Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 79 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Adare Darmazaf
Alcoholocaust. Test Alliance Please Ignore
5
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:32:18 -
[1831] - Quote
Sassura wrote:Not sure why there is still a hefty nerf to the ship when they plan to also look at making the anoms less profitable for carriers and supers.
Also, can anyone tell me how much isk p/h I could make with a handful of smartbombing machs?
With 4 bombing machs and 1 to kill escapees, you run havens in 3 per minute. When you set up for higher warp speeds with the mach lets say from site to sit it is 4, meaning you can run 15 sites per hour. times what? 25 million isk per site? 325 million an hour (not counting escalations, faction spawns, dread spawns, loot and such, pure bounties)
|
Creecher Virpio
Alcoholocaust. Test Alliance Please Ignore
28
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:32:22 -
[1832] - Quote
HEY GUYS WE LISTENED!
WE ARE STILL NERFING, JUST A LITTLE LESS!
thanks for not listening to a ******* word anyone said. |
grigair
SUB Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:33:22 -
[1833] - Quote
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. |
Balta Katei
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:34:34 -
[1834] - Quote
Idea: Have dynamic "difficulty" setting periodically make regional adjustments to bounty payouts. See Bitcoin difficulty adjustments. The more ratting takes place in a region the lower bounties get. The less ratting takes place in a region, the higher bounties build up. |
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners ChaosTheory.
16147
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:35:51 -
[1835] - Quote
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. |
Sassura
Sassy's Corporation
33
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:36:41 -
[1836] - Quote
Adare Darmazaf wrote:Sassura wrote:Not sure why there is still a hefty nerf to the ship when they plan to also look at making the anoms less profitable for carriers and supers.
Also, can anyone tell me how much isk p/h I could make with a handful of smartbombing machs? With 4 bombing machs and 1 to kill escapees, you run havens in 3 per minute. When you set up for higher warp speeds with the mach lets say from site to sit it is 4, meaning you can run 15 sites per hour. times what? 25 million isk per site? 325 million an hour (not counting escalations, faction spawns, dread spawns, loot and such, pure bounties)
Thank you.
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3404
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:37:22 -
[1837] - 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? |
Sassura
Sassy's Corporation
33
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:37:44 -
[1838] - 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.
It does need to be fixed.
There are better ways though, ones which really address the problems. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
3404
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:39:03 -
[1839] - 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. |
Luthien Niell
60 Squadron Mordus Angels
3
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:39:12 -
[1840] - Quote
Why are you CCP so scared to do radical things?
You dont have balls?
Dont ask players for their opinion.
Just do what you want.
Just do it.
Be a man once more! |
|
grigair
SUB Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:39:36 -
[1841] - Quote
Yes I do and it would be worth it. The goal is to remove isk from game thats is a solid way to do so. Nothing drains isk out of eve like Titans, Super Carriers,Carriers dying. |
HighRiser
Varion Galactic
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:39:41 -
[1842] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:[img]http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/newssystem/media/71813/1/GermanFlag33.png[/img] [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/devblog/FLAG_-_RUSSIAN-33.png[/img]UPDATE 2017-07-12: Reduced the damage reduction to fighters. Added supporting data. Greetings Capsuleers, Coming tomorrow in the June 2017 release, the damage output of Fighters will see a reduction by the game design team. After a long weekend sifting through some passionate feedback and taking into consideration previously ongoing design work, letGÇÖs take a look at whatGÇÖs coming. 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. Why:Our primary goal for this change is reducing the combat power of Carriers & Supercarriersin 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 due to NPC Bounties. [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9b_isk.float.3.jpg[/img]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. Our secondary goal is that Carriers and Supercarriers are too effective in PvP, even for the investment it takes to create them. This change will shift the PvP balance, but weGÇÖre confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP battles. What:- Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
- Light Fighters (Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage (was 20%)
- Support Fighters: No Change
- Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): No Change (was 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage)
- Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack damage (was 30%)
- Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
- NPC Fighter Aggression: No Change (was +15%)
- We are working on changes to Anomalies that will reduce the effectiveness of Carriers and Supercarriers. These changes will be announced at a later date.
We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players. Some of you have asked '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.
Hey CCP Larrikin!
Just wanted to say that it is nice that when people do genuinely believe that the devs are mistaken, they will listen somewhat to our calls for a lighter touch. Though if I can put in my two cents...
Pvp: To my understanding, (super)carrier's ability to frag small ships is the problem. So instead of nerfing all damage to all things, why not modify the tracking/weapon signature size/explosion velocity/explosion radius of fighter weapons? Make it so that hitting small ships like dictores or frigates sees significant damage nerfs?
This would maintain the damage balance of carrier v BS or other caps while the balancing against smaller ships.
