Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 79 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Onjine Anekuro
Ichura Survey Service
4
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:20:27 -
[2041] - Quote
I wonder how much even the original changes would impact the problem here. If you reduce carrier damage by 20%, and assuming that translates to a net loss of 10% in bounty income factoring in travel time, etc., it would go from 2.3T to 2.07 for Supercarriers and 2.6T to 2.34T for Carriers.
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6644
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:20:44 -
[2042] - Quote
Eric Lemmonte wrote:I like how we all are punished because of goons' unchallenged ratting.
Top 10 regions for bounties.
Delve8.76918E+1212.14% Deklein4.46455E+126.18% Branch3.11909E+124.32% Cobalt Edge2.96567E+124.11% Outer Passage2.66506E+123.69% Querious2.6635E+123.69% Feythabolis2.60413E+123.61% Period Basis2.46879E+123.42% Providence2.45647E+123.40% Esoteria2.37196E+123.28%
Yes, because 44 trillion ISK entering the economy would not have been a problem at all.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6644
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:23:32 -
[2043] - Quote
Mossyblog Barnes wrote:@CCP Larrikin,
I can see you're stating to take a long term view and like all economies you pull the leaver that shudders the most vs one big leaver that fixes all. However, taking the temperature of Delve and declaring all of Eve a risk is where the logic falls short. Cumualtive sure the data trends upwards but the rate of logins trend downwards and i'd wager the kill/death ratio(s) also have a different story (haven't downloaded the entirity of the data set as yet).
Capping the main sources of ISK will slow total wealth and achieve the goal you're attempting to do in terms of reduce the wealth overall, however you lose accounts as a result and / or the attractors to new customer acquisition also takes a hit.
The trade off is where all of this simply falls short. CCP takes away but what does it provide in return? how does this wealth get redirected?
Why is Delve so high?
The duking of stats serves no purpose but to fuel further negativity. Until you treat the root cause all you're doing is essentially reminding players that the games "rules" are always subject to change which in turn also generates further anxiety about adoption.
Imagine if i kept changing the SDK/Frameworks languages you use to build the game?
Inflation destroys wealth on the whole, it does not create it.
And even if ratting in Delve was completely and totally stopped by CCP there would still be too much ISK entering the economy. This is a little bit too much, this a huge ginormous amount of too much ISK entering the economy.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
15
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:33:24 -
[2044] - Quote
Commander Spurty wrote:Why haven't you used your data to decide:
"We are placing a cap on CONCORD bounties per Region! If you wish to go over X ISK, you need to invade your neighbors"
Faster the super pilots deplete the ISK bucket for their region, the faster they have to uproot and move.
This idea is actually the best, since it's possible certain alliances are using their regions much more than others. I'd rather see this happen, than buffs to the actual rats. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
4025
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:37:32 -
[2045] - Quote
Jang Taredi wrote:
This idea is actually the best, since it's possible certain alliances are using their regions much more than others. I'd rather see this happen, than buffs to the actual rats.
See last page for my reply on why it's actually a terrible idea, and both doesn't work and harms the wrong people. |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6645
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:43:21 -
[2046] - Quote
Mossyblog Barnes wrote:Cismet wrote:Mossyblog Barnes wrote:*sigh*
Can you please hire a someone who understands statistical analysis.
Taking a "snapshot" from 5 days in "June" is like looking at your bank account during St Paddys day and declaring you have a years worth of drinking behaviour.
Qualitative Analysis. Please please get a book on this and come back to us with some concrete evidence that doesn't orbit Delve and Goons. Actually, 5 days would be a fine sample to use given the number of people playing during the period. It would be over 150k people in the sample given an average 35k online in any given day, likely more over a timezone rolling period. The sample size is more than adequate to be representative within a single-digit margin of error with ease. More data would be nice, but ultimately, it'll only likely be a few percent off in either direction. This implies the data has stability and equates to a consistent median behaviour... .. which...we all can surely see is not the case?
We can see this because....?
