| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Corporal Punishment08
NosWaffle
Nostradamus Effect
   |
Posted - 2011.02.16 21:14:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: XXSketchxx
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08
If you fail to see my point, you obviously did not read my post. There's no need to jump at someone who agrees with you just because they found a small portion of one of your posts amusing when taken out of context, and drew attention to it. If I hurt your ego or feelings, that was not my intent.
Its just cute to see someone call fail and then go on to contradict themselves.
You said you noticed significant changes, but that there have been good weeks and bad weeks. You believe things are random but think theres a bigger picture.
Sorry but whatever point you were trying to make was pretty unclear.
lol
k let me break it down for you. The main point from the op was that he believes CCP nerfed the nano-ribbon drops since Incursion.
My post said there are good weeks and bad weeks, but that trends could go even further than a weekly basis (Bigger picture perhaps). I suppose the key word would be "Trends". I did not keep track of data, nor did I make a spread sheet. I stated it was all speculation on my part, from what I observed during my time in a C2, but that I do not think CCP nerfed Nano-ribbons.
I did not call "Fail" on anyone or anything.
Quote:
You said you noticed significant changes, but that there have been good weeks and bad weeks
This is not a contradiction. Good weeks and bad weeks would constitute "Significant changes"
Quote:
You believe things are random but think theres a bigger picture
This was taken out of context, from two seperate paragraphs, regarding two different theories on two different subjects.
I can see why you would be so confused, having just skimmed over my post and taking bits from here and there. Perhaps you should read something in its entirety, and be sure you fully understand, before posting a nonsensical response to something not even aimed at yourself.
_____________________________________
Real men corpse tank. |
XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2011.02.16 21:27:00 -
[62]
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08
lol
k let me break it down for you. The main point from the op was that he believes CCP nerfed the nano-ribbon drops since Incursion.
My post said there are good weeks and bad weeks, but that trends could go even further than a weekly basis (Bigger picture perhaps). I suppose the key word would be "Trends".
Two weeks in a C2 is hardly enough to develop ôtrendsö of any sort.
Quote:
I did not keep track of data, nor did I make a spread sheet. I stated it was all speculation on my part, from what I observed during my time in a C2, but that I do not think CCP nerfed Nano-ribbons.
You contradict yourself again. You said you noticed significant changes. Perhaps you are inexperienced to the point where to you one site yielding 1-2 ribbons and another yielding 4-6 constitutes ôsignificant changes.ö I took this to mean however that you noticed changes in average drop rates (what the discussion is about afterall).
Quote:
I did not call "Fail" on anyone or anything.
Yes you did. Bad memory?
Quote:
This is not a contradiction. Good weeks and bad weeks would constitute "Significant changes"
No they donÆt. They constitute random drops. If you look at the ôaverageö over a few months, youÆd see that it evens out pretty well (along with some of the data posted in this thread).
Quote:
I can see why you would be so confused, having just skimmed over my post and taking bits from here and there. Perhaps you should read something in its entirety, and be sure you fully understand, before posting a nonsensical response to something not even aimed at yourself.
|
Corporal Punishment08
NosWaffle
Nostradamus Effect
|
Posted - 2011.02.16 23:11:00 -
[63]
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08
lol
k let me break it down for you. The main point from the op was that he believes CCP nerfed the nano-ribbon drops since Incursion.
My post said there are good weeks and bad weeks, but that trends could go even further than a weekly basis (Bigger picture perhaps). I suppose the key word would be "Trends".
Two weeks in a C2 is hardly enough to develop ôtrendsö of any sort.
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08
Over the course of a few months living in a C2
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08
I can see why you would be so confused, having just skimmed over my post and taking bits from here and there. Perhaps you should read something in its entirety, and be sure you fully understand, before posting a nonsensical response to something not even aimed at yourself.
Eat troll, eat. You are so weak. 
_____________________________________
Real men corpse tank. |
XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2011.02.16 23:26:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08
Eat troll, eat. You are so weak.
Congrats on still not having a firm position on the subject.
PS: look up the term troll before you use it like a moron
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 00:32:00 -
[65]
Aaaanywayà
It looks like no-one can provide any kind of evidence to support the theory that the drops have been reduced. Randomness is random and if it one thing the patter-recognition machine we have on top of our necks can't handle, it's randomness.
ùùù
ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à
you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö
ù Karath Piki |
Michael1995
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 08:01:00 -
[66]
Random number generator still random
|
Raid'En
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 15:13:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Raid''En on 17/02/2011 15:13:24
i heard often customers saying their drop rated lowered since months ago.
i never saw change by myself, but seems it was loooong ago, before i was doing it so... maybe. but not recently.
anyway nano price went up due to learning sp (giving way more tengu pilots, more demand for nano), and neut change (less nano farmed).
----------------
** Wormhole Trading ** |
Cipher Jones
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 17:17:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Raid'En
Edited by: Raid''En on 17/02/2011 15:13:24
i heard often customers saying their drop rated lowered since months ago.
i never saw change by myself, but seems it was loooong ago, before i was doing it so... maybe. but not recently.
anyway nano price went up due to learning sp (giving way more tengu pilots, more demand for nano), and neut change (less nano farmed).
At best you can claim they went up on speculation of said causes, as they went up before any of it actually happened.
The mineral market crashed in speculation of the insurance nerf anyway.
|
Riatsu
|
Posted - 2011.02.17 18:52:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Riatsu on 17/02/2011 18:54:26
It is true that you need a large sample size data to make a strong point on this subject, but even if you do, you would achieve nothing. IF the drop rate were indeed lowered, then it wouldnÆt affect the players that live in a WH since its market price will increase to keep the profit/time of farming nanoribbons constant. On the other hand if the drop rate has increased, then the market price will drop but you have much more to sell and therefore the profit/time will also remain constant. The only ppl who will be effect are the ppl who buy t3 ship as the ship price will change.
However there is one exception to my statement. If the drop rate was lowered in specific classes of WH space (letÆs say from C5) and increased in specific classes (letÆs say from C2). There is a chance that the market volume will remain constant. But it would mean that players in C5 will suffer and ppl from C2 would gain.
(this is highly unlikely the case since the chance of equal players living in each class of WH being the same or at least the amount of nanoribbons gathered from both holes being equal to the total gathered before any change in drop would be extremely unlikely unless intended by ccp)
This is highly unlikely and unless you have sufficient data from all classes of WH then there is no point of this discussion since you profit should remain constant.
I will quote myself here to clarify one point.
ôIF the drop rate were indeed lowered, then it wouldnÆt affect the players that live in a WH since its market price will increase to keep the profit/time of farming nanoribbons constantö ((This is not 100% constant since less ppl will buy t3Æs this factor acts as a buffer but the standard deviation should be small))
On another note. The market data shows that the volume of nanoribbons has remained app constant which is a clear indication that the increase in price was due to a different variable.
THIS IS SHINIGAMIE |
Valerax Orion
The Corsairs
Total Comfort
|
Posted - 2011.02.18 08:42:00 -
[70]
The correct way to post this entire mess would have been:
"I have noticed that over a series of anomolies, based off of what I can remember, that the drop-rates of melted nanoribbons has decreased and it appears to have only been since the incursion patches. Has anyone else noticed anything similar, and does this require investigation?"
As opposed to "BUT I'M RIGHT. I KNOW I AM. YOU CAN'T TELL ME I'M NOT. I KNOW I AM. BUT I AM. REALLY. AM. LA LA LA LA."
|
Noferatu
|
Posted - 2011.02.18 13:30:00 -
[71]
Three days ago, I collected a jaw-dropping 15 ribbons from a single Outpost Frontier Stronghold.
That's a record in my experience. But it only goes to show that for C3 systems, the possible drop-rate from a single anomaly is certainly (still) high.
|
Cantina Pinata
|
Posted - 2011.02.23 15:46:00 -
[72]
I think the following applies here:
Random * generator = random. End of.
Living in WH space makes you go nuts and see things that arent there. It's part of the paranoia experience of surviving in wh space.
No, drop rate for sleeper salvage hasnt changed. It changed once to accomodate building the damn ships. It's been so long ago that I cant even remember which salvage item it was but my point is everybody noticed.
Also, in my experience you can get between 0 to 38 from a c5 anom with a double escalation. 0?? yes 0, it has happened to me. Never got enough MNR's from a site to build 1 complete tengu with fotm subs. Note: I said, IN MY EXPERIENCE. Some people told me they got 60 + per site.
In short: OP needs to take a break from the game.
|
Cipher Jones
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.02.24 19:20:00 -
[73]
I got 59 ribbons from the last 22 sites for a 2.68 average.
I will get some more info from corpies and post it, and my next 20+ sites.
I have the aprox. number of NPC's also but i cant remember and left my notes at home.
Those were class 1 sites including the mags and radars but not the gravs and ladars.
|
K'uata Sayus
|
Posted - 2011.02.24 19:44:00 -
[74]
This could all be cleared up if the OP would provide a copy of his birth certificate.
EVERYONE SEEMS NORMAL UNTIL YOU GET TO KNOW THEM. |
Zanetia Coralis
|
Posted - 2011.02.24 19:49:00 -
[75]
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08
Eat troll, eat. You are so weak.
Congrats on still not having a firm position on the subject.
PS: look up the term troll before you use it like a moron
He's right, you are a troll. You don't bring anything to the arguement besides skepticism. When you want to discredit any form of information, you need to come up with some form of proof yourself. The op could have very easily come up with any chart with fake numbers and you would still not believe him. Market information means absolutely nothing since there could simply be more farmers at this point in time.
Honestly, I don't really care what the truth is. However, it seems you have some motive to discredit him (or try) based on the repetitive posts you keep replying with.
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2011.02.24 21:29:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Zanetia Coralis
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08
Eat troll, eat. You are so weak.
Congrats on still not having a firm position on the subject.
PS: look up the term troll before you use it like a moron
He's right, you are a troll. You don't bring anything to the arguement besides skepticism. When you want to discredit any form of information, you need to come up with some form of proof yourself. The op could have very easily come up with any chart with fake numbers and you would still not believe him. Market information means absolutely nothing since there could simply be more farmers at this point in time.
Honestly, I don't really care what the truth is. However, it seems you have some motive to discredit him (or try) based on the repetitive posts you keep replying with.
So you necro'd this thread to make wild accusations about what I may or may not do if the op actually presented some sort of data (re: he literally had none).
What was your contribution to this thread exactly?
(The burden of proof is not on me or anyone else being skeptic: it is on the people claiming there has been a change).
|
Vivian Ramasita
|
Posted - 2011.02.24 21:31:00 -
[77]
Holy crap, I can't believe you guys are still talking about this.
|
Holdout
|
Posted - 2011.02.24 21:46:00 -
[78]
I spent 30 minutes in a WH and got 22 MNR.
The drop rate has been increased significantly.
|
shinigamie
|
Posted - 2011.02.27 22:18:00 -
[79]
Edited by: shinigamie on 27/02/2011 22:21:22
Edited by: shinigamie on 27/02/2011 22:20:19
Edited by: shinigamie on 27/02/2011 22:18:18
Originally by: Zanetia Coralis
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Originally by: Corporal Punishment08
Eat troll, eat. You are so weak.
Congrats on still not having a firm position on the subject.
PS: look up the term troll before you use it like a moron
He's right, you are a troll. You don't bring anything to the arguement besides skepticism. When you want to discredit any form of information, you need to come up with some form of proof yourself. The op could have very easily come up with any chart with fake numbers and you would still not believe him. Market information means absolutely nothing since there could simply be more farmers at this point in time.
Honestly, I don't really care what the truth is. However, it seems you have some motive to discredit him (or try) based on the repetitive posts you keep replying with.
DonÆt be so emo Zanetia, although I know u mean well and your trying to protect some one that seems defenceless. But the OP made some massive statements that require sufficient evidence for it to hold any weight. As a mathematician I would have to 100% agree with sketch since what he is saying is as common sense as it gets to someone who is educated in statistics. if you are not a mathematician, there is no way youÆre going to understand why he requires a good sample data to determine if these statements hold any truth. In fact even if data was provided(and they were not made up) it does not mean itÆs enough to determine anything! Several statistical tests must be done just to determine if the sample data can be used let alone be conclusive! Such as Q tests, F tests, T tests, confidence interval and many more.... However I do stand by what I said in my last post.
sorry this is riatsu
|
Chronnick Bladerunner
|
Posted - 2011.02.28 00:38:00 -
[80]
SAME HERE!
A SIGNIFICANT drop in Nanoribbons has also been observed.
I'd say 50--60% drop at least.
WAS going to report it as a bug...til I read this forum..now I think its probably been done purposefully.
|
Substantia Nigra
|
Posted - 2011.02.28 09:31:00 -
[81]
Despite all the "prove it" and randomness debates, I'd been assuming that the melted drop had been nerfed a few months ago.
Sure, I can go four sites and get none then get six from a site ... but overall in medium term my take seems to have fallen quite a bit.
It's not a huge problem, since I figured it was probably happening to everyone and so if it's a stable longer-term phenomenon the prices would rise to compensate .... so I have been accumulating and have quite a collection in the can waiting for next sellup day.
Reduced drop in the face of unchanged or increasing demand = better seller prices ... and I kinda like that :-)
|
Gankit Spankit
|
Posted - 2011.02.28 18:17:00 -
[82]
agreeing with the op and his wreathes of detailed data (but wont be checking back so feel free to go nuts again once im gone). been in wh's allmost a year and used to pull in 10 - 15 on average per site, but for the last few months we are lucky to get 4 or 5, a site the other day had 3 cap escalations and we pulled in 3 nanos. |
khazak mokl
Amarr
Black Viper Nomads
|
Posted - 2011.02.28 20:25:00 -
[83]
We recently done C5 with the 2 carrier 2 dread capital ship escalations in out home system and got between 6 and 11 nanos per site which is way down on the usual. We havent run these though for a few months so I cant say if its a recent thing or not but last year when we ran them we were getting 30-40 a site with the 4 extra cap waves.
Think were having bad luck with the RND or else somethings changed.
|
Kengutsi Akira
|
Posted - 2011.02.28 20:31:00 -
[84]
ask a question, get a flame war about nothing having to do with the question. Sounds like EVE
------------------------------------
"You know, my foot oughta vandilize your ass" |
Chronnick Bladerunner
|
Posted - 2011.02.28 20:42:00 -
[85]
And THEN people making comments about the forum that has nothing to do with the op either. ^^^^
|
Commander TGK
Gallente
The Deep Space Armada
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 01:53:00 -
[86]
I'm hearing this more and more now, we need a CCP response. This needs to be fixed.
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 01:57:00 -
[87]
Originally by: Commander TGK
I'm hearing this more and more now, we need a CCP response. This needs to be fixed.
Yeah I'm sure they'll respond immediately given the indisputable conclusions drawn from the extensive statistical evidence that has been presented in this thread.
|
Vardec Crom
Executive Intervention
Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 05:01:00 -
[88]
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Originally by: Commander TGK
I'm hearing this more and more now, we need a CCP response. This needs to be fixed.
Yeah I'm sure they'll respond immediately given the indisputable conclusions drawn from the extensive statistical evidence that has been presented in this thread.
So you're suggesting that we have to PROVE to CCP whether or not they changed it, as if CCP themselves didn't know? I don't understand. The community noticed an anomaly in drop rate, and it very well may be nothing, but the WH community would like a response from CCP be it a yes or no. Nobody likes stealth nerfs. Also, I'm not a statistician and have no desire to spend dozens of hours of my free time collecting and interpreting data to MAYBE find a statistically significant conclusion, that would likely be rejected by all the supposed stats majors who would reply, "NOPE. ONLY SAMPLE SIZES OF 1 TRILLION OR MORE ARE RELEVANT" while they themselves are simply parroting their equally delusional counterparts such as yourself.
|
XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 05:13:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Vardec Crom
stuff
The community didn't notice ****. A couple people saw a few sites weren't giving them what they perceived as "the usual" and cried about it on the forums. You see the same thing with exploration drops and invention all the time.
When CCP nerfed NIMs they announced it and explained why. A stealth nerf to drop rates would be useless right now. There is no need for it. Additionally, no one said you need a trillion unit sample size nor did anyone say you needed to do hours of statistical data analysis. Hell all you need to do is keep track of wrecks salvaged and ribbons salvaged. Maybe per site as well. Is that really that hard?
Apparently so. People only ever start to question these things when the drop rates are "reduced." When they're on a luck spree and getting ribbons out the ass, its "just good luck."
And as for your "the WH community would like a response from CCP." Grow up. Your sense of entitlement is pathetic.
|
Vardec Crom
Executive Intervention
Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2011.03.01 05:23:00 -
[90]
Originally by: XXSketchxx
Originally by: Vardec Crom
stuff
The community didn't notice ****. A couple people saw a few sites weren't giving them what they perceived as "the usual" and cried about it on the forums. You see the same thing with exploration drops and invention all the time.
When CCP nerfed NIMs they announced it and explained why. A stealth nerf to drop rates would be useless right now. There is no need for it. Additionally, no one said you need a trillion unit sample size nor did anyone say you needed to do hours of statistical data analysis. Hell all you need to do is keep track of wrecks salvaged and ribbons salvaged. Maybe per site as well. Is that really that hard?
Apparently so. People only ever start to question these things when the drop rates are "reduced." When they're on a luck spree and getting ribbons out the ass, its "just good luck."
And as for your "the WH community would like a response from CCP." Grow up. Your sense of entitlement is pathetic.
I thought it was very clear that I was being hyperbolic in saying 1 trillion sample size to highlight the fact that most people parrot the sample size fallacy whenever statistical evidence is presented.
Secondly, I am not part of the wormhole community, but is a significant and growing proportion of the player base, and if a concern is raised I don't see why it's such a terribly difficult thing for a community manager to email a dev, "Were nanoribbon drop rates nerfed?" Dev: "yes/no" community manager: "ok". It's called transparency and communication, something a game community is certainly entitled to and a company rendering a service should be held accountable for.
As far as attempting to maintaining a spreadsheet and then performing hypothesis tests to determine statistical significance? Yes, I would consider that too much work to prove/disprove a possible stealth nerf, when a simple one word dev response would suffice.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |