|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 02:14:09 -
[1] - Quote
Troedoff Dude wrote:Dare I say a monocle style protest may be on the horizon? I sure hope so. We are aware that you are switching to a more micro transaction model CCP. Hence the hiring of the micro transaction guy, the free to play model, and the changing of aurum to plex.Even the way you advertise plex for sale on your site. The look you get this for free bs. Keep forcing your loyal player base into a corner, and watch it shrink.
I am looking forward to the protests. This game only exists because the players and devs came together to make it great. Hubris has blinded them, and caused poorly thought out and planned changes with inappropriate lacking in transparency and working with the community to solve problems.
Bring us your problems, ask our input, debate openly with us - not just the handful of elites with the cares of empires. No more of this we see a problem, here is the WoW fix for it, deal and like it. That is not how this community works. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 02:28:18 -
[2] - Quote
Alexksey Buldakov wrote:Ter Jern Wolf wrote:Troedoff Dude wrote:Dare I say a monocle style protest may be on the horizon? I sure hope so. We are aware that you are switching to a more micro transaction model CCP. Hence the hiring of the micro transaction guy, the free to play model, and the changing of aurum to plex.Even the way you advertise plex for sale on your site. The look you get this for free bs. Keep forcing your loyal player base into a corner, and watch it shrink. I am looking forward to the protests. This game only exists because the players and devs came together to make it great. Hubris has blinded them, and caused poorly thought out and planned changes with inappropriate lacking in transparency and working with the community to solve problems. Bring us your problems, ask our input, debate openly with us - not just the handful of elites with the cares of empires. No more of this we see a problem, here is the WoW fix for it, deal and like it. That is not how this community works. I'm afraid we will never see protests as a "Day of wrath"...the Gaming community is not the same,and the developers absolutely exactly the opinion of the players.
Got a fair few already in jita, I'm hopeful more will show up. Watching damage control from what they had to know was going to be horribly received changes makes me feel terribly sad for the state and mentality they have fallen into. They had better options, they had better ways of doing it, they even had better ways of gaining community support. Instead they treat us like dogs and kick us. It is very telling. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
3
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:01:37 -
[3] - Quote
Dan Sever wrote:Sassura wrote:Dan Sever wrote:Zero Davahum wrote:https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/6g99i4/unsub_if_you_want_ccp_to_listen
CCP does not care about player feedback, this is true with every business even outside of the video game industry.
The only time they will care about something they have done is if you, the player stop paying for subscriptions, stop buying PLEX and other currencies and stop playing EVE. CCP are much more likely to listen if the controversial change to gameplay causes a loss of profit.
Unless every single one of you who has compalined about these nerfs stop giving CCP money. CCP will not listen to anything you have to say, you are being ignored.
As much as it sucks, we have to relise that as true with every company, CCP cares about profit from their products and nothing more, if you don't like a change they make, stop giving them money, when CCP notices a massive drop in profits, then they will start to care about player feedback and start doing the things you wan't them to do so they can get profit back on track. I find it funny how few super pilots are desperately trying to make non-super pilots follow them in their protest against CCP taking their isk mountains. However, this change does affect far more than the 1% of the top 1% as CCp Quant seems to suggest. Ofc, casual ratters like myself will only benefit from this nerf. Less isk = lower prices = higher yield for us. Correct me if I'm wrong.
less isk = higher prices = higher demand. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
3
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:09:22 -
[4] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:WhiteOrm wrote:Teckos Pech wrote: You do not get rich this way. Please learn some basic economics. Increasing the money supply has long been associated with rising prices so that the increase income and the increase in prices cancel each other out.
CCP Larrikin wrote: 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.
Nope. You DO get rich this way. Because when small number of players have many ISK it directly makes them rich. It is other players that become relatively poorer from ISK inflation etc. To put it simply you had a chance to become rich by becoming a carrier/super pilot (that is a long shot), but you have that chance no more. Not as a whole you don't. Look at any RL economy where they have resorted to printing money. Wiemar Germany, Zimbabwe, Venezuela today. The latter is particularly instructive as it is turning in to a veritable **** hole. And those few players who do "get rich" they do so by destroying the purchasing power of the rest of the player base and when that ISK starts circulating you end up with inflation, potentially lots of inflation. This can, in turn lead to a feedback loop where more and more people feel like they have to rat in carriers and supers to stay ahead of the inflation which simply makes the situation worse. Having a game like this is not balanced and can be very bad for the long term prospects. Reducing this degree of growth in the money supply MUST happen. How that reduction in the growth of the money supply happens should be open to debate. The current approach does appear very much to be, at best, ham handed. At worst is will be bad for the game and I would urge CCP to look for an alternative solution even if it is as uninspiring and banal as putting a temporary ban on carriers and supers ratting in NS anomalies. This would preserve the PvP aspects of these ships and address the money supply issue and buy time for finding a better and more thoughtful solution.
This - CCP is blindly nerfing without thought or actually working with their player base. Their new investors suck horribly (they should get some love mails maybe?) Right now they are stuck in a panic cycle because of skill injectors. Which if we keep them they should be limited to use only 1 a day to allow CCP time to respond properly to breaking issues instead of blindly nerf bat and **** everyone off. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
5
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:17:55 -
[5] - Quote
Mariza vonAmdonen wrote:Gumby Taron wrote:[quote=Crash 888]how is pvp screwed by this?
This really hurts small scale pvp groups and their ability to fight numeric odds using higher SP and isk investment into ships such as carriers and super carriers, and it strengthens large capital heavy alliances such as PL, NC. and GSF who have the numbers to not be affected by the damage cuts.
yet its "PL, NC. and GSF " that are most vocal against it
Because they are the largest null sec groups and see the short term effects of poorly planned changes? Isk faucet a problem? Add sinks, remove taps. Don't nerf perfectly good if not underpowered capital ships. (they don't have the teeth should in a pvp fight yet...) |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
5
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:26:40 -
[6] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Ter Jern Wolf wrote:Mariza vonAmdonen wrote:Gumby Taron wrote:[quote=Crash 888]how is pvp screwed by this?
This really hurts small scale pvp groups and their ability to fight numeric odds using higher SP and isk investment into ships such as carriers and super carriers, and it strengthens large capital heavy alliances such as PL, NC. and GSF who have the numbers to not be affected by the damage cuts.
yet its "PL, NC. and GSF " that are most vocal against it Because they are the largest null sec groups and see the short term effects of poorly planned changes? Isk faucet a problem? Add sinks, remove taps. Don't nerf perfectly good if not underpowered capital ships. (they don't have the teeth should in a pvp fight yet...) I disagree on the sinks, those will be hard to balance and will bring additional problems (people seeing a jump in say skill book prices for a problem they did not cause will not sit well). Here is what I wrote earlier as a temporary response.... The current approach does appear very much to be, at best, ham handed. At worst is will be bad for the game and I would urge CCP to look for an alternative solution even if it is as uninspiring and banal as putting a temporary ban on carriers and supers ratting in NS anomalies. This would preserve the PvP aspects of these ships and address the money supply issue and buy time for finding a better and more thoughtful solution. And again: credit where credit is due...the notion that this is heavy handed and not good originates with SurrenderMonkey.
We desperately need more sinks in the game - the easiest way to balance additional sinks is make more items vanity and bpc available from LP + ISK and make bounties payout isk + lp normally (in smaller isk quantities.)
The next sink is to restore / increase admin costs for alliances in the way of Concord Fees, or of NPC only resources that are needed to feed citadels. Both of these target the sink problem and target the accumulation of wealth while maintaining easy balance handles to adjust as player behavior changes.
The third sink could be finally moving implants over to player construction - and again have the bpc / parts for them be NPC isk + lp rewards.
We have GOOD options. Lets take them. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
5
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:34:42 -
[7] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Devon Stone wrote:Cut number of anoms spawned
Cut the respawn rate
Run an anom, search 3 - 4 jumps to maybe find another
repeat And why should people not ratting in carriers and supers have their game nerfed? Oh, and deflation is BadGäó too.
That problem is more along the lines of we need special sites that are designed for caps and regular anoms should prolly get gates. This way risk / reward can be balanced on the farming more easily. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
6
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:42:11 -
[8] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Ter Jern Wolf wrote: We desperately need more sinks in the game - the easiest way to balance additional sinks is make more items vanity and bpc available from LP + ISK and make bounties payout isk + lp normally (in smaller isk quantities.)
The next sink is to restore / increase admin costs for alliances in the way of Concord Fees, or of NPC only resources that are needed to feed citadels. Both of these target the sink problem and target the accumulation of wealth while maintaining easy balance handles to adjust as player behavior changes.
The third sink could be finally moving implants over to player construction - and again have the bpc / parts for them be NPC isk + lp rewards.
We have GOOD options. Lets take them.
Up until recently the amount of ISK being added to the economy was not that large. In fact, in looking at the price indices there is very little overall inflation in the game...for now. And if the sinks are over done then there is a risk of deflation which is also bad, especially if it is too large. We don't want to see-saw back and forth between too much ISK entering the system then too little and so forth. Maybe we need more sinks, but in the last few months I would have said no. And I'm not inclined to include more ISK sinks because more ISK is entering the system. The people paying into those sinks won't necessarily be the one's bringing in the ISK. So we'd have some players getting a buff and others a nerf and while the system as a whole might be balanced, from an individual perspective it probably won't look that way. And at the end of the day, it is the individual perspective that matters...as it is individuals who decide to stay or leave the game.
I don't disagree that deflation is bad too. Adding sinks is good - it should be slow tho instead of like the current nerf wiffleball. I do agree that isk will have transport from the earners to the sinks - it already has to tho - like any economy. What we are really seeing is more isk and ore coming in without a matching increase in ships burnt because we can't go get good fights reasonably and their is little reason to try and evict people from their space.... So the markets have turned to hoarding and accumulation.
We also see simple migrations of people using injectors to move isk bots into whatever happens to be the best paying job right now - and doing so in hours because they can use injectors without limits, which forces a panic nerf in response. Still what is proposed in this patch isn't a fix for any of the actual issues - it only bandaides the symptom, which is wealth is accumulating in the hands of a few elites with enough RL $ to buy into anything they want in this game. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
6
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:47:14 -
[9] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Ter Jern Wolf wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Devon Stone wrote:Cut number of anoms spawned
Cut the respawn rate
Run an anom, search 3 - 4 jumps to maybe find another
repeat And why should people not ratting in carriers and supers have their game nerfed? Oh, and deflation is BadGäó too. That problem is more along the lines of we need special sites that are designed for caps and regular anoms should prolly get gates. This way risk / reward can be balanced on the farming more easily. There we go, yet another possible solution that could be looked into. I really wish CCP would not implement this change and make a new announcement along the lines of: 1. Too much ISK is entering the economy. 2. It is carriers and supers, so regrettably we are going to prevent them from ratting in the next patch. 3. BUT THIS IS TEMPORARY, so we can get a better handle on how to fix the situation. 4. Sorry, we kinda messed up. Please offer helpful suggestions in this thread.
This exactly - All the players really want is to be meaningfully consulted on what is the greatest experiment in cooperative game development the world has ever seen. We don't like being treated like WoW players - if we did we'd play WoW. We aren't however WoW players - and many of us have spent a decade or more in the sandbox helping it grow and evolve - and don't appreciate CCP forgetting how to have meaningful development discussions with the players.
|
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
7
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 20:59:53 -
[10] - Quote
Moor Deybe wrote:Ter Jern Wolf wrote: This exactly - All the players really want is to be meaningfully consulted on what is the greatest experiment in cooperative game development the world has ever seen. We don't like being treated like WoW players - if we did we'd play WoW. We aren't however WoW players - and many of us have spent a decade or more in the sandbox helping it grow and evolve - and don't appreciate CCP forgetting how to have meaningful development discussions with the players.
Good point. Have the CSM been asked for their input on this "carrier problem"?
They were not consulted on any of the last several patch changes from what I've been led to understand. The CSM has pretty much turned into a shallow showpiece with little input and primarily the concerns of alliances and not players.
|
|
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 21:07:16 -
[11] - Quote
Do you remember when back in the day... CCP used to have a major game breaking problem or change they wanted to make... they would post a 5 page dev blog on the issue a month or three before covering every angle of the problem and as many possible solutions as they could.. then would suggest what they think is best - then ASK THE PLAYERS - what do you think? Then they would spend a few weeks to a month hashing out the needed changes with the players - THEN they would implement them as a refined version of both what they wanted and the players wanted.
I do remember this. I miss this. We need this if we are to thrive for another decade in new eden. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.10 21:25:41 -
[12] - Quote
Gimme Sake wrote:Ter Jern Wolf wrote:Do you remember when back in the day... CCP used to have a major game breaking problem or change they wanted to make... they would post a 5 page dev blog on the issue a month or three before covering every angle of the problem and as many possible solutions as they could.. then would suggest what they think is best - then ASK THE PLAYERS - what do you think? Then they would spend a few weeks to a month hashing out the needed changes with the players - THEN they would implement them as a refined version of both what they wanted and the players wanted.
I do remember this. I miss this. We need this if we are to thrive for another decade in new eden. I think the graphs with the huge amount of trillions of enerated isk forced them to come up with this unannounced sollution. Trillions of isk that can be reinvested in isk injectors generating even more pve super pilots.
It's a panic nerf brought on by poor foresight and not consulting the players and working closely with them at large. Any decent designer should have foreseen this issue with skill injects, and we as a player base (and CCP) have known about the lack of isk sinks since we actually had a real economist working with us (I miss his posts too). We have literally had YEARS to deal with the fact empires pay bounties out of thin air and we've never had close to a balanced amount of isk sinks to destroy that isk generated. It has always been a problem, it's just gone from a steady inflation to a rapid inflation with the ability to instantly train into whatever faucet you want to tap if you can get the resources ($$$). This means it's no longer a multi-month process for an elite to switch gears and tap a faucet or expand a faucet tap. The changes proposed in patch aren't going to fix that - just buy a little time at the expense of every player.
We need real solutions. Many have been proposed some of the best include closing the isk cycle so that bounties come from taxes - and then IF isk starts running low more can be secretly added to the pool behind the curtains.
|
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
10
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 20:11:12 -
[13] - Quote
Eternal Night Mikakka wrote:This has to be singlehandedly the worst update to an mmo I have seen in nearly a decade. These nerfs are based on highly inaccurate data using extreme outliers in order to create the illusion of a problem that doesn't exist. Carrier and super ratting is not the issue here, the actual problem lies with the entire PVE system of eve online. The solution to this so called isk faucet is not nerfing an entire shipline to the point of uselessness. I can't understand why the CCP dev team decided to implement a solution that imbalances the game to the point where battleships can out perform an entire class of ships that take months of dedicated training to skill into (not counting skill injectors).
The decision to implement these changes is obviously a rushed and ill thought out. I am surprised any developer could choose to make such a careless decision like this without first consulting their customer base or community representatives such as the CSM. In the past CCP has consulted the community prior to updates such as this, which begs the question why they wouldn't have given the community time to discuss these changes with the dev team.
The only other game I have played that showed this same disconnect from their community and made drastic changes like this over"RMT" and "inflation" was Runescape back in 2007. During this time Jagex (the developers of Runescape for the few who don't know) took similar measures as the one we are seeing here, instead of addressing the actual problems with their game at the time they decided to completely strip entire features from the game. Starting with the removal of PVP via the wilderness which had a similar high risk high reward PVP gameplay we have, and ending with the removal of free trade between players and replacing it with a harshly limited system. Not surprisingly these changes, and Jagexs utter disregard of the community caused outrage and a massive drop in subscriptions. To this day, Runescape hasn't recovered from this even after they reversed these decisions in 2011. The damage is done.
I hate to think about this, but I see CCP taking this in the same direction Jagex did in 2007. They are ignoring their consumers, they are ignoring the actual problems with the game, they are ignoring the obvious imbalances in the game, and worst of all they are refusing to come to a rational and meaningful solution. Most will argue the changes over the past 3 years are the bulk of their concern and this is the straw that broke the camel's back. Don't get me wrong for me this this definitely broke my camel's back, however for me my complaints start with the pheobe changes and fozzie doc, because it is around this time CCP began to ignore their customers again after the whole monocle riots in 2011. All of these changes were exactly like the changes Jagex made in the past. Brute forced methods that only treat the symptoms, not the root of the issue. Fozzie sov has made the game more stagnant and boring than ever, the jump drive changes, while i will admit were necessary to an extent, make getting an outright chore.
What's worse is any negative feedback about these updates has been either outright ignored or held in contempt by CCP. Which isn't an attitude a developer should have towards their players. CCP, your players are your customers why are you treating your customers with outright disrespect like this. This is unprofessional and totally unacceptable.
Honestly if it weren't for the fact I LOVE the friends I made in this game and I LOVE the corp I run, I would have unsubscribed outright. Instead you're picking and only have to deal with losing 4 out of my 5 subs. Anyway I will stop here before I continue to get petty. My point here is that you need to listen to your customers CCP, and actually look into finding real meaningful solutions. Not just useless patch and fix methods that ultimately destroy the game.
TL;DR Listen to your customer base CCP, don't be Jagex and ruin it with stupid brute force fixes.
Also **** this update
Go look at Crunch Base ... see the investments from New Enterprise Associates and Novator? See when CCP started giving no cares about the players? What's 1+1=?
|
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
10
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 20:25:22 -
[14] - Quote
Skill Deficiency wrote:RKJakTup wrote: and i lost 5 T2 fighter last week thats 50 mil. other ships dont spend 50 in ammo doing pve. Than use the other ship; are you that bad at EVE you are not using the best ship for the job or is the ship worth using even with this drawback and thus your point is of little value or concern? Which is it? One ship is not going to be the best choice for everything in the game - get into some other ships and try them on for size.
So I found a way to increase my carrier ratting ticks and the math shows it will work post patch. Instead of letting my alt just sit around with her thumb up some orifice or another I stick her in a little angry making agro ship... drop her on the anom first and set off all the agro alarms I can...
While I can't guarantee the extra 15% more likely to want to shoot fighters won't change the balance of the agro generators needed to **** the rats off enough to focus on the bait - that is just a matter of tuning. Further since I don't carrier rat on more than one account anyhow - I'm still making the exact same - if not BETTER isk than i was before.
so =P CCP. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
11
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 20:47:17 -
[15] - Quote
Kaze Mester wrote:Ter Jern Wolf wrote:Skill Deficiency wrote:RKJakTup wrote: and i lost 5 T2 fighter last week thats 50 mil. other ships dont spend 50 in ammo doing pve. Than use the other ship; are you that bad at EVE you are not using the best ship for the job or is the ship worth using even with this drawback and thus your point is of little value or concern? Which is it? One ship is not going to be the best choice for everything in the game - get into some other ships and try them on for size. So I found a way to increase my carrier ratting ticks and the math shows it will work post patch. Instead of letting my alt just sit around with her thumb up some orifice or another I stick her in a little angry making agro ship... drop her on the anom first and set off all the agro alarms I can... While I can't guarantee the extra 15% more likely to want to shoot fighters won't change the balance of the agro generators needed to **** the rats off enough to focus on the bait - that is just a matter of tuning. Further since I don't carrier rat on more than one account anyhow - I'm still making the exact same - if not BETTER isk than i was before. so =P CCP. I bet you would do the same thing in PVP as well.. gf
I try and avoid multiboxing PVP honestly - I'm not fast enough on the controls and client switching to be effective at it unless I'm part of the blob and all I have to do is set anchor and pew the calls. |
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
11
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 21:16:45 -
[16] - Quote
Radkiel wrote:Ter Jern Wolf wrote:Skill Deficiency wrote:RKJakTup wrote: and i lost 5 T2 fighter last week thats 50 mil. other ships dont spend 50 in ammo doing pve. Than use the other ship; are you that bad at EVE you are not using the best ship for the job or is the ship worth using even with this drawback and thus your point is of little value or concern? Which is it? One ship is not going to be the best choice for everything in the game - get into some other ships and try them on for size. So I found a way to increase my carrier ratting ticks and the math shows it will work post patch. Instead of letting my alt just sit around with her thumb up some orifice or another I stick her in a little angry making agro ship... drop her on the anom first and set off all the agro alarms I can... While I can't guarantee the extra 15% more likely to want to shoot fighters won't change the balance of the agro generators needed to **** the rats off enough to focus on the bait - that is just a matter of tuning. Further since I don't carrier rat on more than one account anyhow - I'm still making the exact same - if not BETTER isk than i was before. so =P CCP. What ship are you using?
Seems most anything "can" work but to take advantage of the rat preferences - they hate logi / indy ships most - and they despise any form of active logi or boosting. The noctis doesn't have enough tank at least the way i've tried so far to just sit and take it, but if I manage it while I manage the carrier I can clean the anom as I do it. I'm thinking of maybe trying a scorpion next to see if I can still generate the same agro while passive tanking the dps.
|
Ter Jern Wolf
STK Scientific The Initiative.
11
|
Posted - 2017.06.11 22:25:05 -
[17] - Quote
Thomas DeTorquemada wrote:Mariza vonAmdonen wrote:Thomas DeTorquemada wrote:Ridiculous preteen Mentality....
I give it two months when number of subscribers have dropped along with the revenue, then coax them back with a buff and an admission of 'we got it wrong' subtly placed somewhere in the patch.
Target the problem of the loot drop in the first place and the bounty.
Next it'll be ' we dont need guns anymore on ships, start throwing buns instead' Ratters will keep on ratting but you've upset the pvp population way more imo, unjustifiably
Do you really think this is the way to assure game longevity? come on devs, do the right thing they dont want nerf all ratting, just carrier/super-ratting thatw OP. I've been watching PLEX prices since this 'uprising' and guess what they are steadily rising. no indication of significant loss of subscribers but by doing so they upset us PvP players, there's easier ways to target the problem rather than apply a quick fix that affects other player types Reduce anomoly sites and the loot table. there's a big void in the balancing between a sub-cap and say a dread and then a Titan. A Friday announcement for a following Tuesday patch? very sneaky and underhand imo. some would'nt have even skilled into/bought/built a Carrier. what a waste
Also the day after the end of a juicy plex sale... almost like they didn't want to drop the bomb until after they raked in all the cash from the sales... where they dropped the rorq changes publicly and gave it a bit to cool off before starting the sale. Almost like they knew this was a bad call and thought maybe it would hurt sales if they announced it properly. |
|
|
|