And actually PCU is an instantaneous measure, the actual number of players who have logged in during a given day would be larger than the peak PCU number. For example, to see this, imagine we have just 2 hours and in hour 1 30,000 players log in. In hour 2 15,000 players log in. What is the number of unique players who logged in? A number between 30,000 and 45,000 (including the end points).
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
208
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:44:20 -
[2047] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Mossyblog Barnes wrote:@CCP Larrikin,
I can see you're stating to take a long term view and like all economies you pull the leaver that shudders the most vs one big leaver that fixes all. However, taking the temperature of Delve and declaring all of Eve a risk is where the logic falls short. Cumualtive sure the data trends upwards but the rate of logins trend downwards and i'd wager the kill/death ratio(s) also have a different story (haven't downloaded the entirity of the data set as yet).
Capping the main sources of ISK will slow total wealth and achieve the goal you're attempting to do in terms of reduce the wealth overall, however you lose accounts as a result and / or the attractors to new customer acquisition also takes a hit.
The trade off is where all of this simply falls short. CCP takes away but what does it provide in return? how does this wealth get redirected?
Why is Delve so high?
The duking of stats serves no purpose but to fuel further negativity. Until you treat the root cause all you're doing is essentially reminding players that the games "rules" are always subject to change which in turn also generates further anxiety about adoption.
Imagine if i kept changing the SDK/Frameworks languages you use to build the game? Inflation destroys wealth on the whole, it does not create it. And even if ratting in Delve was completely and totally stopped by CCP there would still be too much ISK entering the economy. This is a little bit too much, this a huge ginormous amount of too much ISK entering the economy. In this case where 2 regions are creating the inflation, it means that while they suffer a minor amount from the inflation, the rest of the game suffers a lot more.
You know business as usual in EvE.
The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.
After all we are not just players, we are customers.
Time for the CSM to be disbanded.
|
Commander Cain
Trojan Legion Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:46:14 -
[2048] - Quote
102 pages with 20 posts per page. Let's round that to 2000 of your paying customers say this is a terrible idea. Why do you even post stuff like this. You don't listen to what your players want. CCP is always looking for a easy way out. Why do we have a CSM? If these changes are being approved by these people CSM elections need to be changed too. But that's a different day
It almost seems like you want to weed out older generations of your customers. Who are the most loyal. New players coming in on alpha accounts don't know how we are screwing over our players who over months, years and on yeah A DECADE. They are still dreaming a about capitals and making isk. It won't be until they spend hundreads of dollars and subscriptions and plex will they learn that everything they waited and paid for will be neutered.
Don't do this. Fix high sec. stop picking on the players who have devoted the most time and money to your business. |
Shiloh Templeton
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
640
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:54:18 -
[2049] - Quote
This reminds me of articles in the past that suggested making things more lucrative for carebears would create more opportunities for hunters.
So instead of trying to solve the problem with fixes that try to get people to quit playing the game, how about fixes that make it easier to gank the super PVE'rs?
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6648
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:58:43 -
[2050] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mossyblog Barnes wrote:@CCP Larrikin,
I can see you're stating to take a long term view and like all economies you pull the leaver that shudders the most vs one big leaver that fixes all. However, taking the temperature of Delve and declaring all of Eve a risk is where the logic falls short. Cumualtive sure the data trends upwards but the rate of logins trend downwards and i'd wager the kill/death ratio(s) also have a different story (haven't downloaded the entirity of the data set as yet).
Capping the main sources of ISK will slow total wealth and achieve the goal you're attempting to do in terms of reduce the wealth overall, however you lose accounts as a result and / or the attractors to new customer acquisition also takes a hit.
The trade off is where all of this simply falls short. CCP takes away but what does it provide in return? how does this wealth get redirected?
Why is Delve so high?
The duking of stats serves no purpose but to fuel further negativity. Until you treat the root cause all you're doing is essentially reminding players that the games "rules" are always subject to change which in turn also generates further anxiety about adoption.
