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) |
Cismet
Hard-line Syndicate Serrice Council.
89
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 19:05:55 -
[2221] - 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?
Statistics wasn't your fort+¬ was it? With a sample size of data, the larger the sample size, the closer you will get to the ideal spread of that data in reality. Or to put it another way, a sample size of 100% of the available data will match exactly with the observed results because it will be the actual data. 50% of the data as a set taken randomly from all the available data will get you pretty close to the actual behaviour when modelled.
Generally speaking, the more data you have the better your statistical model will match with the reality in observation from the whole possible dataset, but over 150k data points will give you a pretty close approximation as long as you've taken it at random. The data was for the whole of the first five days across the whole game (excluding wormholes which don't give any bounties) and so should be fairly representative of the month as a whole. Well, unless the whole game somehow steps up their ratting for the last 5 days of the month just to mess with CCP. I can't see it myself, but you never know now..... |
Marcel Garsk
5
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 19:06:30 -
[2222] - Quote
Hi, guys!
How are your today's ticks? |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6654
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 19:24:53 -
[2223] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Feracitus wrote: The underlying problem is the infinite nature of the ISK currency. Limit the money supply by actually limiting the money supply. Transform ISK in a blockchain based cryptocurrency with a market cap and limited supply. They could just make NPCs start getting involved in the economy, we already have NPC miners now, why not NPC ratters that CCP can use to fluff the market by forcing the AI to set floors on the prices?
Why?
The way bitcoin works is not applicable to this game. Bitcoin creation is governed by an algorithm. With respect to ISK CCP wants players to play the game and produce ISK, but it can't be too much or too little. Too much and inflation can get out of hand. Too little and deflation can curb stomp the economy. Inflation has the potential for a positive feedback loop, and deflation a negative one. That is, this system may not be self-correcting. Most market activities are self-correcting in that once you start to incur losses it is just a matter of time before you have to stop. Profits will ensure people keep going and provide and incentive for people to get into that market and pursue innovation and invention. Money has always been a tricky thing in economies in that governments rarely can keep their damn hands off of it, thus often mucking it up more than stabilizing things.
Case in point, CCP revamped carriers and supers and turned them into ISK printers. Where a small number of players can create as much ISK as a much, much larger number of players.
And there have been other instances where governments have screwed up money and prices. The most recent example is Venezuela where hyperinflation and price controls have destroyed the economy and people are going hungry in a nation rich with natural resources.
To CCP's credit they see the problem: too much ISK coming into the economy. One can argue their suggested fix is good or bad, but that much ISK entering the economy cannot be allowed to continue. This isn't an issue with an ISK faucet it is an ISK fire hose.
consider this...the amount of new ISK created was around 64 trillion. The overall total amount of ISK is a bit over 1 quadrillion. The previous amounts of ISK entering the economy was around 9.5T ISK/month. So, at that rate to double the amount of ISK in game it would take 105 months or 8 years and 9 months. Last month 64 trillion ISK entered the economy. The amount of ISK in game would double in 1 year and 3.5 months. It took 67 months to add 620T ISK to the game. Now we'll do it in just under 10 months. With absolutely no negative consequences?
Now we'll add NPCs to the market...why? What is this going to accomplish?
Again: Just turn off the ISK fire host. That is the most simple and elegant solution. No need to dance around implementing silly ideas.
"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
|
Cismet
Hard-line Syndicate Serrice Council.
90
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 19:41:38 -
[2224] - Quote
Huren Ogeko wrote:On a side note I am wondering how badly this nerf is really affecting ratting. One of my corp mates reported this morning that his has the same ticks now as before and the only change is takes 2-3 volley's to take out a battleship now. Pre-patch he showed an average of 102mil ticks and after patch his first tick was around 106 mil. Maybe this nerf took away the overkill making less dps wasted on small ships and did little to affect the overall site times.
Does anyone else have any hard results in how it affects their ratting?
You won't get any accurate data on that. People will base the answers on their feelings, much like the placebo effect. The only way to get data would be from CCP. I would hope that CCP might release some figures in a weeks time at the delta for bounties as a percentage over the timeframe, but people's perception of their bounty changes will rarely marry up with the data. |
Valdr Auduin
CatPack
19
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 19:44:09 -
[2225] - Quote
Teckos, stop rambling and propose a solution that limits the printability of carriers without destroying their combat ability, that or demonstrate that even under a full nerf the combat ability isn't actually being harmed and the reduction is really necessary for PvP purposes as well. I'm an invisible hand advocate so all of your economics flourishes don't really sway me at all, active interference in markets ruins everything they're supposed to do. |
Agfro Er
Secret Wormhole Authority Group
18
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 20:08:30 -
[2226] - Quote
Thank you for scaling back some of the damage nerfs. I actually kinda like the nerf to fighter dps (as long as it's low to moderate) because it makes support fighters more valuable to launch. Please consider buffing the fighter's hit points or something like that if further dps nerfs are necessary.
o7 |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6661
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 20:23:33 -
[2227] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Teckos, stop rambling and propose a solution that limits the printability of carriers without destroying their combat ability, that or demonstrate that even under a full nerf the combat ability isn't actually being harmed and the reduction is really necessary for PvP purposes as well, if you can't do either with any competence then I would strongly argue the issue is in how bounty payouts work and not how carriers function. I'm an invisible hand advocate so all of your economics flourishes don't really sway me at all, active interference in markets ruins everything they're supposed to do.
I already have. Train reading comprehension....Hell, inject the skill.
Possible solutions: no change at all the carriers/supers, but they can no longer enter any anomalies. Or they can enter the anomaly, but can't lock rats. Baltec had something like when a carrier warps in a capital rat warps in with no bounty. Thus, the ISK printing is slowed down. Some have suggested carrier/super only anomalies that can be balanced in terms of how much they inject into the economy.
In general I'd be happy with the following:
1. Code in ban on carriers and supers entering anomalies today (tomorrow is acceptable). 2. Look for a better longer term solution that preserves PvP capabilities but does not trash the economy. 3. Maybe remove the ban depending on the solution.
For 2 there are probably a wide number of solutions, some might be implemented together. I have even suggested that CCP listen to their players, not the butthurt raging ones, but the ones who can see the problem and trying to suggest helpful solutions.
"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
|
Axhind
Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation
365
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 20:33:03 -
[2228] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Axhind wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone. If the skills were rendered useless you might have a point. They aren't so you don't. The only thing you really have is that you are excessively butthurt and you think that justifies your petulance. Take all that ISK and be happy. Or how about this: CCP gives you the SP, but takes any and all ISK you made ratting? White knighting for CCP must be a new low for AMOK. Wanting something for nothing is pathetic. Ignoring the huge problem sitting in front of you is stupid.
Issue is that they finally made PvE that can't be multiboxed and is somewhat engaging and are now killing it by nerfing fighters that already barely work in TiDi fights. Ticks are a bit high but if they land around 80 mil that will be perfectly fine and they can just lower bounties if you are using a capital as CONCORD feels it's less risk and thus pays less. That way bounties can be brought down without removing good PvE or completely murdering fighters in PvP.
In any case CCP have not given us a single reason to back them up lately as most of the changes have been beyond terrible (audio change is still amazing level of stupid even for CCP) as has been their behaviour towards us, their customers. So please find someone else to white knight for. |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6662
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 20:40:27 -
[2229] - Quote
Axhind wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Axhind wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone. If the skills were rendered useless you might have a point. They aren't so you don't. The only thing you really have is that you are excessively butthurt and you think that justifies your petulance. Take all that ISK and be happy. Or how about this: CCP gives you the SP, but takes any and all ISK you made ratting? White knighting for CCP must be a new low for AMOK. Wanting something for nothing is pathetic. Ignoring the huge problem sitting in front of you is stupid. Issue is that they finally made PvE that can't be multiboxed and is somewhat engaging and are now killing it by nerfing fighters that already barely work in TiDi fights. Ticks are a bit high but if they land around 80 mil that will be perfectly fine and they can just lower bounties if you are using a capital as CONCORD feels it's less risk and thus pays less. That way bounties can be brought down without removing good PvE or completely murdering fighters in PvP. In any case CCP have not given us a single reason to back them up lately as most of the changes have been beyond terrible (audio change is still amazing level of stupid even for CCP) as has been their behaviour towards us, their customers. So please find someone else to white knight for.
Except that the ISK supply grew in month at a rate that is comparable to six months of ISK growth last year. Yeah, other than that...nothing.
And I have been opposed to simply nerfing the DPS of carriers. I think that is ham handed. I'd prefer a temporary ban on carriers/supers ratting (at least a month, the upside is we can see what happens to ISK growth, if it doesn't drop to a more reasonable number then there maybe other problems too) and look for an alternative solution that preserves the PvP capabilities and does not trash the economy. Maybe limit carriers to capital sanctums where the ISK payouts can be adjusted to keep things on a reasonable basis.
One of the points I raise routinely in balance discussions is do not nerf game play for those not causing a problem. If a player has a carrier, uses it for PvP and does not rat in it, then this nerf hits hard and rather unfairly. A more subtle solution is called for, IMO.
"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
|
addelee
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
106
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 23:03:42 -
[2230] - Quote
CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.
What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.
I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.
What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions. |
|
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6663
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 23:48:38 -
[2231] - Quote
addelee wrote:CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.
What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.
I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.
What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions.
Please tell me how much money it would take to skill into a super, buy the super, and the modules.
Here I'll help. A 25 billion ISK super will cost close to $310. Exactly how many people do you think are plunking that down? Let alone the ISK to fly a super.
And on top of that, all injectors do is move the problem forward in time. If the issue is carriers and supers are efficient at farming ISK...then they'd be just as efficient in 3 years when people have skilled into them the old fashioned way and we'd have the problem then.
See you noticed it too:
Quote:People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in?
That appears to be the problem. Whether people get their via injectors or time.
"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
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
3752
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 00:05:17 -
[2232] - Quote
Random Freak wrote:Marek Kanenald wrote:You guys still whining about this?
Literally the only nerf that is left is a 10% light fighter basic damage nerf and a 20% heavy fighter basic damage nerf.
Even the proposed rat aggro was scrapped.
Wasn't this what you wanted? No. What we want is the isk faucet being fixed, not an arbitrary nerf that will only work short term. We want the underlying cause fixed, not the symptoms.
Interesting.
So maybe if they had max ratting/ded sites per space region or constellation in a given day, the equivalent of belts being mined out? This would limit the isk flow rather than nerf ships. Is that what you meant?
m
Mike Azariah Gö¼GöÇGöÇGö¼n++ ¯|(pâä)/¯
|
Valdr Auduin
CatPack
22
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 00:06:18 -
[2233] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:addelee wrote:CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.
What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.
I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.
What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions. Please tell me how much money it would take to skill into a super, buy the super, and the modules. Here I'll help. A 25 billion ISK super will cost close to $310. Exactly how many people do you think are plunking that down? Let alone the ISK to fly a super. And on top of that, all injectors do is move the problem forward in time. If the issue is carriers and supers are efficient at farming ISK...then they'd be just as efficient in 3 years when people have skilled into them the old fashioned way and we'd have the problem then. See you noticed it too: Quote:People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? That appears to be the problem. Whether people get their via injectors or time. I've seen people drop thousands of dollars on cardboard and plastic, some will do it on a whim two or three times a year. Never underestimate how swiftly a fool and his money will be separated, look at me, I'm poor. |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6663
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 00:12:54 -
[2234] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:addelee wrote:CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.
What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.
I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.
What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions. Please tell me how much money it would take to skill into a super, buy the super, and the modules. Here I'll help. A 25 billion ISK super will cost close to $310. Exactly how many people do you think are plunking that down? Let alone the ISK to fly a super. And on top of that, all injectors do is move the problem forward in time. If the issue is carriers and supers are efficient at farming ISK...then they'd be just as efficient in 3 years when people have skilled into them the old fashioned way and we'd have the problem then. See you noticed it too: Quote:People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? That appears to be the problem. Whether people get their via injectors or time. I've seen people drop thousands of dollars on cardboard and plastic, some will do it on a whim two or three times a year. Never underestimate how swiftly a fool and his money will be separated, look at me, I'm poor.
I don't doubt it. Some people have plenty of discretionary income....but how many (and I am not one of them, I've gotten my SP the old fashioned way)? And why all of a sudden now, this month? I just don't buy this as a THE problem. Seems to me the problem is an unbalanced ship and whether the person getting into one got there in 5 days by spending a bucket of RL ISK or having started the game 8 years ago is not really relevant.
"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
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
4027
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 00:25:25 -
[2235] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote: Interesting.
So maybe if they had max ratting/ded sites per space region or constellation in a given day, the equivalent of belts being mined out? This would limit the isk flow rather than nerf ships. Is that what you meant?
m
The problem is this impacts everyone, and in fact hits the non supers/carriers harder than the supers, since the faster you do sites as a result the more of the proportion you get. It might slow down the total isk supply, but at the cost of hammering everyone else into the ground, and forcing a single alliance to sprawl all over Nullsec again.
Maybe if we had sites that could be done co-operatively using the new large grid where shooting/hacking this tower over here impacts that structure 1000km away over there and everyone on grid (who isn't cloaked) shares the payouts along the way, but even then supers could split their squadrons to some extent, though the range would place them at greater risk of losing fighters to PvP. |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6664
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 00:36:39 -
[2236] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Mike Azariah wrote: Interesting.
