1 (edited by Mistress 2012-05-11 20:39:41)

Topic: Industry feedback - how it affects me

1) Material efficiency for factories is abysmal (on alpha-2).

Even with all efficiency extensions maxed, which takes me almost two months of additional EP, I end up only 3% more efficient then I am now. It also seems that relation has a far to great impact on efficiency. It always annoyed me to no end, that relation affects nearly everything to begin with, but now it is downright and absolute silly!

It doesn't make any sense, forcing players to grind standing even when they absolutely hate missions of any kind. I cannot get myself to go even do the rookie missions, they are that uninteresting! Missions should earn you something immediate and limited in scope. It should be rewarding in and of itself, regardless of the standing gains.

Standing should affect hourly usage costs for facilities and you should gain standing if you are a good customer, just like it is in the real world. There is no sane reason why a factory becomes less efficient if you did not do totally unrelated missions for a faction. It is downright silly/dumb and is nothing but adding complexity for the sake of complexity and grind!

Use/rent, whatever prices is what should be the flexible component in any interaction and not the performance of the facilities you use! We got personal extensions and efficiency variations in facilities for that I would argue!


2) It has been written in a previous devblog that bots overall would get more expensive to make and modules less.

By the looks of material costs, I estimate everything is going to get way more expensive! Especially when you take the issues of point 1 into account.



Please remove the unneeded standing complexity from industry (now is the time) and keep things logical instead of drifting of in a mathematical construction that tries to tie everything together for the sake of using one formula for everything. The current side effects are not acceptable!

And you are forcing us to do everything, but at the same time expects us to specialize...make up your mind!

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

And what about the peoples that grinded their arse out of the missions to get max standing?  Since you dont want to do it, lets just remove it then? Its a grind everybody agree on this, but if you want instant action gratification the game's not for you obviously.


   Its like saying:  ok remove kernel researching altogether. I dont like it and i dont want to do it. What? Some peoples/corp dedicated hundreds of hours into that? Nevermind, theyll just be happy i dont have to do it yikes
Their time is less precious than mine its logical.....

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

the last change of standing affecting industry already made the mission running worse -

someone complained that he was "forced" to do combat missions to get max standing bonus on production -> which wasnt actually true.

the DEVs reacted to it - and now all my combat standing and logistic standing is nothing worth anymore - only a single spark to unlock for each profession. my Mission runner agent cannot boost my combat agents relations anymore -> squad shared mission button even more useless then before.

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

Cobalt wrote:

And what about the peoples that grinded their arse out of the missions to get max standing?  Since you dont want to do it, lets just remove it then? Its a grind everybody agree on this, but if you want instant action gratification the game's not for you obviously.


   Its like saying:  ok remove kernel researching altogether. I dont like it and i dont want to do it. What? Some peoples/corp dedicated hundreds of hours into that? Nevermind, theyll just be happy i dont have to do it yikes
Their time is less precious than mine its logical.....

Your reasoning is totally upside down...akin to saying:

I don't care if it makes any sense, I invested in it, so it must stay the same...always!

or like:

I got mistreated in my youth, so its perfectly normal all future children should too...just to be fair!

Because your reasoning is emotional and void of any logic (you don't even go into my fundamental argument), I don't see a point in going into it more.

5 (edited by Lucius Marcellus 2012-05-12 00:32:15)

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

Actually, having investigated the test server I must disagree with OP. It's actually easier to get a high-end end efficiency with the new system. If you really hate grinding reputation, you can improve your extensions or use gamma facilities. The new system offers more flexibility, only extreme optimisers will want to aim to maximise every point-giving factor due to strong diminishing returns.

On the note of prices, this is purely a rebalancing and will just have some transitory effects. Also, it's really very difficult to say as the commodities have been recalibrated and the mining system altered.

Finally, raising reputation to a 'decent' level (around 3) only takes a day or two. The grind used to be long and unrelated to industry, but these days you can do it all mining away.

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

I just want to add here that we also plan to turn relation gain into a diminishing system in the near future. Meaning that it will be quick to reach a decent relation but it will gradually slow down as you reach towards 10.0.

7 (edited by Mistress 2012-05-12 01:17:53)

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

Annihilator wrote:

the last change of standing affecting industry already made the mission running worse -

someone complained that he was "forced" to do combat missions to get max standing bonus on production -> which wasnt actually true.

the DEVs reacted to it - and now all my combat standing and logistic standing is nothing worth anymore - only a single spark to unlock for each profession. my Mission runner agent cannot boost my combat agents relations anymore -> squad shared mission button even more useless then before.

Your "argument" only strengthens mine if you think about it deeper.

As I wrote, missions should be rewarding for their own sake and not for their artificial and illogical side effects in area's that have by reasoning nothing to do with the missions and the objectives you achieve with them.

The standing gains you currently enjoy are nothing more then to control the rate at which level up in missions and control your access to sparks. As I see it, the tie to industry we currently know is to cover up the lack of real mission value.

Players that want to do missions do not get real rewards meaningful to their style of play. While those that have another style of play and aren't interested in missions are held back or forced to do them anyway.  How can holding on to the current use of the standing system benefit anyone in their quest for fun then?

I could accept current mechanics if they made any logical sense whatsoever, but they don't. And since the expansion is going to do a major overhaul of industry, it only makes sense to get rid of the industry side of the problem from the get go.

And I am all for challenging missions with meaningful rewards and more sparks for those that feel they haven't done enough missions in their life (like I did in EVE). But lets not have an immediate solution for missions stand in the way for a better version of industry.

The mentality of "if I got to burn, let everyone else burn too" only stands in the way of moving forward by doing the right things.

8 (edited by Mistress 2012-05-12 01:20:29)

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

Lucius Marcellus wrote:

Actually, having investigated the test server I must disagree with OP. It's actually easier to get a high-end end efficiency with the new system. If you really hate grinding reputation, you can improve your extensions or use gamma facilities. The new system offers more flexibility, only extreme optimisers will want to aim to maximise every point-giving factor due to strong diminishing returns.

On the note of prices, this is purely a rebalancing and will just have some transitory effects. Also, it's really very difficult to say as the commodities have been recalibrated and the mining system altered.

Finally, raising reputation to a 'decent' level (around 3) only takes a day or two. The grind used to be long and unrelated to industry, but these days you can do it all mining away.

Odd, I thought I explained that it takes nearly two extra months of training just to advance 3% above an already bad material efficiency. And those two months are for exactly what you advice, by maximizing all skills. The difference between your and mine agents is the standings you got on yours, which exactly highlights my point.

Not only should standings not affect the efficiency of an installation, ...does anyone here have a good reason for that..., it has a rather large effect on the whole. You are no doubt right, that it would take only a few days of grind (per agent) to get standing up to level 3. That is quite a few weekends of no fun, only to deal with a mechanic that doesn't make game play sense. That gaining standing used to take more time then now, does not validate the mechanic or give a reason to hold onto its role in industry either.

9 (edited by Mistress 2012-05-12 01:13:59)

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

DEV Zoom wrote:

I just want to add here that we also plan to turn relation gain into a diminishing system in the near future. Meaning that it will be quick to reach a decent relation but it will gradually slow down as you reach towards 10.0.

I support the diminishing returns approach to everything as it makes perfect sense. What does not make sense however is why this would validate for having standing affecting efficiency of installations in the first place, instead of just affecting costs of usage (be it time or volume, depending on the installation).

You could argue that since it then becomes diminishing return converted to points, used in a diminishing return point system, the effect of gaining more efficiency by working up standing to higher levels diminishes very fast. But that only means the the impact of an unsound mechanic/influence is lessened in practice and still forces everyone to participate in doing the missions up to a certain level to be economic. Whereas you have the chance to start with a pretty clean slate now and get rid of the mechanic and use standings it in a way that actually does make sense!

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

Mistress wrote:

Not only should standings not affect the efficiency of an installation, ...does anyone here have a good reason for that..., it has a rather large effect on the whole. You are no doubt right, that it would take only a few days of grind (per agent) to get standing up to level 3. That is quite a few weekends of no fun, only to deal with a mechanic that doesn't make game play sense. That gaining standing used to take more time then now, does not validate the mechanic or give a reason to hold onto its role in industry either.