Imagine if i kept changing the SDK/Frameworks languages you use to build the game? Inflation destroys wealth on the whole, it does not create it. And even if ratting in Delve was completely and totally stopped by CCP there would still be too much ISK entering the economy. This is a little bit too much, this a huge ginormous amount of too much ISK entering the economy. In this case where 2 regions are creating the inflation, it means that while they suffer a minor amount from the inflation, the rest of the game suffers a lot more. You know business as usual in EvE.
It isn't two regions either.
Look, on average the money supply grew at around 7 billion ISK/month. In May it grew 53 trillion. Even if you took out Deklein and Delve you'd still have some over 500% above average.
This is not 2 regions. It is a systemic problem.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6648
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 05:05:01 -
[2051] - Quote
Shiloh Templeton wrote:This reminds me of articles in the past that suggested making things more lucrative for carebears would create more opportunities for hunters.
So instead of trying to solve the problem with fixes that try to get people to quit playing the game, how about fixes that make it easier to gank the super PVE'rs?
You mean like when they first introduced Dominion Sov with anomalies and saw the money supply start to increase dramatically and had to nerf anomalies? Like that?
Yeah, that didn't work to well did it?
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Mossyblog Barnes
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
31
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 05:15:11 -
[2052] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:[quote=Mossyblog Barnes][quote=Cismet][quote=Mossyblog Barnes]*sigh*
And actually PCU is an instantaneous measure, the actual number of players who have logged in during a given day would be larger than the peak PCU number. For example, to see this, imagine we have just 2 hours and in hour 1 30,000 players log in. In hour 2 15,000 players log in. What is the number of unique players who logged in? A number between 30,000 and 45,000 (including the end points).
I don't disagree, however when you are game it comes down to server ticks as a unit of measurement. Moreover when you play you have a range in hours of your interaction with the game universe. Let's say you play avg 3 hours a day and they were between 4am to 10am most weekdays. Now obviously your gaming experience is going to differ from those in USTZ during peak periods of use, therefore your overall chances of death are lower. This in turn is prime wealth making timezone but on the otherhand its likely the hardest to get a round of epic ship loss/battles.
So Logins Per Hour matter, as you have to work on the differences of peak player time zones vs offpeak whilst also taking into account regional interaction(s).
If n% of the population on that time are in Delve fighting you guys, and y% of the people fighting are from Branch, then who's backfilling their interactions in surrounding areas? ..who imposes friction to their rating/mining farming lines?
More players would increase the chances of death not lesson but would also decrease wealth given harassments in game for pvp are up, death is up and wealth is lowered. |
EisernesTaipei
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 05:15:16 -
[2053] - Quote
The primary goal should be like long-term economic stability. Not just reducing combat power of capitals. If those big toys becoming useless strategy junk I believe nobody will build it afterward.
I suggest CCP to build a isk recycle mechanism.
For example to implant investment system which could be used on Planet Interaction system.
First off, investments can be only made in any planets that is marked "Allied", or in planet that are territory of the investor's nation.
Second, Investments reveal upgrades like local system start to support new clothes and some specific items.
Lastly, investing could gives you lots of interaction tax reduction. Each time you invest a certain amount of money the planet can also get different terrain appearance
|
WHAT7
I'm fine and You aren't Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 05:21:58 -
[2054] - Quote
Eric Lemmonte wrote:I like how we all are punished because of goons' unchallenged ratting.
Top 10 regions for bounties.
