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 : ... 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 ... : last (118)

Author Topic

lpttpnalt
Posted - 2011.03.30 19:45:00 - [1831]
 

wow
this is a bad idea. lets just revert back to just before dominion.
and as for there being more reason to rfight? as if we dont fight enough. i spent the past weekend on like 8 different pew ops. this is stupid. some carebear in jita thought this one up

Degara Farat
Caldari
Posted - 2011.03.30 19:51:00 - [1832]
 

Originally by: "CCP Soundwave"

For those that don't know what Little Things are, it's a project that Team Best Friends Forever is working on....
&
As a part of the "equal value space makes this game boring" initiative, we've changed the way anomalies work. The quality of anomalies will depend on the systems truesec - the better the truesec, the better the spawns. CCP Greyscale is writing a blog on this exact change, coming soonTM

Maybe we are accusing the wrong person(s) for this brainfart.

I hardly run anomalies because I dont like them but removing the sanctums/havens from the low true sec systems is simply put a bad thing. Individual corp members run these to fund their PVP. Less income per anomaly means longer PvE to fund PvP. So basicly less PVP allround. People will move back to Empire to run lvl 4 missions since most dislike mining or PI (considered boring and needs extra training). And when people leave nullsec and nobody runs these low-end anomalies the index drops and even less valuable anomalies will spawn. Rendering low true-sec not worth exploiting. High Risk No Reward isn't going to sell anywhere.

If the said changes about coalition stability is hoped to reduce the size of blobs then think again. We need large numbers to play CCP's new Sov Mechanics. Dominions proposed drive-by takeovers aren't going to happen if you have to reinforce any I-HUB or Outpost twice. Remove those from the Sov Mechanics. Just return to the old spamming system as before but use TCU's anchored around planets this time. Needs a rebalance of the sov bill and the onlining times of SBU's/TCU's but it would become a lot more dynamic then todays "Drive by now, come back next week" mechanics.

There might be some space opening up for new alliances to settle, but this would be in systems with a low true-sec thus bad revenue. And most likely the previous owner will drop a fleet in the moment they see Sov being claimed/taken just to kick the new entity back to Empire. It will get some more PVP out in nullsec but it will stop soon. No new alliance will try that twice in the same region.

And stop posting about the changes being made to Lvl 4 highsec agents quality. Devs already explained (in Missions forums) that it isn't going to be the case in the near future due to the difficulty of programming for it, if it ever will.

Dazram Two
Posted - 2011.03.30 19:59:00 - [1833]
 

I think it's pretty obvious now that this is an april fools joke....so everyone that's getting really really upset needs to relax a little and get a sense of humor.. ugh

Cassius Hawkeye
Minmatar
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:04:00 - [1834]
 

Originally by: Ghostscorpion
Originally by: Cassius Hawkeye
I feel this is a good change to bring back a bit of balance in the eve 0.0 economy.

I remember grinding ****ty rats in crap systems/ to get my first battleship, and the pain of losing it. 0.0 shouldn't be a free isk printing machine. Belt rats, PI, mining, havens/sanctums in other system still provide more than enough isk to many new players.

I look forward to 0.0 being a bit tougher, with more reason to fight over richer regions / systems. Having the potential for every system to be the same for isk making was always wrong, and i am glad ccp is fixing it.

P.S - i benefit from sanctums - i will miss the easy isk, but i will just go back to other ways to make isk.


Humm I just looked at your alliance sovereignty. Looks to me that your Alliance will be... Will kicked from you rented space good luck to you after CCP adds the change.

Quote:
her is your Alliance sovereignty. info
Quote:

Region SolarSystem Security lv
Catch NH-1X6 -0.24
25S-6P -0.95
4-07MU -1.00
FAT-6P -0.64
CZK-ZQ -0.66
QETZ-W -0.40
Querious NDII-Q -0.04
5V-BJI -0.43
W-IIYI -0.35
F-NXLQ -0.79
H74-B0 -0.68
0TKF-6 -0.42






Well we don't rent space currently - as far as i am aware! And thanks for the good luck message - but it really doesn't bother me. I see sanctums/havens as a luxury item, but personally, i am quite happy to go back to the traditional way of lvl 4 0.0 missions, or belt ratting, or mining, or whatever i need. I managed to do well out of that in the past - i'm sure i will not go broke in the future on a new system.Smile

Selpy
Caldari
Penumbra Military Industrial Complex
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:06:00 - [1835]
 

Originally by: mkmin
Originally by: Jenn aSide
Another thing about this idiotic idea is that it sets people like me (who are RL cash poor) WAY back against these kids who have no families and can just buy GTCs to fund pvp. As it is now, you have to do A LOT of sanctums and havens to match what someone with 35 bucks can get in seconds.



^^ The real reason CCP is doing this. Money. EVE is now officially unofficially funded by RMT.


People seem to be getting what I meant in my post yesterday about this being a money grab. You have to step back and look at the whole picture, not just how PLEX is applied in 1 part. CCP have really stacked it in their favor, and it's going to get much worse. This nerf is about getting people to buy more PLEX for money, nothing more.

PvP is an isk pit, particularly for the guys just learning it. Anyone who says otherwise should drop whatever they're smoking. Experienced PVPers, or members of the large block alliances who get their ships refunded don't apply here. These less experienced, new 0.0 citizens are the target demographic which CCP claims they're "helping" with this nerf. But they're the ones that are going to feel the pinch the most, as the low end systems won't be able to generate the isk required to sustain the heavy losses they WILL suffer at the hands of the roaming pirates and griefers that will essentially permacamp these systems for the "easy kills".

Newer alliances just starting out in 0.0 that are farming sanctums hardcore to get themselves and their corps established are going to get screwed. Once you've got your infrastructure and upgrades in place, POSes running, and have a good stock of minerals, ships, mods, maintaining that is fairly easy with minimal isk flow. But without the initial resources available to do this, it leaves them with 2 options - abandon their investments and return to Empire, or buy PLEX to convert to ISK to fund their advancement. Most determined players will choose that second option.

Now instead of these players buying a PLEX with ISK to sub their (sometimes multiple) accounts, they're buying PLEX with cash to sell for isk so they can continue their development. The more PLEX is bought and traded directly for isk in-game, the more money CCP make. Remember, it costs $15 for 1 month of play time. 1 PLEX for the same play time costs you $17.50. It's not much more, but it's still 16.6% more. Over time, that adds up.

I agree in part what people say that one way or another, SOMEONE paid for that PLEX that's used to pay for the account. But, there's that 16.6% markup on it. And there's one important aspect people aren't considering that CCP not only planned for, but engineered - the ability to move PLEX, and thereby have PLEX destroyed. One must consider what percentage of the PLEX bought and sold are destroyed in attacks. There are no figures here, but you can be it's a fair percentage. And it was engineered exactly for that purpose - to "detroy money" so that people will buy more PLEX from CCP to replace the ones lost because the isk from them is required to fund their activities.

There's much more to this than what appears on the surface. And it doesn't take much scratching if you do it in the right place to wear away the thinly veiled "excuse" for this (I'd hardly call CCP's version a "reason") and reveal the underlying intentions.

Boo CCP. I really love this game, but you're starting to make it rather difficult to stand behind you when you pull off idiotic moves like this.

Selpy
Caldari
Penumbra Military Industrial Complex
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:09:00 - [1836]
 

Edited by: Selpy on 30/03/2011 20:09:51
Double post. Please disregard

Anaplian Laine
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:14:00 - [1837]
 

oh Brilliant...more time doing boring crap to earn isk to do exciting stuff, CCP really now!!! ugh

Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:14:00 - [1838]
 

Originally by: Selpy
Edited by: Selpy on 30/03/2011 20:09:51
Double post. Please disregard


Can we disregard your post above that too?

MrCoolShades
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:22:00 - [1839]
 

Originally by: Cassius Hawkeye

I remember grinding ****ty rats in crap systems/ to get my first battleship, and the pain of losing it. 0.0 shouldn't be a free isk printing machine. Belt rats, PI, mining, havens/sanctums in other system still provide more than enough isk to many new players.



Yes why not go back to dark ages, or back to when we had to hunt our food. It was tough and good then too!

The "old" players should stop complaining about how tough and satisfying the good old days were.

We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.
C.S. Lewis

Turn around Greyscale!

Lonely Island
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:23:00 - [1840]
 

Originally by: Mihai1
-8 accounts (-120 euro per month, 1440 eurp per year)
seya next expansion if your blood arrive to ccp brains



lol it's probably better for your health that you quit if you have 8 accounts. Now you can finally get away from the PC screen and work off that fat....

Ashaai
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:23:00 - [1841]
 

It's been four days and almost 1500 posts in this thread since someone from CCP commented on it. Last CCP post as far as I can find is post 470 by Greyscale.

And yet this change is still scheduled to go live with the Incursion 1.4 patch scheduled for this coming Tuesday: http://www.eveonline.com/en/incursion/features

Regardless of the rest of those features (most of which are super A+ awesome kthx), has this particular change been put on hold pending continued development/iteration? The response in this thread has been overwhelmingly negative. The response across most of the eve blog community has been overwhelmingly negative. And the response amongst most of the peolpe I know in game has been overwhelmingly negative (for whatever my personal bias counts).

None of the very reasonable concerns raised by the community here and elsewhere have been addressed. I think it would go a long way to assuage our concerns if we knew we weren't going to be deaing with this change in less than a week. Some follow up, I think, is deserved.

Renan Ruivo
Hipernova
Vera Cruz Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:30:00 - [1842]
 

Originally by: Ashaai
It's been four days and almost 1500 posts in this thread since someone from CCP commented on it. Last CCP post as far as I can find is post 470 by Greyscale.

And yet this change is still scheduled to go live with the Incursion 1.4 patch scheduled for this coming Tuesday: http://www.eveonline.com/en/incursion/features

Regardless of the rest of those features (most of which are super A+ awesome kthx), has this particular change been put on hold pending continued development/iteration? The response in this thread has been overwhelmingly negative. The response across most of the eve blog community has been overwhelmingly negative. And the response amongst most of the peolpe I know in game has been overwhelmingly negative (for whatever my personal bias counts).

None of the very reasonable concerns raised by the community here and elsewhere have been addressed. I think it would go a long way to assuage our concerns if we knew we weren't going to be deaing with this change in less than a week. Some follow up, I think, is deserved.


And that is the response of only those who follow eve news. Once the change goes live, expect the negative response to grow ten-fold.

I can only say that CCP's real reasons are unknown to us, and that they also wish it to remain unknown. Regardless of all the bad things that were argumented here, CCP perceives something as a big plus, and that something is a secret.

Lonely Island
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:35:00 - [1843]
 

Originally by: Ashaai
It's been four days and almost 1500 posts in this thread since someone from CCP commented on it. Last CCP post as far as I can find is post 470 by Greyscale.

And yet this change is still scheduled to go live with the Incursion 1.4 patch scheduled for this coming Tuesday: http://www.eveonline.com/en/incursion/features

Regardless of the rest of those features (most of which are super A+ awesome kthx), has this particular change been put on hold pending continued development/iteration? The response in this thread has been overwhelmingly negative. The response across most of the eve blog community has been overwhelmingly negative. And the response amongst most of the peolpe I know in game has been overwhelmingly negative (for whatever my personal bias counts).

None of the very reasonable concerns raised by the community here and elsewhere have been addressed. I think it would go a long way to assuage our concerns if we knew we weren't going to be deaing with this change in less than a week. Some follow up, I think, is deserved.


Greyscale (and CCP) don't give a fiddler's f*** what you think. Deal with it!

mkmin
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:38:00 - [1844]
 

Originally by: Renan Ruivo
Originally by: Ashaai
It's been four days and almost 1500 posts in this thread since someone from CCP commented on it. Last CCP post as far as I can find is post 470 by Greyscale.

And yet this change is still scheduled to go live with the Incursion 1.4 patch scheduled for this coming Tuesday: http://www.eveonline.com/en/incursion/features

Regardless of the rest of those features (most of which are super A+ awesome kthx), has this particular change been put on hold pending continued development/iteration? The response in this thread has been overwhelmingly negative. The response across most of the eve blog community has been overwhelmingly negative. And the response amongst most of the peolpe I know in game has been overwhelmingly negative (for whatever my personal bias counts).

None of the very reasonable concerns raised by the community here and elsewhere have been addressed. I think it would go a long way to assuage our concerns if we knew we weren't going to be deaing with this change in less than a week. Some follow up, I think, is deserved.


And that is the response of only those who follow eve news. Once the change goes live, expect the negative response to grow ten-fold.

I can only say that CCP's real reasons are unknown to us, and that they also wish it to remain unknown. Regardless of all the bad things that were argumented here, CCP perceives something as a big plus, and that something is a secret.

The big secret is that now more people will be using PLEX to fund 0.0 PVP. This is just a greedy bastard money grab by CCP. On the plus side PLEX prices will drop through the floor making it easier to play the game for free. On the downside, there will be no reason to play.

Selpy
Caldari
Penumbra Military Industrial Complex
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:39:00 - [1845]
 

Originally by: Lonely Island
Greyscale (and CCP) don't give a fiddler's f*** what you think. Deal with it!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This...

Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:42:00 - [1846]
 

This is disheartening. Have EVE players really become this soft?

htfu

mkmin
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:51:00 - [1847]
 

Originally by: Marconus Orion
This is disheartening. Have EVE players really become this soft?

htfu


Have forum trolls really run out of creativity that they have to use tired old tropes that really weren't all that funny to begin with?

Khadann
Caldari
Sense of Serendipity
Echoes of Nowhere
Posted - 2011.03.30 20:58:00 - [1848]
 

Originally by: Dazram Two
I think it's pretty obvious now that this is an april fools joke....so everyone that's getting really really upset needs to relax a little and get a sense of humor.. ugh


I hope so dude...

Knokploeg
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:02:00 - [1849]
 

This is a step in the proper direction. CCP had it wrong when they reduced module drops and increased ISK through sanctums. Drop more modules and reduce the ISK from sanctums.

Terianna Eri
Red Federation
RvB - RED Federation
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:06:00 - [1850]
 

Originally by: Marconus Orion
please give me attention i'll even use red letters for it

The crux of the matter is that sanctums were BARELY better than level4s as it is.
Making vast regions of 0.0 worse then Empire can't possibly do anything good for the game. Why should I make less isk/hour in 0.0 when i could do it in highsec with less risk? Why should a group of people share the bad anoms in 0.0 when a single level4 system can support infinity people making better isk/hour?

Khadann
Caldari
Sense of Serendipity
Echoes of Nowhere
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:08:00 - [1851]
 

Originally by: Terianna Eri
Originally by: Marconus Orion
please give me attention i'll even use red letters for it

The crux of the matter is that sanctums were BARELY better than level4s as it is.
Making vast regions of 0.0 worse then Empire can't possibly do anything good for the game. Why should I make less isk/hour in 0.0 when i could do it in highsec with less risk? Why should a group of people share the bad anoms in 0.0 when a single level4 system can support infinity people making better isk/hour?


This.

Selpy
Caldari
Penumbra Military Industrial Complex
United Front Alliance
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:12:00 - [1852]
 

Edited by: Selpy on 30/03/2011 21:13:49
Originally by: Knokploeg
This is a step in the proper direction. CCP had it wrong when they reduced module drops and increased ISK through sanctums. Drop more modules and reduce the ISK from sanctums.


The module nerf was a pain in the ass for a lot of people, and it in no way had its desired effect of restoring the value of mining. It's another artificial interference in the "player generated world" that we could have done without.

Despite all my "*****ing" about this, I do agree Sanctums are crazy ISK faucets that need to be tamed somewhat. Rather than this thinly veiled attempt at clawing more money out of its subscribers in the guise of "balancing", I would personally prefer to see the bounty payouts of high end anoms nerfed somewhat and based on system true sec, kind of the way belt rats are valued according to true sec. The lowest band of sec would retain the same bounties that they currently give out, with the bounties decreasing as sec increases. BUT.... restore the loot drops. That way, it would actually give people incentive to salvage and collect loot.

And of course, there's the moon mining. Nerfing / readjusting that with depletion cycles or some other similar mechanism would have exactly the outcome CCP is claiming their upcoming changes are meant to promote. Take away the REAL isk faucets that the large alliances are comfortably sitting on and make them fight for them. That's the way to promote conflict.

But then again, this isn't about conflict. This is about making more money, so all these points are moot.

Evil Zeb
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:19:00 - [1853]
 


Latino lover
Minmatar
SEX WITH PENYS
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:23:00 - [1854]
 

Edited by: Latino lover on 30/03/2011 21:24:53
Carebears

Illiet
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:25:00 - [1855]
 

Originally by: Selpy

This nerf is about getting people to buy more PLEX for money, nothing more.



Totaly agreed. I was going to make same post but had to leave office, so you made it before =)

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:27:00 - [1856]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 30/03/2011 21:29:59
Originally by: Terianna Eri
Originally by: Marconus Orion
please give me attention i'll even use red letters for it

The crux of the matter is that sanctums were BARELY better than level4s as it is.
Making vast regions of 0.0 worse then Empire can't possibly do anything good for the game. Why should I make less isk/hour in 0.0 when i could do it in highsec with less risk? Why should a group of people share the bad anoms in 0.0 when a single level4 system can support infinity people making better isk/hour?


I've spent more time with hostiles on grid with my mission ship in high sec and low sec than in 0.0 Intel channels are fantastic for reducing actual risk of PVE in 0.0 to near 0.

-Liang

Ed: And apparently I must have spent 14 hours a day for 3 solid years belt ratting in 0.0 to pay for all my PVP ships. Rolling Eyes

Also, Selpy... please stop with the tinfoil hattery about how this will increase revenue for CCP. Your grasp of real economics is obviously worse than your grasp of in game economics.

Illiet
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:32:00 - [1857]
 

Edited by: Illiet on 30/03/2011 21:32:17
Originally by: Liang Nuren

Your grasp of real economics is obviously worse than your grasp of in game economics.


Except he is right at least about reasoning of nerf and you just insulting him =)

Xel Ra
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:38:00 - [1858]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Edited by: Liang Nuren on 30/03/2011 21:29:59
Originally by: Terianna Eri
Originally by: Marconus Orion
please give me attention i'll even use red letters for it

The crux of the matter is that sanctums were BARELY better than level4s as it is.
Making vast regions of 0.0 worse then Empire can't possibly do anything good for the game. Why should I make less isk/hour in 0.0 when i could do it in highsec with less risk? Why should a group of people share the bad anoms in 0.0 when a single level4 system can support infinity people making better isk/hour?


I've spent more time with hostiles on grid with my mission ship in high sec and low sec than in 0.0 Intel channels are fantastic for reducing actual risk of PVE in 0.0 to near 0.

-Liang

Ed: And apparently I must have spent 14 hours a day for 3 solid years belt ratting in 0.0 to pay for all my PVP ships. Rolling Eyes

Also, Selpy... please stop with the tinfoil hattery about how this will increase revenue for CCP. Your grasp of real economics is obviously worse than your grasp of in game economics.


Yeah, Liang, all 279 of your kills, the vast majority of which in lowsec, are really impressive. Especially the haulers.

Also, I have yet to see you produce your degree in economics for how quick you are to ridicule someone else's economic views. I especially like how, yesterday, because I said nothing more harsh than "shut up" to you, you posted that I was "frothing at the mouth".

I hate to burst the bubble of your self-importance but controverting you hardly ascends to the lofts of rabid discourse.

VIncent Vance
Gallente
URSALIS LOGISTICS GROUP
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:38:00 - [1859]
 

Originally by: Terianna Eri
Originally by: Marconus Orion
please give me attention i'll even use red letters for it

The crux of the matter is that sanctums were BARELY better than level4s as it is.
Making vast regions of 0.0 worse then Empire can't possibly do anything good for the game. Why should I make less isk/hour in 0.0 when i could do it in highsec with less risk? Why should a group of people share the bad anoms in 0.0 when a single level4 system can support infinity people making better isk/hour?


Indeed, lvl4 missions in hi-sec empire need to be severely nerfed, or at least moved out to losec.

mkmin
Posted - 2011.03.30 21:38:00 - [1860]
 

Originally by: Illiet
Edited by: Illiet on 30/03/2011 21:32:17
Originally by: Liang Nuren

Your grasp of real economics is obviously worse than your grasp of in game economics.


Except he is right at least about reasoning of nerf and you just insulting him =)

Why are you responding to Liang? I mean, he's not even a real person. Just some sad creature that was beaten and molested and says stupid stuff in an attempt to make other people feel bad. In fact, I would bet he's a CCP troll alt trying to defend a royal ****up with insults. The liquid crap exploding from both ends of that troll to these forums is just sad. No intelligence, just insults, jibes, mocking, and 100% utter bull****. Just like the anom proposal. The ONLY way these changes begin to make even a little bit of sense is if CCP's doing it for PLEX revenue.


Pages: first : previous : ... 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 ... : 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