Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
JitaGodess
500 Percent Markup Triumvirate.
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 16:17:49 -
[1] - Quote
Been running relic sites on my alt, in the area I usually do, only the relic sites I am finding are dropping terrible loot, if any at all. Prob done 20 sites so far, and hardly anything of value is dropping, at least in comparison to last week. Been like this for a couple of days now.
Did I miss a dev blog, or anyone else noticing the same thing?
In sansha null btw, hunting those intact armor plates! |
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
566
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 16:53:22 -
[2] - Quote
Once again, since this always seems to come up once in while, no. It's luck based, not mechanics based. Whether the first ten sites you happen to run all have the best possible loot drops you've ever even heard of or whether the next 100 sites drops crap for loot is not evidence of a stealth nerf to anoms and sigs. For the last damn time, CCP is not secretly working for the Soviets to hurt your exploration income. No, there is no Dev blog on how CCP will be nerfing said exploration income.
(pauses briefly before hitting "Post") You know what, **** it! Yeah, CCP secretly is working for the Soviets to nerf your income. In fact, they just hate you in particular. All the good loot's gone, and you're on to them. I wouldn't be surprised if they send assassins to your door to remove you and others who are equally suspicious of the intents.
"Tomahawks?"
"----in' A, right?"
"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."
"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
|
JitaGodess
500 Percent Markup Triumvirate.
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 16:56:53 -
[3] - Quote
Sobaan Tali wrote:Once again, since this always seems to come up once in while, no. It's luck based, not mechanics based. Whether the first ten sites you happen to run all have the best possible loot drops you've ever even heard of or whether the next 100 sites drops crap for loot is not evidence of a stealth nerf to anoms and sigs. For the last damn time, CCP is not secretly working for the Soviets to hurt your exploration income. No, there is no Dev blog on how CCP will be nerfing said exploration income.
(pauses briefly before hitting "Post") You know what, **** it! Yeah, CCP secretly is working for the Soviets to nerf your income. In fact, they just hate you in particular. All the good loot's gone, and you're on to them. I wouldn't be surprised if they send assassins to your door to remove you and others who are equally suspicious of the intents.
Wow mate, think you need to take a moment and chill out.
I understand the mechanics of exploration, as I have been playing since 2006. I simply wondered if anyone else had experiences similar to mine, as in all the time I have been involved in explo, I don't recall a time when I received so little in loot.
But thank you kindly, for your response.
Jita Godess |
Sporx Utensil
Colossus Enterprises
12
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 17:16:25 -
[4] - Quote
so many forum warriors on here that just sh*t on every post they see. thousandsd upon thousands of keyboard diahreah posts from these absurd autists. |
Sobaan Tali
Caldari Quick Reaction Force
566
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 17:52:24 -
[5] - Quote
No offense, but it's a pet peeve of mine to see people ask the same damn thing over and over and have been given the same answer over and over when there is a search function, so don't take it personally. I'd be lying if I were to claim that that didn't sound harsher than intended.
20 sites is hardly a large enough number of "failures", if you will, to suspect arbitrary changes to loot rarity, though there is nothing stopping CCP from doing that admittedly. Consider this though; maybe this month, you'll find nothing at all of value from the best sites that exist in Eve, even though you've had the best loot drops from all of last year till now, and then suddenly next month hit jackpot again from the very first site you hit. It's why faction frequency crystals burn out at exactly 4000 rounds, but T2 burns out somewhere around 1000. Because the T2 crystals have a 10% Volatility Rating, it acts as a chance based system, not a guaranty like it is for faction crystals at 100%. Oddly, I think some people just instinctively draw the conclusion that "1 in 10" means that if the first 9 attempts yield nothing, the next one absolutely must.
Truth is, that's not how chance works, since no one result has any effect on another. I don't know how Eve is coded to simulate odds, having the results of one site play into the results of another would be more work and coding I would think and kind of defeats the point of making it random in the first place. I'm not saying CCP will never nerf loot (Lord knows they've proven that before), but striking bad odds are hardly believable evidence. Trouble with random is that it is in fact random. Go figure.
"Tomahawks?"
"----in' A, right?"
"Trouble is, those things cost like a million and a half each."
"----, you pay me half that and I'll hump in some c4 and blow the ---- out of it my own damn self."
|
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
1352
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 17:52:26 -
[6] - Quote
came in expecting some guy who had done insignificant sample of sites complaining about drop rates
was not disappointed. |
JitaGodess
500 Percent Markup Triumvirate.
4
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 18:02:09 -
[7] - Quote
1st post and prob last in mission and complex.
A lot more trolls, and hostility than expected, think ill warp myself back over to market discussion and stay there.
Toodles o/ |
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
1352
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 18:32:37 -
[8] - Quote
it's not hostility, it's gentle mocking to make you realise your own mistake. |
Shiloh Templeton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
380
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 19:38:33 -
[9] - Quote
JitaGodess wrote:1st post and prob last in mission and complex.
A lot more trolls, and hostility than expected, think ill warp myself back over to market discussion and stay there.
Toodles o/ No need to take it personal, "random is random" is the standard answer around here. Every once in a while someone will post monthly stats that present some hard data that people will stop to consider.
Does CCP really announce every time they make a change to the drop tables or frequency of occurrence? It seems to me like they would make adjustments to keep values in the range they want them without causing an uproar.
|
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
61
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 20:48:24 -
[10] - Quote
Welcome to random is random.
Once upon a time I ran 51 sites in a row with only OPEs as a reward. Once upon another time I ran 3 dinky highsec sites for kicks.. 3 pith adaptives and a faction bpc.
Now my time in fantasy land is over.. back to fantasy spacesheets in spreadships.
|
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
1489
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 22:42:29 -
[11] - Quote
or someone came through with a cargo scanner took all the good loot and left the bad loot to rot in the site till someone else showed up.
@ChainsawPlankto
|
Vivien Meally
Des-Meisters-Lakaien Phoenix Company Alliance
119
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 23:03:33 -
[12] - Quote
In Drone Space we dont even have Relic Sites :( |
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
51538
|
Posted - 2015.08.27 23:57:35 -
[13] - Quote
JitaGodess wrote:1st post and prob last in mission and complex.
A lot more trolls, and hostility than expected, think ill warp myself back over to market discussion and stay there.
Toodles o/ Don't judge this sub-forum on a couple of bad replies, most people here are usually helpful.
As for your question, I'm gonna say yes. Over the years I've watched loot drops diminish on a regular basis which tells me CCP is constantly messing with them. No they won't post about it since it'll create a massive uproar. Besides that, CCP is pretty much covered due to players who constantly keep spouting the old crap answer of RNG. Basically it's their go-to answer without having to provide any actual proof.
As to why CCP would do that, because they want to encourage and foster a hostile environment. They reduce the loot drops so you'll have to do more sites thus making yourself more of a target for PvP encounters.
Yeah, that's just my opinion.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
Brown Pathfinder
Black Spot on Parchment
6
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 10:55:19 -
[14] - Quote
Random is random but also CCP might have listened to players complaining their loot value is down on the market and then perhaps made some of the nicer drops more rare. Maybe I need more tinfoil? |
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
62
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 12:20:41 -
[15] - Quote
CCP has exactly 3 ways to alter a cans drops. They can alter what does or does not drop. They can alter how often something drops. They can alter the total volume of the cans generated drops.
Changing any of these will not have an instant effect on the market. The supply alteration has to migrate to markets and drive the price up/down.
It would be difficult for them to make more then low percentage changes to these numbers without people noticing. and yes.. we are NERDS enough to notice something like this on a statistical average. |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
714
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 13:46:30 -
[16] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:or someone came through with a cargo scanner took all the good loot and left the bad loot to rot in the site till someone else showed up.
^^THIS^^ |
Paranoid Loyd
6792
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 15:42:38 -
[17] - Quote
Nafensoriel wrote:we are NERDS enough to notice something like this on a statistical average. A real nerd would know 20 sites is not sufficient to have a reliable statistical average.
"Gankers are just other players, not supernatural monsters who will get you if you don't follow some arbitrary superstition. Haul responsibly and without irrational fear." Masao Kurata
Fix the Prospect!
|
Johnathan Coffey
Niforce Triggers
35
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 16:13:12 -
[18] - Quote
DeMichael Crimson wrote:JitaGodess wrote:1st post and prob last in mission and complex.
A lot more trolls, and hostility than expected, think ill warp myself back over to market discussion and stay there.
Toodles o/ Don't judge this sub-forum on a couple of bad replies, most people here are usually helpful. As for your question, I'm gonna say yes. Over the years I've watched loot drops diminish on a regular basis which tells me CCP is constantly messing with them. No they won't post about it since it'll create a massive uproar. Besides that, CCP is pretty much covered due to players who constantly keep spouting the old crap answer of RNG. Basically it's their go-to answer without having to provide any actual proof. As to why CCP would do that, because they want to encourage and foster a hostile environment. They reduce the loot drops so you'll have to do more sites thus making yourself more of a target for PvP encounters. Yeah, that's just my opinion. DMC There is a serious flaw in your justification. Why would reduced loot drops lead to more sites run? If anything, you would expect the number of explorers to go down since they get discouraged by bad luck. Then again, a decline in the amount of explorers would lead to an increase in the prices of exploration loot, which in turn would encourage more exploration. With that we have established that as long as there is valuable exploration loot, the number of explorers is self-regulating and reducing the loot amount would not encourage and foster a hostile environment in any way.
First rule of EVE UI: right click EVERYTHING.
|
Nafensoriel
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
62
|
Posted - 2015.08.28 18:15:57 -
[19] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:Nafensoriel wrote:we are NERDS enough to notice something like this on a statistical average. A real nerd would know 20 sites is not sufficient to have a reliable statistical average. Oh hell yes. But have you seen ze germans? Crazy nutballs will pull a thousand data points out of somewhere suddenly.
|
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University Minmatar Republic
51550
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 00:05:48 -
[20] - Quote
Johnathan Coffey wrote:DeMichael Crimson wrote:JitaGodess wrote:1st post and prob last in mission and complex.
A lot more trolls, and hostility than expected, think ill warp myself back over to market discussion and stay there.
Toodles o/ Don't judge this sub-forum on a couple of bad replies, most people here are usually helpful. As for your question, I'm gonna say yes. Over the years I've watched loot drops diminish on a regular basis which tells me CCP is constantly messing with them. No they won't post about it since it'll create a massive uproar. Besides that, CCP is pretty much covered due to players who constantly keep spouting the old crap answer of RNG. Basically it's their go-to answer without having to provide any actual proof. As to why CCP would do that, because they want to encourage and foster a hostile environment. They reduce the loot drops so you'll have to do more sites thus making yourself more of a target for PvP encounters. Yeah, that's just my opinion. DMC There is a serious flaw in your justification. Why would reduced loot drops lead to more sites run? If anything, you would expect the number of explorers to go down since they get discouraged by bad luck. Then again, a decline in the amount of explorers would lead to an increase in the prices of exploration loot, which in turn would encourage more exploration. With that we have established that as long as there is valuable exploration loot, the number of explorers is self-regulating and reducing the loot amount would not encourage and foster a hostile environment in any way. Why would reduced loot drops lead to more sites run? It's called status quo.
A decline in amount of explorers doesn't equate into an increase of price for exploration loot. A reduction of loot supply is what increases the price.
When loot drops are reduced, explorers must search longer in order to gain their usual amount of ISK per play session. Scarcity of loot combined with a lot of competition fosters and encourages a hostile environment.
More and more players are doing exploration everyday. Whenever they ask about loot drops, they're constantly told 'Do more sites, RNG will get better'. Most will not give up right away. Now there's an overabundance of competition searching for scarce loot, all of them trying to make their status quo / ISK value.
That alone fosters and encourages a hostile environment just between explorers. Now add in site invaders, thief's, gankers, etc and you definitely have a hostile environment.
DMC
'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
|
|
Kitty Bear
Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club
1525
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 11:43:19 -
[21] - Quote
http://dilbert.com/strip/2001-10-25
|
Shiloh Templeton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
383
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 17:43:53 -
[22] - Quote
Paranoid Loyd wrote:A real nerd would know 20 sites is not sufficient to have a reliable statistical average.
For those who want to refresh their statistics class: Sample Size Calculator
|
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1327
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 13:21:11 -
[23] - Quote
Looking at the prices of Intact Armor Plates ... still around 4M, so I would say nothing has changed.
I'm my own NPC alt.
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
718
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 16:26:40 -
[24] - Quote
Seriously, Chainsaw Plankton explained it perfectly; but I'll recap.
Some players just go into the relic and data sites, use a cargo scanner to identify the good loot, loot only that can, then move on to the next site. Thereby leaving the next person to come along and get the crap loot. |
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
1360
|
Posted - 2015.08.30 21:42:18 -
[25] - Quote
that's if you notice any cans hacked already |
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
720
|
Posted - 2015.08.31 13:22:21 -
[26] - Quote
Tsukino Stareine wrote:that's if you notice any cans hacked already
That's if they take everything from a can. Lot of people scan every can with a cargo scanner, go to the can with the most expensive loot, hack it, take only the expensive loot and leave the rest.
The next person will not be able to tell a can has been hacked if someone leaves something in it. |
Shiloh Templeton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
386
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 14:29:54 -
[27] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:The next person will not be able to tell a can has been hacked if someone leaves something in it. Is this true? I thought cans which have been hacked disappeared within 5 minutes whether you take anything or not.
Also, this topic came up about 6 months ago and it was proven that relic/data sites despawn within 1 hour after a can has been hacked even if you stayed in the site cloaked.
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
722
|
Posted - 2015.09.01 14:47:18 -
[28] - Quote
Shiloh Templeton wrote:Estella Osoka wrote:The next person will not be able to tell a can has been hacked if someone leaves something in it. Is this true? I thought cans which have been hacked disappeared within 5 minutes whether you take anything or not. Also, this topic came up about 6 months ago and it was proven that relic/data sites despawn within 1 hour after a can has been hacked even if you stayed in the site cloaked.
That hasn't been my experience. I've hacked cans before, only took what I wanted, came back later thinking it was a new site, but it was the same one. |
Shiloh Templeton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
387
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 03:09:07 -
[29] - Quote
Estella Osoka wrote:That hasn't been my experience. I've hacked cans before, only took what I wanted, came back later thinking it was a new site, but it was the same one. I used to think the same thing until this thread. You can test it yourself in case something has changed.
I keep a spreadsheet of the systems I explore so I don't have to rescan sites I've scanned before. I use "copy all" shortcut key to minimize the typing.
|
Estella Osoka
Perkone Caldari State
725
|
Posted - 2015.09.03 13:24:41 -
[30] - Quote
I don't do spreadsheets. This is a game, not work. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |