|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3379
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 13:47:39 -
[1] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Faruzen en Divalone wrote:
The problem here is the devaluation of ISK, when group of players generate way too much of it. Players who do not generate that much then suffer and are poor. And its getting worse, when ISK sinks do not remove the excess ISK from game. Scissors are opening wider. Its quite complicated, thats why they have economist in the team.
Perfectly well said. What carriers and supers have done is devalue isk, meaning that you have to rat even longer even with a carrier or super to make enough for a plex. In addition to that, soooo many escalations meant that the deadspace loot was near worthless. A lot of players are too young in the game to remember when doing a DED site and getting a good drop meant you had enough isk for 2 months of game time (when plex was 500 mil and a Mach blueprint would get you 1 bil, getting that BPc was HITTING THE LOTTERY). Now you have to do like 10 DED 10/10s to get enough loot to turn into ONE month of game time.
If they want to stop the gravy train, they can also remove the auto drone aggro vs rats so nobody can run multiple anoms at the same time. Those also generate extra escalations devaluing them. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3379
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 14:03:32 -
[2] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Count Basie Thellere wrote:Not impressed. Every time I spend ages training to get into a ship with good specs CCP nerfs them. Makes me wonder why I waste my time with this game. Smart people learn that following the Flavor of the month is bad. While everyone around me was ratting with Carriers or afking with ishtar's, I stuck to my MJD Rattlesnake. I told my bros "they are going to nerf those you know". Find something you like that works but isn't the FotM. Those things always get the axe. Happens in PVP too, which is why I never got to fond of the Orthrus, because they are going to nerf those things lol.
CCP essentially gave us a paint suppliers to paint them in corners every time they create a gravy train with skill injectors too. Every time they mess up, a large number of player can inject up to the new fad and milk it while it used to be a rather slow process unless you hit the bazaar for a character someone somehow pre-trained for that new niche by accident or were trained for it already for some reason. To avoid backlash from the player base, they really need to get the balancing engine into high gear soon so they can intervene on any badly balanced things they create faster than months after people invested into it. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3379
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 14:14:39 -
[3] - Quote
ALUCARD 1208 wrote: And before the people who jump in say well hurr durr people have already paid ccp with the plex your paying isk for, yes this is true but if noone can achieve the isk/farm thats needed to do this its extra money in ccps pocket when they buy a a sub.
PLEX price will always adjust to what people can or want to pay for them in ISK. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3379
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 14:42:38 -
[4] - Quote
Mute Karimar wrote:When I compare my almost maxed Rattle-skills and the ticks I generate with that with my mediocre carrier-skills and their ticks that 20% nerf actually will make it more worthwhile for me to go in a Rattle than to bring the Carrier.
So I gotta second the question asked often here yet: Why not remove the damn carriers at all? Or just sell me a damn SKIN for lets say 60EUR that makes my Rattle look like a carrier?
The poweer curve is supposed to be linear increase in power for exponential cost increase. Gaining "just 20%" is supposed to cost you a lot of extra. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3381
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 14:47:32 -
[5] - Quote
Mute Karimar wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:I stuck to my Rattlesnake the entire time because as soon as I saw the 1st Monthly Economic Report after the fighter changes and saw that HUGE spike in null sec bounties my 1st thought was "they are going to nerf that". Now they are nerfing that. I'm glad I kept my last 10 Rattlesnake blueprints I gave my rattle to my GFs acc, that is rarely online. Will prolly take it back, cause why put an "above a bill"-ship in space if I can make better ticks in a ship that costs about half of that? And if its only about ISK-generation, why the heck doesnt CCP turn the bounty-screws, make anoms harder, but instead screws the whole shiptree-balance over?
The price tag on that rattlesnake will change pretty soon sir. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3381
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 14:50:30 -
[6] - Quote
Winter Lee Wintershadow wrote:
Why is earning isk with one account getting harder and harder?
Getting lots of ISK easily only devalue the ISK itself which shaft anyone not riding the FOTM gravy train. That's why they are nerfing carriers/supers and not all ratting with a flat bounty nerf on rats.
Now if only they could remove afk ratting... |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3381
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 14:55:07 -
[7] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Winter Lee Wintershadow wrote:
Why is earning isk with one account getting harder and harder?
Getting lots of ISK easily only devalue the ISK itself which shaft anyone not riding the FOTM gravy train. That's why they are nerfing carriers/supers and not all ratting with a flat bounty nerf on rats. Now if only they could remove afk ratting... They could if they were willing to put an NPC dread in every anom
That screws up ratting for everyone who can't just GTFO when the dread spawn. Remove auto aggro on drones and it's all over. The best "afk" truck become a FoF missile boat and those have limited launched load which need to be turned back on all the time. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3381
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 14:59:15 -
[8] - Quote
Geanos wrote:Geanos wrote:The simplest solution would be to put a tax on bounties for carriers, supers or any other ship class you fancy. Bounties are calculated at 15 minutes, right? So if you add a formula for carrier/super ratting like this - total bounties per tick (tbt) = tbt - (tbt * 20) / 100 - the server extra load would be negligible. Having the ability to put a bounty tax on certain classes of ships would also help you in the future.
I think this is way better than straight up nerfing. And with a tax on bounties you won't have touch the PVP capabilities of ships "because of ISK". If you want to make it really really easy, you can add this formula at the end of tick bounty calculations, just like you do with other taxes. This means that it will apply even if the player killed just 1 rat with the carrier and the rest with other ships, but it's still better than nerfing. It's just an extra IF (if corp tax / if alliance tax / if ship class).
Except I'm pretty sure there is nothing currently in game that exist to influence wallet entries based on current ship type. Will people eject from their carrier/supers to get their tick while in a pod and then hop back in to continue the farming? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3381
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 15:02:33 -
[9] - Quote
ALUCARD 1208 wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:ALUCARD 1208 wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: The end result is a return to how it used to me, you rat, you make isk, you get an escalation and most times you don't get much but every once in awhile you get that jackpot that pays for a month or 2 of game time.
not if you dont run the escalations it will hurt the bm sale as lower chance to drop while also making demand for the bs higher than supply so fking with income makes it more of a grind to get for fleets You know you will be able to charge more for your escalations after this right? Because they will be more valuable? take a moment and breathe, think it through. It's not going to be that bad. Trust me I've been ratting for 10 years now, even before we had respawning anomalies.. you do realise the beloved T3cs that run those escalations are getting nerf batted right so will not be run as often
They don't need to be run as often if less spawn.
Some are also run in different things than T3Cs so there are still options to run them. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3381
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 15:09:16 -
[10] - Quote
ALUCARD 1208 wrote:Texas Queens wrote:
You do realize that people use other ships for that right? Marauders are the **** for 10/10's.
ya and so easy to use in hostile space if ur escalation takes you there
And here I though it was supposed to be dangerous and all that... |
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3384
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 15:52:58 -
[11] - Quote
yogizh wrote: Maybe if the SOV systems was not so big of a fail people would PVP more and CCP could have its precious ISK sink. I don't usualy rant like this, but this vicious circle must end.
PVP is a faucet, not a sink. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3385
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 16:39:01 -
[12] - Quote
Pterry Dactyl Kasterborous wrote:28 pages. have you figured out this is a dumb way of fixing a non problem?
"PVE is too easy so we are going to nerf carriers/supers in a way that ALSO completely nerfs PVP capability"
. . . . . . . . . when are you changing high sec incursions? or is that isk faucet ok?
Well...
CCP Larrikin wrote:
We also think that Carriers and Supercarriers are a bit too effective in PvP now. This change will significantly change the PvP balance, but weGÇÖre confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP.
I'm not saying they aren't wrong but they do havea reason to not be too concerned about the PvP ramification of a DPS nerf if they think they are currently too effective...
Edit: HS incursion is also not that much of a faucet unless people don't use their LP. If they do, a lot of the ISK injected get burned back. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3385
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 16:42:23 -
[13] - Quote
Ringo Caldari wrote:You Guys know the real reason behind this right?
Why let players pay for game time with isk they grind for hours upon hours when we can reduce the income and make it less and less possible for players to play without having to dish out the ol'credit card to buy plex.
CCP - where we don't really give a **** about your in game economy as long as you line our pockets
Why would they do that when every single account subbed to the game with PLEX give them more money than an account subbed directly via CC? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3385
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 16:46:30 -
[14] - Quote
Nana Skalski wrote:Y u no nerf bounties? From where all those ISKs are printed anyway?
Because subcap ratters don't, according to CCP, need a nerf. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3385
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 16:49:13 -
[15] - Quote
Ringo Caldari wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Ringo Caldari wrote:You Guys know the real reason behind this right?
Why let players pay for game time with isk they grind for hours upon hours when we can reduce the income and make it less and less possible for players to play without having to dish out the ol'credit card to buy plex.
CCP - where we don't really give a **** about your in game economy as long as you line our pockets Why would they do that when every single account subbed to the game with PLEX give them more money than an account subbed directly via CC? Not sure I follow, If you buy plex with IRL money yea, but I can put In time and effort to rat and make isk to pay for my accounts, ergo, no money from my irl wallet to ccp.
Where is the PLEX you buy on the market coming from?
CCP does not give a damn who's money it is as long as it become an income for them. It's still more money for them at the end of the day. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3385
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 16:52:18 -
[16] - Quote
Ebony Texas wrote: but of course we know you wont nerf that high-sec incursion income.. oh no no no.. you wont dare hurt those guys..
Can't wait for everyone to jump on that gravy train only to see how cancer it actually is because even with 3 spawn active, you will never really have more than 9 fleet running at the same time in HS. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3385
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 16:54:01 -
[17] - Quote
Dawny Star wrote:
Give us a reason to PVP again. Null sec wars are a huge ISK sink, they create lots of player content, generate headlines, and gave alliances a reason to be competitive with each other.
Null sec wars are not an ISK sink. They never are and probably never will be. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3387
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 16:59:22 -
[18] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:I'll say again, all the accusations of "omg CCP just wants me to buy plex" are stupid.
If CCP wanted you to buy plex theiy'd BUFF fighters so you can generate isk easier to buy plex. Plex is money in the bank for CCP
Their point of view doesn't even make sense if you forget about that. "CCP want us to buy more PLEX" is stupid when you are crying about nerf to player income. Who the **** is gonna buy your PLEX if player income is so god damn nerfed anyway? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3387
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 17:06:15 -
[19] - Quote
Dawny Star wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Dawny Star wrote:
Give us a reason to PVP again. Null sec wars are a huge ISK sink, they create lots of player content, generate headlines, and gave alliances a reason to be competitive with each other.
Null sec wars are not an ISK sink. They never are and probably never will be. Whilst I think I see where your going to go with this, let me ask a couple of questions. How much ratting did goons do per day when EvE descended on Deklien? Whilst that's not an ISK sink as such, it certainly hinders ISK generation for the average line member no? Also battles like B-R are quite literally an ISK sink, trillions of iSK in ships instantly removed from the game. Whilst not an ISK to players with a decent Alliance SRP program that again is still ISK being moved out of existence. Null Sec Wars in EVE do generate incomes for some, but by and large they slow/lower income at line member level.
Do you know what an ISK sink is?
Every ship exploding in EVE is a faucet. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 17:07:50 -
[20] - Quote
Ida Aurlien wrote:1 you train for say cruisers they nerf them
2 you train pi they change it
3 you train for pirate ships they change them
4 you train for logi they change it
5 you train for whatever they change it and add more to get to the same level
6 you train carriers They change it
7 you train fighters they change it and add new skills
8 you train t3's they nerf them
My thoughts are if your building a game with a base of people you would think some add ons and deletes threw time but a constant change is frustrating. You just get to a point where you feel good with the game and you kill it or destroy it. I had been feeling tired of the game on a personal level. but was ok with continually subbing gonna start getting ready to call it what it is tho. As this never ends and 20% nerf when a couple cruisers can kill a carrier. something is wrong with this picture. That's like being able to bump kill a freighter with a cat ....stupid.. game you would think has some parameters that would fit like frigates 2 to kill a cruiser or a bs maybe 4 to kill etc but when you can have more dps from a bs than a carrier it does not fit, sorry. I realize this is a game but when you constantly change the Bar or parameters you destroy the goal and game. good job ccp you have made my mind up for me
TLDR : I follow the FOTM and get nerfed.
WTF did you expect? |
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 17:08:48 -
[21] - Quote
Manicsar wrote:Since I just wasted all the time training carrier skill can I get a refund for those skills?
Skills still have a use in game so no refund is the usual CCP response. Your carrier skill would get refunded only if carriers were deleted from the game. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 17:25:59 -
[22] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:So next time you want to clarify that this was mainly a DPS nerf to put Supers more in line with HAW Titans why don't you go with that angle instead of from the PVE angle and have everyone freak out? It implies you nerfed fighter dps solely for a PVE majority. Clarification would have been nice.
They literally said in the OP they though carriers/supers were over performing in PvP and the change would alleviate some of this. Too bad people didn't read all the way to the end of the post. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 17:38:05 -
[23] - Quote
Vetus Metallicus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Tara Read wrote:So next time you want to clarify that this was mainly a DPS nerf to put Supers more in line with HAW Titans why don't you go with that angle instead of from the PVE angle and have everyone freak out? It implies you nerfed fighter dps solely for a PVE majority. Clarification would have been nice. They literally said in the OP they though carriers/supers were over performing in PvP and the change would alleviate some of this. Too bad people didn't read all the way to the end of the post. Have you actually flown a carrier in PvP before? Thats absolute BS. A rattlesnake now does more damage than an archon...
I'm not saying they are right on that, just that they gave a reason. No need to fly a carrier to read a post all the way... |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 17:51:12 -
[24] - Quote
8RU74L wrote: Did any of you ever think about,instead of nerfing ships,nerf the bounty on npcs,but i guess you dont care.
Why do you want to nerf my ratting oracle? It sure as hell does not need to be nerfed. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 17:59:42 -
[25] - Quote
singthegrief wrote:So here is a idea how about all that are in the AT just use rookie ships this year. if i can get people to agree i will have my guys do the same. enough is enough #fuCCP
LOL if you think nobody will sell out to get the shiny prizes. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 18:11:01 -
[26] - Quote
C09 wrote:Making some new anomalies for capital ships is too difficult for CCP?
Either the anomaly will let carriers/supers generate more ISK/hours because of the rats included or the carrier/supers will just continue running the current ones. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 18:13:49 -
[27] - Quote
Vetus Metallicus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:C09 wrote:Making some new anomalies for capital ships is too difficult for CCP? Either the anomaly will let carriers/supers generate more ISK/hours because of the rats included or the carrier/supers will just continue running the current ones. If existing sites were gated to sub caps and capital only sites for caps then no it wouldn't be that way. It's not a terrible idea.
This make hunting sub-cap ratters even harder than it currently is because the hunter has to use the gate. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 18:20:09 -
[28] - Quote
Tara Read wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Tara Read wrote:So next time you want to clarify that this was mainly a DPS nerf to put Supers more in line with HAW Titans why don't you go with that angle instead of from the PVE angle and have everyone freak out? It implies you nerfed fighter dps solely for a PVE majority. Clarification would have been nice. They literally said in the OP they though carriers/supers were over performing in PvP and the change would alleviate some of this. Too bad people didn't read all the way to the end of the post. Their main reasoning was a PVE based nerf. Read carefully next time
Of course the main reason is PVE but that does not change the point. They are not too concerned about the PVP ramification because they think the ships are doing a bit too well anyway. That is why they are not trying a PVE only change. They might be totally wrong but that does not change their point of view. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 18:29:06 -
[29] - Quote
Vetus Metallicus wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Tara Read wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Tara Read wrote:So next time you want to clarify that this was mainly a DPS nerf to put Supers more in line with HAW Titans why don't you go with that angle instead of from the PVE angle and have everyone freak out? It implies you nerfed fighter dps solely for a PVE majority. Clarification would have been nice. They literally said in the OP they though carriers/supers were over performing in PvP and the change would alleviate some of this. Too bad people didn't read all the way to the end of the post. Their main reasoning was a PVE based nerf. Read carefully next time Of course the main reason is PVE but that does not change the point. They are not too concerned about the PVP ramification because they think the ships are doing a bit too well anyway. That is why they are not trying a PVE only change. They might be totally wrong but that does not change their point of view. If you think PvP performance has anything to do with this you have never actually flown a carrier in PvP fleet before. Your fighters can be jammed by a million isk griffin for christ sake.