Note, I am currently underwhelmed by the current industry changes....

But your above statement makes no sense.  If you are using an Asintec op to do your processing, and you have higher standings with Asintc, why shouldn't you get better efficiency?  It's a preferred customer status you have earned with that megacorp, and is a reward for doing assignments for that mega corp.  You don't have to do them, but those that do should get a reward for doing assignments, ie standings.  And a few weekends, once they are done, are done, and viola, you never have to do them again. Those who do the work reap the rewards.

In the gods we trust, all others bring data!

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

"Those who do the work reap the rewards." Thats as simple as that.

Franlky i would take your proposition more seriously if you had "at least" pushed 1 combat and 1 industrial relation up to more than 6.0

In that case your proposition would be more interesting, in the fact that you would be also impacted by the change.

Playing a game has absolutely nothing to do with being mistreated as a youth, its time investment versus reward ingame. Every mmo need a grind somewhere, or it would be instant gratification as i said earlier.  Here we have a grind, and the reward is better efficiency.

Now if the DEVs choose to dilute and dilute each time more the grind part out of the game, id prefer they tell it now so i wont bother:

-farming NIC
-farming research
-pushing up standings
-etc...

If all this become easier at a time or another because someone cant handle the grind, ill just "do nothing more" and wait until it becomes easier. My time is not less precious than any other one time.

There are boring things to do to build up your world, so you can enjoy other things, wich have much meaning BECAUSE it was tedious to get them....   See my point?

If we follow your reasoning of "dont wanna do the grind", lets just play all the time like its atm in the test server.

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

Lupus Aurelius wrote:
Mistress wrote:

Not only should standings not affect the efficiency of an installation, ...does anyone here have a good reason for that..., it has a rather large effect on the whole. You are no doubt right, that it would take only a few days of grind (per agent) to get standing up to level 3. That is quite a few weekends of no fun, only to deal with a mechanic that doesn't make game play sense. That gaining standing used to take more time then now, does not validate the mechanic or give a reason to hold onto its role in industry either.

Note, I am currently underwhelmed by the current industry changes....

But your above statement makes no sense.  If you are using an Asintec op to do your processing, and you have higher standings with Asintc, why shouldn't you get better efficiency?  It's a preferred customer status you have earned with that megacorp, and is a reward for doing assignments for that mega corp.  You don't have to do them, but those that do should get a reward for doing assignments, ie standings.  And a few weekends, once they are done, are done, and viola, you never have to do them again. Those who do the work reap the rewards.

My writing here makes every sense if you stop clinging to the "he did the effort argument" and break it down to review it in a more objectively manner. Stop thinking like it is now, but as to what it should be, makes sense and can become.

I would summarize your above reply as  if something takes effort, then it must be rewarding down the read regardless of the level of "logic" (for lack of a better word). And that mode of looking at things misses all the details!

My perception of sense would be that the mega corp charges you more if you are NOT a repetitive steady customer with a long relationship (you do not get a discount). And not that standing affects the efficiency of an installation, we got extensions for that!

Standings should be distinct from extensions and here they are thrown on the same pile of points to calculate the final efficiency and thus become one and the same thing.

13 (edited by Mistress 2012-05-12 12:04:47)

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

Cobalt wrote:

"Those who do the work reap the rewards." Thats as simple as that.Franlky i would take your proposition more seriously if you had "at least" pushed 1 combat and 1 industrial relation up to more than 6.0

In that case your proposition would be more interesting, in the fact that you would be also impacted by the change.

OMG, you again are sidestepping every argument I make by falling back on the "effort" card, which frankly means everything I wrote in my first reply to your initial response is spot on!

Cobalt wrote:

Playing a game has absolutely nothing to do with being mistreated as a youth, its time investment versus reward ingame. Every mmo need a grind somewhere, or it would be instant gratification as i said earlier.  Here we have a grind, and the reward is better efficiency.

You are again display clinging to the idea that "effort" must have "reward", regardless of its intrinsic value or value to others. Things simply do not work that way, they never did and never will. Just trying hard at getting top notch grades in school, does not mean an employer 5 years down the road will pay you 20% more for doing the same thing as anyone else when you perform just the same! And being a genius does not mean you do not have to work for a living!

You are totally sidestepping the arguments and directly connect effort with better efficiency as if those two have a meaningful relationship or at least as meaningful as training up extensions to achieve the same.

Cobalt wrote:

Now if the DEVs choose to dilute and dilute each time more the grind part out of the game, id prefer they tell it now so i wont bother:

-farming NIC
-farming research
-pushing up standings
-etc...

If all this become easier at a time or another because someone cant handle the grind, ill just "do nothing more" and wait until it becomes easier. My time is not less precious than any other one time.

You are mixing things here that make sense with those that do not, simply because you are blind sighted by the effort you already put in under the current system. Take your kernels argument from your first post You totally missed the reality that they can be bought from others whereas standing cannot. And now you are missing that gaining new research knowledge by analyzing leftovers from NPC makes perfect sense. It is not just some artificial "effort" and "reward" flow like standing is. You just perceive everything you mentioned as a grind and pile it onto one stack as if it is the same because it costs "effort", without looking deeper into meaning.

You also bring up the time based leveling up argument, neglecting that this game is fundamentally that, where it not that you have to decide where improve. Improving combat by spending EP does mean your industry does not. If you feel that just waiting to gain EP because that is lame, then you fundamentally disagree with this games core.


Cobalt wrote:

There are boring things to do to build up your world, so you can enjoy other things, wich have much meaning BECAUSE it was tedious to get them....   See my point?

If we follow your reasoning of "dont wanna do the grind", lets just play all the time like its atm in the test server.

I get your point, but you are missing mine completely. Never did I argue that standing should have no effect on a players use of installations. I argued just that it is fundamentally incorrect to have it effect efficiency of installations and that we have prices that can be affected by them. I also proposed a more reasonable way of gaining standings, more akin to how you would get it in RL business interactions.

I offered constructive arguments and alternative use of standing in industry, all I got back is two versions of reply:

1) I did the effort under current rules and I want to keep the rewards I gained under current rules.
2) Missions are meaningless without the effects we have under current rules.

The first is downright being stuck/stubborn and not being open for change, based on you did the grind. Well you had the benefits too all that time since you did, so stop using it as an argument.

The second highlights there should be brought true rewards for missions, of all types, that go beyond the long lasting "side" effects. This would make missions stand o their own as an activity, instead only being done to get spark X and standing Y for industry. After which that career ends.

Right now, I can say nothing more then express my disappointment. And please know that if there is no other way, I will just like EVERY other gamer, do the grind. But that does not make it good game play, but just the opposite!

14 (edited by Lucius Marcellus 2012-05-12 12:47:02)

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

This is really way out of hand, and not that relevant in the test section. Relations gave a bonus before as well, the system hasn't really changed much in that regard (slightly more useful). But given how much recalibration is coming in the next patch, the things you mention are minor.

And I really don't think you've been very constructive at all. This thread is basically "I want reward but no effort" VS "There must be effort to get reward". Both are opinions, and quite a few people here simply don't agree with you.

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

I must by typing in invisible letters somehow as arguments again, got ignored and nowhere did I wrote anything of the likes of "I want reward but no effort", nor anything that implied this. Nearly all the replies to my arguments where cry posts!

This is sickening!

Re: Industry feedback - how it affects me

Please remove the unneeded standing complexity from industry (now is the time) and keep things logical instead of drifting of in a mathematical construction that tries to tie everything together for the sake of using one formula for everything. The current side effects are not acceptable!

If production is not effected by reputation at all, which is what you appear to be asking for, then EP is the only thing that differentiates one producer from the next.

The reason everyone keeps going back to 'effort' for 'gain' is simply that without relations, all a producer needs to do is sit in the outpost and collect EP. There is nothing a new player can do to close that gap.

Relation is completely optional. You don't have to go out and run missions to raise standings. But if you don't run them, then you won't be competitive with those players of similar EP that do.

In other words, players that put additional effort into playing gain an advantage. This is good game design.

Without relations, producers could actually be as competitive to other players, without ever needing to undock.

Is your arguement about not wanting to undock? If not, that would be the unintentional consequence of removing relations, and is highly undesireable from a game play standpoint.