EVE Search - Radar sites were nerfed after patch, Why?

All Channels

Missions & Complexes

Radar sites were nerfed after patch, Why?

» 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)
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 2066	Posted - 2011.12.15 15:25:00 - [31] - Quote Rubinia Valeska wrote: Dont listen to Tippia. Radar sites are useless now, do not do them, just filter them out. See it as positive thing, you gain a mid slot. Yes. Listen to this manGÇª GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs.
Plyn the recon inc KRYSIS. 7	Posted - 2011.12.15 16:43:00 - [32] - Quote Or people could just work together. The OP's statement isn't a conclusion, it's a hypothesis. How about.... Instead of flaming each other when NEITHER side has enough evidence, you combine your evidence and create a result. Every time you run a radar site for the next however long, post the truesec of the system you were in, the number of cans that had stuff, the number of cans that didn't have stuff, and the approximate value of the loot. You can even use alts if you're worried about people knowing your habits. In under a week's time you will have thousands of records from all different areas, and THEN you guys can start arguing about what the numbers mean. Come2Nullsec
FloppieTheBanjoClown The Skunkworks Petition Blizzard 403	Posted - 2011.12.15 17:19:00 - [33] - Quote DeMichael Crimson wrote: I agree with the OP and see no reason to do 100, 1000 or even a million Radar sites.. 10 sites is more than enough to ascertain a basic conclusion. No, it's not. When I'm prowling for wormholes, I stop for any radar, ded 4/10s, and Watch sites I find. Since I started exploration a year ago, I can remember multi-day runs of bad luck where I found almost nothing, followed by multiple days making over 200 million isk an hour. Run 10 Gurista Scout Outposts and you'll decide a "good" drop is worth about 50-70 million. Run 40 more and you'll probably score two C-Type medium shield boosters, each worth 400+ million. Think of it as rolling dice: The odds of rolling any given pair is 1 in 36. If you roll the dice 100 times and never get a pair of 1s, do you call the dice broken? You need a sample size of 1000+ to effectively generate numbers that match the statistical predictions. It's the same with the coin-flipping analogy someone else used: you don't flip the coin twice and declare it broken. You flip it twenty times and see if the pattern is consistent.
Tippia Sunshine and Lollipops 2066	Posted - 2011.12.15 17:31:00 - [34] - Quote Plyn wrote: The OP's statement isn't a conclusion, it's a hypothesis. That might be sensible if the statement had been made in the form of a hypothesis. Just one problem: it wasn't. The OP is demanding explanations and rectification for a situation that he claims is true, without a shred of evidence to back that claim up and without any reason to even believe it to be true to begin with. That's not how you form hypotheses, nor how you pursue them. Hell, he even categorically denies the possibility that it is anything other than fact and emphatically states that it simply cannot (or must not) be proven false. If it is no longer falsifiable, it is no longer a hypothesis. At best, it could be construed as maths-hostile fundamentalismGÇª GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥ If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs.
Dztrgovac University of Caille Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2011.12.15 18:31:00 - [35] - Quote First to op. No hisec radars have most certainly not been nerfed they might have actually been buffed a little bit. Pseudorandom numbers are random. In my rather limited exploration history I've found entire 10 sites. 5 Last year, then account expired and 5 in last 10 days since I ressubed after Crucible. Though I've also done couple of static 1/10s but those are not exploration and generally dropped loot. Last year I though a bad drop was a dead-space passive EM armor hardener or a small remote rep. Now, out of 5 DED sites I've done only a single one dropped any dead-space loot. A very discouraging streak of bad luck. But its just random. When there is couple of thousand (maybe couple dozen thousand) people doing exploration ; all hitting the same pseudoRNG (computers are deterministic, true RNG is impossible) generator day after day short or even ling-ish streaks of very good or very bad luck are to be expected. If 10,000 sites are done each day by couple thousand players not a single one of them will have data to have a good picture of how exactly goes the loot distribution curve. Even if you ran exploration for a year or two you will still have access to several hundred, maybe a thousand datapoints. Considering wast number or loot options that might still be not enough to be able to tell anything about exact distribution curves.
Emperor Salazar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2011.12.15 18:41:00 - [36] - Quote ITT DMC proves he has no understanding of this game beyond repairing faction standings. oh and GÖÑ u Tippia
Emperor Salazar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2011.12.15 18:47:00 - [37] - Quote DeMichael Crimson wrote: As for my saying that only 1/3rd of cans contain loot, that's an average estimation due to checking 15 cans and only 5 contained loot. That equals to 1/3rd. LO AND BEHOLD, ALL RADAR SITE EXPLORERS! DMC HAS FOUND THE ANSWER! After evaluating 15 cans, he found 5 contained loot. This sample size is without a doubt enough to prove that the drop rate of all radar sites is in fact one third. There is no question to the validity of this analysis. The science of this discovery cannot be undermined; it has been proven beyond any doubt. What this means for all of you: if you do a site, and there are 6 cans and at least 2 of them do not have loot, you should in fact report this as a bug and make a forum post to spread word of your findings. I would even go so far as to say that if you find loot in more than 2 cans out of the 6, you should report it as a bug, else you are exploiting the game. Please bestow all thanks and gratitude upon DMC for his efforts here. This is a monumental moment in the history of exploration. The drop rate of radar sites has been revealed!
Emperor Salazar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2011.12.15 18:53:00 - [38] - Quote Plyn wrote: Or people could just work together. The OP's statement isn't a conclusion, it's a hypothesis. How about.... Instead of flaming each other when NEITHER side has enough evidence, you combine your evidence and create a result. Every time you run a radar site for the next however long, post the truesec of the system you were in, the number of cans that had stuff, the number of cans that didn't have stuff, and the approximate value of the loot. You can even use alts if you're worried about people knowing your habits. In under a week's time you will have thousands of records from all different areas, and THEN you guys can start arguing about what the numbers mean. Hell I'd be all for this. I would love to see a giant damn database recorded. Unfortunately this would require explorers to work together (hint: most enjoy solo play/working alone) and sharing data. It would also require an immense amount of trust. The reason we flame people like the OP is because they have a tiny bad run and immediately decide the game is broken and its time to come to the forums to rage post about how CCP is unfair and exploration is no longer worth doing. The burden of proof in these discussions is on the OP in order to generate a valid discussion. As I said in another post, none of us want exploration to be broken, and thus if there is reasonable evidence of a problem, then we will address it with concern. Unfortunately, people like the OP never present this. They provide anecdotal observations because they are e-mad, thus the responses we see in this thread. People white knighting them does not help.
Citizen Smif Traumark Shadow Elite H Y E N A 30	Posted - 2011.12.15 18:56:00 - [39] - Quote DeMichael Crimson wrote: Nice of you to post all that other nonsense while sidestepping the most important question. DeMichael Crimson wrote: Please inform us what you think a significant sample size is? Obviously your answer shows you have no idea. Tippia wrote: How many different sites are there? How many cans do each of them have? How many of each have you run before the patch? The defending side seemed ignorant before but this quote just really shows your mathematical ignorance. It's ludicrous to assume that probability can be determined from 10 samples. Perhaps if the chance of loot was 50%+ then it would be unusual but it's not. Even then 10 wouldn't be enough (40 would be a good number).. You need a much higher sample than 10.. 500 would be a good preliminary and 1000 would be fairly reliable.
Dztrgovac University of Caille Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2011.12.15 19:18:00 - [40] - Quote Its really sad that doe to competition any effort to create a nice little loot DB, even if it was just "dropped deadspace/faction" "didn't drop" entry, would be futile. People are too afraid do reveal trade secrets and sufficient number of people would enter false data to make entire thing useless. Though I think it hurts more when someone in a hurry for cash undercuts on contracts by 15% then just sharing your finding stats. One thing that amazed me in WOW was that even rarest and most expensive stuff got hard numbers on drop chance just days after being added into game. Loot tables were fully compiles for nearly everything. Most MMOs have that. EVE... Well two years ago just posting about DSP tricks on EVEO forums would have caused wars and IRL beatings. So maybe things are improving a little bit.
Emperor Salazar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2011.12.15 19:26:00 - [41] - Quote Dztrgovac wrote: Its really sad that doe to competition any effort to create a nice little loot DB, even if it was just "dropped deadspace/faction" "didn't drop" entry, would be futile. People are too afraid do reveal trade secrets and sufficient number of people would enter false data to make entire thing useless. Though I think it hurts more when someone in a hurry for cash undercuts on contracts by 15% then just sharing your finding stats. One thing that amazed me in WOW was that even rarest and most expensive stuff got hard numbers on drop chance just days after being added into game. Loot tables were fully compiles for nearly everything. Most MMOs have that. EVE... Well two years ago just posting about DSP tricks on EVEO forums would have caused wars and IRL beatings. So maybe things are improving a little bit. We'll get there eventually. Personally I love the people that undercut my loot. In a rush to get isk or something? Demand rarely changes and I know the prices people will pay when supply drops a bit. So I just leave my stuff up there and in time it sells.
namelessclone01 blackbox ops 6	Posted - 2011.12.15 19:36:00 - [42] - Quote i just spent 2 hrs docked in jita and i haven't had any good drops in that timeframe. hell, no drop at all! explo is surely broken.
Rubinia Valeska Todespropheten T0DESPR0PHETEN 0	Posted - 2011.12.15 20:27:00 - [43] - Quote Emperor Salazar wrote: Plyn wrote: Or people could just work together. The OP's statement isn't a conclusion, it's a hypothesis. How about.... Instead of flaming each other when NEITHER side has enough evidence, you combine your evidence and create a result. Every time you run a radar site for the next however long, post the truesec of the system you were in, the number of cans that had stuff, the number of cans that didn't have stuff, and the approximate value of the loot. You can even use alts if you're worried about people knowing your habits. In under a week's time you will have thousands of records from all different areas, and THEN you guys can start arguing about what the numbers mean. Hell I'd be all for this. I would love to see a giant damn database recorded. Unfortunately this would require explorers to work together (hint: most enjoy solo play/working alone) and sharing data. It would also require an immense amount of trust. The reason we flame people like the OP is because they have a tiny bad run and immediately decide the game is broken and its time to come to the forums to rage post about how CCP is unfair and exploration is no longer worth doing. The burden of proof in these discussions is on the OP in order to generate a valid discussion. As I said in another post, none of us want exploration to be broken, and thus if there is reasonable evidence of a problem, then we will address it with concern. Unfortunately, people like the OP never present this. They provide anecdotal observations because they are e-mad, thus the responses we see in this thread. People white knighting them does not help. When I came to the game I checked the wiki for drop rates and sources of items and was amazed to not find aynthing about that. I was used to it from other games. I dont know what you would gain from hiding that in this game. It's not like you wont run a site that drops expensive items just because you do not know what exactly can drop and by what probability. Unfortunately the interface also doesnt allow easy collecting of this data so you would have to enter it manually. But if such a project ever gets started I'd be interested to join.
Emperor Salazar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2011.12.15 20:31:00 - [44] - Quote Do other games developers provide the information? Or do the players actually work together? Like I said I would love to see players work on this (I'm pretty sure people have tried evaluating various aspects of exploration, but it usually doesn't amount to much). But I am quite glad that CCP does not release the information. The less information the better. It means players have a bit more work to do. We have but to do it...
Flakey Foont Republic University Minmatar Republic 13	Posted - 2011.12.15 20:37:00 - [45] - Quote Random can not be compiled. Unlike "the fleet slippers of Zambo" in some elf game, the drops are random.
Dztrgovac University of Caille Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2011.12.15 21:06:00 - [46] - Quote Flakey Foont wrote: Random can not be compiled. Unlike "the fleet slippers of Zambo" in some elf game, the drops are random. Has this ever been actually said by devs? Has it ever in 8 years of EVE's life been said "exploration loot doesn't have ANY behind the scenes drop tables and is completely random"? Loot tables exist, it can't be completely random. 4/10 plex has to drop C-type [prefix]um loot and faction stuff. It can not drop any deadscape and faction stuff; but if it drops deadspace it has to drop loot of its own type. Faction gear is likely also restricted; I don't think a 4 (or 5 or 6) type plex can drop faction BS modules.