My alliance has a doctrine to do just that. I know very well it can be done. I am not the one who need to eb convinced. I am only tell that CCP does not have a problem with the PVP ramification because they see the ship as over performing. Even if that information is actually wrong, it does not change anything as long as they still believe it to be true. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 18:33:26 -
[30] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Vaktul wrote:This makes no sense. So you're sweeping the biggest ISK making game-breaking exploit and guilty parties under the rug while at the same time punishing people that are actually out their grinding for their ISK instead? You people are the equivalent of corrupt politicians with how you represent us and you're equally as out-of-touch. Yup Yup yup
Yeah but it's an actual gravy train for CCP and does not generate any surplus ISK in the economy. :CCP: |
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 18:36:44 -
[31] - Quote
waltari wrote:If its due to PVE just make some area effect similar to those in wormholes to weaken the fighters or whatever that ****** up idea of yours is, The PVP part is more like correct usage of correct mods in correct situations and its all dependant on either Fleet Commanders, fleet concept or pilots themselves and there are no NPCs involved so not your fuckin concern. You gave us **** to use, we do it, dont try to fix somethingthat you ****** up enough already.... AGAIN!
Those effect are system wide so they would impact PvP too unless you ask CCP to design some kind of "NPC command burst" centered on the sites with gigantic ranges that only affect the required type of fighters in the required way. They obviously went with an easier solution... |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3391
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 18:54:47 -
[32] - Quote
Crashys wrote:
* You make sure plexs get high enough to make player spend RL money instead of farm to pay gametime;
How many people really don't understand that subbing with CC make them less money so forcing you out of PLEXing is not their goal? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3393
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 18:58:24 -
[33] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:Panther X wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Brigadine Ferathine wrote:Vaktul wrote:This makes no sense. So you're sweeping the biggest ISK making game-breaking exploit and guilty parties under the rug while at the same time punishing people that are actually out their grinding for their ISK instead? You people are the equivalent of corrupt politicians with how you represent us and you're equally as out-of-touch. Yup Yup yup Nope nope nope. This is patently ridiculous. First of all, the two situations are not remotely comparable, nor are they at all related. Ghost training absolutely should be punished in some way (I'd start with an outright deletion of all earned ISK and take it from there), but that has nothing to do with this. You're not being punished. It's simply necessary, for the health of the game, to reduce the inflow of ISK from carrier ratting. vOv Then just make havens and sanctums gated deadspace. Carriers can't go in. Problem solved. If that's what the problem is? Carriers are still pvp machines, fighters still do capital level damage. There are better ways of fixing issues than the nerfhammer. I don't disagree with that, and said as much upthread. The nerf to carrier ratting seems appropriate, the nerf to carrier PvP power seems heavy-handed and unwarranted (at least at this magnitude).
They should of started with an actual NERF bat, not a Louiseville slugger... |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3393
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 18:59:54 -
[34] - Quote
vinihood1 wrote:So CCP want more AFK ishtars ? Ok
That's a thing that should go if they think too much ISK enter the economy but... :CCP: |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3393
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 19:28:53 -
[35] - Quote
Vaktul wrote:Wolfstorm wrote:So because CCP releases skill injectors and lets richies buy their way into SP now they broke the ever living snot out of the gameplay balance and instead of admitting it are now going about systematically screwing every player who isn't a power player over, with stupid change after stupid change. I've been making games professionally for over 20 years now and the level of incompetence on display by the design team is terrifying.
This is not acceptable. You broke the game with the skill injectors, the rest of this nonsense is fallout from that horrible choice. There's a lot of truth to this. I think Skill Injectors should be removed period. First CPP screwed up be introducing them into the game, then they screwed up again by ignoring a game-breaking exploit for months, and now they've screwed up yet again by ignoring people sitting on trillions of ISK worth of "illegally farmed" SP. But hey, at least life is going to get harder for people trying to make ISK through legit means, right? Who even cares about pvp and structure security? They're reasonable causalities apparently.
The injectors are an amplifier. Whatever is broken has everybody jump on the new FOTM much faster. If they constantly made small iteration to things so they never stay a long time broken it would not be that big of a deal but stuff stay in the same state for months giving MANY people time to hop on the bandwagon and then the nerfs come and everyone who joined is mad because they get nerfed forgetting the fact they all had jumped on a bandwagon because for many of them, it's been months since they did the jump. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3403
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:02:56 -
[36] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Original Post updated Quote:The Data: LetGÇÖs set the stage for the decision by taking sample of 5 days in June. During that timeframe 10.6 Trillion ISK was rewarded in bounties. Of that: 22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers 24.2% (2.6%) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers 19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers Just under half (46.5%) of the bounties earned during the time period was generated by Supercarriers and Carriers, meaning a small percent of the population received a huge portion of the total bounties. That's 65.6% of the ISK and only 22.8% of the characters earning bounties. Partial transparency is still opaque censoring. A round of applause for the measured step back, though.
Because the rest are outliers compared to those 3. Do you really need the total to be displayed because I can tell you even logi ear bounties so the list of ship class to be posted would be long. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3404
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:29:54 -
[37] - Quote
Rhivre wrote:What percentage of characters earning bounties were living in HS exclusively. For the purposes of this discussion, the only relevant numbers are characters earning bounties in nullsec.
Also, why those specific 5 days, why not use the last year?
Because the issue became more visible once everyone and their dog got a carrier/super to rat with?
It's an exaggeration but you should get the idea. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3404
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:37:22 -
[38] - Quote
grigair wrote:I rarely ever post about anything on this game. I have been back for 3 months now considering being around on and off since 06 I disagree with the direction ccp has went. People that have played for years or dumped a whole bunch of money into ccp's wallet shouldn't be punished to take isk out of the game. What the real problem is all the big alliances have become to comfortable with each other and let everyone have their own space. Their is nothing making them want to fight each other for space. A better idea would be rotate sections of nullsec that pays better than others. Force the big alliance to fight for space to earn more profits. Take out modules completely everyone on a even playing field and add bonuses certain nullsec space areas for a random amount of time and make people fight for that space. Get eve flowing again get those caps and titans into full scale warfare again insted of whats going on now where they are just used to blap someone jumping on a mining barge bait.
Do you have any idea how large the temporary bonus would have to be for large alliance to deem it worthy to throw trillions of ISK in war material and infrastructure at it? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3404
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:39:03 -
[39] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:Original Post updated You just explained that almost half the bounties in null sec are generated by only 6% of all ratting characters then you cut down on the balance pass you were about to make? I think that's just prolonging the inevitable. You're going to have to fix this and it would have been better to do most of it up front IMO.
Depends what the supposed change to the anomaly themselves are supposed to be but my hopes aren't all that high. If they reduce rat sig size for example, we are stuck with everything getting nerfed since guns and drones also use target sig for hit calculation. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3407
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 19:48:19 -
[40] - Quote
Khara Hirl wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Shinto Master wrote:So Supers earn 3.1% more than cruisers, and supers are the problem? A: Supers, as a class, earned 16.75% more than T1 cruisers, as a class. B: They did it with 1/12 the number of people. For every ratting super, there are 12 people ratting in T1 cruisers who are earning less, collectively, than that one super. So, yes, ratting supers are a problem. Supers made 16% more money but cost 40 times more then a t1 ratting ship.. yeah but THEY are the probem. Shut the **** up moron.
As power increase linearly, cost is supposed to increase exponentially in EVE. You should understand that by the time you train into a carrier/super. |
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3409
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 20:06:29 -
[41] - Quote
sabastyian wrote:Quote:The Data: LetGÇÖs set the stage for the decision by taking sample of 5 days in June. During that timeframe 10.6 Trillion ISK was rewarded in bounties. Of that:
22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers 24.2% (2.6T) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers 19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers
Just under half (46.5%) of the bounties earned during the time period was generated by Supercarriers and Carriers, meaning a small percent of the population received a huge portion of the total bounties. For may; 4537 VNI's were lost for around 502.5b 648 Carriers were lost for around 1.6T 51 supers were lost for 1.41T Supers as a whole netted just under 900b last month Carriers as aw hole netted 1t last month VNI's/T1 cruisers netted about 1.5T last month. If you are going to focus on numbers why don't we focus on how many of each ship were lost during the activities as well as looking at fighter losses.
The rattign data he provided is not a month but 5 days. Your number don't align. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3409
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 20:07:56 -
[42] - Quote
Tessa Sage wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Helga Chelien wrote:You will be able to lower T1 cruiser? They extract as much isk, how much supercarrier.
Not on a per-capita basis, they don't. sabastyian wrote:Supers as a whole netted just under 900b last month Carriers as aw hole netted 1t last month VNI's/T1 cruisers netted about 1.5T last month. Levelized data suggests that capitals are not the culprit. Net after ship replacement from routine PvE is in favor of cruisers taking home the most bounties for the May economic report.
Your data is wrong. This "net" data is removing the loss of a month compared to the income of 5 days. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3409
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 20:22:01 -
[43] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Hogeron Amelan wrote:you guys from CCP have to learn how to read graphs...
When you average the increase in ISK since the citadel upgrade, aka since carriers and supers can generate ISK the way they do now (May 2016 - June 2017), roughtly estimated 1085T-960T=125 T ISK in 13 months what equals 9,6T or lets say rougly 10T ISK/month since May 2016.
When you compare the months before, (Oct 2014- Apr. 2016) thats about 790-600T = 190T in 17 months, what equals about 11,2T per month so thats over 10% more than we have now. So in which mathematical universe you are living to say that 11,2 is less than 10 that the actual income situation is not tolerable when there was even more income generated per month before the carrier change? Of cause when you see the smooth lines before the citadel patch and the edgy lines after it, you can see that people are struggeling with a constant method for income, meaning that the game content is rapidly shifting between making Isk and loosing it.
Would you please add a 30-day-playtime cost development graph to that one please? Maybe then you will find out why people are up to increase their income in short periods of time and you may think about it how to introduce game mechanics for a more stable economy. Instead of fine-tuning with a precision tool you are ripping of vavles and soldering rips in the pipes of the material flow... The average growth rate in the money supply up to Nov. 2016 is about 7 trillion. After that there is considerably more volatility. However, for May 2017 the money supply for just characters grew 53 trillion. That is a huge increase. Using the updated OP and the ratios there as a crude measure of that 53 trillion about 24-25 trillion came from carriers, about 10 trillion from T1 cruisers. And the rest from all other ships. And if there were 2,000 characters ratting in carriers and supers, that is over 12.3 billion on average per character for one month. You my friend need to stop posting now - Using the updated OP is not even close to accurate. So any numbers you magically pulled out of it are also inaccurate..
How do you know it's not accurate? You are always mad when carriers get nerfed but that does not mean you can pretend the data is not accurate just because. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3413
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 20:49:32 -
[44] - Quote
Marcel Garsk wrote:Dear CCP!
Please buff dread, commander and escalation spawns in anoms to compensate us.
Thanks!
When the intend is to nerf, there is no need for compensation. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3413
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 16:18:13 -
[45] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Random Freak wrote:Marek Kanenald wrote:You guys still whining about this?
Literally the only nerf that is left is a 10% light fighter basic damage nerf and a 20% heavy fighter basic damage nerf.
Even the proposed rat aggro was scrapped.
Wasn't this what you wanted? No. What we want is the isk faucet being fixed, not an arbitrary nerf that will only work short term. We want the underlying cause fixed, not the symptoms. Interesting. So maybe if they had max ratting/ded sites per space region or constellation in a given day, the equivalent of belts being mined out? This would limit the isk flow rather than nerf ships. Is that what you meant? m
Why should alliance that actually use their space be limited just because of 2 class of ship that overperform? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3413
|
Posted - 2017.06.14 16:20:32 -
[46] - Quote
Lord Heluene wrote:
So now CCP.............you have taken away my ability to mine, and you are about to take away my ability to rat........I don't PVP unless forced to.
People still mine and still rat. No ability were taken away from you. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3415
|
Posted - 2017.06.15 14:09:58 -
[47] - Quote
venetistrader norie wrote: I would propose a different approach from you side. Just tell us you are nerfing it and that this is just the start because you want the players to buy plex and not make it in-game. In the end, you want us to buy plex thatGÇÖs the only logical answer to the nerfs.
Another one who don't understand how PLEX work... |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3424
|
Posted - 2017.06.16 19:47:36 -
[48] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote: ED: Could also make it so anomalies don't spawn, they're built up over time, but that would mean there wouldn't be as many which would severely dampen income opportunities. I was thinking the same thing could be implemented with belts, requiring NPC miners in empire space to perform moon mining to create all new belts once the feature is implemented, but again, that would all but eliminate typical income and mineral opportunities for everyone but the highly active players willing to hunt these things down. However, it would definitely clamp down the economy- might stall it out though.
Why do you want to nerf all ratters when carriers and supers are the problem? Why am I supposed to see less anomalies in my Oracle when it's carrier and supers which are too much of a gravy train? |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3424
|
Posted - 2017.06.16 19:59:10 -
[49] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Valdr Auduin wrote: ED: Could also make it so anomalies don't spawn, they're built up over time, but that would mean there wouldn't be as many which would severely dampen income opportunities. I was thinking the same thing could be implemented with belts, requiring NPC miners in empire space to perform moon mining to create all new belts once the feature is implemented, but again, that would all but eliminate typical income and mineral opportunities for everyone but the highly active players willing to hunt these things down. However, it would definitely clamp down the economy- might stall it out though.
Why do you want to nerf all ratters when carriers and supers are the problem? Why am I supposed to see less anomalies in my Oracle when it's carrier and supers which are too much of a gravy train? I'm a simulationist at heart, it's not a serious theoretical mechanic like the upper half of the post, I just dislike "spawns" of any sort- I'd be much happier if NPC had to mine and manufacture all their ships just like players.
Functionality > realism/quality of simulation
The top part of your post is also bad since all it does is make people completely stop using carriers and supers. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3424
|
Posted - 2017.06.16 20:21:55 -
[50] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:Functionality > realism/quality of simulation
The top part of your post is also bad since all it does is make people completely stop using carriers and supers. The validity of that statement relies on your assumption of what is and is not functional, or rather what function is most desirable. Since this is, I've been told, a highly detailed economics simulator (in space, for fun and imaginary profit), one would be led to assume that the quality of the simulation is actually fairly important. And it doesn't stop people using carriers and supers, it just means using them leaves an escalating paper trail, I'm more thinking about the kind of content having pirates following a high-end player's caps around would entail than the functionality of your bland ratting mechanics.
If it's ever escalating like you were proposing, it means your ship will die at some point and you won't have a counter beside not participating. You know what happen to feature that grantee your ship will go boom with not associated counter? Player stop participating. If you don't believe me on that, check how active the Drifters incursion were and you will understand how interesting a mechanic you can't avoid is. |
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3459
|
Posted - 2017.07.10 19:59:57 -
[51] - Quote
Ace Aideron wrote:SurrenderMonkey wrote:Secondly, captain obvious, devaluing those items is the entire damn point. They're overpowered, and need to be brought back into line. If that hurts someone's feefees, that's just too damn bad. Nobody held a gun to their head and forced them to chase after the destined-to-be-nerfed flavor of the month. The whole idea of "destined-to-be-nerfed" is completely wrong-headed. IMO, nerfing is an intellectually lazy solution to balance issues. You may not care how it makes people feel, but assuming CCP cares about their customers and doesn't intentionally want to drive them away (always a possibility!), they should. If nerfing was a no-go from the beginning, CCP would be motivated to be much more careful and thorough about introducing potentially balance-altering changes. Once introduced, if they were "too powerful," (by some nebulous standard) then other aspects of the environment could be adjusted. There are many, many ways to achieve balance that don't result in players feeling like they've had something stolen from them. Although Eve is certainly "just a game," it's different from most games in a couple of important ways. First, it can takes months or even years to skill up to things like capital ships. Second, it can take hundreds of hours and/or dollars to reach your goals. Those supporting nerfs (including CCP) clearly don't understand the psychology of the Eve player base. If you intentionally want to drive those players away, then sure, nerf to your heart's content. OTOH, if you want to keep those players, then nerfing is a bad, bad idea, that should be undertaken only as a last resort.
People crying because their game pixels got nerfed are just as bad as people crying about losing pixels in the game. You are playing a game where balance matter. If you are not ready to get your stuff nerfed one in a while, quit now because that's literally how all damn MMO work. |
|
|
|