|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
3
|
Posted - 2017.06.09 21:24:39 -
[1] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:[img]http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/newssystem/media/71813/1/GermanFlag33.png[/img] -á [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/devblog/FLAG_-_RUSSIAN-33.png[/img]Hi Space Friends, Coming with our release on Tuesday, weGÇÖre significantly reducing the damage output of Fighters. Why:We are making this change because Carriers & Supercarriers are too strong in PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is primarily due to NPC Bounties. This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players. 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. What:- Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
- Light Fighters (Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage.
- Support Fighters: No Change
- Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage.
- Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage.
- Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
- NPCs are 15% more likely to shoot at fighters than they are currently.
We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players.
|

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
3
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 12:19:20 -
[2] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Hi Space Friends, Coming with our release on Tuesday, weGÇÖre significantly reducing the damage output of Fighters. Why:We are making this change because Carriers & Supercarriers are too strong in PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is primarily due to NPC Bounties. This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players. 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. What:- Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
- Light Fighters (Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage.
- Support Fighters: No Change
- Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage.
- Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage.
- Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
- NPCs are 15% more likely to shoot at fighters than they are currently.
We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players.
After all i've read and the thoughts i've had, i'd like to see a Isk generating breakdown by ship. We can see from the graphs, that isk is being generated from bounties (duh), but what ships are the ones doing so? I can hardly imagine that ships that cost between 2 - 30 Bil (Carriers and Supers) are the main issue when you can have at least a 6th of the income of a capital by only investing a 100th of the isk (Ishtar vs Super) and about a 12th of the time (Ishtar + Drones 5 vs a well rounded super pilot). |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
4
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 13:52:45 -
[3] - Quote
Laenatus wrote:You guys think CCP will address us pleibs before having their censorship brigade lock the thread again? Hmmmmmmm
At this moment in time, i can see this going both ways. Either the Patch hits without a single comment or they are scrambling right now to go over their data again and decide if they remove the nerf.
But the lack of communication is greatly disheartening, that's for sure. |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
6
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 16:49:02 -
[4] - Quote
Darkligh 81 wrote:Ok so I see the nerf is going live in the patch notes. but i figured I would post anyway just incase CCP wakes up and sees there is a far simpler solution.
The most logical solution I have found is pretty simple and does not need to nerf the carriers, thus wasting a lot of SP and ISK on skill books. Especially for those who did it without injectors. those who used injectors can just as easily do it for the next 'Big Shiny' that becomes the top dog of anomalies.
So to my point-
Same as jump fatigue. The longer you rat the more of a penalty you incur and then start to suffer a negative penalty to fighter damage and also possibly to resists. get over a certain limit and your carrier becomes useless in combat as you have worm yourself out. and have to rest until you can effectively use your carrier again.
This does 2 things.
Allows casual players to still enjoy their toy.
Clamps down heavily on those utilising carriers to "Milk ISK" thus limiting the increase in money supply "from carriers" we are seeing.
My last 0.2 isk worth on the subject.
Ohh, I forgot: Thanks CCP for all the replies you gave. Shows your interest in your customers.
If I may expand on that idea a bit.
Since the bounty isk comes from CONCORD, let's give them a limited pool of isk to draw bounties from.
The total pool being the maximum amount of isk ccp wants in the system per day, week, month, whatever. Divide the total over all players. Each player reaching the bounty cap will get a decreased or no payout (insert balancing here). At the end of the bounty period, untouched bounty pools can be split up from inactive towards active players. CCP can decide what the total pool is, active players are limited in generating isk, casuals (such as me) get to keep enjoying full payouts, people who don't do anything concerning bounties will be unaffected, pvp will be unaffected, missionrunners will be unaffected and it would make sense lore wise for CONCORD to have limited money available. And if you need more isk in the system, just tweak the numbers a bit or raise the total pool.
|

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 18:01:14 -
[5] - Quote
What about a new kind of support fighter by ORE?
One for tractoring, one for salvaging. Gives carriers and supers a reason to stay in site, less bounty generated. Less isk in the system. More minerals via refining scrap, minerals go down in value, stuff is affordable on a item per isk basis. Inflation is a bit countered.
Just a random idea, just remembered that mtus exist, but I'd rather just clean up after myself over warping back and forth. |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 18:26:10 -
[6] - Quote
Fix the faucet or the drain. Those are the only options. Hitting the person playing with the broken faucet will less nowhere. |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
9
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 02:49:38 -
[7] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote: 'Why not just reduce the bounties?'. The focus of this change is Supercarriers and Carriers. We don't want to effect the income of ships besides those with this change.
And i don't want my Carrier nerfed into the ground, but we can't all have what we want.
There has been a multitude of suggestions from bounty nerfs to the hulls, the anoms, diminishing returns / fatigue, isk pool to draw from, even something like an ESS effect, flat out reducing bounties in certain systems.
The higher your index, the lower your bounty, leaving systems to rat in rather undefended, making them more attractive targets. Also, the percentual reduction in bounties is already there, you coded it. I bet it could be adapted rather easily.
Or even just increase fighter weapon cycle times. Reduces DPS, but let's you keep the moment of just flat out volleying an NPC off grid. Do not underestimate that psychological satisfaction to be able to do that.
If this damage nerf gets reverted and some actually good change is implemented, a lot of people will be, let's just say, less "passionate" as it was put.
Understandably, CCP needs time to go through options offered by players. All of which would have been offered if you just simply asked for it. There can not be a single argument made that fighter damage had to be nerfed RIGHT THERE AND THEN to keep the economy alive.
This could have just as easily be pushed to the next patch while having a serious and calm discussion on the topic, so you didn't have to sift through 100 pages of which arguably a few were quite emotional rather than rational, which in turn just delays the solution to the underlying problem even more, diverts resources and makes players and community managers alike quite unhappy.
Keep an open discussion on this. Give us information on the topics. CCP has what, 600 employees? You have a playerbase over easily 50'000 people. You can crowdsource for ideas within the community. Why would you not tap into such a massive amount of ideas and manhours of worktime?
Got most off my chest now.
o/ |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
10
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 10:22:53 -
[8] - Quote
Petros K wrote:Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:Destriouth Hollow wrote:If you really want to compare capital-ratting to other ships, do the following: 1) Take only bounties that came from ratting anomalies (caps don't rat anywhere else) 2) Take only bounties that came from nullsec (cap's don't rat anywhere else) 3) Divide them by the amount of time spent to generate that isk (The amount of bounty-ticks generated will work reasonably)
I would REALLY be interested in THAT statistic, as it would actually be usefull information.
Haven't you been paying attention? They get up to 260 mil ticks. What more do you need to know? 260m tick would mean that some1 is killing 1 haven in 2-2half minutes. Is it even possible ?
Only way i see this being possible would be to have 3 consecutive sites with a dread spawn. 60m on that * 3 makes 180m + about 80m from the regular bounties, about 25 - 30M per Anom. So, you know, an utter outlier, a 1 in a million happening. |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
10
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 10:33:02 -
[9] - Quote
Destriouth Hollow wrote:
True Sansha Dreads (the seldom faction kind) give 120mil bounties.
.
My bad then. Since i reside in Delve, i've only ever encountered the Bloodraider Dreads which are at 60m bounty. Thanks. |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
10
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 10:47:50 -
[10] - Quote
Destriouth Hollow wrote:Random Freak wrote:Destriouth Hollow wrote:
True Sansha Dreads (the seldom faction kind) give 120mil bounties.
.
My bad then. Since i reside in Delve, i've only ever encountered the Bloodraider Dreads which are at 60m bounty. Thanks. You have the same in your region. They are just very rare and called "Dark Blood Dreadnought": https://zkillboard.com/ship/41397/
I did get those about 2 or 3 times since i have started flying a carrier, but i remember those being at 60m bounty (48m with ESS) and not 120m. |
|

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
10
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 10:55:41 -
[11] - Quote
Destriouth Hollow wrote:Random Freak wrote:Destriouth Hollow wrote:Random Freak wrote:Destriouth Hollow wrote:
True Sansha Dreads (the seldom faction kind) give 120mil bounties.
.
My bad then. Since i reside in Delve, i've only ever encountered the Bloodraider Dreads which are at 60m bounty. Thanks. You have the same in your region. They are just very rare and called "Dark Blood Dreadnought": https://zkillboard.com/ship/41397/ I did get those about 2 or 3 times since i have started flying a carrier, but i remember those being at 60m bounty (48m with ESS) and not 120m. You are talking about the "Blood Dreadnought" which is 60mil and not the "Dark Blood Dreadnought", which is 120mil. Here is the regular "Blood Dreadnought": https://zkillboard.com/ship/37463/
And learned something new. Thank you. |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
10
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 14:50:39 -
[12] - Quote
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. |

Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
12
|
Posted - 2017.06.13 15:59:50 -
[13] - Quote
Ikshuki wrote:Huren Ogeko wrote:On a side note I am wondering how badly this nerf is really affecting ratting. One of my corp mates reported this morning that his has the same ticks now as before and the only change is takes 2-3 volley's to take out a battleship now. Pre-patch he showed an average of 102mil ticks and after patch his first tick was around 106 mil. Maybe this nerf took away the overkill making less dps wasted on small ships and did little to affect the overall site times.
Does anyone else have any hard results in how it affects their ratting?
did you forget the 50% fighter drone aggro effect? that means the rats can randomly all aggro one drone and kill it in half a second, or web it to ****
According to the patch notes, it was 15% also, it was not implemented. And I have yet to hear different from my corp mates. |
|
|
|