|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 01:42:38 -
[1] - Quote
Is there any chance of this being rethought? Seems like CSM wasn't involved in the decision whatsoever, and any checks and balances were evaded at CCP Headquarters.
Also, 260m ticks? That would be like multiboxing 3 Revenants. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 02:12:26 -
[2] - Quote
Crash 888 wrote:The fact that "PVE super" is now a common thing is evidence of insane level of safety brought to vast areas of the galaxy thanks to jump fatigue.
Carriers seem to get blapped pretty often, actually. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 03:15:07 -
[3] - Quote
idontknowy wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:C0ATL wrote:
Where exactly do the graphs show >carriers< responsible for the ISK influx? While bounty is the highest index on the income graph, it needs to be stated that it has always been so. The extra influx is coming from Alpha clones being drafted into nullsec alliances and thought to AFK rat in drone cruisers. CCP claims to make a stand against passive isk income while doing little to nothing in terms of punishing bot users and solving AFK cruiser ratting. Funny how on the same release as carrier nerfs, the Vexor and Ishtar models are getting a re-work :))) ...
The fact that the dramatic spike in Bounties from about 40 Trillion isk to today's 70 Trillion isk can be traced back to the patch that buffed carriers. Given that Vexors & Ishtars have been around in their current form for significantly longer, and if it were profitable to the tune of 30 trillion isk to put more alts doing it, people would have done it with subbed alts, it's a reasonable assumption to guess that Alpha's in Vexors are not responsible for the sudden jump and that it is instead carriers. Furthermore Quant is almost certainly capable of pulling more detailed metrics from the system like 'what ship was someone in when they got paid/killed a rat' and probably does know what he's talking about when he says that the spike is carriers. Especially when the player accessible data supports that statement. I.E. Stop trying to blame someone else and accept that it is carriers causing the massive spike. CCP Quant is an amateur statistician using outlier numbers.
Let's be honest. The only way you're getting 260m ticks, is if you get a dread spawn and an escalation. That, or you're multiboxing supercarriers (and probably using macros). Most people get between 60-100mil, and that's with a supercarrier. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 03:52:03 -
[4] - Quote
It's also worth mentioning that this is going to adversely affect anyone that owns a (super)carrier, as their vessels will drop in value. To already see once 20 billion ISK ships being sold for 15 billion is just plain pathetic. It's almost downright theft. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 19:24:53 -
[5] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Man these new players are whiny ass bitches.
No really. I was days away from getting into a nano Ishtar when CCP nerfed nano HACs. Did I come to the forums and rage like a punk ass *****? No. I just moved on and re-organized my skill queue.
You guys are nothing but goddamned wimps and cry babies. Oh a blue blue blue...CCP ruined my plans.
What are you? 12? Wait, 12 year old girls?
Seriously, those of you whining because you wanted to earn buckets of ISK and thereby destroy the purchasing power of other players' ISK...please simply FOADIAF...literally.
Some of them are in your alliance. :D |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 19:39:31 -
[6] - Quote
Aldent Arkanon wrote:RKJakTup wrote: all the CSM on here saying oh "good work". or "nice changes" are the biggest trolls in eve. The only CSMs I've seen saying that are the ones who don't know anything about capitals because they have 0 capital experience.
Read: Solo PVPers speaking for capital pilots. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 22:41:02 -
[7] - Quote
This is the second largest thread in the section. Do what's right, devs. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 22:55:41 -
[8] - Quote
Kaze Mester wrote:Jang Taredi wrote:This is the second largest thread in the section. Do what's right, devs. Work?
Without the "Greed is Good" mentality, perhaps. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 23:11:50 -
[9] - Quote
I wonder if CCP also accounted for all the supers/carriers that got hotdropped, or fighter losses. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
12
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 01:11:44 -
[10] - Quote
Tom Ocilithon wrote:Right then. There's practically no point adding to the mountain of **** that's gone down already, but here goes:
So I'm a new cap pilot, just bought myself a shiny new thanatos. I've spent a year training for this, and I've spent just shy of 5 billion ISK on it. I look forward to ratting with it, possibly make back the time and money I've put into this thing.
Suddenly - "Fighter damage reduction", and I think "Oh. It'll be something like a 5% reduction. 10% If we're being serious." Hmm.
I don't understand what CCP are thinking. A 20% nerf to fighter damage is insane. I've only just got my hands on a carrier, and I'm having 700dps just lopped off of my initial 3500dps. I've been training for this for a third of my EVE career, and I've been grinding for this thing, only to have it stomped on as I get it. Thanks. To make things easier, someone has obviously had the great idea of "Oh, lets give everyone 5 days notice before we drop this!" Just enough time to do... oh wait. Nothing.
I must admit. I was worried that it was the 1st of April, and I'd just gone mad. But at this point, it looks like those damned "Biomass converters" might genuinely be added, which would still be more balanced than these fighter changes.
The forum post mentioned that "This ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players." well, I'd like to point out that this is called "Progression"! This is what makes EVE actually fun! There's always something bigger and shinier, and carriers are a large part of the higher up progression elements of EVE. This is the point - for a relatively small number of people to be at the top of a progression distribution in terms of players by character skill and by extension, age.
Now, I am highly against the idea of just un-subbing, it seems a damn sight close to blackmailing the developers into giving us what we want and not thinking about the overall balance of the game. But when such an obviously harmful nerf is dropped with 5 days worth of notice, that basically makes the last year worth of grinding and skill training redundant, I am furious. And that's extremely difficult for a British person to say. I have dropped my subscription, with the only regret that my re-sub happened too recently.
CCP, please genuinely listen to our feedback. We have a wonderful game which has been built by both developers and the community. Do not **** it up like this.
TL:DR - These fighter changes can **** off.
I've friends that were training and having supercarriers built, only to have the same happen. Their 20bil ships will only be worth 15bil, as well. |
|
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
14
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 02:43:22 -
[11] - Quote
Thank you for listening, even if just somewhat. By doing so you've encouraged me to invest more in your game. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
15
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 04:33:24 -
[12] - Quote
Commander Spurty wrote:Why haven't you used your data to decide:
"We are placing a cap on CONCORD bounties per Region! If you wish to go over X ISK, you need to invade your neighbors"
Faster the super pilots deplete the ISK bucket for their region, the faster they have to uproot and move.
This idea is actually the best, since it's possible certain alliances are using their regions much more than others. I'd rather see this happen, than buffs to the actual rats. |
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
15
|
Posted - 2017.06.23 14:53:49 -
[13] - Quote
Siliya wrote:Guess they kept the agro changes even tho they said they were going to leave them out
I noticed a slight increase in aggro. |
|
|
|