open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: Those anomaly changes in full
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 110 111 112 113 [114] 115 116 117 118 : last (118)

Author Topic

BackStreet Babe
Posted - 2011.04.29 08:17:00 - [3391]
 

Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Originally by: Makumba Aki
Still no reply from CCP?

My perception is that many corps are leaving alliances and join alliances with better space, break apart or are leaving 0.0 for WH or high.

Let us look at some NPC kill numbers:

You're using NPC kill numbers to judge a patch aiming at reducing NPC kill numbers and increasing conflict? Did you completely miss the point of the change?

http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Pure_Blind#kills24
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Pure_Blind/2011-04-01#kills24

Four week ago and there were FEWER PvP kill than this friday, so what does that tell us by the way of anecdotal evidence? That the patch is working as intended.


so your saying that these kills are over ratting space?

this conflict was in place before these changed and would have taken place with or with out them. its just in the last 3-4 weeks its seen an escalation with pl, nc., and the RMT (plus others)alliances all banding together with a common goal.

no alliances gives a **** about ratting space, its about the moon gold and common hate for each other

Makumba Aki
Posted - 2011.04.29 08:24:00 - [3392]
 

Originally by: Spc One
Originally by: Makumba Aki
Still no reply from CCP?

My perception is that many corps are leaving alliances and join alliances with better space, break apart or are leaving 0.0 for WH or high.

Let us look at some NPC kill numbers:

Providence

Cloud Ring

Pure Blind

and now compare it with the Region with probably lowest true sec on average

Deklein

So what happened? Smaller entities have left 0.0 or joined big powerblocks. No small entites dare to attack big powerblocks for better space (suprise, surprise!!!) There are no more smalle conflicts. We basically have one huge conflict. DRF, Trivoke, PL and Raiden vs. NC, Goons and -A-.

Could CCP please post their perception of the situation? They should have more, and better data sources than I do.

I mean really, no flame or whine intended here. I would just like to know CCP's POV on that.




I am pretty sure ppl left to high sec and are doing missions.
Even level 3 mission gives more isk than -0.2 systems.
ugh


Nope!
You still make more money with hubs on avg. compared with missions. Provided that you can pay your sov bills from moon goo. Additionally you get some income from PI in 0.0.


Makumba Aki
Posted - 2011.04.29 08:28:00 - [3393]
 

Edited by: Makumba Aki on 29/04/2011 08:35:56
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Originally by: Makumba Aki
Still no reply from CCP?

My perception is that many corps are leaving alliances and join alliances with better space, break apart or are leaving 0.0 for WH or high.

Let us look at some NPC kill numbers:

You're using NPC kill numbers to judge a patch aiming at reducing NPC kill numbers and increasing conflict? Did you completely miss the point of the change?

http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Pure_Blind#kills24
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Pure_Blind/2011-04-01#kills24

Four week ago and there were FEWER PvP kill than this friday, so what does that tell us by the way of anecdotal evidence? That the patch is working as intended.


No NPC kills means no activity. No activity --> no ganking --> less PVP. And this patch didn't aim to decrease the 0.0 population as far I know.

And I hope you are not proposing that Triv0ke deployed to pure blind because of ratting space. Because pure blind's true sec is almost as ****ty as providence's. And noone is ratting there anymore as well. They are there because of moon goo and because they simply hate NC. There are no more smaller conlicts which was something this patch tryed to achieve.

If the patch would be working, Deklein and not Geminate/Pure Blind would be under siege. Even the former IT space has better true sec and is undefended but noone is rushing to get down there.

So no IMHO the patch is not working as intended, at least not yet.

Red Morbo
Posted - 2011.04.29 17:31:00 - [3394]
 

CCP about time you give some feedback to your paying customers.

Numbers and graphs on how the indended idea has outcome,

1: Has pvp increased or decreased in 0.0?
2: Has population increased or decreased in 0.0?
3: How meny new alliances have moved to 0.0 since the patch?
4: Where does CCP go from the aftermath.

We just want some simple answers, you look at the numbers, were in the trenches.

Imperator Ceasar
Posted - 2011.04.29 19:28:00 - [3395]
 

CCP Greyscale said:

Expected consequences

1) Some alliances will immediately start wanting to look for better space
2) In the longer run, there'll be more conflicts going on, with more localized goals
3) Newer alliances will have an easier time getting a foothold in nullsec
4) Coalitions will be marginally less stable
5) Alliances will have to choose more carefully what space they develop, where their staging systems are, and so on (low truesec systems generally tend to be in strategically inconvenient places)

#1 - it still seems CCP fails to understand WHY conflict happens - isnt over "better space" and entrenched alliances arent going to move.

#2 - this is dreamland.. again, CCP seems incapable of understanding their own game and why conflicts happen.

#3 - this may or may not be the case.. I fail to see how this will make anything easier about a new or small alliance taking space.

#4 - again, this may nor may not be the case... I fail to see how this will make coalitions "marginally less stable." - this seems to be a CCP pipedream

#5 - alliances set up systems and locations due to strategic concerns, not "true sec" of systems.. again, CCP seems incapable of understanding what motivates their player base.

Imperator Ceasar
Posted - 2011.04.29 19:35:00 - [3396]
 

However, this arrogance betrays CCP's hubris. CCP are clearly blind to their own flaws, introducing these changes while dealing from a position of weakness (the original blog indicated that greyscale admitted he was wrong to implement Dominion's bountiful havens and sanctums). At the end of the day, it's precisely this hubris that will keep this nerf in the game. How can someone blinded to their own weakness ever see criticism of said weakness as "constructive?" The fact is, Greyscale believes he was wrong before. So what makes him so damned certain history hasn't repeated itself with this (abysmal) change?


NOW THAT IS A NICELY MADE POINT AND QUITE CORRECT... CCP, pay attention and fix this.

Imperator Ceasar
Posted - 2011.04.29 19:50:00 - [3397]
 

Originally by: WisdomPanda
Originally by: Marley Browning
Originally by: WisdomPanda


Incorrect. -0.3 to -0.4 has one haven.

With full upgrades, this is how I feel it should break down;

0.0 to -0.2 = 1 Haven
-0.3 to -0.4 = 2 Haven
-0.5 to -0.6 = 1 Sanctum, 2 Haven
-0.7 to -0.8 = 2 Sanctum, 2 Haven
-0.9 to -1.0 = 2 Sanctum, 4 Haven



I think your wrong, I am in a -.62 system and I only get 3 havens, no sanctums since the patch.


This has been miss quoted a few times, so to correct it;

With full upgrades, this is how I feel it should break down;

It was my opinion how the changes SHOULD be, not how they ARE. The -0.3 to -0.4 having one haven is correct though. (At Lv5 military)

To all the haters out their trying to grow their self importance by bashing on the "carebears", you fail to see why this is an issue.

1) CCP made these changes in Dominion because they acknowledged that most of these systems are totally worthless. They also put isk sinks in place. If anything, the sinks should be increased, gradually, until a happy spot is found.

2) The changes can not be inflation related as they are ISOLATED. If this were really about turning off the taps, empire should have been equally hit. After all, as you all keep reminding us; it has a larger population thus a greater potential to generate isk. (Many 0.0 carebears already doing so, in fact)

3) The changes were put in last minute, as a foot note, and they are terribly unbalanced.

4) It is far more expensive to live in 0.0 than empire/low-sec. On top of the damage we do to each other on a daily basis, 0.0 also has maintence costs that empire/low-sec people are not exposed to.

5) They did this with no community support, input or discussion. Do you remember seeing the CSM being consulted?

6) They gave inaccurate, flawed or just plain false reasoning for the change.

7) The (very) limited response so far has been short sighted at best. This isn't about opposing the changes (at least not for me) it's about either making them global (nerf ALL isk fountains) or at least give real, solid, irrefutable reasoning for not only implementing the changes, but also doing so WITHOUT any community interaction.

If those aren't reason enough to get you fired up or at least slightly agitated, I doubt any reason presented will sway you beyond your own prejudice.

As far as reasoning goes, from CCP Grayscales second response:

Quote:
- Related to this, the current concern about low-value space as it relates to new alliances is that, because it can be upgraded to be almost as good as anywhere else in the game, there's little incentive to move along once you're there. Dominion worked well with getting these regions more useful and more occupied, but we're concerned that unless the current tenants have a good reason to want to leave behind the infrastructure they've built up and move on to better areas, the next crop of prospective alliances are going to find they have nowhere to go.


So basically what he's saying is that CCP expects you to drop billions into system development, dropping outposts, etc. Then move because you don't like your current rats, you will need to invest trillions (spread across many accounts) into getting new space, by forcing out it's current owners. You'll also need to do all of this with space that is so worthless that no self respect power block wants it. (Because if they did, they would have it by now)

Apparently, this reasoning made sense at CCP. /facepalm

Also, help keep this thread alive! 200 pages is the new goal. If we still have no proper response from CCP by then, we'll need to take more drastic steps.


I concur on every point - well said.

CCP, fix it or lose more customers.

Mina Scalleto
Posted - 2011.04.30 04:13:00 - [3398]
 

Well, this is how it works, CCP looks at all of these posts and laughs all the way to the bank.

Why? Because of the separate set of numbers they have that they don't tell us about. It's more important to attract new customers than to worry too much about current ones.

Until pocketbooks start shrinking over there (at a rate at which new customers cannot recoup), then I hate to say it fellow EVE players, CCP just took ONE BIG DUMP on you.

That is all.

Dark Damus
Posted - 2011.04.30 10:46:00 - [3399]
 

Edited by: Dark Damus on 30/04/2011 10:46:10
What you can see on this pic. the Accounts what is log in at same time go down

http://www.eveger.de/serverstatus/serverstatus_p_month_server_1.png?date=050002

Because 0.0 is now borring.

We will see what ccp do next to stop this trendExclamation

Azgard Majik
Gallente
UK Corp
Posted - 2011.04.30 18:36:00 - [3400]
 

Are CCP even gonna repay alliances for all the systems upgrades?

Davelantor
Caldari
The Resistance Movement
Posted - 2011.05.01 07:16:00 - [3401]
 

RESULT:
Large alliances migrating to good areas, small alliances migrating back to high sec, because the good vs bad systems balance has been shifted more to "generally piece of crap" systems bar.

It feels like the general value of staying at 0.0 has decreased, because now if you want good stuff, you need to take over a good system from a large alliance, and we all know how easy that is.

Also ****s up the current alliance balance system completely, now we will have high concentration of players in specific place, instead spreading out relatively evenly.

GrindAllStar
Posted - 2011.05.01 14:38:00 - [3402]
 

Honestly if they really wanted to increase chances for small alliances to succeed/have a starting point while increasing conflict, all they should of done was go back to the beginning of eve. Back then when we had 10k dudes in the entire game looking for a gathering to get into a fight. When people were "war decing" others for the weird reason of owning a high sec mission hub.

Why it was like that then?... Because there were a Few players spread over 5k or so systems maybe?

Modern day numbers show around 35k players online at some times. So why no simply escalate the eve world to a enormous 15/20 or 25k 0.0 solar systems???.
Make it so if alliance x needs help from alliance y they will have to wait for a month for them to get there. So how about that? seed about 4/5/6 ... 10x more 0.0 systems.

Don't link them so they can be easy access from everywhere. Link them so people actually put there minds together when setting up a invasion at a 100+ jumps away location. (like in real world they will actually have to think about logistics and fleet movements and ****)

I think that will kill the massive blobs and yes will make some localized power blocks but not like we don't have those now....

Overall think it would create conflict at a smaller scale, give small alliances a chance and as for the big-boys they will have to secure their space/borders better ans many small dudes will be on the rise.

Fell free to poke me how ever you want I still think this idea is better than killing the anoms.

(just checked 23 days left on my 3 accounts still waiting for a reason to refresh counter)...

Skaarl
Posted - 2011.05.01 15:20:00 - [3403]
 

Originally by: GrindAllStar
Honestly if they really wanted to increase chances for small alliances to succeed/have a starting point while increasing conflict, all they should of done was go back to the beginning of eve. Back then when we had 10k dudes in the entire game looking for a gathering to get into a fight. When people were "war decing" others for the weird reason of owning a high sec mission hub.

Why it was like that then?... Because there were a Few players spread over 5k or so systems maybe?

Modern day numbers show around 35k players online at some times. So why no simply escalate the eve world to a enormous 15/20 or 25k 0.0 solar systems???.
Make it so if alliance x needs help from alliance y they will have to wait for a month for them to get there. So how about that? seed about 4/5/6 ... 10x more 0.0 systems.

Don't link them so they can be easy access from everywhere. Link them so people actually put there minds together when setting up a invasion at a 100+ jumps away location. (like in real world they will actually have to think about logistics and fleet movements and ****)

I think that will kill the massive blobs and yes will make some localized power blocks but not like we don't have those now....

Overall think it would create conflict at a smaller scale, give small alliances a chance and as for the big-boys they will have to secure their space/borders better ans many small dudes will be on the rise.

Fell free to poke me how ever you want I still think this idea is better than killing the anoms.

(just checked 23 days left on my 3 accounts still waiting for a reason to refresh counter)...


but but but ccp greyidiots models show that this wil work to increase conflict!!! and that you will base staging systems on true sec!!!

basically until they replace this idiot 0.0 is gonna be fairly crappy.

Red Morbo
Posted - 2011.05.01 16:21:00 - [3404]
 

Edited by: Red Morbo on 01/05/2011 16:21:13
In the aftermath:

Conflict has dropped, our null sec area is a waste land.
our small alliance gave 3 optoins:
1: Drop sov in half the systems we own
2: merge our alliane into a powerblock
3: quit null and move back to high-sec

This is a small alliance on the par with ccp thinks will have a better time moving into null- your so wrong.
considerable drop in nuets and reds venturing through the region-less pvp.
More time spent afk-less to do less intrest in the game.

Still not a decent reply from CCP so i guess they have a hard time reading.


h4kun4
Cold Steel Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.02 10:50:00 - [3405]
 

Edited by: h4kun4 on 02/05/2011 10:54:13
Many people just want to have comfort, it is not comfortable to fly 6 jumps for a sanctum which is safely enganged by another one since downtimes end. I havent gained money Incursion 1.4, because there is no sense for me flying a Hub or a Den with a Tengu im Risking more money than i can get... Its obviously more comfortable to get into higsec. There you have your missions, you can undock and gain ISK, in Nullsec you have to scan Complexes, fly Hubs, or try to get a Sanctum which is nearly impossible, you can get some money with hubs, but people just do not want to fly for peanuts. Second point, in highsec its safe to fly instead in nullsec its more dangerous, I dont risk a milliard of ISK (Tengu) to get 5 Million in 20 minutes, for this I can use a crappy drake wothed 50 million, level four missions are more rentable.
So people leaving nullsec, because in high its not only easier to gain money, if you try hard, you get more money. Nullsec dies! The conflicts source with DRF, NC and PL is not on Incursion 1.4, its because DRF wants this strategic territory in northeast.
Maybe CCP would understand Nullsec rules better if they would play with a non omnipotent acc in Nullesc alliances, because they are recuiting people.

Garia666
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
Xenon-Empire
Posted - 2011.05.02 18:19:00 - [3406]
 

This is what you get when you dont play the game.

Woodywilson
Posted - 2011.05.02 22:06:00 - [3407]
 

CCP turning into FLS????? I never...

Lord of cocksuckers
Posted - 2011.05.03 07:04:00 - [3408]
 

being a ceo of a 170man corp in 0.0 fighting for our lives. this patch has screwed us.

the guys are having to spend so much extra time making isk to replace ships there not fighting as much as they were.

no way we can afford to replace the ships as the corp income has crashed as a result. the moons we have access to dont make anywhere near enough to compenstae for the 50% drop in corp tax income.

so the changes you put in ccp are having the total oposite effect on small corps and alliances. would like it if you stoped lying and just state the true reasons for this change, as the current reasons even a blind man could see are bullsh*t

John Maynard Keynes
Posted - 2011.05.03 12:30:00 - [3409]
 

Well, the patch seem to be working as intended. People leaving 0.0 = less lag... mission accomplished
[/irony]

Azgard Majik
Gallente
UK Corp
Posted - 2011.05.03 13:09:00 - [3410]
 

Even Sony are not this vague when communicating with its customers. Please answer us CCP.

Khamal Jolstien
Caldari
THORN Syndicate
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.05.03 19:54:00 - [3411]
 

Originally by: Woodywilson
CCP turning into FLS????? I never...


Zing!

Kandarus
Minmatar
Lyonesse.
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2011.05.04 06:46:00 - [3412]
 

Edited by: Kandarus on 04/05/2011 06:47:10
Making mistakes are ok, just as long as you 'fess up to them. 114 pages later ... well that's just stupid.

I don't even plex/rat much, but seeing how the players are being ignored (no response as of yet) is very disconcerting. Unfortunately space-holders cannot band together in letting subs lapse for a month or so because that invites vultures to move on in.

Because of this, eve (lower-case intended) is losing interest for me. Lets see what the next month brings otherwise a hiatus or possible cancellation is looming.

Would be a shame, eve was a great game.

And, I'd rather trash all assets than give them to anyone out of corp. Wink

Mortus Valitum
Posted - 2011.05.04 08:02:00 - [3413]
 

+1

My 3 accounts are under cancelling.

d4refiner
Posted - 2011.05.04 09:32:00 - [3414]
 

Originally by: Kandarus


And, I'd rather trash all assets than give them to anyone out of corp. Wink

Well, devs were saying there needs to be a new isk sink. Seems stupid to try to do that through ragequits, but they let that scrub dumbass push this change through so that might actually be the plan. "guess what! If we have no more users, there'll be no one to complain any more!"

Pres Obama
Posted - 2011.05.04 20:40:00 - [3415]
 

just canceled all 4 of my autorenews.

get f'd ccp & greyscale

slevik
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.05.04 21:19:00 - [3416]
 

So sorry...I'm not exactly sure what you'd call a "High End Player"!! WTF is that anyway?! Apart from an insult to players that don't meet your set criteria to class as a high end player. Our money doesn't have the same value as theirs?
For the layman, in layman's terms..what does this upgrade do for us "low end players" that run missions from high and low sec? Anything? Is it REALLY worth me getting excited about?

Bubanni
Cryptonym Sleepers
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.05.05 01:18:00 - [3417]
 

Edited by: Bubanni on 05/05/2011 01:19:51
From what I understand, less than 10% of eves population lives in 0.0, if you really want more action in 0.0, make it so more people "can" and "will" live there, with that said... that only about 10% live in 0.0, it's not the most optimal place to try and reduce "isk", the place to hit is high sec, even with the so called "lp isk sink", missions pay out decent isk itself if you know what your doing, just like 0.0... (heck, im hearing about some people being able to get 250+ mil hour from running missions... while thats next to impossible with anomalies unless you count multiple characters in, or using a titan)

I personly canceled an account because of this, still keeping main for pvp

Ghazu
Posted - 2011.05.05 01:29:00 - [3418]
 

Originally by: slevik
So sorry...I'm not exactly sure what you'd call a "High End Player"!! WTF is that anyway?! Apart from an insult to players that don't meet your set criteria to class as a high end player. Our money doesn't have the same value as theirs?
For the layman, in layman's terms..what does this upgrade do for us "low end players" that run missions from high and low sec? Anything? Is it REALLY worth me getting excited about?


in layman's term your stupid, try again and rephrase your thoughts with coherenceCrying or Very sad

Hakaru Ishiwara
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2011.05.05 02:24:00 - [3419]
 

Originally by: Bubanni
Edited by: Bubanni on 05/05/2011 01:19:51
From what I understand, less than 10% of eves population lives in 0.0, if you really want more action in 0.0, make it so more people "can" and "will" live there, with that said... that only about 10% live in 0.0, it's not the most optimal place to try and reduce "isk", the place to hit is high sec, even with the so called "lp isk sink", missions pay out decent isk itself if you know what your doing, just like 0.0... (heck, im hearing about some people being able to get 250+ mil hour from running missions... while thats next to impossible with anomalies unless you count multiple characters in, or using a titan)

I personly canceled an account because of this, still keeping main for pvp
The funny thing is that the people behind that "10%" of the populace may have 2, 3, or more characters based in high-sec working hard to ensure that their null-sec characters are well-supplied and ready for action.

Make no mistake about it, much of high-sec EVE, including trading, logistics and industry, is focused on furthering the interests of null-sec characters and alliances.

slevik
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2011.05.05 03:40:00 - [3420]
 

Originally by: Ghazu
Originally by: slevik
So sorry...I'm not exactly sure what you'd call a "High End Player"!! WTF is that anyway?! Apart from an insult to players that don't meet your set criteria to class as a high end player. Our money doesn't have the same value as theirs?
For the layman, in layman's terms..what does this upgrade do for us "low end players" that run missions from high and low sec? Anything? Is it REALLY worth me getting excited about?


in layman's term your stupid, try again and rephrase your thoughts with coherenceCrying or Very sad


If you are having difficulty following such a simple thought I'm guessing English isn't your first language?? Let me help you....Greyscale states in his blog "Firstly, we've evened out the upgrades so each one has four sites in it now, rather than five in the first and four in the rest. We're also retaining a mix of the sites that we're aware are regarded as "filler" by high-end players" My question was very easy to understand..what's his definition of a High End player? The way he has explained the mechanics of the changes is a little difficult to follow and, in regards to calling me stupid, finish school and work harder on grammar...the correct spelling would be 'you're stupid'...Need a mirror?


Pages: first : previous : ... 110 111 112 113 [114] 115 116 117 118 : last (118)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only