Jump to content

Why the Industry changes are no good [DISCUSSION..


blazemonger
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

So, after a bit of time to gather my thoughts on this I figured to share what my opinion is on the changes in the coming patch.

 

At face value I actually see very little wrong with any of it, most of the changes makes sense or I can understand. It's a bit of a shame that the small but useful additions of RGB control for lights and canopy glass arriving were snowed under due to the massive change in Industry.

 

Is the idea of using schematics a terrible idea? Not really, it actually makes sense and would offer a great deal of additional gameplay IF NQ actually properly implemented them in the context of the game itself and not just looking at how to slow down industry and pretty much shoehorn "specialization" into the mix.

 

As the concept is pretty much the same as it is in EVE where any industry job starts with a blueprint I decided to transpose the way this works in EVE and build the mechanic for DU from that. This assumes that there would be gameplay currently not in game but I wil get back to that later..
 

The Schematics:

T1 schematics are seeded through bots on the market. These would not be usable in industry by themselves and be relatively inexpensive starting at around 5K for XS components. L and XL component and element schematics would obviously be more valuable but still affordable with some effort.

 

Making "working" copies: 

Players can use a "research" element to make copies of these for several runs and/or increase the batch size per run, for smaller items batch size could go as high as 100 per run and have a total use of 10 runs, bigger items would see smaller batch sizes wil L and XL size elements being 1 per run only. Once all runs have been used, the copy is consumed. Copies will always succeed

 

Doing research:

On these copied schematics, by using specific materials (at a future date these could be items found in events/sites but at the start these could be "regular ore" as a placeholder), through research, players can upgrade these copies which would reduce material cost and/or runtime for batches. A talent will determine the RNG factor of these upgrades succeeding

 

The inventions:

In the world, on planets, moons and asteroids, items can be found which will allow players to research and upgrade blueprints. Several of these items can be combined to craft higher tiers of these. As with research, these could initially be ores (of higher tier than for research) as a placeholder. The player can choose a desired outcome for the invention based on the input materials for the schematic copy and the higher the tier of the outcomes set, the lower the chance of this invention being successful will be. Talents again will increase the chance of success.
 

Copied, researched and invented schematics can then be traded on the markets by players. All of this means that not only can Industrialists use the original schematics if they want, they can buy better quality, higher tier or multiple run blueprints with higher batch sizes, possible lower material requirements and/or time reduction for production from other players creating another income stream and another "profession" in game.

 

It also creates opportunity for explorers top  go out and find the materials needed to do research and invention, this again, creates an income stream for player and a profession in game as well as promotes use of markets and interaction between players.

 

 

Clearly, this all hinges on something NQ seems to try and avoid like the plague... creating in game content themselves. Frankly, while the idea of no PVE content is all wel and good, i think it should be clear by now that this wil not work and NQ, by excluding the option, is only making the game more of a grind and harder to enjoy.

 

 

Explorers also would not need big/expensive ships. The materials they look for may require nimble small ships which could be relatively cheap. That also means they would not suffer a devastating loss if they get caught by PVP players. The loss is relative and they can get back into things pretty quickly. In turn the PVP player gets their reward in loot which in itself still flows back to the markets where researchers can buy them to do their work regardless of whether the explorer or the pirate brings them to market. So for the game, and the players, it's a win-win. 

 

 

But NQ already is about to release this update, how can they make the change towards this you ask? It's fairly simple.. Reduce cost for the schematics to get the base mechanic in game without too much of an impact and then see how this might work .. That is not difficult, it's a matter of changing numbers in a pricing table..

 

 

All this sounds familiar? Sure it does, it's pretty much the industry loop from EVE but why is that bad, it's certainly different enough, being "physical in the world" and if you let yourself be "inspired" by the mechanic in the first place, which IMO is clearly the case here, why not go all the way.

 

 

 probably missed a few thigs here and there but let's discuss and hope NQ pays attention..

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People can say what they will about Eve, but it has well-functioning emergent markets. What makes Eve markets function though, isn't some huge level of initial money investment in order to make anything.

 

- Eve resources are way more diverse. It does not take the same base 25 resources to make everything.

- Resources are unevenly and diversely distributed. You commit entire playstyles on gathering one or two types. It takes significant effort to begin collecting moon goo (t2), doing reactions (t3 cruisers), doing PI (citadel and implant production).  You don't get to roam around the universe for 5 days and get everything you need to build everything you want doing the same exact thing (mining planets). Every resource comes with it's own know-how.

- Eve has many alternative chains of value generation. The only income track DU has is mining -> industry -> construct making. You can choose your place in this chain (eg you can be just a miner), but it's one single chain. Once a few people come together there is no reason to not to horizontally complete this chain (mine and build everything in-house), Eve has many chains. So one can be completely uninvolved with the ship production chain yet generate value to go to markets and buy ships. That's why people go to markets in Eve. They have ways of making ISK unrelated to the production chain.

 

If markets aren't functioning as NQ was expecting, the culprit is the feature incompleteness and lack of several deep chains of value generation. It's true that higher investment levels can be better for t4/t5 production, but getting everything behind huge investment walls isn't the answer for specialization and market activity. When the sole prerequisite is money, it just means making money with money is heavily buffed. Eventually rich people will return to their gigafactories and the rest will just starve.

 

EDIT: One thing I forgot. Well-functioning markets are grounded on traders. Traders (among many other roles such as organization managers) can't function without a market API. JC seems to be categorically opposed to APIs. That's a bad choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Olmeca_Gold said:

The only income track DU has is mining -> industry -> construct making. You can choose your place in this chain (eg you can be just a miner), but it's one single chain. 

We typed our fingers to bones about this in endless "feedback" with alpha guys. Was ignored by NQ (if we exlclude mockery of "wrecks").

 

I honestly tempted to go to something that can be percieved as "devs bashing", but generaly current reality we play...  tells better story for everyone to judge themeselves without me going rage mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true @Olmeca_Gold

 

The point for me is that so much of what EVE does, and does well, would actually translate really nicely to DU. The only requirement would be for NQ to stop pretending there is no/will not be PVE content (as there is and will be more) and start working on that.

 

And this does not need to happen overnight either, placeholders like in the idea I posted could be a starting point and NQ could then filling the blanks one at al time and by doing so create an ever expanding array of options and gameplay which in the end would benefit everyone. I just do not understand why they are so .. well.. stubborn in dismissing any of that while from what I see it's right in front of their face. I am not advocating NQ turn DU into EVE here but why are they constantly trying to reinvent the wheel.

 

Giving small groups and solo players a gameloop which lets them go out and find valuables which can be used towards industry and research by bringing them to market is a great balance to having industry which really requires investment and specialization to run well. It turn "as a small group/solo player just use markets to buy what you need" into "go out and find what the industrialists need and sell it to them, making their business in part dependent on yours"..

 

It just feels like NQ is not actually considering options, they are certainly not using the vast resource they have in their community for ideas. They just sit around a table and the first thing that comes to mind is what they go with, regardless of how it will impact he game down the line.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Oh, I can absolutely see how, for some, certain PVE content is not interesting and that is absolutely fine. The point is though that this content mostly provides for and basically enables PVP as everything PVP players use and buy originates from what the PVE players retrieve and bring to market through their gameplay. And then obviously there is the given these PVE players are actually a big "target audience" for PVP players too ;) ..

 

The point is also that you have the CHOICE to do either or both, depending on your preference entirely and not driven by "need to" in any way.

 

That is a major difference between a game like EVE, which obviously has nearly two decades of development behind it , and DU. But NQ can use what CCP has done and apply it in their own way to get to that point "faster" instead of trying to go hard mode and reinvent all these mechanics for themselves which I sometimes feel they are doing. A lot of what we have in a game like EVE today came to be because of the exact reasons DU is struggling to find a way now. I just wish NQ took notice of the solutions out there and adopt them to their own style and game instead of blindly getting in on the bottom floor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my perspective I'd certainly expect that the PVE content I would imply is located in PVP space, yes.. The point is to create value for everyone and that includes opportunities for PVP player to track or "hunt" these explorers.. Much like in EVE..
 

The safezone in DU is a huge no PVP zone so besides some basic stuff I'd not expect there be much of this content if it woud ever be considered by NQ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EVE has got the basic's correct but the general PVE that drives a big part of the economy (special drops, BP from rats, bounties and ore mining) is boring as hell. 

 

Copying EVE and implementing it badly is even worse than not have having your own ideas at all  as what happened after patch release.

 

DU needs to invent their own basics, implement those to get all streams implemented that feeds the market and removes currency from the game. After this the market will start to "live" and can then be tweaked to make sure the balance is correct.

 

Forcing the market upfront is not a good move as you create a runaway train that has no brakes and you are busy building brakes while it is just gaining more and more speed.

 

Funny how I remember DU was advertise as all content created in game will be player based. I knew back then it was very unlikely fitting that into the rest of the game meta.

 

If I remember well CCP hired professional economists to help with setting up the market and maintaining it, it does not look like it is done by NQ.

 

NQ should not copy EVE too much as EVE has re-spawnable resources that DU does not have and is fundamentally a big difference. Work to that strength and not be bound by the limitation of static worlds.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, GallopingTortoise said:

EVE has got the basic's correct but the general PVE that drives a big part of the economy (special drops, BP from rats, bounties and ore mining) is boring as hell. 

Seeing how the steady stream of parts needed to build T2/3 ships and parts in EVE is not a problem I'd say there is plenty of people who enjoy and engage in these activities. The success and growth of groups specializing in running high risk sites shows both that they work and that the communal purpose of the game and these sites works. this is something NQ has yet to comprehend and work towards. Hanging out with 10+ players on comms running these sites for hours is very much fun and engaging as well as quite lucrative for all involved. And be it PVP or PVE, seeing an entire fleet get wiped out because one person miscalculates is great cause for banter and a good laugh. 

 

I completely understand you may find PVE content (in EVE) boring. For me it beats hanging around a gate hoping for something juicy to come along (and yes often that juice is in fact an explorer) as it allows me to set my goals and mostly be in control of my activities as well as quite easily pay for my game time. DU makes a point of saying you can earn your keep in game but so far I'm not seeing how anyone wil be able to make that happen as I'd expect DAC to not go cheap in game.

 

 

Quote

If I remember well CCP hired professional economists to help with setting up the market and maintaining it, it does not look like it is done by NQ.

CCP has economists on the payroll and has has one or more for many, many years as it is crucial to their bottom line. they produce the monthly economy reports and do a lot of work behind the scenes. DU wants to be EVE with regards to the economy but NQ seem to think they can make that happen overnight relatively speaking and without any substantial faucets beyond mining. I'm sorry but it will take years for that to happen and yes, I absolutely think NQ should have an economist on hand.

CCP is also absolutely dedicated to protecting the EVE economy as the recent issue with releasing original blueprints for faction battleships as loot drops showed.  They not only removed those from the game, replacing them with the intended copies,  but also tracked and removed any copies made from the originals as well as reverted any trade contracts completed for them (as they should). And this is how you deal with and communicate about such things; We made a booboo, do not do X while we fix this and we will take Y action. Short, to the point, clear and no ifs or buts..

NQ would have removed the originals and left the copies made, allowing those that got to them before the error was corrected to benefit from it. It's how many of the big orgs in game got their wealth and many high tier elements early on..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

Yes, gamifying schematics would certainly be an improvement from a content perspective, giving us something else to do.  It would still do little to help with the economy however.  No game in existence has a functioning economy.  No, not even EVE, though it is better than most.  The first game that does create a functioning economy will quickly be abandoned because it not at all fun for a majority of the people.  This game is not even vaguely close to having anything approximating an economy. And should stop trying.

 

An economy requires multiple things that never exist in an MMO.  Lets look at industry, for example.  Someone grinds, buys a schematic.  Month later they buy another with the profit from using the first.  Month later they buy 2 more. Then 4, 8, 16....  Rinse and repeat and nine months later they have all the schematics and massive mega factories.  They will dominate the market until they get bored and stop playing.  All before the game is even released (and no wipe is planned).  So before the game is even released, future players are screwed.  This would never happen in the real world.  Why?  Expenses.  Risk.  Innovation.  Companies can go bankrupt.  The market is complex enough to accept innovation.  But in MMOs, power/wealth only goes in one direction.  MMO success is based solely on grind.  Time spent.  

 

Also, lets look at an economy.  What are 99.9% of the people participating in it?  Consumers/wage-slaves.   Lets look at the 'iPhone example'.  In the real world, sure people don't create their own from scratch they buy it in the market.  But lets look at that chain and see just how poorly it works for games.  You have dirt poor miners in 3rd world countries supplying the resources (as well as miners from other places) working in miserably and dangerous conditions to feed their families.  Don't want to play that in a video game.  You have the people who spend a month at sea moving the materials from various places in the world to China.  Not my idea of fun. You have the workers living in dorms in China doing the same repetitive task for 12+ hours per day for barely enough money to live on, at least until they (try) to kill themselves (companies literally put nets to catch them).  Nope, not paying a monthly subscription for that role.  Out of the 100's of thousands of people in the chain, there is less than 0.1% that don't have soul crushing tasks (CEOs, designers, etc). So less than 0.1% of people would actually get any gameplay value from it.  Yay.  Can't wait to have that in my game. Now lets look at the other half of the economy.  Consumers.

 

As a consumer, I just want my iPhone (or spaceship part).  So I go to a market and buy one.  All I care about is getting the item.  It doesn't matter if 10,000 players formed a massive supply and manufacturing chain to produce it, or a Dev simply spawned it into existence.  All I care about is getting that part so I can go about my day.  So what gameplay value are consumers getting from it?  None.  It is one of those things that makes for a good article in a gaming news blog, but is basically irrelevant to people actually playing the game.  (The only player driven markets that adds to a game are based upon creative resources.  Such as selling ship designs, scripts, custom hairstyles, etc.  Actual player created content, not digital items grinded into existence.)

 

No real economy will (or should) exist in a video game.  Only a highly gamified one.  All the parts of it should be at least mildly enjoyable, not feel like jobs.  You cannot expect people to spend money just to be cogs in a wheel with only a small percentage of people having access to the fun mechanics.

 

TLDR; The entire idea of creating an economy to force people to 'work together' is flawed.  What it does is restrict the already limited amount of game mechanics to people based upon their role in the economy. Aka, reduce the fun, and fun is the only economy that matters in a game.   Instead, people should take part in every game mechanic they find enjoyable, and not have to grind to gain access to it.  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Taziar said:

Yes, gamifying schematics would certainly be an improvement from a content perspective, giving us something else to do.  It would still do little to help with the economy however.  No game in existence has a functioning economy.  No, not even EVE, though it is better than most. 

 

The EVE economy is definitely a functional in-game economy. And "gamifying" schematics as I suggest will absolutely drive the economy as players will sell components for  research and invention through the markets or using contracts if and when these become available as wil those that create more efficient or higher tier schematics. In my idea only the T1 XS elements would be available directly through bots and even that could be gamified by releasing them into the game as rewards for challenges or events and that way allow NQ to manage the level of availability for these schematics.

 

The biggest problem I see here is that NQ is not thinking at this level as they have yet to manage to get through the basic game design and will be doing so for a longtime to come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2020 at 10:09 AM, Olmeca_Gold said:

People can say what they will about Eve, but it has well-functioning emergent markets. What makes Eve markets function though, isn't some huge level of initial money investment in order to make anything.

 

- Eve resources are way more diverse. It does not take the same base 25 resources to make everything.

- Resources are unevenly and diversely distributed. You commit entire playstyles on gathering one or two types. It takes significant effort to begin collecting moon goo (t2), doing reactions (t3 cruisers), doing PI (citadel and implant production).  You don't get to roam around the universe for 5 days and get everything you need to build everything you want doing the same exact thing (mining planets). Every resource comes with it's own know-how.

- Eve has many alternative chains of value generation. The only income track DU has is mining -> industry -> construct making. You can choose your place in this chain (eg you can be just a miner), but it's one single chain. Once a few people come together there is no reason to not to horizontally complete this chain (mine and build everything in-house), Eve has many chains. So one can be completely uninvolved with the ship production chain yet generate value to go to markets and buy ships. That's why people go to markets in Eve. They have ways of making ISK unrelated to the production chain.

 

If markets aren't functioning as NQ was expecting, the culprit is the feature incompleteness and lack of several deep chains of value generation. It's true that higher investment levels can be better for t4/t5 production, but getting everything behind huge investment walls isn't the answer for specialization and market activity. When the sole prerequisite is money, it just means making money with money is heavily buffed. Eventually rich people will return to their gigafactories and the rest will just starve.

 

EDIT: One thing I forgot. Well-functioning markets are grounded on traders. Traders (among many other roles such as organization managers) can't function without a market API. JC seems to be categorically opposed to APIs. That's a bad choice.

.  oops  someone necro'ed another one and I didn't notice.

Edited by Zeddrick
Necro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/8/2020 at 3:23 AM, le_souriceau said:

We typed our fingers to bones about this in endless "feedback" with alpha guys. Was ignored by NQ (if we exlclude mockery of "wrecks").

 

I honestly tempted to go to something that can be percieved as "devs bashing", but generaly current reality we play...  tells better story for everyone to judge themeselves without me going rage mode.

I spent hours, HOURS of my free time typing up responses to focus groups and the like for these guys.  And there are many who spent TONS more time than I did.  Most of it went ignored.  Had they only listened to some of our feedback we would have been in a better spot. 

 

The way they specifically asked for and then proceeded to ignore our suggestions was rather insulting.  They didn't even pretend to listen.  That's what put a sour taste in my mouth.  I know I'm not a "scientist"  but my time is just as valuable as anyone else's. I feel they had zero respect for that.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dhara said:

I spent hours, HOURS of my free time typing up responses to focus groups and the like for these guys.  And there are many who spent TONS more time than I did.  Most of it went ignored.  Had they only listened to some of our feedback we would have been in a better spot. 

 

The way they specifically asked for and then proceeded to ignore our suggestions was rather insulting.  They didn't even pretend to listen.  That's what put a sour taste in my mouth.  I know I'm not a "scientist"  but my time is just as valuable as anyone else's. I feel they had zero respect for that.

 

Yep, greatly pains me to this day. Overall, as I concluded for my self over research and latest news -- in terms of WHY this was like this...

 

I think despite all blablabla of super innovation, they kinda botched techical part of development very early on, to catasprophic levels of things not working for years, until practicaly 1st month of so called Beta start (something they indeed never admited "transperantly"). So, development of actual gameplay (things about we "feedbacked" in agony) suprisignly never was priority. They just wasted everyone's time and passion, doing some mocking pretending of listeing feedback (15 k posts in "ideas") -- and in practice just throwing together some hastly, low effort mix of (bad) parroting of Eve and (JC?) "civilization-building" fantasies in very little time they left from tech stugges.

 

While I maybe missing nuances (because again -- zero transperancy) but strongly believe this is DU general story until this day. With crowning achievment of 0.23.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...