PVE: -Option 1: Do what you did above. Now carriers and supers will have very hard times hiring the frigates in spawns. Slow killls = less payout per tick. -Option 2: Add a anti-fighter rat to sites or just have current rats shoot fighters more. Profitable, but still not without fighter losses. Or some sort of EWAR against fighters by npc frigates? Ecm/tracking disrupt?
There are many ways you can go with this to not adversely affecting the current carrier meta against hostile fleets.
If CCP ever does read these threads, it would be nice to see more finesse and less heavy handed changes. |
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners ChaosTheory.
16147
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:40:29 -
[1843] - Quote
PenguinBacon wrote:I too can massage data to justify a false conclusion! Per Quant's 2015 presentation 1.5% of the games population logged in and ran incursions This group accounted for at the time 8.36T worth of incomeAssuming linear growth of the player base based on the increase in incursion income May 2017th Income is 9.92T. This was a growth of 18.68% of income. The estimated population of incursion runners is 1.66%. So Rounding up to 1.7% to be consistent with the chart made by Quant. We have 1.7% of the games population accounting for 9.92T income. To compare this with the numbers posted by Larrikin in the first post 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 Incursion runners are about 21% more of a player base than SuperCarriers but result in 331% more income per character.
You do know Larrikin meanted "characters earning bounties", where as when Quant was talking about incursions he was talking about their percentage of the general population.
You'd need to know how many people were earning bounties (so you'd know what percentage of characters were involved in bounty generating activity) yo compare the two.
No one knows how unbalanced high sec incursions are more than me, but your attempt and analyses is off. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3179
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:41:34 -
[1844] - Quote
grigair wrote:Yes I do and it would be worth it. The goal is to remove isk from game thats is a solid way to do so. Nothing drains isk out of eve like Titans, Super Carriers,Carriers dying.
No, that moves ISK from one player to another, and removes minerals from the game.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Sophos Mileghere
TunDraGon Shadow Cartel
34
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:46:21 -
[1845] - Quote
This is ********. Because ISK faucet is created using capital ships to PVE, the solution is to broad brush nerf capitals... I just do not even begin to understand the logic in this.
Reduce frequency of PVE in null, buff null NPC's, make them fighter hungry to off put capital ratting - do something to nerf the ratting but not do not wreck the PVP game experience.
You are fixing symptoms, not root causes. You must think of the end to end systemic cause and effect. If you cannot hand on heart say you have that view then dont do the change |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3180
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:46:49 -
[1846] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Sassura wrote: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. It does need to be fixed. There are better ways though, ones which really address the problems. The problem is fighter squadrons. This problem did not exist the day before CCP patched in Fighter Squadrons. that shouldn't be changing anomalies when they know what the problem is. CCP did that before (with tracking titans and forsaken hubs, they added frigs to forsaken hubs, slowing down everyone, not just the titan ratters) and that shouldn't ever do that again.
No, the full definition of the problem is, "Fighter squadrons in PvE" or, even more specifically, "Fighter squadrons in null ratting". Saying, "The problem is fighter squadrons," is a misstatement, as fighter squadrons have many other uses that aren't problematic.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Mrs Guderian
Patriot Security Services Solyaris Chtonium
2
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:46:53 -
[1847] - Quote
You kicked capital pilots out of WHs when you crushed C5 capital escalations. Those were actually fun because they were a group effort. Two or three capital players and all the subcap pilots could play together in blingy ships, share the ISK reward, and deal with the danger of a new sig opening while the dreads were in siege and maybe a carrier in triage. Now we are stuck in null sec, where ISK farming is a solo enterprise - no human interactions required. Carrier ratting alone is dull, annoying WORK. It is not gameplay. If the rats start attacking (and killing) my fighters more often, it will take longer and be more WORK. Speaking as a former wormholer, the whole tick mechanism sucks. It's not just me. The proof is in who isn't logging on and why. My former-WH corpies don't bother to log on except to update their PI or to say hello for five minutes before going to bed. They'd rather watch TV. I don't blame them. While I could easily PLEX my accounts, I never do. I don't mind paying for a service. But I have to say it's really getting tiresome. This newest nerf to fighters/increase in game time spent ratting really sucks. |
Zockhandra
Flames Of Chaos
36
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:47:12 -
[1848] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:Reserved
First off, i'm really sorry that you had to put up with all the cry babies moaning about their isk printers making less money. Kudos to a job well done on the initial changes and the current ones (this is why you my fav CCPBRO).
Though to be honest, this relates all the way back to Incarna here..... The fighter change as a whole was too big too quick. Now that it's had time to breed with the Rorq mess, it has created one hell of a messy situation to deal with. So is it any wonder than people are complaining over changes that dumb-down their ability to pump out previously unheard of levels of profit?
I understand that these changes are a step in the correct direction, and that fighters still require alot of attention in order to bring them in line. But i think that in order to address this issue as a whole, you guys would be better off acknowledging the current state of balance and power build up (which currently has no release due to foz sov).
This trend is going to continue to build with ever increasing levels of isk and supers, accumulating in isolated areas of space. Eventually resulting in a content less saturation of super-carrier fleets. The issue with this eventuality, is that large super capital fleets like this are quite honestly, un-attractive to fight. This is mainly due to the length of time it takes to kill them, but also due to the risk averse nature of players.
No single change to fighters can rectify this situation, and a public discussion (o7 show) asking for player thoughts and acknowledging a tipped balance of power is highly recommended in order to sort this, without causing mass tears (upset) across the cluster.
Shield are red, Armor is too, i slapped my heavy neut, all over you.
Fingers crossed, broken shattered and burned,
across from the bubble and into your hull.
|
Ian Hestia
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:47:12 -
[1849] - Quote
Jen Makanen wrote:Re: The Update Monday 12th June.
I'm not going to pretend this cut back on the initial nerf pleases me at all, but I would personally advise you learn to listen to your playerbase a bit more, yes there is bias, but you must consider their opinions and logically come back with your own arguments, rather than the method used by CCP Quant and CCP Falcon by disregarding the concerns of players as "1% of the 1%" and "edgy memelord". Bad for PR, bad for respect and quite frankly, real **** social awareness.
CCP Quant and CCP Falcon these two just enraged the community with their carelessness about the game and subscripted players.
|
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners ChaosTheory.
16147
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:48:59 -
[1850] - Quote
Wrong place, sry. |
|
O2 jayjay
Usque Ad Mortem Solyaris Chtonium
63
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:49:13 -
[1851] - Quote
Good call devs. You do bring a good argument to the table. How about putting a spawn timer on Heavens? 20 mins sounds about right. that way nothing gets nerfed and the grind slows down. Also makes players move around and want to expand their space. |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6628
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:50:38 -
[1852] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:CCP Larrikin wrote:UPDATE 2017-07-12: Reduced the damage reduction to fighters. Added supporting data. 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. When 6ish % of people engaged in bounty generating activity account for almost HALF of all bounties injecting isk into EVE's economy, it's time for the nerf hammer to fall. Of course CCP caved and in the same post announced that they were pulling back on some of the nerfing. That's a mistake, it's just going to prolong the issue to the point where more drastic nerfing is going to be needed later. You rip a bandaid off, trying to peel it slowly and nicely just makes it worse.
:smug:
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
Sassura
Sassy's Corporation
33
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:50:51 -
[1853] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Sassura wrote: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. It does need to be fixed. There are better ways though, ones which really address the problems. The problem is fighter squadrons. This problem did not exist the day before CCP patched in Fighter Squadrons. that shouldn't be changing anomalies when they know what the problem is. CCP did that before (with tracking titans and forsaken hubs, they added frigs to forsaken hubs, slowing down everyone, not just the titan ratters) and that shouldn't ever do that again.
I wish that it were that simple, but I don't believe it is. Fighters need work, a 3 day old character shouldn't be able to render a carrier useless. I'm not arguing there. A simple damage reduction simply doesn't fix the issues at hand.
Do you think so many people would be out there ratting in carrier and supers, making those bounty numbers so high if it wasn't for things like skill injectors, lack of force projection creating much safer space than intended and many other things? Lets not forget about how cheap and easy they are to get hold of now.
The bigger picture makes me think that nerfing fighter damage wouldn't be the fix that the game needs. |
Kortes Ellecon
INSePaRaBLeS Wings Wanderers
3
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:54:38 -
[1854] - Quote
CCP Larrikin wrote:[img]http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/newssystem/media/71813/1/GermanFlag33.png[/img] [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/devblog/FLAG_-_RUSSIAN-33.png[/img]UPDATE 2017-06-12: Reduced the damage reduction to fighters. Added supporting data. Greetings Capsuleers, Coming tomorrow in the June 2017 release, the damage output of Fighters will see a reduction by the game design team. After a long weekend sifting through some passionate feedback and taking into consideration previously ongoing design work, letGÇÖs take a look at whatGÇÖs coming. 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. Why:Our primary goal for this change is reducing the combat power of Carriers & Supercarriersin 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 due to NPC Bounties. [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9b_isk.float.3.jpg[/img]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. Our secondary goal is that Carriers and Supercarriers are too effective in PvP, even for the investment it takes to create them. This change will shift the PvP balance, but weGÇÖre confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP battles. What:- Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
- Light Fighters (Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage (was 20%)
- Support Fighters: No Change
- Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): No Change (was 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage)
- Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack damage (was 30%)
- Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
- NPC Fighter Aggression: No Change (was +15%)
- We are working on changes to Anomalies that will reduce the effectiveness of Carriers and Supercarriers. These changes will be announced at a later date.
We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players. Some of you have asked '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.
40% nerf for heavy fighters ??? ...really ?? ok last days for me and for my corps never will return again to this game if u want to kill your game do it ccp! bye ! good reason to sell accounts ty . |
grigair
SUB Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:54:42 -
[1855] - Quote
SurrenderMonkey wrote:grigair wrote:Yes I do and it would be worth it. The goal is to remove isk from game thats is a solid way to do so. Nothing drains isk out of eve like Titans, Super Carriers,Carriers dying. No, that moves ISK from one player to another, and removes minerals from the game.
Minerals need to leave the game. The carrier pilots want to not get their stuff nerfed well the backbone of this whole game is ore. Isk needs to change hands and if that means some of the trillions of isk that some of these people have needs to be redistributed to the poorer people of this game then so be it. CCP is implementing these changes to hurt the big guy but in the end its hurting any new players joining. If a new person cantget into this game this many years in than the game has become stagnant. CCPisnt killing their game the old players are because they have become to comfortable sitting on the isk and not actually trying to large scale fight anymore. The pvp in this game just isnt what it was 2-3 years ago and nowhere what it was when bob was around. |
Teckos Pech
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
6628
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:56:00 -
[1856] - Quote
Valdr Auduin wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:Side1Bu2Rnz9 wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:I know most people here are averse to looking at the data...but you can find it here. The money supply grew rapidly last month. We saw some pretty wild swings recently with Alpha clones lining up with a surge in the money supply. A big drop when citadels were released (everyone and their Uncle Bob buying up blueprints). There is no similar explanation with the recent rise in the money supply. A cold war caused by a TERRIBLE sov mechanics has a tendency to also cause an increase in the amount of money generation. Maybe you should try to find the problem and not do what CCP is doing by putting bandaids on a symptom... You're also naive if you don't think people will just move back to "printing ISK" in semi-AFK drone boats instead of carriers. Carriers were never the most efficient ISK per effort in the game, but it allowed people to play on one account and make the same amount of ISK per hour as running 3-4 accounts using VNIs. Carriers were a click fest, but they were perfect for the person who maybe can't play 20 hours a day or run multiple accounts. The only thing CCP will do with this patch is nerf carrier's PVP ability and forced the customer base to adapt to multi-boxing 3-4 accounts using semi-afk drone boats instead... You don't see the inherent contradiction in your post there do you? A carrier was good for a person who can't afford to pay for his sub, but he'll expand his accounts by 3 or 4...and find the money somewhere? Never mind that using VNIs are less efficient meaning he'll have to rate even longer for each of these accounts to PLEX them. Yes, but VNI-ratting is sustainable over longer periods to the point, as demonstrated, of breaking the cost margin.
So let me get this straight....the guy who is having issues paying his sub is going to spend more time ratting (you can't totally AFK rat in a VNI no matter how much you guys lie about it) AND he is going to have more accounts.
Maybe he should...oh I don't know....go get a better job or something instead of spending more time in his mom's basement.
"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek
8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
|
FeistyOne
13. Enigma Project
15
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 17:58:13 -
[1857] - Quote
You should never have introduced Skill Injectors to the game
Too many Rorqual/Carrier/Super alts in the game now.
But Greed is good right?
|
Marcel Garsk
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 18:00:52 -
[1858] - Quote
Guys! What carrier ticks do you foresee tomorrow? |
Random Freak
Fearless Tiger. Tactical Narcotics Team
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 18:01:14 -
[1859] - 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. |
Sassura
Sassy's Corporation
33
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 18:02:59 -
[1860] - Quote
Teckos Pech
So let me get this straight....the guy who is having issues paying his sub is going to spend more time ratting (you can't totally AFK rat in a VNI no matter how much you guys lie about it) AND he is going to have more accounts.
Maybe he should...oh I don't know....go get a better job or something instead of spending more time in his mom's basement. [:roll: wrote:
When you have to resort to comments about peoples real life jobs and 'moms basement' comments it seems that you are out of reasonable and factual comments. Your posts read more like reddit posts. There are people whose opinions I do not necessarily agree with that I enjoy interacting with, ingame and on the forums. Their posts give me fresh insight into other perspectives and widen my thinking. It's a pleasure to banter with them. They in turn, for the most part. can express themselves without falling back to insults. It's a shame that you Sir, are not one of those people. It would give your posts more credibility. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 .. 79 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |