EVE Search - Dear CCP - You broke nullsec...

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Dear CCP - You broke nullsec...

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Michael J Fox	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:23:00 - [31] Originally by: Aldo Bridger Originally by: Michael J Fox massive amount of pvp for an area that only holds 11% of the playerbase You mean to tell me people pvp more in nullsec? this just in: null sec pvp shocker
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:44:00 - [32] Patience my dear. Think of the nerf-bat as a pendulum, the moons will get theirs away on the return swing Ratting has always been the first to be changed when economy needed tweaking due to the ease with which it can be done (bounties, loot tables etc). We have all become fat and complacent from the numerous ISK faucets .. it does the economy no good if everyone has a copy of the ISK printing plates.
HeliosGal Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:47:00 - [33] all that ccp is doing is basically nuking all income, it allows quicker isk accumulation quicker ship building now it takes longer less pvp more grind more players leaving game wormhole space seems fine tho hope ccp have thought this through
knobber Jobbler Executive Intervention Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2011.04.12 09:59:00 - [34] Originally by: Michael J Fox Originally by: Kijo Rikki Empire Region - Ships / Pods (24hrs) 1. Map The Forge 2597 / 198 2. Map Essence 2406 / 186 3. Map Heimatar 2176 / 160 4. Map Lonetrek 1820 / 90 5. Map Domain 1493 / 90 6. Map The Citadel 1406 / 131 7. Map Sinq Laison 1396 / 117 8. Map Metropolis 964 / 112 9. Map Verge Vendor 875 / 37 10. Map Tash-Murkon 681 / 57 0.0 Region - Ships / Pods (24 hrs) 1. Map Curse 729 / 291 2. Map Fountain 635 / 328 3. Map Vale of the Silent 650 / 284 4. Map Geminate 631 / 229 5. Map Pure Blind 533 / 235 6. Map Catch 473 / 213 7. Map Syndicate 422 / 172 8. Map Delve 317 / 183 9. Map Venal 318 / 153 10. Map Tribute 298 / 165 EDIT: For further perspective: Curse averaged 30.38 kills per hour yesterday. Curse has 50 systems. That's .61 kills per hour per system. now consider this: 80% of players live in high sec. 11% in null sec. when you throw these additional statistics in it looks like null is doing a massive amount of pvp for an area that only holds 11% of the playerbase. high sec rools, null sec drools. Those statistics tell us nothing. Null sec alliances use low sec too. We need low sec statistics. How many high sec losses were down to incursions and more importantly Concorde? We also need ISK lost in those systems. One capital battle and a titan or two lost in Curse would be more ISK than probably the top two high sec regions in lost ISK. If we add SOV structures and POS lost to that then high sec would look even worse compared to null sec in ISK invested and lost. We also need ship types used and lost. If all those ships lost in Tribute were hellcat abaddons and all the ships lost in the Forge were frgiates and cruisers then those statistics would look utterly different. 1 SOV battle might involve hundreds of billions in ships, you might get losses on both sides totalling 50b and that is just one battle in a war. Its still impressive for 11% of the player base but add in all the other statistics we need to really look at this objectivly and high sec PVP will look alarming cheap and poor.
Gustav Knuttsen	Posted - 2011.04.12 10:43:00 - [35] Well the worst thing is that nobody from CCP is looking on forums. (only moderators) so writing here is useless ... Sorry to say ...
Virtue Maulerant	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:14:00 - [36] Edited by: Virtue Maulerant on 12/04/2011 11:14:27 This thread speaks the truth,the 0.0 change was implemented without being given the appropriate thought.
sonewiv	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:22:00 - [37] Im confused about this change that broke nullsec. since patch, I now have 12 sanctums in one system. Lol I hope this is working as intended ;)
Signal11th Versatech Co.	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:42:00 - [38] Originally by: sonewiv Im confused about this change that broke nullsec. since patch, I now have 12 sanctums in one system. Lol I hope this is working as intended ;) Nope you see if you would have been a clever troll you could have said I now have 6/7 sanctums in my system and some muppets would have believed you.
sonewiv	Posted - 2011.04.12 11:52:00 - [39] tell you what, we get chribba to hold the isk, Ill bet you any amount of isk you want that Im telling the truth, I will even give you 3/1 odds ;)
Aneu Angellus Caldari SKULLDOGS RED.OverLord	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:03:00 - [40] Originally by: sonewiv tell you what, we get chribba to hold the isk, Ill bet you any amount of isk you want that Im telling the truth, I will even give you 3/1 odds ;) You really are a bad troll, out! SHOOO! ___ Death Pain Suffering DPS - Recruitment Open Aneu

Hana Steelethorne	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:07:00 - [41] Well, if CCP developers would wake up long enough from their tequila and hooker induced stupor, they might stop doing the stupid **** they are doing. But I doubt it.
Scralt	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:18:00 - [42] Nobody here understand the true. They put a new kind of PvP : Communauty vs CCP.
Carniflex StarHunt R.A.G.E	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:19:00 - [43] While the proposed ideas are less than stellar they might be better than current crap. Well anyway, main obstacle to small alliance / large corp claiming null sec is the raw amount of HP one needs to dig through at specified timers in combination with super capital numbers. What kicked my faith in CCP competence in nuts, however, in the 1.4.1 expansion was the completetly out-of-the-blue clearly untested turnaround in null sec vision (introduced in Dominion) with no other explanation than "our models predict there will be more conflict" while every player with clue was telling them it will just screw over smaller alliances. Dominion system had many faults and it was certainly less than ideal system, but one thing that they got right with it was making claiming null sec make economic sense compared to hi sec. Now it's wasteland again with occasional higher true sec oasis. People built stations based on the Dominion system, invested in infrastructure. And then CCP in their infinite wisdom decided "it's easy to do" and turned your fertile soil into a Gobi Desert overnight. Flushing down the drain past year and some of player effort and empire building. Yeah you can mine gold in there (Tech), however the population that your previously fertile land was capable of supporting is starving overnight. Main issue is communication or to be precise almost total lack of it. In combination with well .. outright stupid decision. TBH I would be really interested of seeing that "model" of theirs that predicts that "there shall be more pewpew". As my model (based on personal experience and some spreadsheets about what makes isk where) just predicts exodus of iskmaking characters back to empire leaving just pvp alts behind in 0.0, as it was before Dominion. So they nerfed what they got right in Dominion and left stuff thats wrong untouched (supers, the huge hp structures sov system and timers implemented in a way that makes blobbing mandatory).
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia Test Alliance Please Ignore	Posted - 2011.04.12 12:56:00 - [44] Edited by: Rastigan on 12/04/2011 12:56:52 Originally by: Kijo Rikki Agreed. Maybe everyone took a break this week or something since the patch, but pvp took a nosedive from where I'm sitting. I wish I could find a chart or something from before the patch and afterwards so we could get some hard data, but all I can find is dotlan. I dunno what it was like before the patch, but, pretty sad that the most deadly 0.0 system falls in 9th place behind empire regions. Empire Region - Ships / Pods (24hrs) 1. Map The Forge 2597 / 198 2. Map Essence 2406 / 186 3. Map Heimatar 2176 / 160 4. Map Lonetrek 1820 / 90 5. Map Domain 1493 / 90 6. Map The Citadel 1406 / 131 7. Map Sinq Laison 1396 / 117 8. Map Metropolis 964 / 112 9. Map Verge Vendor 875 / 37 10. Map Tash-Murkon 681 / 57 0.0 Region - Ships / Pods (24 hrs) 1. Map Curse 729 / 291 2. Map Fountain 635 / 328 3. Map Vale of the Silent 650 / 284 4. Map Geminate 631 / 229 5. Map Pure Blind 533 / 235 6. Map Catch 473 / 213 7. Map Syndicate 422 / 172 8. Map Delve 317 / 183 9. Map Venal 318 / 153 10. Map Tribute 298 / 165 EDIT: For further perspective: Curse averaged 30.38 kills per hour yesterday. Curse has 50 systems. That's .61 kills per hour per system. What does this show ? Other than NPC rats blow up more ships than players ? and that people like med clone jumping in highsec.
Eris Alamina	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:31:00 - [45] Im sure that the results wont be the ones they listed in the dev blog, which just proofs the "genious" that implemented and the employer that authorized it (CCP) dont even known the game. And on top of that why they didnt said anything during fanfest, cause they knew the players will burn the place down and tell them to fk off. This was a stab in the back and a fk you to the null sec costumer/player. I am mad bro
knobber Jobbler Executive Intervention Controlled Chaos	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:34:00 - [46] Originally by: Carniflex While the proposed ideas are less than stellar they might be better than current crap. Well anyway, main obstacle to small alliance / large corp claiming null sec is the raw amount of HP one needs to dig through at specified timers in combination with super capital numbers. What kicked my faith in CCP competence in nuts, however, in the 1.4.1 expansion was the completetly out-of-the-blue clearly untested turnaround in null sec vision (introduced in Dominion) with no other explanation than "our models predict there will be more conflict" while every player with clue was telling them it will just screw over smaller alliances. Dominion system had many faults and it was certainly less than ideal system, but one thing that they got right with it was making claiming null sec make economic sense compared to hi sec. Now it's wasteland again with occasional higher true sec oasis. People built stations based on the Dominion system, invested in infrastructure. And then CCP in their infinite wisdom decided "it's easy to do" and turned your fertile soil into a Gobi Desert overnight. Flushing down the drain past year and some of player effort and empire building. Yeah you can mine gold in there (Tech), however the population that your previously fertile land was capable of supporting is starving overnight. Main issue is communication or to be precise almost total lack of it. In combination with well .. outright stupid decision. TBH I would be really interested of seeing that "model" of theirs that predicts that "there shall be more pewpew". As my model (based on personal experience and some spreadsheets about what makes isk where) just predicts exodus of iskmaking characters back to empire leaving just pvp alts behind in 0.0, as it was before Dominion. So they nerfed what they got right in Dominion and left stuff thats wrong untouched (supers, the huge hp structures sov system and timers implemented in a way that makes blobbing mandatory). What about the new DED sites? Do they not make up some of the shortfall in ISK? I've not looked yet. I do know some 0.0 residents have left in a knee jerk reaction though.
Kijo Rikki Caldari Point of No Return Waterboard	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:35:00 - [47] Edited by: Kijo Rikki on 12/04/2011 13:36:20 Originally by: Rastigan Edited by: Rastigan on 12/04/2011 12:56:52 What does this show ? Other than NPC rats blow up more ships than players ? and that people like med clone jumping in highsec. Those statistics from dotlan are pulled from eve-kill.net. Pretty sure those are only player on player kills. Quote: Null sec alliances use low sec too. We need low sec statistics. How many high sec losses were down to incursions and more importantly Concorde? Again, pretty sure eve-kill doesnt report npc kills unless another player got a shot in.
Narisa Bithon Caldari	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:44:00 - [48] Originally by: Aneu Angellus Dear CCP, I have been an avid eve player since the beta and have enjoyed something from each free expansion since that time but to be blunt, this latest part-expansion sucks. You have gimped nullsec on the off-chance that alliances and powerblocks will start to attack each-other for better space... As a former political player I can guarantee you this will not be the case, the larger blocks know its better to earn at-least something than nothing at all - plus with moongoo still being a hugely viable income source all you have done is nerf individual player income rather than overall alliance income. I find it difficult to understand the mindset behind the change and I really think that CCP need to invest more time in how alliances and blocks work before they rush out a change such as this. A far more realistic approach that would not have screwed over almost all of the non-botting nullsec money makers would have been to rework moon-goo but sadly this is not the case. Once again you show how you do not understand nullsec and that has sadly been the case since you introduced sov taking and nullsec alliances. You want conflict drivers but fail to see that you will not be able to put them in and have people use them unless you FORCE it through, changes such as: >> Limit space that can be taken over by an alliance, a flat limit, dont base it on corporations or the like, a simple flat limit >> Half the amount of standings an alliance can set and introduce a limitation that if the alliance doesnt have corp A set blue and a corp inside said alliance does, the alliance standings override the corps standings and Corp A is neutral. >> Introduce constellation capitals - every const in eve has a capital system, if you control the capital you control the constelation (but not in a sov point of view). You may put up TCU's in every system in the constellation, this means that enemy alliances will need to break through each system on the way to your capital otherwise it will not become vulnerable no matter what you do. This means taking space is harder but will give longer conflicts and build greater rivalry between alliances (more fun for all!) >>If you want to go down the route of more bonus's for your alliance then you can control constellation capitals but you will reduce your buffer of "safe systems" around the capital. This was just pulled out of my ass and I can see this increasing fighting, even if its not intentional fighting, generally if a corp member see's a neutral they will shoot it, even if it is meant to be blue! (This also breaks down powerblocks due to them not actually being able to set each other blue). To me this can only be good for eve, but who am I, I am sure many people will disagree and have better ideas but until they are aired CCP will continue to push out crap such as the last patch!. Anyway, its time to go do some more work... Aneu stop botting and null sec would be worth more
Janu Hull Caldari Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:52:00 - [49] Originally by: Signal11th Originally by: sonewiv Im confused about this change that broke nullsec. since patch, I now have 12 sanctums in one system. Lol I hope this is working as intended ;) Nope you see if you would have been a clever troll you could have said I now have 6/7 sanctums in my system and some muppets would have believed you. Except that he is speaking the truth. My corp's home system jumped from 6-7 Drone Hordes to 10-12 consistently. And this is only a -.66 system. I had a few concerns when the changes were announced, and those have quietly been laid to rest. In the event of an emergency, my ego may be used as a floatation device.
War Kitten Panda McLegion	Posted - 2011.04.12 13:53:00 - [50] Confirming that these ideas had to have come from someone's ass. Arbitrary rules and limits are not a good idea in a sandbox game. Subtle incentives like "this space is better than that space" are.

Luwc Caldari Easy Co. Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2011.04.12 14:10:00 - [51] the best 0.0 atm is the NPC controlled space... thats it.
Luwc Caldari Easy Co. Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2011.04.12 14:13:00 - [52] plus ... if you move to 0.0 for your massive pvp battles have fun with the clusterf**cks aka. lagfests ccp promised to fix years ago btw.
Tosser Galore	Posted - 2011.04.12 15:02:00 - [53] Originally by: Luwc plus ... if you move to 0.0 for your massive pvp battles have fun with the clusterfcks aka. lagfests ccp promised to fix years ago btw. If you stay in empire space and like to do station games with the fail neut reping *gots, also enjoy the lagfest. Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Hun Tim	Posted - 2011.04.12 15:31:00 - [54] Originally by: Kijo Rikki Edited by: Kijo Rikki on 12/04/2011 13:36:20 Those statistics from dotlan are pulled from eve-kill.net. Pretty sure those are only player on player kills. ... Again, pretty sure eve-kill doesnt report npc kills unless another player got a shot in. At least in w-space, dotlan stats DO include NPC kills of player ships. Seen noobs come in and quickly die to sites before any pvp could get setup. Ship death showed up on dotlan.
Deb Dukar Minmatar	Posted - 2011.04.12 15:58:00 - [55] Edited by: Deb Dukar on 12/04/2011 15:59:07 i would be a happy pilot if some1 starts to explain me why a small aliance would even want to move into (crappy truesec) 0.0. beside some low quality minerals and a random 6/10 plex from time to time its kinda worthless now. so please, why move into 0.0 if u can be a much richer and safer guy with doing missions? serious question in case i fail to see something. PS: at least its for me this way unless i start train mining. ------------------------- horray for typos
Irani Firecam Gallente Lords 0f Justice Fidelas Constans	Posted - 2011.04.12 16:02:00 - [56] Edited by: Irani Firecam on 12/04/2011 16:02:41 Originally by: Kijo Rikki Edited by: Kijo Rikki on 12/04/2011 13:36:20 Originally by: Rastigan Edited by: Rastigan on 12/04/2011 12:56:52 What does this show ? Other than NPC rats blow up more ships than players ? and that people like med clone jumping in highsec. Those statistics from dotlan are pulled from eve-kill.net. Pretty sure those are only player on player kills. Quote: Null sec alliances use low sec too. We need low sec statistics. How many high sec losses were down to incursions and more importantly Concorde? Again, pretty sure eve-kill doesnt report npc kills unless another player got a shot in. Dotlan statistics are not pulled from eve-kill.net, they are pulled from the eve api server: http://api.eveonline.com/map/Kills.xml.aspx, eve-id documentation: http://wiki.eve-id.net/APIv2_Map_Kills_XML My Wallpaper
Kijo Rikki Caldari Point of No Return Waterboard	Posted - 2011.04.12 17:11:00 - [57] That's wierd. Quote: Recent Ship+Pod Kills (last 48h) - powered by eve-kill.net
Lord Mudekai Caldari hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2011.04.12 17:53:00 - [58] Edited by: Lord Mudekai on 12/04/2011 17:54:59 Ive got an idea how to get this all settled and fixed How about CCP actuallys come out from their secluded super space and has to come out to 0.0 with the rest of us WITHOUT all their fancy smancy ships and has to duke it out with the rest of the 0.0 populace with the same as we do t1 t2 ships caps supercaps etc and has to go through the same taking sov upkeep maintaining defending it like the rest of us do and see how they like all these "Changes" they have made instead of sitting back in their secure space looking at the rest of us through a one way mirror and deciding "Oh this is totally gonna fix this" Edit: Also they have to make isk the same way the rest of us does and NO they cant just make ships out of thin air either they need to buy or manufacture everything like we do Thank you Mud
Irani Firecam Gallente Lords 0f Justice Fidelas Constans	Posted - 2011.04.12 17:57:00 - [59] Originally by: Kijo Rikki That's wierd. Quote: Recent Ship+Pod Kills (last 48h) - powered by eve-kill.net Yes, that's for specific kill mails. My Wallpaper
Kijo Rikki Caldari Point of No Return Waterboard	Posted - 2011.04.12 18:30:00 - [60] I see. Regardless, 30 kills per hour in a 50 system region deemed the "most deadly" is pretty weak. Even taking the estimated 10% of the EvE population who lives in 0.0, that brings you down to an average of 4,000+ player numbers that are fairly consistent over a 24 hour period. Divide that by the top 10 0.0 regions and that brings you down to 400 players, and all they can average is 30 kills per hour for an entire region. You could probably camp the entry to null from empire and get those kind of numbers. Unless all the action is happening in one or two systems, I don't see how this could be heralded as an improvement to pvp. From my own personal perspective, its been very quiet in my neck of the woods this past week, we barely got any visitors from our typical nemesis corps and our roams have been painfully long to find any fights in our region, to a point where we've purposefully thrown ourselves at superior fleets just for the chance to shoot at something. I wonder why eve-kill or battleclinic doesn't have chart data for this, alot of people would be interested to see these stats, especally at a time like this.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.