the news.  Without that ego, there would be no out of game information to read apart from the occasional dev post.

Can the TCS Public POCO Project make ISK with low taxes?  I think your taxes are on the low side, but you don't have POS fuel to pay for.  When I had lowsec POCO's I charged more than  you currently are, but still 'cheap'.

The major damage for others seeing our stumbles is to our ego, but ... we like to think that our ego's are big enough for the job.  I also think our bruised ego posts often make for the better posts.

I would love to see you publish aggregated data (and you will have more API data if you charge a 0.1% tax to blues), but publishing the API details is dangerous to your clients.  From the corporation API, hostiles could see when pilots are hauling, and where they are hauling from.  Some information is fine, too much detail will have the effect of driving customers away (after they are consistently blown up)

What I would like to see TCS (or someone else) do is set up local buy (and sell) orders in the systems that the POCOs are in, or at least cover these systems with ranged buy orders.  The most dangerous part of the trip is negotiating gates.  Yes, Epithals can (and possibly even should) have 4 WCS, but a single stealth bomber can still lock an Epithal with far too much loot down.  Encouraging local trading (and there will be both buy and sell) will both increase the amount of PI done, and should be a profitable business on it's own.

New clients also want to know where your customs offices are.  I recall that you have mentioned Bosena but confirmation that these are roughly where the POCO's are would help me send lowsec PI recruits in the right direction.  (When they get hooked they can then join me in our wormholes).

(1) Sugar Kyle is also running for CSM, and deserves your vote.
(2) I fear I may be dubbed sir spamalot.  I am also jealous of the PI farmers TCS will get.  PI farmers are mine I tell you, all mine.
(3) Blogging does take time.  I have no idea how the daily bloggers find that time.