So maybe if they had max ratting/ded sites per space region or constellation in a given day, the equivalent of belts being mined out? This would limit the isk flow rather than nerf ships. Is that what you meant?
m
The problem is this impacts everyone, and in fact hits the non supers/carriers harder than the supers, since the faster you do sites as a result the more of the proportion you get. It might slow down the total isk supply, but at the cost of hammering everyone else into the ground, and forcing a single alliance to sprawl all over Nullsec again. Maybe if we had sites that could be done co-operatively using the new large grid where shooting/hacking this tower over here impacts that structure 1000km away over there and everyone on grid (who isn't cloaked) shares the payouts along the way, but even then supers could split their squadrons to some extent, though the range would place them at greater risk of losing fighters to PvP.
Or in fleet to share rewards. That way you can not have to worry about a cloaked dingaling on grid hoping to get some free benefits.
But yes, using carriers and supers in cooperative anomalies might be interesting.
"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
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
4028
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 01:14:33 -
[2237] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote: Or in fleet to share rewards. That way you can not have to worry about a cloaked dingaling on grid hoping to get some free benefits.
But yes, using carriers and supers in cooperative anomalies might be interesting.
I had the idea of simply on grid to allow two small fleets to meet in a site, but decide not to shoot each other, instead each take separate objectives to stay out of weapons range from the other. Co-operation & competition together that way, while if it's fleet only the only sensible response to an intruder is shoot instantly, if it's anyone on grid you get a bit more of an interesting dilemma.
It's a lot more development work to create that sort of thing though, which means that as a right now solution, they needed to do something, and outright banning carriers/supers from anoms means those people effectively earn 0 with their ships or rather -100% income, rather than the -20% or so profit (assuming fighters are lost sometimes, so profit isn't perfectly aligned with DPS). So in terms of carrier ratting, the current nerf is about as nice as it can be while still doing something. If they gave something back in terms of fighter survivability alongside the volley reduction it might be nicer for PvP purposes, or something like that, but I don't know enough about new carriers & PvP to really comment on that balance overall. |
Objectless Hatred
El Ultimo Hombre Goonswarm Federation
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 03:11:20 -
[2238] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:Objectless Hatred wrote:Mark Marconi wrote:With the new changes I must ask
why the NPC Fighter Aggression: No Change (was +15%)
That was probably the most sensible change there in and the one that no one was complaining about. fighters already get curbstomped if they stop moving for more than about 10 seconds.. 15% more aggression is not needed. Yeah curb stomped. 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 Curb stomped must mean something different where you come from.
Wow, congrats you can copy and paste...
Fact remains that they are curbstomped if they stop moving, they don't die generally primarily becuase of this awesome thing called the W key, aka Orbit. But meh, the changes were halved, you lost... deal with it. |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6664
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 04:22:28 -
[2239] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Teckos Pech wrote: Or in fleet to share rewards. That way you can not have to worry about a cloaked dingaling on grid hoping to get some free benefits.
But yes, using carriers and supers in cooperative anomalies might be interesting.
I had the idea of simply on grid to allow two small fleets to meet in a site, but decide not to shoot each other, instead each take separate objectives to stay out of weapons range from the other. Co-operation & competition together that way, while if it's fleet only the only sensible response to an intruder is shoot instantly, if it's anyone on grid you get a bit more of an interesting dilemma. It's a lot more development work to create that sort of thing though, which means that as a right now solution, they needed to do something, and outright banning carriers/supers from anoms means those people effectively earn 0 with their ships or rather -100% income, rather than the -20% or so profit (assuming fighters are lost sometimes, so profit isn't perfectly aligned with DPS). So in terms of carrier ratting, the current nerf is about as nice as it can be while still doing something. If they gave something back in terms of fighter survivability alongside the volley reduction it might be nicer for PvP purposes, or something like that, but I don't know enough about new carriers & PvP to really comment on that balance overall.
Okay, spontaneous cooperation...interesting suggestion.
"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
|
Harry Forever
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
1334
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 08:42:47 -
[2240] - Quote
Mary Timeshift Jane wrote: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.
you are the only one little slacker and small minded player here.. bring up your own ideas or shut the **** up
Harry Forever vs. Goonswarm
|
|
Lord Heluene
Arach-Tinilith
3
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 13:59:54 -
[2241] - Quote
So CCP nerfed my missiles a while back and I swiitched to a carrier because of it, now I am being punished by CCP for making isk in the ship they pushed me into. How thoughtfull!! NOT
AND to top it off,,,they nerfed the mining drones for the Rorqual. They were damaged easily enough before, because they are so slow to return to the ship when recalled. Now they are even slower!! So I literally toss out 900 mil bricks, and pray they don't die to rats. So now that I can't really use the Rorqual to mine anymore, you should put it back in the pos for remote boosting...that or else refund everyone who bought one recently...because you have make them totally useless to the individual miner.
So now CCP.............you have taken away my ability to mine, and you are about to take away my ability to rat........I don't PVP unless forced to.
So please remind me again...why i spent time here playing your game...when there are other things I could be doing?
|
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
215
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 14:15:32 -
[2242] - Quote
Objectless Hatred wrote:But meh, the changes were halved, you lost... deal with it. Yeah after 100 pages of tears the likes of which hi-sec has never produced and why?
So 46.5% of the bounties can be gained by 6.2% of the players.
But it is not like it is unusual for CCP to fold to the tears of Null to the ruin of the rest of the game.
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.
|
HandelsPharmi
Pharmi on CharBazaar
1846
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 14:22:01 -
[2243] - Quote
Mark Marconi wrote:So 46.5% of the bounties can be gained by 6.2% of the players.
Keep in mind, that all miners and even gate camped who have shot a single rat are counted to the 100 % :) |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3413
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 16:18:13 -
[2244] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Random Freak wrote:Marek Kanenald wrote:You guys still whining about this?
Literally the only nerf that is left is a 10% light fighter basic damage nerf and a 20% heavy fighter basic damage nerf.
Even the proposed rat aggro was scrapped.
Wasn't this what you wanted? No. What we want is the isk faucet being fixed, not an arbitrary nerf that will only work short term. We want the underlying cause fixed, not the symptoms. Interesting. So maybe if they had max ratting/ded sites per space region or constellation in a given day, the equivalent of belts being mined out? This would limit the isk flow rather than nerf ships. Is that what you meant? m
Why should alliance that actually use their space be limited just because of 2 class of ship that overperform? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3413
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 16:20:32 -
[2245] - Quote
Lord Heluene wrote:
So now CCP.............you have taken away my ability to mine, and you are about to take away my ability to rat........I don't PVP unless forced to.
People still mine and still rat. No ability were taken away from you. |
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort Test Alliance Please Ignore
240
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 16:35:08 -
[2246] - Quote
Lord Heluene wrote:
So now CCP.............you have taken away my ability to mine, and you are about to take away my ability to rat........I don't PVP unless forced to.
My bad, I didn't realize this patch removed all mining barges/exhumers from the game. You're right though, they've taken away everyone's ability to mine by nerfing something we haven't even had access to as a mining vessel for a year.
Also I didn't realize that nerfing fighters by 10% made it impossible for you to rat (long range bombers by 20% if you're a super pilot). It's damage and application is just so unbearably low now you just can't bring yourself to do it.
I'm also sorry you're playing a PVP centric game and refuse to partake unless forced.
PS - Please biomass. This is obviously not the game for you. Thanks for the money you gave to CCP for that plex you obviously used for injectors though. It really does help the dev team. At least you provided that much for the community before leaving. |
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers EVEolution.
646
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 17:29:31 -
[2247] - Quote
Lord Heluene wrote:So CCP nerfed my missiles a while back and I swiitched to a carrier because of it, now I am being punished by CCP for making isk in the ship they pushed me into. How thoughtfull!! NOT
AND to top it off,,,they nerfed the mining drones for the Rorqual. They were damaged easily enough before, because they are so slow to return to the ship when recalled. Now they are even slower!! So I literally toss out 900 mil bricks, and pray they don't die to rats. So now that I can't really use the Rorqual to mine anymore, you should put it back in the pos for remote boosting...that or else refund everyone who bought one recently...because you have make them totally useless to the individual miner.
So now CCP.............you have taken away my ability to mine, and you are about to take away my ability to rat........I don't PVP unless forced to.
So please remind me again...why i spent time here playing your game...when there are other things I could be doing?
Not your missiles, CCP's missiles and they do what the hell they want with them. confused? read the EULA.
nobody pushed you into any type of ship, you asked your mates what's the best ship for ratting/isk tick and that's why you trained it.
monkey see monkey do.
mining drones are new and they where OP, CCP needed to adjust them, again read the EULA it covers all this about how CCP can do what they want when they want and how they want, you sir are leasing the right to take part. you own nothing in EVE.
you can still mine and rat or don't, your choice, plenty of other ships to rat or mine in.
you spent time here playing the game because you love it, no other reason.
these other things you speak of, why would you blame a video game for stopping you doing them, that's a lazy fecks attitude. the problem isn't the game stopping you or making you do anything, it's you refusing to accept responsiblity for your own fecking life, the reason why you didn't do the other things is because you made a decision to stay in and play video games.
|
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3204
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 17:58:43 -
[2248] - Quote
Lord Heluene wrote:So CCP nerfed my missiles a while back and I swiitched to a carrier because of it, now I am being punished by CCP for making isk in the ship they pushed me into. How thoughtfull!! NOT
The self-importance of anyone who manages to rationalize necessary gameplay changes as, "I'm being punished!" is mind-boggling.
Tell you what: Why don't you tell us what you think should happen instead?
Here's the problem: There's WAY too much ISK flowing into the economy. This major overabundance is attributable to the ISK-generating capabilities of ratting supers and carriers.
Provide a solution to this problem.
Alternatively, present an argument in favor of allowing the entire game's economy to collapse in lieu of making you sad by correcting the problem.
Failing that, just bugger off.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Atrinos
Ordo Teeutonicus Shadow of xXDEATHXx
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 18:48:36 -
[2249] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Lord Heluene wrote:So CCP nerfed my missiles a while back and I swiitched to a carrier because of it, now I am being punished by CCP for making isk in the ship they pushed me into. How thoughtfull!! NOT
The self-importance of anyone who manages to rationalize necessary gameplay changes as, "I'm being punished!" is mind-boggling. Tell you what: Why don't you tell us what you think should happen instead? Here's the problem: There's WAY too much ISK flowing into the economy. This major overabundance is attributable to the ISK-generating capabilities of ratting supers and carriers. Provide a solution to this problem. Alternatively, present an argument in favor of allowing the entire game's economy to collapse in lieu of making you sad by correcting the problem. Failing that, just bugger off.
1. Eve is a Sandox Game. So why shouldn't they be allowed to make money in Caps and Supercaps? 2. There are much smarter ways to decrease the isk flow. For example a global tax for ratting bounties with 20%. So why just **** up shipclasses 3. Many ppl were ratting in supers for a long time. It never was a Problem cause there were only a few of them. Skill injectors were anounced and now much More ppl were ratting in Caps and supercaps. This Problem was selfmade by ccp... |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3206
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 19:08:16 -
[2250] - Quote
Atrinos wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Lord Heluene wrote:So CCP nerfed my missiles a while back and I swiitched to a carrier because of it, now I am being punished by CCP for making isk in the ship they pushed me into. How thoughtfull!! NOT
The self-importance of anyone who manages to rationalize necessary gameplay changes as, "I'm being punished!" is mind-boggling. Tell you what: Why don't you tell us what you think should happen instead? Here's the problem: There's WAY too much ISK flowing into the economy. This major overabundance is attributable to the ISK-generating capabilities of ratting supers and carriers. Provide a solution to this problem. Alternatively, present an argument in favor of allowing the entire game's economy to collapse in lieu of making you sad by correcting the problem. Failing that, just bugger off. 1. Eve is a Sandox Game. So why shouldn't they be allowed to make money in Caps and Supercaps? 2. There are much smarter ways to decrease the isk flow. For example a global tax for ratting bounties with 20%. So why just **** up shipclasses 3. Many ppl were ratting in supers for a long time. It never was a Problem cause there were only a few of them. Skill injectors were anounced and now much More ppl were ratting in Caps and supercaps. This Problem was selfmade by ccp...
1. Nobody said they shouldn't be allowed to make money in caps and supercaps. The assertion is that the amount of money being made in caps and supercaps is unsustainable, and needs to be brought into line.
2. A global tax on ratting bounties would impact all ratters, including those who aren't currently earning the massively outsized incomes of carriers and supercarriers. This fails to address the problem that was identified, impacting far more players.
3. And your point here is... what? Even if we blame injectors, what is the actual point you imagine you're making? What part of this is actionable? What is your suggestion? Are they supposed to remove injectors from the game? Or are you trying to assert that since it's CCP's "fault" (All balance and gameplay problems are CCP's fault in this sense, btw. It's also their responsibility to correct those missteps) it should just be allowed to persist indefinitely?
Given the above, you have utterly failed at the task of presenting a solution that addresses the problem. Please try again.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
|
|
|
|
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 |