Delve8.76918E+1212.14% Deklein4.46455E+126.18% Branch3.11909E+124.32% Cobalt Edge2.96567E+124.11% Outer Passage2.66506E+123.69% Querious2.6635E+123.69% Feythabolis2.60413E+123.61% Period Basis2.46879E+123.42% Providence2.45647E+123.40% Esoteria2.37196E+123.28%
then come challenge us, oh wait, you're in VOLT, you guys run at the first sight of danger. |
xOmGx
Order of Order SOLAR FLEET
23
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 05:34:58 -
[2055] - Quote
there cant be too much ISK
if you have too much ISK pls send them to me ingame iand i promise i will make them disappear safe and fast
CCP just fails making NPC ISK sinks and ISK accumulated and will be accumulated ingame |
Harry Forever
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
1332
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 05:35:02 -
[2056] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:[img]http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/newssystem/media/71813/1/GermanFlag33.png[/img] [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/devblog/FLAG_-_RUSSIAN-33.png[/img]UPDATE 2017-06-12: Reduced the damage reduction to fighters. Added supporting data. Greetings Capsuleers, Coming tomorrow in the June 2017 release, the damage output of Fighters will see a reduction by the game design team. After a long weekend sifting through some passionate feedback and taking into consideration previously ongoing design work, letGÇÖs take a look at whatGÇÖs coming. The Data:LetGÇÖs set the stage for the decision by taking sample of 5 days in June. During that timeframe 10.6 Trillion ISK was rewarded in bounties. Of that: - 22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers
- 24.2% (2.6T) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers
- 19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers
Just under half (46.5%) of the bounties earned during the time period was generated by Supercarriers and Carriers, meaning a small percent of the population received a huge portion of the total bounties. Why:Our primary goal for this change is reducing the combat power of Carriers & Supercarriersin PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is due to NPC Bounties. [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9b_isk.float.3.jpg[/img]This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players. Our secondary goal is that Carriers and Supercarriers are too effective in PvP, even for the investment it takes to create them. This change will shift the PvP balance, but weGÇÖre confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP battles. What:- Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
- Light Fighters (Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage (was 20%)
- Support Fighters: No Change
- Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): No Change (was 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage)
- Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack damage (was 30%)
- Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
- NPC Fighter Aggression: No Change (was +15%)
- We are working on changes to Anomalies that will reduce the effectiveness of Carriers and Supercarriers. These changes will be announced at a later date.
We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players. Some of you have asked 'Why not just reduce the bounties?'. The focus of this change is Supercarriers and Carriers. We don't want to effect the income of ships besides those with this change.
why don't you just limit the maximum bounty payout per tick? with that you could easy have control and just hurt the ones doing the really highest ticks, just limit the payout to example 50m per tick (150m per hour) no matter how many rats are killed..
Harry Forever vs. Goonswarm
|
Mary Timeshift Jane
Perkone Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 05:49:38 -
[2057] - Quote
So people get their toys they always dreamed of and CCP goes nerf nerf nerf,.. so jaded. |
Mary Timeshift Jane
Perkone Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 05:53:41 -
[2058] - Quote
Harry Forever wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:[img]http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/newssystem/media/71813/1/GermanFlag33.png[/img] [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/devblog/FLAG_-_RUSSIAN-33.png[/img]UPDATE 2017-06-12: Reduced the damage reduction to fighters. Added supporting data. Greetings Capsuleers, Coming tomorrow in the June 2017 release, the damage output of Fighters will see a reduction by the game design team. After a long weekend sifting through some passionate feedback and taking into consideration previously ongoing design work, letGÇÖs take a look at whatGÇÖs coming. The Data:LetGÇÖs set the stage for the decision by taking sample of 5 days in June. During that timeframe 10.6 Trillion ISK was rewarded in bounties. Of that: - 22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers
- 24.2% (2.6T) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers
- 19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers
Just under half (46.5%) of the bounties earned during the time period was generated by Supercarriers and Carriers, meaning a small percent of the population received a huge portion of the total bounties. Why:Our primary goal for this change is reducing the combat power of Carriers & Supercarriersin PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is due to NPC Bounties. [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9b_isk.float.3.jpg[/img]This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players. Our secondary goal is that Carriers and Supercarriers are too effective in PvP, even for the investment it takes to create them. This change will shift the PvP balance, but weGÇÖre confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP battles. What:- Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
- Light Fighters (Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage (was 20%)
- Support Fighters: No Change
- Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): No Change (was 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage)
- Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack damage (was 30%)
- Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
- NPC Fighter Aggression: No Change (was +15%)
- We are working on changes to Anomalies that will reduce the effectiveness of Carriers and Supercarriers. These changes will be announced at a later date.
We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players. Some of you have asked 'Why not just reduce the bounties?'. The focus of this change is Supercarriers and Carriers. We don't want to effect the income of ships besides those with this change. why don't you just limit the maximum bounty payout per tick? with that you could easy have control and just hurt the ones doing the really highest ticks, just limit the payout to example 50m per tick (150m per hour) no matter how many rats are killed..
Another example Jesus Christ crucifixion. Little people wanting to limit great people. Slackers offended by hardcores. One would think PH would do a better job at teaching people and bring out their potential, instead of small mindedness. |
Shallanna Yassavi
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
550
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 06:09:20 -
[2059] - Quote
Onjine Anekuro wrote:I wonder how much even the original changes would impact the problem here. If you reduce carrier damage by 20%, and assuming that translates to a net loss of 10% in bounty income factoring in travel time, etc., it would go from 2.3T to 2.07 for Supercarriers and 2.6T to 2.34T for Carriers.
The effect wouldn't be exactly that strong. There is that time you spend in warp that has to be accounted for. And... I don't rat in null, but I don't think the rats are on grid until you've been on grid for a few seconds.
A signature :o
|
Mary Timeshift Jane
Perkone Caldari State
16
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 06:12:46 -
[2060] - Quote
xOmGx wrote:there cant be too much ISK
if you have too much ISK pls send them to me ingame iand i promise i will make them disappear safe and fast
CCP just fails making NPC ISK sinks and ISK accumulated and will be accumulated ingame
Sadly it's obvious this game has turned into CCP and rest of EVE vs Goons. I'm not a goon but even I can clearly see, also looking into history, they've always been a force to recon with. |
|
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
209
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 06:16:45 -
[2061] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Mossyblog Barnes wrote:@CCP Larrikin,
I can see you're stating to take a long term view and like all economies you pull the leaver that shudders the most vs one big leaver that fixes all. However, taking the temperature of Delve and declaring all of Eve a risk is where the logic falls short. Cumualtive sure the data trends upwards but the rate of logins trend downwards and i'd wager the kill/death ratio(s) also have a different story (haven't downloaded the entirity of the data set as yet).
Capping the main sources of ISK will slow total wealth and achieve the goal you're attempting to do in terms of reduce the wealth overall, however you lose accounts as a result and / or the attractors to new customer acquisition also takes a hit.
The trade off is where all of this simply falls short. CCP takes away but what does it provide in return? how does this wealth get redirected?
Why is Delve so high?
The duking of stats serves no purpose but to fuel further negativity. Until you treat the root cause all you're doing is essentially reminding players that the games "rules" are always subject to change which in turn also generates further anxiety about adoption.
Imagine if i kept changing the SDK/Frameworks languages you use to build the game? Inflation destroys wealth on the whole, it does not create it. And even if ratting in Delve was completely and totally stopped by CCP there would still be too much ISK entering the economy. This is a little bit too much, this a huge ginormous amount of too much ISK entering the economy. In this case where 2 regions are creating the inflation, it means that while they suffer a minor amount from the inflation, the rest of the game suffers a lot more. You know business as usual in EvE. It isn't two regions either. Look, on average the money supply grew at around 7 billion ISK/month. In May it grew 53 trillion. Even if you took out Deklein and Delve you'd still have something over 500% above average. This is not 2 regions. It is a systemic problem. Yes it is a systemic problem with 2 regions sticking out like sore thumbs.
Top 10 regions for bounties.
Delve 8.76918E+12 12.14% Deklein 4.46455E+12 6.18% Branch 3.11909E+12 4.32% Cobalt Edge 2.96567E+12 4.11% Outer Passage 2.66506E+12 3.69% Querious 2.6635E+12 3.69% Feythabolis 2.60413E+12 3.61% Period Basis 2.46879E+12 3.42% Providence 2.45647E+12 3.40% Esoteria 2.37196E+12 3.28%
But like all of the over done crap in Null, if CCP ever try to fix it they will be greeted with a waves of tears so great as to make all that have come before it look like a drip in an ocean.
Now the fact that CCP has caved in to the whining in such a huge manner to a massive alteration to the economy done by such a small number of people has shown everyone else that Null still rules supreme and will be given what ever they want if they cry enough about it.
These changes were even approved by the CSM, yet since their change not one word has been uttered by a CSM member.
The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.
After all we are not just players, we are customers.
Time for the CSM to be disbanded.
|
Mossyblog Barnes
Kenshin. DARKNESS.
31
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 06:32:30 -
[2062] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:[quote=Teckos Pech][quote=Mark Marconi][quote=Teckos Pech][quote=Mossyblog Barnes]@CCP Larrikin,
But like all of the over done crap in Null, if CCP ever try to fix it they will be greeted with a waves of tears so great as to make all that have come before it look like a drip in an ocean.
Now the fact that CCP has caved in to the whining in such a huge manner to a massive alteration to the economy done by such a small number of people has shown everyone else that Null still rules supreme and will be given what ever they want if they cry enough about it.
These changes were even approved by the CSM, yet since their change not one word has been uttered by a CSM member.
Waves of tears are always coming.
Never listen to your fans as they dont want change, never listen to your critics as change is all they want. Listen to the ones who have indifference to your change, as they're the ones who influence.
In the end, change is inevitable provided you manage the psychology of it's impact. Nerfing anything in game is a destructive behaviour and in turn you either need to win hearts/minds or trade.
Negative reinforcement with an emphasis on weakening behaviour is whats happening, so them "caving" is not necessarily ground zero of the backlash, its the *way* in which its taken place is what's amplifying the said pain.
Looking back they could of ripped the super/carrier bandaid off without warning. Wait and see the actual behaviour of players vs the vocal response, and use the data then to win hearts/minds on how change was used to influence the goals they are setting..
In the case of wealth slow downs it would have and will backfire which we've covered i think as to that "why".
|
sakpuncher
Angry Rock Killers Inc. Serrice Council.
6
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 06:40:20 -
[2063] - Quote
the issue is not the carriers though. they just happen to be the current best ships for ratting therefore they are the prominent ships used for ratting. the ship doesnt matter. the means of makeing the money does. right now you have anoms that just instantly respawn you can endlessly do sites without remorse. and in delve you have this happeing. hundreds of pilots all running sigs. knowing that they just instantly respawn after. yes they use carriers cause that is the fastest way. but in accordance to isk invested/ isk made honestly the VNI is WAAAY above carrier. if your investing that much isk in a ship it should be for a reason. a VNI can litterally pay for itself in a hour and a half to two hours. a carrier despite its ticks takes exponentially longer. it all about the risk/reward and thats what makes eve great dont break that. you want to fix this faucet as you call it make it where the anoms have a respawn timer. or if your really that hellbent on carriers make it where they cant enter specific sites so they have to take a actual risk. i agree something needs done but what your chooseing to do is litterally the WORST possible choice. your nerfing the wrong thing. all this will accomplish is people finding other means to make the same amount of isk. which in turn will just be a calling to nerf another ship. the ship isnt the issue the mechanics are. the only reason its so weighed towards carriers is because thats the currently most cost effective way
or who know maybe you just want people to skill extract all carrier skills into whatever becomes the new flavor of the month so you can line your own pockets. but i mean you wouldnt do that would you |
lolz Quekz
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
3
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 06:43:46 -
[2064] - Quote
at least ccp listened and reduced the overall nerf think it is a reasonable change as of now until a more permanent fix can be decided to reduce capital ratting |
venetistrader norie
H S attack
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 06:44:10 -
[2065] - Quote
Guys, you did nerf the 0.0 guys a lot in the past weeks. Just put the rorq in the state that he was before. Let him just boost and donGÇÖt play with us. I did train for it now IGÇÖm sad. I did train for carriers and now IGÇÖm sad. If you make this change make them in 1 week!!! DonGÇÖt let it go on for mounts and then nerf it!!!!
And if you want to nerf the fighters more just make them self-destruct as soon as we launch them. Eh, IGÇÖm sad :(
BY THE WAY IN A C5 OR 6 YOU CAN MAKE 400-500M AN HOUR. NERF THEM :)
|
Petros K
North Korean Nuclear Research Requiem Eternal
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 06:53:52 -
[2066] - Quote
Introduce a new taxing system (just like real life works )
Monthly tax the income money(may it be bounties , contract payments , ANYTHING that goes into wallet ) of each player with scaling factors .
ex
2.5% tax if your income was between 1 and 5billions 5% tax for 5.000.0001 isk earned up to 10billions
You get my point .
This would BALANCE the enormous incomes of people , but still be save for smaller fish .
|
HandelsPharmi
Pharmi on CharBazaar
1845
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 07:00:54 -
[2067] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: The Data: LetGÇÖs set the stage for the decision by taking sample of 5 days in June.
Holy ****, are you kidding me?
I would not even have passed the first year in my scientific studies (chemical engineering)...
Nice, I have spent ZERO $ for EVE Online in the last five days! I am the worst customer!
Come on guys, what are you doing? |
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
209
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 07:24:41 -
[2068] - Quote
Will admit it is crap like this why I avoid the forums.
CCP come out with data
The Data: LetGÇÖs set the stage for the decision by taking sample of 5 days in June. During that timeframe 10.6 Trillion ISK was rewarded in bounties. Of that:
22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers 24.2% (2.6T) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers 19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers
Just under half (46.5%) of the bounties earned during the time period was generated by Supercarriers and Carriers, meaning a small percent of the population received a huge portion of the total bounties.
They come out with a solution.
Then Null cries and CCP folds.
And if you are not a member of the big blue donut, it shows just how much you matter to CCP.
Not at All.
Null will continue to grow huge fortunes in bounties, in an environment where even the targeting of fighters by NPCs is to much for the Null bears to take and everyone else dies by inflation.
As someone who likes Wormhole space and Hi-sec, I don't even feel like an after thought in this game any more.
The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.
After all we are not just players, we are customers.
Time for the CSM to be disbanded.
|
Tessa Sage
Legion of the Wicked Way ChaosTheory.
13
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 07:32:35 -
[2069] - Quote
xOmGx wrote:Sov system does NOT encourage deploying and or use of capitalships
CCP need to go back to SOV blocade units and or POS warfire (POS warfire will boost need for POS and POS fuel and so)
Create / go back to NPC fuel blocks (yes yes abandon planetary stuff) ... TO remove ISK you have to make NPC relates ISK sinks NOT the relocation due to player to player trade
I agree, keeping POS warfare active is one solution. The need then arises for POS emplacement to keep supplementing the newer sov mechanics but to a further extent (TCU upgrades could require a certain % of system moons seeded under the same sov holder).
If PI is too profitable, merge it with moon mining UI where POS operators can utilize some amount of control on command center saturation of their satellite's host planet. Reintroduce orbital bombardment ammo, now for structure weapons / weapon upgrades, so that one moon can stake a claim against another moon's futile PI efforts.
I will try to catch up on the more recent info, but please let me know your thoughts xOmGx. |
Slave Endoma
Exterminated
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 08:02:47 -
[2070] - Quote
Since 2004 I have suffered many upheavals and major changes, but what happens to this game over the past 2 years is really extreme. You guys from CCP have proven from long time, that I'm not important to you. Stop pushing me! It's true that I'm stubborn, but finally I will get tired and will leave you to destroy all that we have built together last 15 years. Seem you have forgotten that at the base of your richness is my enjoyment. Without me, you are just a pixel, one of many others.
Enjoy your destruction. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 79 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |