| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
68
   |
Posted - 2012.01.21 04:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
Large Collidable Object wrote:CeneUJiti wrote:Gathering a fleet and doing a NPC site for sole purpose of annoying and angering everyone?
I like how you speak for everyone. As an eve player, I'm aggravated by the absurd amounts of isk spilled into eve's economy via incursions.
Which accounts for about 5% or less of the faucets.
Have you considered how much for instance normal mission running contributes into the mix? Or all the other isk generating capabilities.
Regardless of that inflation isnt an issue according to the recent CSM minutes (about 1%) so any "spilling" into the economy isnt a problem as reported by CCP.
The main objections to high sec incurions seems to be from Null sec sov players who want to monopolise the personal wealth generating opportunites to encourage player interest in their area of EvE. Either that or people are just jelly of people being able to generate personal wealth in any form.
However, its continually missguided to link incursions as a main contributor to economic problems that don't exist.
Having said that, sandbox is sandbox, and asking CCP to police the process of early MoM killing is just stupid. I'd seriously prefer to retain freedom of Player expression to colour what happens in new eden. But it seems to be an increasing problem that players will quickly run for a CCP nerfhammer or ruling to compensate for something they dont like. |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
68
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 04:44:00 -
[2] - Quote
cpu939 wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote: early MoM killing. how can it be early if you have the force to take it out and you want to you should this topic made me cry from lol to much
Since the objections are towards incurions runners who leave the Mom alone for extended rewards whilst it's alive due to the ongoing spawns.
|
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
74
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 12:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tres Farmer wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Large Collidable Object wrote:CeneUJiti wrote:Gathering a fleet and doing a NPC site for sole purpose of annoying and angering everyone? I like how you speak for everyone. As an eve player, I'm aggravated by the absurd amounts of isk spilled into eve's economy via incursions. Which accounts for about 5% or less of the faucets. Have you considered how much for instance normal mission running contributes into the mix? Or all the other isk generating capabilities. Regardless of that inflation isnt an issue according to the recent CSM minutes (about 1%) so any "spilling" into the economy isnt a problem as reported by CCP. *snip* 1% per month.. that's 12% per year.. probably more. A currency is being considered 'stable'* in a window of 1-3% per year.. *) stable would be 0%, but there is some more to it and current real world currencies aren't constructed/designed to work with 0% (for the worse of the planet and all it's inhabitants). @OP: you fail @Br1ck & Co: nice job
The 1% is the current inflation value, I assume this is an annual figure not a monthly one. And the fact that CCP reported to the CSM that it wasnt an issue refutes your scare mongering attempt to twist the statistics for personal selfish reasons as opposed to an objective argument.
Seems to be an ongoing trend with the griefers however, in that they need to invent reasons.
|
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
75
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 13:25:00 -
[4] - Quote
Quote from the recent produced CSM minutes:
"Both the CSM and CCP agree on that Incursions are good in terms of gameplay and ISK payout, but the time for adjustments based on player behavior data is at hand"
So rewards are fine.
Gameplay isnt broken, so systems dont need to change.
So I assume the "behaviour" data must refer to AI changes for the predicatability they talk about, which sounds like a good thing on the "funsics" level. |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
75
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 13:30:00 -
[5] - Quote
Andski wrote:yeah hey wardec an alliance that doesn't have any static assets and whose members can just drop corp for the duration, great idea
Unlike someone who admitted to be playing an alternative game altogether in a public channel recently when his alliance members where involved in a large scale fight. Oh, of which the fail goons lost big time.
And despite that the system currently works both ways, with grifers and runners equally abusing the systems consistently for their own ends. |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
75
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 13:32:00 -
[6] - Quote
Krissada wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Quote from the recent produced CSM minutes:
"Both the CSM and CCP agree on that Incursions are good in terms of gameplay and ISK payout, but the time for adjustments based on player behavior data is at hand"
So rewards are fine.
Gameplay isnt broken, so systems dont need to change.
So I assume the "behaviour" data must refer to AI changes for the predicatability they talk about, which sounds like a good thing on the "funsics" level. Quote:Focusing the discussion on Incursions, CSM brought up the point that Incursions are unbalanced in
that the easier levels of Incursions are more profitable than the more difficult levels GÇô something
that CCP has noted as well and is working on adjusting. I too can quote the CSM minutes.
And? Thats rebalancing, not changing systems and if rewards are being adjusted overall rather than redistributed then CSM are presumably contradicting themselves? |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
80
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 16:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Calisto Fox wrote:Oh really? So what next on the witch hunt? L4 missions because they pay an easy 40m ph. GǪand that's the reason they have been a target for requests for nerfs for, oh, the last 4+ years or so, since the risk-vs-reward is so obviously off-kilter. So no, it's actually incursions that are the Gǣnext itemGǥ on the hunt.
Of course bounties account for substantially more of an isk faucet overall than incursions alone. By quite a considerable amount. Interesting then that the best bounties are in null sec who are interested in nerfing incurions instead. In the worst case scenario as some null bears have suggested simply removing the high sec earning altogether from them whilst retaining theirs which have much better earnings anyhow atm.
And you wonder why High sec pilots are worried about these biast motivations? |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
80
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 16:53:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Of course bounties account for substantially more of an isk faucet overall than incursions alone. By quite a considerable amount. Oh really? Source? Numbers?
Look at the QEN for the last quarter of 2010, it shows how much the isk faucets that bounties contribute.
I'd love to see current figures of course as the values would have likley incresed, but these are the official last records we have. |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
80
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 17:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
Andski wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Tippia wrote:Grumpy Owly wrote:Of course bounties account for substantially more of an isk faucet overall than incursions alone. By quite a considerable amount. Oh really? Source? Numbers? Look at the QEN for the last quarter of 2010, it shows how much the isk faucets that bounties contribute. I'd love to see current figures of course as the values would have likley incresed, but these are the official last records we have. yeah Q4 2010, before incursions entered the game, nice one
Thats irrelavant genious as you can still get a good indicator of how much overall was being generated (a magnitude e.g. about 42 Tril / month by the last numbers) and see how substantial it is from it, even though pilot numbers and skills have increased that will likley add to the pot and then any economic factors.
Then look at incursion pilot numbers and relative earnings per hour and compare.
Do it for yourself if you like and see how much you consider the relative earnings are.
Personally, when you consider all the mission running and other activities by the vast majority of the player base it doesnt take much to imagine how much is being generated by comparison.
You want to nerf incursions you prove to the player base that they are the major contributor that needs to be considered over other things. Otherwise focus elsewhere where its needed. |
Grumpy Owly
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
80
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 17:48:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tippia wrote:gfldex wrote:There you go. Just sum it all up for all regions. GǪwhich says nothing about the actual payout of all those kills, and provides even less information about incursions. Grumpy Owly wrote:Thats irrelavant genious as you can still get a good indicator of how much overall was being generated (a magnitude e.g. about 42 Tril / month by the last numbers) and see how substantial it is from it, even though pilot numbers and skills have increased that will likley add to the pot and then any economic factors. No, it's not irrelevant, because it still doesn't provide the numbers you claim to have (or, perhaps more accurately, the numbers needed to make your claims). Quote:Do it for yourself if you like and see how much you consider the relative earnings are. GǪor you could just provide them and show your sources, since you are the one making claims based on those numbers. Quote:Personally, when you consider all the mission running and other activities by the vast majority of the player base it doesnt take much to imagine how much is being generated by comparison. Just one problem: imagination is not a source and cannot be used as a basis for anything.
Then by the same token can you provide supporting evidence that supports the claim that incurions ARE the main problem over other areas of the game.
I have done a previous exercise with someone else's claimed figures before in a previous thread that demonstrated based on the figures provided what the contribution was.
But unlike your other null slaves I dont jump around to address your whims when you click your fingers.
As the responsibility to support all the claims that they are an issue to begin with should come from those who are asking for things to be nerfed surely.
I'll give you a hand, all you have to do is work out how much the activities generate a month and compare it. Even as a rough guide it should help to indicate if there is any validity to the priorities of isk generating activities. And you even have the advantage of using 2010 figures as your baseline.
What would be useful of course is if we had a more up to date QEN also. Can't understand why CCP is draggin their heels reporting on it. |
| |
|