Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
Solanarrr
Vasilkovsky Interstellar Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 20:11:00 -
[61] - Quote
Kurron wrote:CCP Bayesian wrote: High-sec at least seems to be on a similar trend, albeit with a much smaller jump in usage but what on earth happened to null-sec Combat Sites? We'd need to gather some more information to find out exactly but clearly people are much less interested in them now.
Please tell me that this is some sort of joke. Anyone who does any money making in null can tell you in a heartbeat why there's a crash in the number of ratters doing Hubs. You added tackling frigates to them. It isn't even the presence of tackling rats that is the problem here - the issue is that by adding small, fast, high resist rats, you've removed entire categories of ships from being able to run those anoms. And to add insult to injury, the promised sanctum/haven changes (fewer small ships, more battleships) didn't materialize, so there's no reason to shift to running them either! If you wanted to add the risk of being tackled by NPCs and then ganked, you should have added scramming cruisers - that way we could still use T3 BCs/Vindicators, we'd just have to be more careful. I'm completely baffled by the fact that CCP doesn't seem to be able to understand the simple direct results of PvE changes, while managing to have a decent grasp on PvP (as evidenced by tiericide).
No, it obviously makes a lot more sense to have frigates, cruisers, battlecruisers, and battleships all in one anomaly designed to be run by one person.
But yeah, it's painfully obvious that if they wanted to add more risk to these sites (and in a meaningful way), all they needed to do was add scramming to either the cruisers, BCs, or battleships. But nope, lets add frigates. I too have not run a single anomaly since the changes. |
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
78
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 21:06:00 -
[62] - Quote
I'd like to see graphs for hisec 4/10s: the number of players running them, the number of players who died to NPCs, and the number of players who died to other players or a combo of NPC/players.
I would think many more people are running them than before patch since they are easier to find for lower skilled pilots now. But prices suggest otherwise.
Since T3s were banned there are more flimsy ships running them, as well as lower skilled pilots, so I wouldn't be surprised to see an upswing in ship loss to NPCs. Ive seen a few player wrecks in sites, and have found sites that were started but then seemingly given up on.
PVP activity in the most sought after hisec site would just be plain interesting to see. There is definitely more criminal activity but I wonder how much ends up with a kill. |
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc. The Fourth District
221
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 21:18:00 -
[63] - Quote
I hope someone in CCP could make similar bog analysing results of 0.0 industry improvements in Odyssey.
I'm especially interested in how much of an increase, if any, we had in 0.0 mining, and was there any increase in number of .0. manufacturing slots being used, and by how much. Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows... |
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
664
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 22:28:00 -
[64] - Quote
Thanks for the exploration statistics CCP! But a few minor comments and questions.
You show one year worth of exploration being flat lined, then a spike when it is "improved". How does this spike compare to past "improvements"? In other words how much of the spike is due to something being new?
Since the "improvement" the trend for relic and data sites is downward. You could easily say this isn't indicative of future results due to the small sample size. But then why would you show results with a small sample size to begin with?
Hacking attempts is not indicative of people using the feature. As a matter of fact none of your graphs are, they just represent runs or attempts. The whole point of dumbing down exploration was to attract more people to it. Do you have any data to support that, or are the old explorers just taking advantage of you making it easier? This thread has so much content it may be 'Thread of the Year' and it is only January.
|
Lucas Kell
JSR1 AND GOLDEN GUARDIAN PRODUCTIONS SpaceMonkey's Alliance
151
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 23:00:00 -
[65] - Quote
Solanarrr wrote:Kurron wrote:CCP Bayesian wrote: High-sec at least seems to be on a similar trend, albeit with a much smaller jump in usage but what on earth happened to null-sec Combat Sites? We'd need to gather some more information to find out exactly but clearly people are much less interested in them now.
Please tell me that this is some sort of joke. Anyone who does any money making in null can tell you in a heartbeat why there's a crash in the number of ratters doing Hubs. You added tackling frigates to them. It isn't even the presence of tackling rats that is the problem here - the issue is that by adding small, fast, high resist rats, you've removed entire categories of ships from being able to run those anoms. And to add insult to injury, the promised sanctum/haven changes (fewer small ships, more battleships) didn't materialize, so there's no reason to shift to running them either! If you wanted to add the risk of being tackled by NPCs and then ganked, you should have added scramming cruisers - that way we could still use T3 BCs/Vindicators, we'd just have to be more careful. I'm completely baffled by the fact that CCP doesn't seem to be able to understand the simple direct results of PvE changes, while managing to have a decent grasp on PvP (as evidenced by tiericide). No, it obviously makes a lot more sense to have frigates, cruisers, battlecruisers, and battleships all in one anomaly designed to be run by one person. But yeah, it's painfully obvious that if they wanted to add more risk to these sites (and in a meaningful way), all they needed to do was add scramming to either the cruisers, BCs, or battleships. But nope, lets add frigates. I too have not run a single anomaly since the changes. The changes really haven't affected the difficulty all that much. Just you have to be a tiny bit more awake for some sites. I think the main reason for the dip is definitely the war. There are thousands of null sec players who used to rat a lot now fighting all day every day, and that's going to have an impact on the other activities they used to do. If they pulled out the null sec mining graph that probably dipped around the same time.
|
Traska Gannel
ROC Academy The ROC
14
|
Posted - 2013.06.25 23:47:00 -
[66] - Quote
Hi ...
Ok ... I must be missing something.
The blog cited the "Angel Forsaken Hub" as a 0.0 combat site.
... but it isn't.
It's an anomaly which has been available as a warpable site without using probes for years. All that you needed to do was hit the onboard scanner for a list of available anomalies.
In addition, it used to be one of the most profitable and safe anomalis because it only had battleships and battlecruiser rats ... which all spawned at a central point. It was an easy, safe, fast and efficient combat anomaly for making isk.
The patch changed the ship composition in the Angel Forsaken Hub by adding some scramming frigates ... and possibly made other changes in the ship composition (I haven't been in one in a while). There were also changes to sanctums and havens as far as I know also affecting their profitability ... thus some folks have likely migrated from Angel Forsaken Hubs to other anoms ... no mystery at all.
If you want to look at the impact on 0.0 scanned combat sites you need to look at completion rates for the DED 7/10, 8/10 and 9/10 complexes and not combat anomalies. |
S Byerley
The Manhattan Engineer District
37
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 00:01:00 -
[67] - Quote
No one is going to make a joke about Bayesian statistics? I've lost faith in this community. |
Spathe Ne Boirelle
Dead Space Continuum
4
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 00:35:00 -
[68] - Quote
I love how exploration works, its pretty clear that it was meant to be easier and faster to scan down a site. But I do have 1 problem or 1 question regarding the hacking sites which seems to be odd in nature.
Questions to the devs : When you successfully complate a hacking minigame and those mini cans are release was it intended to have a "BIG" random chance of loot gathering ?
Before the patch I remember when you hacked a container, you had some loot in your can and that was it. THere was no chance of getting like the current system. Just think about it. you get around 6-10 cans when you hack correctly. At best your cargo scanner on those scans works with a timer of 5 seconds. Given the fact you have to target all containers, scan it, look at the items. At the end it doesn't give you enough time to get the item you want.
Personally, I would love to get a list of items so I can choose what I want. Either because of what I need for production or just pure profit. This current system has way too much chance in it and I don't personally like that since the original one didn't incorporate any chance at all...except for the success cycle of hacking the container. |
Galphii
Clandestine Vector THE SPACE P0LICE
156
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 01:13:00 -
[69] - Quote
I would speculate that the amount of cans being lost in a site is due to people preferring to do them solo. You can't force people to work together if they don't want to. You need to use a carrot (added benefit), not a stick (miss out if you don't have more players). As it stands, an individual still gets the same amount of stuff whether or not the pilot has a friend in that site, as the friend isn't necessarily handing their stash over to the first pilot afterwards. X |
Zircon Dasher
284
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 01:17:00 -
[70] - Quote
Is it possible to add scale to all the graphs?
For example, total hacking attempts per day is expected to level off ~100K, but is that the line it hovers on now?The "Peak" line?
Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'. |
|
Johan Toralen
IIIJIIIITIIII
135
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 02:13:00 -
[71] - Quote
Hope the diving income gets adressed soon. Looks like you expect the number of explorers to stay higher then before Odyssey so i think what's needed is a much wider range of loot so the market doesn't get flooded with the same couple items from everyone. Or more jackpot items to set off the lower income from the regular loot. Tho i'm not so sure what it could be because i sorta expect everything to dive that will be put in these sites :/
|
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
2519
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 03:58:00 -
[72] - Quote
I would like a point or some strategy to the hacking mini-game. Buy a friggin' puzzle company or something CCP. This thing is too dumb for EvE. It should be hard.
|
Epsilon Knight
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 04:00:00 -
[73] - Quote
Johan Toralen wrote:Hope the diving income gets adressed soon. Looks like you expect the number of explorers to stay higher then before Odyssey so i think what's needed is a much wider range of loot so the market doesn't get flooded with the same couple items from everyone. Or more jackpot items to set off the lower income from the regular loot. Tho i'm not so sure what it could be because i sorta expect everything to dive that will be put in these sites :/
Something something free market. Prices are going to get hosed until people start saying "this isn't worth doing", or "this is barely worth doing." Then they will stabilize. You're pretty much right in whatever they put into these sites is going to drop in value, and any fix other than letting the player economy come up with the value for for the labor performed and risk taken is going to flop.
The only alternative might be expanding the hacking game so that arch V and hack V are required for some sites, or so that the sites with high value items are extremely difficult to probe down without high skills. Changing the time sink for becoming moderately profitable will stem the number of people who pursue the profession, and limit the item flood. More people will still train to do it, because probing and hacking is no longer brain-hemorrhaging-ly boring, but it'll shave off some of the mission-running interlopers who can't tack a month onto their skill time before cruise missiles V.
But then, limiting the exploration crowd is exactly what CCP doesn't want to do. You've seen their trailer for the expansion, right? All bets: get ready for new, permanent lower prices on salvage, blueprints, etc. |
ghosttr
Gespenster Kompanie Villore Accords
19
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 04:09:00 -
[74] - Quote
Epsilon Knight wrote:Johan Toralen wrote:Hope the diving income gets adressed soon. Looks like you expect the number of explorers to stay higher then before Odyssey so i think what's needed is a much wider range of loot so the market doesn't get flooded with the same couple items from everyone. Or more jackpot items to set off the lower income from the regular loot. Tho i'm not so sure what it could be because i sorta expect everything to dive that will be put in these sites :/
Something something free market. Prices are going to get hosed until people start saying "this isn't worth doing", or "this is barely worth doing." Then they will stabilize. You're pretty much right in whatever they put into these sites is going to drop in value, and any fix other than letting the player economy come up with the value for for the labor performed and risk taken is going to flop. The only alternative might be expanding the hacking game so that arch V and hack V are required for some sites, or so that the sites with high value items are extremely difficult to probe down without high skills. Changing the time sink for becoming moderately profitable will stem the number of people who pursue the profession, and limit the item flood. More people will still train to do it, because probing and hacking is no longer brain-hemorrhaging-ly boring, but it'll shave off some of the mission-running interlopers who can't tack a month onto their skill time before cruise missiles V. But then, limiting the exploration crowd is exactly what CCP doesn't want to do. You've seen their trailer for the expansion, right? All bets: get ready for new, permanent lower prices on salvage, blueprints, etc.
Its not the items that are the issue its the demand, demand was already relatively weak prior to odyssey.
CCP needs to create more demand for exploration related materials. Add bpc merging that uses some materials, shift datacore to supply from passive research agent farming, make data interfaces have finite amount of uses (so that people need to purchase more than one).
|
Ajunta Thor
Pwn 'N Play Nulli Secunda
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 04:10:00 -
[75] - Quote
CCP i have solved your problem for you :) Why has the amount of Angel Forsaken Hubs done dropped off since the expansion? Simple Null Sec is played owned space as you know and so generally the only people ratting in this space or specifically the sites in question take ships and fittings of a higher value then normal. This means mostly the people ratting those sites are the players of whatever alliance/coalition owns that region of space. Currently N3 owns a large part of Angel's Null Sec pre-expansion the majority of N3 was ratting it up which explains the pre-expansion site counts. There was times where in a specific region we had 4-6 systems with over 12k rat kills in 24h's according to dotland and a total of 10-12 if not more systems over 10k. Shortly after Odyssey N3 as all of eve knows deployed to help Test with the goons. Now in 24h's dotland shows not a single system over 12k rat kills and only 1 over 10k. So its not some failing in the game mechanics or a disinterest in this specific site but more like no one is really around to do them atm. I will say though that some of the changes to null sec ratting sites which made Hub's less profitable then havens according to the patch could account for a very small amount of the drop off but honestly most people dont even notice that yet. |
Jean-Pierre Boirelle
Dazed and Hazed Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 04:36:00 -
[76] - Quote
I have been trying out exploration since odyssey but I also did exploration 5 years ago when I dabbled in EVE as well.
The differences are stark CCP has made exploration feel like a real activity.
However I think the ideal of exploration and the reality of EVE are making it hard for newcommers to get into this.
Truth of the matter is that unless you have a partner or a fleet with you your survive ability is hard to gauge. I have gotten ganked doing a Exploration Combat site Escalation in low sec. I can't imagine how I would solo a data/relic site in low/null sec. I am a decent multitasker but I don't think simultaneously running the hacking mini game and d-scanning is my idea of a good time. Not to mention how in the old exploration you can hack and rat at the same time (numerous video guides pretty much say this is the only way to explore in low/null). Now you have to take down the rats before you can attempt a hack; and don't forget that d-scan!!!
Also I'm sorry but the toss in the air grab what you can thing at the end is silly; I feel like I lost most of the items; And why is the ability to "tractor" in items not affected by, I don't know, the number of tractor beams you have equipped? Very disappointing when I hacked a site ready with 3 tractor beams......
Finally I must say the hacking game is alot more enjoyable than I thought. There is a sense of strategy and luck that mixes well and I don't feel like I'm just clicking away until I reach the objective. I would make a recommendation for a future update that your virus should be configurable like every other fighting vehicle in the game. There should be the ability to load scripts and plugins and customize the virus. Likewise the hacking board should be made more complex and add more obstacles and opponents.
However, being that I cant see how to solo explore where the money is and high sec is pretty much getting farmed out I'm not sure if I can truly answer my own question which is can I just explore and make isk? So far the answer has been no; not alone at least. |
Hawke Nolen
SA-Brotherhood Recursive Error
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 06:18:00 -
[77] - Quote
How about providing statistics on how this impacted on market value of the loot derived from this new mechanic....... now that EVERYONE is doing it the market value of t2 salvage has depreciated to such an extent that you guys would have to look at ways of adding more valuable or faction loot to make up for the difference... One of your developers claimed that capsuleers would be getting the same amount of ISK value loot as before odyssey,,,, well that's no longer true is it?...
Simple fact, making it easier has not made it better........
Stop loot spews!! - It causes carpal tunnel syndrome!! - If you can open the can the contents are yours... simple effort and reward. Bring the rats back - in null sec at least as in WH space... it will create a better market by making it a niche profession again.
Crappy Hacking minigame is crappy |
Ze'ev Sinraali
Ataraxia Pharmacies
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 06:28:00 -
[78] - Quote
S Byerley wrote:No one is going to make a joke about Bayesian statistics? I've lost faith in this community.
Clearly you need to re-evaluate your priors. |
|
CCP Bayesian
897
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 08:37:00 -
[79] - Quote
Thanks for all the comments!
For those of you asking for statistics on other features that changed in Odyssey, I hope some will be along soon as other teams take a look at their specific areas of interest in more depth. EVE Software Engineer Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
|
CCP Bayesian
897
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 09:17:00 -
[80] - Quote
Nexus Day wrote:You show one year worth of exploration being flat lined, then a spike when it is "improved". How does this spike compare to past "improvements"? In other words how much of the spike is due to something being new?
Thanks for the excellent questions.
It's a fairly common trend across videogames for the new new to be extremely popular for a short period of time before declining to a stable population then declining further until death. How long that tail is depends on how good the game is. This landscape is changing a bit with the advent of alpha-funding and other similar models though.
On EVE a lot of changes that have predictable market effects will also get lots of speculator uptake as well. You can see this in the Hacking Attempts graph as the first week is full of activity which begins to tail off at a quite quick rate which rapidly begins to decrease with minor bumps for weekends. This is an expected trend as the players who still don't enjoy the feature and speculators leave to new pastures. I'm basically taking a bet on where the stable level will be, the 100,000 line is the one the graph is dancing above and below. The downward trend during the week also stopped for the first time today and we saw a slight uptick in attempts yesterday (which might just be due to the publicity this blog generated or it might just be noise).
Quote:Since the "improvement" the trend for relic and data sites is downward. You could easily say this isn't indicative of future results due to the small sample size. But then why would you show results with a small sample size to begin with?
Downward after, in some cases, a more than ten-fold increase in use. As above this is what we'd expect to see with any new feature addition or major change.
Quote:Hacking attempts is not indicative of people using the feature. As a matter of fact none of your graphs are, they just represent runs or attempts. The whole point of dumbing down exploration was to attract more people to it. Do you have any data to support that, or are the old explorers just taking advantage of you making it easier?
They definitely don't measure directly the number of people using the feature but they are definitely indicative of the number of people using it otherwise we wouldn't see an uptick at the weekends when we know more people are online. One thing that suggests that this is not just the old players exploiting an "easier system" is the scale of uptake.
This data collection and aggregation on a larger scale is quite new and as you reasonably point out this captures only at the character/user level. It says nothing about the subscriber level where people have multiple accounts. However characters are owned by users and users are subscribers so it should be possible to aggregate up to the subscriber level. This sort of data mining will be done by our Research and Statistics guys. EVE Software Engineer Team Prototyping Rocks |
|
|
Manfred Hideous
TOHOKU 9.0
24
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 09:39:00 -
[81] - Quote
Spathe Ne Boirelle wrote:I love how exploration works, its pretty clear that it was meant to be easier and faster to scan down a site. But I do have 1 problem or 1 question regarding the hacking sites which seems to be odd in nature.
Questions to the devs : When you successfully complate a hacking minigame and those mini cans are release was it intended to have a "BIG" random chance of loot gathering ?
Before the patch I remember when you hacked a container, you had some loot in your can and that was it. THere was no chance of getting like the current system. Just think about it. you get around 6-10 cans when you hack correctly. At best your cargo scanner on those scans works with a timer of 5 seconds. Given the fact you have to target all containers, scan it, look at the items. At the end it doesn't give you enough time to get the item you want.
Personally, I would love to get a list of items so I can choose what I want. Either because of what I need for production or just pure profit. This current system has way too much chance in it and I don't personally like that since the original one didn't incorporate any chance at all...except for the success cycle of hacking the container.
You're doing it wrong. |
I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
530
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 10:52:00 -
[82] - Quote
I've lost the urge to do exploration since Odyssey. I find it too tedious for the possible rewards, playing the mini-game to get a chance at something good, which usually fails to happen much of the time. Definitely not worth the time and trouble now. Like a lot of stuff that is getting noobed down. EVE is getting boring. *removed inappropriate signature* - CCP Eterne |
Adare Darmazaf
City Limits
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 11:21:00 -
[83] - Quote
The new way of exploration for data and relic sites: a drama.
Keep doing this CCP and you will loose a lot of players to upcoming games who might gonne compete with EVE.
Monopolists tend to fall asleep.
|
Tzu Tran
Blood And Profit Inc
0
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 11:23:00 -
[84] - Quote
Gotta agree with others, the loot scattering thing is just horrible. I don't mind the mini-game thing much, but only getting a little carbon and some data sheets when my scanner said there was some great **** in the container? Balls. Very much balls. Explo isn't worth my time. |
Titan Ace
United Nomadic Navy Consortium Collective
3
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 11:34:00 -
[85] - Quote
Quote: what on earth happened to null-sec Combat Sites? I just wonder, if it might have something to do with a major war going on out there which just happens to have kicked into high gear around the time of the Odyssey release. Maybe you should create a number cruncher that can tell what is actually going on in the game. (I would have thought a quick look at recent kill logs mght give a hint but yeah CCP do like statistics, as long as they show what CCP want them to show)
NB; Nulsec alliances typically don't approve of their members ratting while at war (doesn't make for good fleet participation when half your alliance is off ratting)
|
Grace Ishukone
Ishukone Advanced Research
24
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 11:35:00 -
[86] - Quote
Sofia Wolf wrote:I hope someone in CCP could make similar bog analysing results of 0.0 industry improvements in Odyssey.
I'm especially interested in how much of an increase, if any, we had in 0.0 mining, and was there any increase in number of .0. manufacturing slots being used, and by how much.
Yup.
Come on CCP, give us the numbers.
Anecdotally, Odyssey has been great for freeing up World of Warcraft and BF3 play time. |
JD No7
Malevolent Intentions Ineluctable.
65
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 11:36:00 -
[87] - Quote
Tzu Tran wrote:Gotta agree with others, the loot scattering thing is just horrible. I don't mind the mini-game thing much, but only getting a little carbon and some data sheets when my scanner said there was some great **** in the container? Balls. Very much balls. Explo isn't worth my time.
You are really doing it wrong. You can 100% guarantee getting the good stuff. And that's solo.
http://neural-boost.com/minicontainer-loot-distribution |
Samuel Wess
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
16
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 11:37:00 -
[88] - Quote
The statistics are not good, you have to compare number of magnetometric sites present in space before the patch with the number present now. Before the patch that number was limited and respawn very slow, we had to fight over them and was fun. Now everybody just ignores them due to being spammed every hour, the mechanics is bad, no challenge present and not fueling the pvp at all. In my area of space only thing left now are DED plexes, I am waiting on a nerf on that too soon and than can just leave :)
Edit: and if you see a high number of sites explored it is just cause we ignore a few pilots in covops that run them all day long, because chasing covops is not fun at all and the loot is bad. |
Prop Wash
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
79
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 11:52:00 -
[89] - Quote
Dear CCP guy,
Don't mistake correlation for causation. The Sparking Transmitter was a particularly bad example for you to pick and here's why.
The pre-patch Sparking Transmitter was ten kinds of a mess. First off, the loot was awful. Just awful. A couple datacores, maybe some parts to make data interfaces. So it wasn't worth the time, but even if you did give it a try, the site itself was particularly painful for a few reasons. It was clustered around an eye-rending sort of nova thing, ensuring that you could barely look at your screen, and it had a whole bunch of structures littered around and so it was very easy to get stuck on one. This was a bad thing, because the site itself was programmed to spawn an overly large amount of elite guristas frigates and cruisers, and it would drop them right on top of you, and so if you got stuck on a structure you'd be in some very big trouble. As a point of reference, my Tengu has never been as close to blowing up as it was doing one of these sites (due mainly to the mix of elite webbing frigs, ECM cruisers and elites doing thermal damage). You couldn't take care of the site from a distance, because the spawns would only happen once you'd accessed a container. You had to do it in a tanked ship, which since it was Guristas meant you had to do it in a kin/therm tank, which is the shields special, but using a shield tank meant you had only one or two slots remaining for a hacking module, and since no tanking ship has a hacking bonus (until Odyssey) meant you were sitting on each individual container for minutes at a time waiting for it to open. When it did, you could loot your 3m worth of datacores.
So that was long, but the point was that Sparking Transmitters were so bad pre-patch that they weren't worth running. So to compare your new Odyssey sites to those old hacking sites simply means that you now have a site worth running, rather than a site that is well-designed or well-balanced. For the record, there's a long way to go with data and relic sites. The idea of the spew container could use some work, but there's also a lot of work to be done with loot tables. Do you know why people like relic sites more? It's because t2 salvage is valuable. Hacking isn't as popular because it isn't as valuable, because there's really nobody left in EVE that wants a data interface that does not already own one. You kindly gave us cans with hundreds of m3s worth of data interface parts, and I promptly jettison those parts because they aren't even valuable enough to ship back to Jita. Nobody wants rigging skillbooks, or racial encryption methods skillbooks, and they're worth about as much room in my cargohold as the datasheets that nominally are the "gag gifts" from the data mini-containers.
I don't mind the new hacking minigame. This is an MMORPG, and any money-making activity in an MMO necessarily has to involve a certain amount of tedium. As far as tedium goes, the minigame compares favorably to "shooting red crosses" and "shooting rocks" and has a lot less swing than combat sites, where you can go for hours and have nothing to show but tags and ammo.
So this was an extreme effortpost but the tl;dr is this: Congratulations CCP on upgrading data and relic sites from "non-functional" to "somewhat worth the time." Don't look at rising numbers and mistake it for a compliment. Oh, and in terms of practical suggestions - shorten the amount of time it takes to click on a node. Currently the interface restricts those of us who know what we're doing from going at a comfortable speed because you have to wait the several seconds it takes to reveal what was underneath (and therefore blow through powerups). We're meant to be fighting the game, not the interface.
|
Tzu Tran
Blood And Profit Inc
1
|
Posted - 2013.06.26 12:13:00 -
[90] - Quote
JD No7 wrote:Tzu Tran wrote:Gotta agree with others, the loot scattering thing is just horrible. I don't mind the mini-game thing much, but only getting a little carbon and some data sheets when my scanner said there was some great **** in the container? Balls. Very much balls. Explo isn't worth my time. You are really doing it wrong. You can 100% guarantee getting the good stuff. And that's solo. http://neural-boost.com/minicontainer-loot-distribution
Thanks for the link! Hopefully it helps. Haha.
But still, y'know.... It almost seems like the scattering should happen if the hack fails, and the container explodes. Then you get to play the clicking game. Successful hack? Just give me the stuff, dangit! |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |