Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[orange]

This is relevant to previous discussions on mobility.

Hello everyone!

In the upcoming Summer release we are making a lot of changes that we expect will impact player behavior surrounding manufacturing, mining and starbase use. We see an opportunity here to make some adjustments to the way that Jump Drives consume their isotope fuel that will hit a few birds with one stone.

The goals of this change are:
Stimulate the isotope (and therefore ice) market to help cushion any drop in demand from players using smaller starbases after the science and industry slot changes.
Help encourage cost competitiveness for local resource gathering in nullsec.
Although we don't expect this change to significantly impact behavior around jump drive power projection, it should at least provide a small incentive change through higher costs for moving huge capital fleets often.

The plan for this release is to start with a 50% increase in the fuel cost of all jump drives and jump portals, and adjust further if necessary once we see the results. This change applies both the the base consumption of ship based jump drives, as well as the isotope consumption per kg of mass on all jump bridges and portals.

To compensate for the extra isotopes that ships will need to carry, the volume of all four isotopes will be reduced by 1/3, to 0.1m3. Thanks to Resgo for some excellent feedback.

The storage volume of jump bridge starbase structures will be increased by 50% since Ozone volume won't be changing.

For reference, this will increase the cost of running a max skilled Rhea from Jita to RIT-A7 (jump drive transit the whole way) from ~50m isk to ~75m isk.

Edit: Link

[PracticalTechnicality]

This seems like a fair enough change to me.  Jump logistics will still be the life blood of null-sec industry and the raised cost will contribute to both hi-sec and local producers. 

I think an unwritten incentive here was to raise the 'minimum wage' in EVE in response to the rises in price that will come after the industry patch.  I agree with pretty much all of the changes, but production costs are going to rise and mineral values, should export of compressed ore become a favourable means of transport, will similarly rise (even with an over all yield bonus).  This will be driven by a flattened (though still Jita-biased) supply distribution compared to the old 'buy mins, turn into guns, ship' approach.  If Ice products remained as they are, they would quickly fall into the poverty wage level of EVE, resulting in potentially unpredictable fluctuations as it goes in and out of vogue depending on global consumption and comparative prices for similar activities. 

Long story short - I certainly won't shed a tear over what amounts to a minuscule increase in operational costs, when those costs go towards aiding the base resourcing community in the manner explained in the original post and above. 

[Andreus Ixiris]

Well, looks like I picked a good time to start training Jump Fuel Conservation V.

In general I approve of this change. As Aelisha pointed out, it's going to keep ice harvesting competitive with the rest of the market, and while it'll obviously raise expenses for capital fleets slightly, anyone who has enough money to maintain a capital fleet is going to be able to shoulder a little extra expense without even noticing it.

At some point I'd really like them to explore methods of limiting power projection, but that might need to wait until the promised capital overhaul.

[Esna Pitoojee]

I'm... rather less enthusiastic about this.

I get what CCP is trying to do, but I don't think this is a good way or the right time to be doing it. With Kronos already dumping a ton of industry changes onto the market and anyone with half a brain predicting several weeks of chaos while everything settles, I think CCP reeeeeally needs to hold off for a little while and see if their preconceptions about what people are going to do are actually correct.

My other gripe with this is that while Fozzie says it will not significantly affect power projection, it will be a significant load on small alliances without large volumes of cashflow, where individual players are far more often responsible for supplying their own fuel costs.

[Milo Caman]

Time to start bulk-buying fuel again.

[Silas Vitalia]

Double Plus good changes.

But I'm always a fan of it taking more things (tm) to do logistics.

[Ayallah]

This is a stupid and heavy handed nerf for completely stupid reasons.

[PracticalTechnicality]

This is a stupid and heavy handed nerf for completely stupid reasons.

Which are?  Not a challenge, I am genuinely curious, as my point of view is probably predicated on entirely different circumstances to those you experience.

[DeadRow]

This will change nothing.. apart from being able to bring in more fuel via JFs \o/

[PracticalTechnicality]

This will change nothing.. apart from being able to bring in more fuel via JFs \o/

As you may have guessed, I like the way you think.  Bulk is a small word.  MOAR BULK.

[Ayallah]

They are adding a fix to a problem that does not exist yet, this theoretical cluster wide drop in tower sizes and therefor in consumption. (which entirely speculative)

And what they have done is vastly increase the cost of using capital ships and null/lowsec logistics.

Many people are blindly cheering as a nerf to power projection but the very last people that will be hurt is the superpowers.  Small alliances, small groups that rely on JF's will be hurt first and hardest the it is contributing to the blandness of null and the cost of living there and in low. 

Just in case people don't use large towers as much after the patch?

it is a bullshit change and made blindly.  There is a lot of speculation as to the aftereffects of it but the reasons for it and the first and biggest consequence both make no sense at all.

[Esna Pitoojee]

They are adding a fix to a problem that does not exist yet, this theoretical cluster wide drop in tower sizes and therefor in consumption. (which entirely speculative)

And what they have done is vastly increase the cost of using capital ships and null/lowsec logistics.

Many people are blindly cheering as a nerf to power projection but the very last people that will be hurt is the superpowers.  Small alliances, small groups that rely on JF's will be hurt first and hardest the it is contributing to the blandness of null and the cost of living there and in low. 

Just in case people don't use large towers as much after the patch?

it is a bullshit change and made blindly.  There is a lot of speculation as to the aftereffects of it but the reasons for it and the first and biggest consequence both make no sense at all.

This, basically. I feel like this was a change which would have been much better done somewhere 3-6 weeks after the patch deployment was put in. and even then with a far better mechanic.

If starbases are what they're really looking at responding to, couldn't the rate starbases eat fuel at be upped, and everything else altered to keep in line with the new volumes? If long-range multi-jump trips are what they're trying to curb, couldn't they set up a mechanic that increases fuel usage with each repetitive jump?

[DeadRow]

They are adding a fix to a problem that does not exist yet, this theoretical cluster wide drop in tower sizes and therefor in consumption. (which entirely speculative)

And what they have done is vastly increase the cost of using capital ships and null/lowsec logistics.

Many people are blindly cheering as a nerf to power projection but the very last people that will be hurt is the superpowers.  Small alliances, small groups that rely on JF's will be hurt first and hardest the it is contributing to the blandness of null and the cost of living there and in low. 

Just in case people don't use large towers as much after the patch?

it is a bullshit change and made blindly.  There is a lot of speculation as to the aftereffects of it but the reasons for it and the first and biggest consequence both make no sense at all.

This changes nothing. If a small alliance that lives in low can't afford the increase, they are doing something seriously wrong. They are predicting the price will be an extra 25mil if you are going to the very edge of Null from Jita. This means your lowsec run will cost like 5mil more max.

[Ayallah]

Individually.  In large volumes, it is going to change a lot.

they buff null and low sec industry, then they shrink the profit margins to compensate for something that hasn't and may not happen.