2manno Rockland Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2011.12.15 21:14:00 - [47] - Quote i do a fair amount of exploration in low sec (that is 1-5 systems/day) and have noticed a significant reduction in the value of the average radar site as well. it seems they're actually worth about what the average mag site has been buffed to. $1.5 - $5 mil.
Flakey Foont Republic University Minmatar Republic 14	Posted - 2011.12.15 23:02:00 - [48] - Quote The only thing I've noticed lately is a noticeable dearth of radar sites. But those I've found still yield 4 or 5 operations manuals or the like. Hardly 1.5m isk.
Aine Morchet State War Academy Caldari State 13	Posted - 2011.12.15 23:41:00 - [49] - Quote Emperor Salazar wrote: Do other games developers provide the information? Or do the players actually work together? Like I said I would love to see players work on this (I'm pretty sure people have tried evaluating various aspects of exploration, but it usually doesn't amount to much). But I am quite glad that CCP does not release the information. The less information the better. It means players have a bit more work to do. We have but to do it... It is player compiled. And I was a little surprised when I came to eve and such a thing was not available. But eve is...different. More real? Less gamelike? For some reason the idea of compiling droprates and staring the fact that this is a videogame in the face seems less appropriate here than in WoW (where Blizzard makes everything extremely 'gamelike', as it's doing with D3). PS: Here's my anecdotal radar experience postpatch: plenty of sites, no site less than 5m, average 10m, combination hisec lowsec (about 50/50).
Rubinia Valeska Todespropheten T0DESPR0PHETEN 1	Posted - 2011.12.15 23:57:00 - [50] - Quote Flakey Foont wrote: Random can not be compiled. Unlike "the fleet slippers of Zambo" in some elf game, the drops are random. No drops are not random and I have no idea why you would say such. Each site in eve has a certain item pool and range of number per items it can drop. For instance in radar sites you will only see racial specific decryptors, data cores, tool blueprint, tool materials and such. This makes the item pool per site pretty small. The names just differ from that elf game of yours.
Rubinia Valeska Todespropheten T0DESPR0PHETEN 1	Posted - 2011.12.16 00:07:00 - [51] - Quote Emperor Salazar wrote: Do other games developers provide the information? Or do the players actually work together? Like I said I would love to see players work on this (I'm pretty sure people have tried evaluating various aspects of exploration, but it usually doesn't amount to much). But I am quite glad that CCP does not release the information. The less information the better. It means players have a bit more work to do. We have but to do it... In Wow the info can easily collected by UI addons and uploaded to web sites such as wowhead. This makes it easy to gather large sample sizes. Since players have access to the official test server the loot pool is mostly available when the content goes live. In Final Fantasy XI the info the game gives you is pretty much non existant. The players have to band together to discover stuff even game mechanics for themselves. For item drops this has never been a problem though. Most items worth anything are either crafted or dropped by one specific source in the game. Normal monsters rarely drop items other than crafting materials. So its pretty easy to compile the source of an item that matters. As to the probability, lets just say, if you want it you either buy it if you can or grind as long as you need to get the item.
Flakey Foont Republic University Minmatar Republic 14	Posted - 2011.12.16 01:03:00 - [52] - Quote Rubinia Valeska wrote: Flakey Foont wrote: Random can not be compiled. Unlike "the fleet slippers of Zambo" in some elf game, the drops are random. No drops are not random and I have no idea why you would say such. Each site in eve has a certain item pool and range of number per items it can drop. For instance in radar sites you will only see racial specific decryptors, data cores, tool blueprint, tool materials and such. This makes the item pool per site pretty small. The names just differ from that elf game of yours. Forgive me. Within the item pool in each type of site, the drops are random, including zero.
Emperor Salazar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2011.12.16 01:31:00 - [53] - Quote Flakey Foont wrote: Rubinia Valeska wrote: Flakey Foont wrote: Random can not be compiled. Unlike "the fleet slippers of Zambo" in some elf game, the drops are random. No drops are not random and I have no idea why you would say such. Each site in eve has a certain item pool and range of number per items it can drop. For instance in radar sites you will only see racial specific decryptors, data cores, tool blueprint, tool materials and such. This makes the item pool per site pretty small. The names just differ from that elf game of yours. Forgive me. Within the item pool in each type of site, the drops are random, including zero. We don't know how drops are chosen. All we know is that there are drop tables. It seems like some items are more rare than others but this may simply be our primal WANT MORE ISK. I personally think each item has a 1 in something chance to drop, depending on what its possibly dropping from. I think it does some calculation like "how many items will drop", then based on that amount, goes through the loot table and picks the items seemingly randomly. But the items would be "weighted," so faction modules would have much less weight than deadspace modules and some deadspace modules may be weighted less than others, thus introducing their drop rate. So in theory, when the overseer npc/structure is destroyed, first the amount of items would be established and then which items to drop would be established based on their weights. To simplify things, Item A may have a 70% chance, Item B a 25% chance and Item C a 5% chance. So if when you destroy it and its decided the drop will be 2 items, you will have a good chance at Item A and Item B, with a very small chance that one of them might be Item C instead. And then there might be the rare occasion that Item B and C get chosen. Just my theory on it.
Mnemosyne Gloob Teshnology Inc. Stealth Wear Inc. 8	Posted - 2011.12.16 02:19:00 - [54] - Quote Emperor Salazar wrote: So in theory, when the overseer npc/structure is destroyed I think it is calculated earlier, because you can cargo scan overseers and look what they hold. Otherwise i approve on the direction this thread is headed. :) [edit]oh and i think THEY are watching deadspace market on whatever terms, so if say the c-type boosters go down in price a lot because many are found the droprates will be slightly adjusted. Might just be superstition on my part tho.[/edit]
Emperor Salazar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 259	Posted - 2011.12.16 02:35:00 - [55] - Quote Oh I forgot about the scanning method. Either way, theory could still apply, albeit with modification as to when that stuff is determined.
Czeris Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 15	Posted - 2011.12.16 10:09:00 - [56] - Quote It is sad to hear that they nerfed the Radar sites, but keep your chin up, for I have good news! I ran a Dread Guristas Fleet Staging Point for the first time since the patch and it dropped 500 million isk! This is 400 million more than the two I ran before the patch! This huge buff I think more than offsets the clear nerf to Radar sites. Unfortunately I also started drinking and let some guy in a Machariel pop my pod when I forgot it was my good clone. Nerf Machariels!
2manno Rockland Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1	Posted - 2011.12.16 15:18:00 - [57] - Quote Aine Morchet wrote: PS: Here's my anecdotal radar experience postpatch: plenty of sites, no site less than 5m, average 10m, combination hisec lowsec (about 50/50). hmmm. that's what radar sites were for me pre-crucible. maybe it's just my region then, or an unusually long spout of really bad luck. i haven't had a radar site drop more than $5mm yet (frankly not even $5mm). yesterday was radar drop fail again :/ also like Flakey Foont said above, thus far they seem to be more rare as well.
Emperor Salazar Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 264	Posted - 2011.12.16 15:44:00 - [58] - Quote dry spells in drops and site spawning? SAY IT ISNT SO
OllieNorth Recidivists Incorporated 23	Posted - 2011.12.16 16:20:00 - [59] - Quote I am seriously tempted to just start an exploration log to post online with the drops from sites I run. I would like to see how it all goes over time (hint: it will even out). Then I would be able to just link that to every one of these threads.
St Mio Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 188	Posted - 2011.12.16 16:48:00 - [60] - Quote I don't usually do Radar sites but, in the name of science, I contribute the following: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgyYH4Hyu_cZdDNsTUdkckZpSGYwa215X2NCS3k5c0E

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

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,08s, ref 20250920/2301
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

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.