Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
missminer69
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 08:48:00 -
[1]
Edited by: missminer69 on 20/04/2011 08:50:05 Just wanted to post a reality check post 0.0 nerf.
A lot of the space I live in is now useless and despite trying for a long time to farm these systems i have now been forced to go to an NPC region to create isk. A lot of people are leaving corp and the alliance etc - this is good in my opinion becuase it seperates out the team players etc.
A lot of these players have left for better space and have chosen to join the holding alliance not fight them for it.
This is not a whine just some feedback. I couldnt care less about the nerf becuase i was in 0.0 long before they seeded sanctums etc. i make isk to kill things it just means i can't pew pew as much any more with not being able to sit at a computer grinding isk with a family to look after.
|
Xtreem
Gallente Knockaround Guys Inc. Sin City Coalition
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 09:17:00 -
[2]
although not popular i can see why they did it, the vast increase in available isk, while good for wallets for us, overall the isk increase ingame could not be sustained, just not enough isk sinks (there needs to be alot more tbh)
|
McRoll
Minmatar Brutor Tribe
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 09:19:00 -
[3]
Edited by: McRoll on 20/04/2011 09:19:34 I would say working as intended. You are supposed to fight over the good spots and players would chase them down- wasnt it what CCP had in mind?
Now if the players join the alliances insted of competing with them, you cannot force them to do so, it's the players fault, not CCP's.
|
Guilliman R
Gallente Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 09:25:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Guilliman R on 20/04/2011 09:25:27
But the good systems can only support 5 people at a time, and there's a VERY SMALL amount of good systems. Where are the other 500 people supposed to go?
------ http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4441/evesigr.jpg
|
El'Niaga
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 09:26:00 -
[5]
Originally by: McRoll Edited by: McRoll on 20/04/2011 09:19:34 I would say working as intended. You are supposed to fight over the good spots and players would chase them down- wasnt it what CCP had in mind?
Now if the players join the alliances insted of competing with them, you cannot force them to do so, it's the players fault, not CCP's.
No one is fighting over rats.
All the fighting is driven by moon goo, as it has been since its introduction and especially the changes that made Tech king.....
|
El'Niaga
Minmatar Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 09:36:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Guilliman R Edited by: Guilliman R on 20/04/2011 09:25:27
But the good systems can only support 5 people at a time, and there's a VERY SMALL amount of good systems. Where are the other 500 people supposed to go?
I do agree with you, and if you look back on my past posts I point out this problem.
The sprawl of empires in 0.0 has more to do with the fact the systems support so few than anything else. If you had 0.0 systems that could support a 100 or more like they can in Hi Sec you'd have folks taking less space. They only take regions because they have to...
|
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 09:37:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Guilliman R Edited by: Guilliman R on 20/04/2011 09:25:27
But the good systems can only support 5 people at a time, and there's a VERY SMALL amount of good systems. Where are the other 500 people supposed to go?
PewPew the 5 already there and take the system for yourself... or is it that you want a nice safe 0.0 to play in? ------------------------ Jint Hikaru - Miner / Salvager / Explorer / SpaceBum "I've got a couple of Strippers on my ship... and they just love to dance!" ------------------------ |
StuRyan
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 09:41:00 -
[8]
In my opinion there needs to be more ways of making ISK in 0.0 other than ratting (or plexing) / mining.
Trading is too unstable with the limited capacity.
If there was going to be something completely tangible for the player it has to be something specific to the region that everyone can get their hands on.
Some would argue moon goo - but this all goes to the alliance and if there is a corp holding a moon it usually ends up in the hands of the corp in forms of ships and mods.
Making a region of space exploitable would be really neat - i mean the players who exploited Worm holes were not lucky - they were clever and adds a completely different dimension to the game.
|
Guilliman R
Gallente Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 09:43:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Jint Hikaru
Originally by: Guilliman R Edited by: Guilliman R on 20/04/2011 09:25:27
But the good systems can only support 5 people at a time, and there's a VERY SMALL amount of good systems. Where are the other 500 people supposed to go?
PewPew the 5 already there and take the system for yourself... or is it that you want a nice safe 0.0 to play in?
So from now on alliances and corporations can be no larger then 20-50 people total? Why artificial limitations? Also, why is it a good idea to cater to only <1% of the current 0.0 population? Didn't we want more people in 0.0?
If you want good 0.0 to be a reason to fight over, they need to be able to cater to hundreds of people. Somehow I doubt 100 sanctums and havens in a single system is a good idea.
The entire idea that you can only support a small amount of people per system (5 at most) and need hundreds to conquer it is a fallacy, it makes no sense what so ever. That's rewarding a select few for the work of many. You cant conquer those systems without massive backup, and we have sov warefare to thank for that.
This change is a direct proof that ccp has no idea how sov politics and mechanics work. ------ http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/4441/evesigr.jpg
|
Grimpak
Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 09:57:00 -
[10]
tbh I'm seeing this nerf more as a way to stifle isk creation than actual political reshuffling.
CCP just decided to sugar-coat it with "oh hey, but don't worry, this will increase conflict!" so that it could (erroneously) be more accepted by the masses. ---
Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 10:03:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Grimpak tbh I'm seeing this nerf more as a way to stifle isk creation than actual political reshuffling.
CCP just decided to sugar-coat it with "oh hey, but don't worry, this will increase conflict!" so that it could (erroneously) be more accepted by the masses.
Those are some great choices, either CCP is incompetent or is intentionally lying to us. TBH I have hard time knowing what to believe. Not because the options are in the tinfoil hat territory, but because they are both very plausible options.
|
Grimpak
Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 10:07:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue
Originally by: Grimpak tbh I'm seeing this nerf more as a way to stifle isk creation than actual political reshuffling.
CCP just decided to sugar-coat it with "oh hey, but don't worry, this will increase conflict!" so that it could (erroneously) be more accepted by the masses.
Those are some great choices, either CCP is incompetent or is intentionally lying to us. TBH I have hard time knowing what to believe. Not because the options are in the tinfoil hat territory, but because they are both very plausible options.
well, the political reshuffling might be one of the reasons why it was done like that, but not the only one nor the most important. ---
Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
ivar R'dhak
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 10:28:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue Those are some great choices, either CCP is incompetent or is intentionally lying to us..
Yeah, both. They have no fncking clue how 0.0 works and about basic psychology. Like for example you DON¦T take away "free cake" without giving out some other free cookies(where the frack are the agent changes CCP???).
And the lie is that they actually believed this will lead to fighting. This is about removing isk-faucets, fullstop. ______________ Mal-¦Appears we got here just in a nick of time. What does that make us?¦ Zoe-`Big damn heroes, sir.` Mal-¦Aint we just.¦ |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 10:41:00 -
[14]
How much ISK do you need to survive? I can make do quite easily in FW for about 100M a week and that is without insuring anything (forgetfulness is the new cool!).
One hundred is about 5 hours for me doing lazy stuff like exploration, low-sec ratting and selling PvP loot.
Sounds like your problem is not so much a reduction of income but that the local SC blob is gouging you something fierce and/or that you regularly suicide your ships (read: bad at PvP).
|
Aderata Nonkin
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 10:53:00 -
[15]
The only thing that is nerfed here is the vocal minority's lack of grasping reality. They lack logical thinking and basic sane reasoning. However, that is something outside of CCP's control and it stands to believe this vocal minority has to be dealt with in another way.
æIf you are not big enough to lose, then you are not big enough to win.Æ |
Xanarae
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 11:05:00 -
[16]
what do you need isk for anyway, if your alliance has a proper reimbursement programme and you follow the directions, then you should only lose 5-10m per ship you lose :/
kill 10 rats a day and you're fine, or do some exploration and make much more, sanctums and belts arent the only means to make isk in nullsec.
|
Ioci
Gallente Morrigna Order
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 11:19:00 -
[17]
Quite a few valid points made here. Moon goo, belt chaining and what you need to ISK milk a system, mine its belts to oblivion and what you need to defend it.
We can all agree I am sure this was done for the very reason CCP said it was done. They got a sudden spike in Plex paid accounts. I noticed when the server status became Unknown and 5 minutes prior to it, there was 18K, then 15K then unknown. I'd speculate most of that is bot. That puts EVE at around 35% macro. That's the problem. They are building mechanics to fight bots and it's a death spiral. |
Grimpak
Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 11:34:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Grimpak on 20/04/2011 11:34:37
Originally by: Ioci That's the problem. They are building mechanics to fight bots and it's a death spiral.
that might be true. however most botting occurs on belts and not anoms.
however if CCP's idea was forcing player base to move their nullsec isk generation from anoms to belts so that they actually cut off the bots, then the change has some merit. ---
Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
Ioci
Gallente Morrigna Order
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 12:03:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Grimpak Edited by: Grimpak on 20/04/2011 11:34:37
Originally by: Ioci That's the problem. They are building mechanics to fight bots and it's a death spiral.
that might be true. however most botting occurs on belts and not anoms.
however if CCP's idea was forcing player base to move their nullsec isk generation from anoms to belts so that they actually cut off the bots, then the change has some merit.
As long as they don't force more people to bot to compete and this is one part of alot of problems now in EVE 0.0 sec. An IHub used to be a 500 mill ISK sink. Now its an ISK transfer. A large POS used to be a 400 mill ISK sink, now its a 200 mill transfer. POS fuel was an ISK sink, it isn't any more. The dynamics are working against EVE. |
Grimpak
Gallente The Whitehound Corporation Frontline Assembly Point
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 13:37:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Ioci
Originally by: Grimpak Edited by: Grimpak on 20/04/2011 11:34:37
Originally by: Ioci That's the problem. They are building mechanics to fight bots and it's a death spiral.
that might be true. however most botting occurs on belts and not anoms.
however if CCP's idea was forcing player base to move their nullsec isk generation from anoms to belts so that they actually cut off the bots, then the change has some merit.
As long as they don't force more people to bot to compete and this is one part of alot of problems now in EVE 0.0 sec. An IHub used to be a 500 mill ISK sink. Now its an ISK transfer. A large POS used to be a 400 mill ISK sink, now its a 200 mill transfer. POS fuel was an ISK sink, it isn't any more. The dynamics are working against EVE.
well tbh only time can tell.
atm the the only thing that happens is a drop on isk injected. ---
Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
|
Michelle Vega
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 16:48:00 -
[21]
We took down our remaining POS's and moved a 250+ man corp to highsec/lowsec. We now make MORE blitzing lvl5 missions than we made after the changes. Find new ways.
|
missminer69
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 17:44:00 -
[22]
i do not understand the hole isk sinks etc.... please explain.
|
Aessoroz
Nohbdy.
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 17:45:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Aessoroz on 20/04/2011 17:45:36
Originally by: StuRyan
Trading is too unstable with the limited capacity.
Don't worry! CCP is gonna remove jump bridges to make it impossible and fix that bug of it being even possible.
|
Ioci
Gallente Morrigna Order
|
Posted - 2011.04.20 17:55:00 -
[24]
Originally by: missminer69 i do not understand the hole isk sinks etc.... please explain.
True ISK sinks remove the ISK from the game. A skill book is an ISK sink. Nobody sold you the book, its an NPC seeded item. Planetary Interaction took alot of 0.0 sec seeded items off the grid from POS to modules to Sov stuff. That made EVE better but it also removed ISK sinks. Huge ones. They weren't replaced.
I'm guessing the reason the nerf was pointed at 0.0 sec is because those sinks should have been replaced with process to replace inside 0.0 sec. No need to make ISK for that stuff now, you can make it all without ISK so not as much need for 0.0 sec ISK. EVE is a monetary game though. Very few people produce. Most buy so ISK making systems being stripped away impacts in a deeper way than manufacture and barter. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |