| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11703
   |
Posted - 2015.07.08 16:11:14 -
[1] - Quote
EvilweaselSA wrote:The anom change is a great change, by the way, especially undoing the over-nerfing of garbage truesec in the original greyscale anom nerf. It might be tolerable to live in now.
Amen
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11703
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 16:18:53 -
[2] - Quote
Ab'del Abu wrote:Increasing anomaly spawns is somewhat contradictory to incentivize group PVE, you know that right?
I really think Pirate Detection Arrays should work more like Survey Networks and Entrapment Arrays do. A Pirate Detection Array should only increase the chances that sites spawn in a system, however, it shouldn't give you a fixed amount of sites to run. This way, PVE content per systems would be limited and people would actually be forced to spread out and travel to make isk (similar to the way it is in wormholes).
That would make people spread out and travel, the Faction Warfare and high sec incursions.
Null anomalies don't pay what wormhole anoms do and other forms of k space pve are competitive with null anoms. The ONLY way to make a living off null anoms is chaining them unlike wormhole anoms that can pay enough to be worthwhile before they run out
Without a significant rise in the value of each null anom, The end result of what you propose would be a replay of what happened when this change went into effect.: ie less null activity rather than more. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11703
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 16:39:31 -
[3] - Quote
Querns wrote:Soldarius wrote:I find much irony in that, after this effectively caused the downfall of the old NC, those changes are being reversed 4 years later. (Ref: senior members of the coalition telling ME/RAGE/etc that their space (Geminate and Vale) wasn't worth saving anymore.) This is not really the case.
It's fairly close, one of the big problems with anomalies is the fact that so few systems would produce enough of the good ones to be worth doing, forcing everyone who wanted to rat to bundle up and trip all over each other while creating nice red Dotlan Beacons for everyone who wanted to come disrupt you.
That cause me and a lot of PVErs I know to make and keep high sec pve alts. These changes don't cure the disease, but they definitely lessen the symptoms. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11703
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 16:40:42 -
[4] - Quote
Syrias Bizniz wrote:Was almost pissing my self in excitement on the +75% anomalies thing, left disappointed when 0 (ZERO) Rally Points were added.
6/10 farmer detected. Named rally points are good even if their escalations aren't as great. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11703
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 16:53:35 -
[5] - Quote
Lim Yoona wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Syrias Bizniz wrote:Was almost pissing my self in excitement on the +75% anomalies thing, left disappointed when 0 (ZERO) Rally Points were added. 6/10 farmer detected. Named rally points are good even if their escalations aren't as great. I do nothing but rally points exclusively because when a roamer comes into my system in his uncatchable interceptor the first thing he does is warp to a forsaken hub or sanctum while my butt is getting safe 
Oh me too lol, which is why I mentioned named Rally Points.
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11704
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 19:07:19 -
[6] - Quote
Yroc Jannseen wrote:Quote:This means that a fully upgraded system will have 35 anomalies instead of the current 20 (a 75% increase) This sounds great, but surely your statistics show that there is a huge drop off in the number of anomalies that are run below Forsaken Hubs. So in the example Quote:+2 Sanctums, +3 Havens, +2 Forsaken Hubs, +4 Forsaken Rally Points, +2 Forlorn Hubs, +1 Hub, and +1 Forlorn Rally Point. Only 7 of those are sites that will likely be run. Are you looking into the reasons why players have deemed half of the anomalies in a system to be useless?
This may be true where you are at, but actually people do run other anom types ever since CCP upped the escalation chances across the board. Forsaken Rally points have always been good and knowledgeable anom runners do them instead of F.Hubs because of the awfulness of the 9/10 (8/10s across the board have horrible drop rates, but it's better than doing a 30 jump Fleet Staging point). And Forlorn Hubs pay better while being easy to afktar or sniper-rat in. Regular Hubs are great for new players.
The only 'useless' addition is the Forlorn Rally point and all the "Hidden" null anoms, those need some work.
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11707
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 12:07:06 -
[7] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:I would be ok with the reduction of c5-npc nullsec if the safety of all nullsec and lowsec was compromised by a change to how local function so that ratters still have fear of getting hit by anybody.
Probably the easiest and most direct way would be to change local system chat to local constellation chat.
The average region has about 10 to 20 constellations and 6 to 12 systems in each constellation. So instead of instant Intel per system, it would be instant Intel per constellation. You can't tell where in a constellation a person is, you just know they are somewhere there. Gates can be monitored, instant anon clockers can hunt, all pve in a system doesn't stop because 1 anonymous person logged into the system. Risk is brought back, a greater voice is created, hunting of larger groups spans between the constellation vs just the system. Hunting and roaming with groups increases because now when you enter a empty constellation, you know it's empty, and when you enter a busy constellation, you know people are there.
You change local to constellation chat, where a plus 1 doesn't cause everybody to insta warp to a pos.. I'd be ok with the spawn changes. You realize of course you would then have a whole constellation of ratters docking up or running to pos's until the location of those entering it was known?
You wouldn't have a whole constellation of ratters docking up or running to POSes, you'd have them running to Faction Warfare, High Sec SOE missions or High Sec Incursions....again....
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11707
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 12:09:31 -
[8] - Quote
Sigras wrote:I fully support the idea of group only content in null sec, but I'm not the biggest fan of artificial limits.
Couldnt we simply make a type of anom that is unable to be soloed?
I'm thinking a gated anom so no carriers, and 1000 DPS omni damage output with a really high active tank to EHP ratio... So something like a 1300 DPS active tank. Top all that off with a respawning neut tower or two and you got yourself an anom that cant be soloed... Thoughts?
People will just stick Level 5 Mission fit passive Tengus/Lokis into it...and solo it. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11707
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 12:13:46 -
[9] - Quote
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:SCom Thor wrote:(...)
FFS get your heads out of your ass, it's clear as daylight: REDUCE the number of anoms/system so one system won't be enough for 100 carebears, increase their ISK/h so to motivate hisec mission runners to move into nullsec, and then come back for more suggestion.
(...) Here lies a common misconception, so let me adresss it: choosing a security level it's not about the "reward" part of the risk/reward ration. Pumping up the reward of a certain securiy level just fills up the pockets of those who adopted that certain risk. So no. More rewards don't will make people move out of highsec. But they certainly will allow nullbears to rake up ISK even faster than before, as if iSK was an issue in nullsec. I just find ironical how, suddenly, nullsec PvE has become the most important issue to adress right now. Oh yes. Forget about the 73% of guys who log into highsec: it's not as if they were quitting in hordes as PCU digs itself below 2008 levels, no. It's all about poor nullerites and incursion runners who don't rack up enough billions per month! Frankly, each time I ask myself "What has CCP done for me in the last years?" I feel stupider and stupider about giving them any money... 
And yet you will continue to, so don't act like you won't.
Some of those 73% are US, captive "nullbears" who in some cases will be free to go home to null where we belong, unchained from the shackless of high sec where people like you get rich from selling us ammo to use in your incursions. Null Sec Libre! |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11719
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 12:18:17 -
[10] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Pirate Detection Array Changes
What a wonderfull conflict driver... Alliance with huge amount of memebers don't need to conquer anymore, they just upgrade their own systems? What is the reason to go to war?
This is the faulty thinking of the past.: Quote:Expected consequences
Some alliances will immediately start wanting to look for better space
In the longer run, there'll be more conflicts going on, with more localized goals
Newer alliances will have an easier time getting a foothold in nullsec
Coalitions will be marginally less stable
Alliances will have to choose more carefully what space they develop, where their staging systems are, and so on (low truesec systems generally tend to be in strategically inconvenient places)
NONE of that happened, because NO ONE fights for anomaly and mining space. When CCP nerf anomalies and the upgrade system, we didn't fight for more space, we fought to see who was the fastest at making high sec incursion and Faction Warfare Stealth Bomber alts lol. Sov space became renter space because generally only renters (and scrub frontline alliance members to dumb to to get high sec incursion and FW alts) valued the space then.
CCP is partially fixing this by upping the amount of people who can actually live in a system. They aren't directly boosting null resident income (sure, you can use more alts to farm, but that means you have higher overhead in the form or more plex or subscription fees to pay), just making it space more livable by more people. More people in null means more chances for conflict because raiders WILL come into your space and WILL tackle ratting carriers and WILL form defense fleets to save said carriers etc etc, wormholes or not.
It amazes me after years of seeing the effects of bad thinking (like this example of thinking that keeping sov space nerfed in "Greyscale 2011" will drive conflict) people still cling to it. How many more years of proof do we need to see that something doesn't work?
|
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11720
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 13:40:27 -
[11] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:
NONE of that happened, because NO ONE fights for anomaly and mining space.
and they will now? It's like more anoms, sigs etc. what will this change? The urge to log for 4 hour window and see where is entosis link in use? This will become tedious very fast. I liked E-links at start (good replacement for hp grind) but knowing the community it may become not entertaining at all.
Players don't fight over anomaly space. CCPs un-nerfing of the anomaly upgrades system (it is an un-nerfing rather than a 'buff') means pve players will be able to spread out a bit more from the "ratting hub" systems that were easily cloaky camped. This means more targets for roaming gangs as someone will slip up and not watch intel channels. More content like this is good for the game, and CCP didn't understand this when they nerfed system military upgrades in 2011.
Quote:Jenn aSide wrote: When CCP nerf anomalies and the upgrade system, we didn't fight for more space, we fought to see who was the fastest at making high sec incursion and Faction Warfare Stealth Bomber alts lol. It's the problem of incursions and FW that pay such amount of ISK.
Which CCP isn't going to fix. So since they aren't, they have to do something to make null livable for grunt pve pilots (which in turn makes null more attractive for roaming raiders, it's an eco system). More anoms is a step (but only a step) in the right direction.
Quote:
What is the actual number of residents of all nullsec alliances? 12k goons only? Don't think so.
Goons have nothing to do with anything. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
11750
|
Posted - 2015.07.13 12:54:40 -
[12] - Quote
Jeremiah Saken wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:I personally hate Burner missions. When puzzles are figured they may become boring. Null need missions, for solos and groups. Anoms are the most boring part of PvE ever. I tried to do them in null with rattle. After 3 days I've started to wonder what I'm doing with my life. I can't imagine someone could be doing them on daily basis, only mining was more boring, I even felt asleep once.
I do them on a daily basis, and i love it.
For me, the keys to the fun is not getting caught by neutrals, getting faction spawns and escalations (traveling for the escalations can be harrowing), finding new ways to do them (I'm having fun with Dual FoF missile Ravens right now, Machariel plus fof FoF/Sentry Fleet phoon is what I do when i really want to rake in isk and escalations) and the fact that they are a million times less tedius than missions (which make you dock and undock all the damn time) helps too.
Like mining it isn't for everyone, but as always, "fun" is subjective.
|
| |
|