open All Channels
seplocked Jita Park Speakers Corner
blankseplocked What ie the CSM doing about the patch?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Better Than You
Posted - 2011.04.04 03:54:00 - [1]
 

So you all promised to protect the interests of those of us who hack it out in null sec. Now CCP is on a null sec nerfing rampage. What is CSM 6 going to do about it?

Widemouth Deepthroat
Posted - 2011.04.04 06:41:00 - [2]
 

I strongly urge THe Mittana to quit in protest of this hate crime against the EVe player base.

Saxton Hale
Posted - 2011.04.04 09:42:00 - [3]
 

Nullsec rampage! **** poster in hyperbole shocker!

White Tree
Gallente
Broski Federation
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.04.04 10:03:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: White Tree on 04/04/2011 10:03:44
The Patch is being rushed in during the CSM transitional period, and given that we're not yet 'seated' we're not yet in a position to influence this decision. That being said, we haven't been asked what we think of it either. I can assure you we will have a united position on this subject Soon™.

Better Than You
Posted - 2011.04.04 11:37:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: White Tree
Edited by: White Tree on 04/04/2011 10:03:44
The Patch is being rushed in during the CSM transitional period, and given that we're not yet 'seated' we're not yet in a position to influence this decision. That being said, we haven't been asked what we think of it either. I can assure you we will have a united position on this subject Soon™.


Thanks for the update.

See everyone. Now that we have a real CSM filled with actual players who care and not a bunch of high sec noobs (exception being Vuk Lau who did the best giving the situation of being surrounded by morons) like CSM 5, **** will actually get done.

I salute you sir! 07

Th3bl4ckr4bbit
Posted - 2011.04.04 11:50:00 - [6]
 

Well an easy way to open negociation :

All leave your csm positions.

That would be clear enough for ccp.

Blake Zacary
Volatile Nature
White Noise.
Posted - 2011.04.04 12:24:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Blake Zacary on 04/04/2011 12:25:06
Originally by: Better Than You
Originally by: White Tree
Edited by: White Tree on 04/04/2011 10:03:44
The Patch is being rushed in during the CSM transitional period, and given that we're not yet 'seated' we're not yet in a position to influence this decision. That being said, we haven't been asked what we think of it either. I can assure you we will have a united position on this subject Soon™.


Thanks for the update.

See everyone. Now that we have a real CSM filled with actual players who care and not a bunch of high sec noobs (exception being Vuk Lau who did the best giving the situation of being surrounded by morons) like CSM 5, **** will actually get done.

I salute you sir! 07

Maybe actually wait till they even do something constructive before you tell them how f4nnytastic they are.TBH most of the carebear complaints about the anom changes seems more a knee jerk reaction without looking at all the changes in close detail and how exactly they will affect null sec.The 'oooh noes don't take my sactums away' isn't an effective argument against it.We survived np before we had the carebear changes to space.Personaly I can see good and bad with both sides of the coin i.e. I like the idea of true sec actually meaning something again but will it definitly make some space crap especially with the changes to plexs in null sec and the l4 nerf supposed to be coming or will it just reduce the isk coming into game,lower the prices of the market and opening up more space meaning more pvp.Risk Vs reward is unbalanced just now with null sec actually being fairly safe if not safer that empire in some parts.

White Tree
Gallente
Broski Federation
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.04.04 12:43:00 - [8]
 

Edited by: White Tree on 04/04/2011 12:44:53
Indeed, the long term consequences of this change are - in an immediate sense - unforeseeable. It may act as a significant conflict driver, it may not. Its important to also note that higher trusec means more than 2 sanctums, so MOST regions will have at least a handful of systems which have a fairly reasonably amount of Sanctums in them.

However, it is unfortunate that regions like Pure Blind will be getting a kick over this. We'll have to see how it plays out over the next couple of months. Once a change this significant is made, the process of analyzing the after-effects is long and arduous.

Blake Zacary
Volatile Nature
White Noise.
Posted - 2011.04.04 12:57:00 - [9]
 

Yeah some regions look to be hit worse than others.Provi looking to be one of the really bad ones.But then again it was considered crap before but I think what CVA (when they had it) did with it,really opened up a large section of space that gave newer players to null sec a chance to experience it.Would this change make a drive towards that again,who knows but there's no doubt the current meathod with massive coalitions holding some space and renting out the rest isn't an ideal situation.

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.04.04 14:33:00 - [10]
 

I would assume the non-******s of them are giggling like schoolgirls.

Lt Pizi
Gallente
Dark-Rising
Executive Outcomes
Posted - 2011.04.04 15:34:00 - [11]
 

in cas you missed it ill quote it for you dear OP:

Originally by: The Mittani
Edited by: The Mittani on 04/04/2011 03:33:47

you ccp guys do know most modern alliances reimburse fleet ships and so the actual trusec of a staging system has absolutely no impact upon the combat strength/ability to fight of an alliance at war, right?

-------------
so if youre in an good alliance you can still fight like you desire as a 00 fightbear

youre set mate

Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.05 12:40:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Vile rat on 05/04/2011 14:11:11
Originally by: Better Than You
So you all promised to protect the interests of those of us who hack it out in null sec. Now CCP is on a null sec nerfing rampage. What is CSM 6 going to do about it?


Couple things.

CCP has stated they want conflict drivers. They want things worth fighting over and they want some space to be 'better' than others because once again, inequality does drive conflict and conflict is fun.

Previously truesec mattered (in some regions!) and there was a direct benefit to owning better space, it made generating income for your membership easier. The introduction of anomalies was designed to get more bang for your buck out of space and make it so it's not necessary to own large swathes of space in order to be effective. They wanted space to be used and this provided a mechanism for even crappy 0.0 space to have some kind of value where previously it really didn't.

This change on one hand is a nod to conflict generation but implementation appears to be at odds with the original intention of making more 0.0 space worthwhile.

Now the idea of making it so better truesec space is ~better~ isn't a bad idea. Better space should be better in terms of value and isk generation but the problem I see here is that while they made the best space moderately more valuable, they made mediocre to bad space nearly worthless in regards to value. Why live in a constellation where it's back to the good ol' days in garbage space at all? They've dropped the bottom out and made owning that space worthless instead of "worth less".

Quote:
Expected consequences

Some alliances will immediately start wanting to look for better space
In the longer run, there'll be more conflicts going on, with more localized goals
Newer alliances will have an easier time getting a foothold in nullsec
Coalitions will be marginally less stable
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)


You see I don't agree with this list at all. Well the first one is obvious but the rest, no. These changes don't introduce a new dynamic, they move space back to the pre-anomalies dynamic and reintroduced the concept of "worthless space" which we already experienced.

I'd be much more comfortable with this if the goal were a little more balanced and kept some mechanism in place to make worthless space "worth something" which encourages people to use it. These changes appear to just correct a perceived imbalance that they never intended (great space no matter where you are) which is fine, but the original concept of making space worthwhile was a good one and shouldn't be fully revoked.

Krutoj
Caldari
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.04.05 15:06:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Krutoj on 05/04/2011 15:07:24
According to CCP DRF is fighting over an AWESOME region called Geminate, due to its high security status and ... oh wait

I like the whole "entrance for newcomer alliance", rings a bell from Dominion's "entrance for newcomer corporations", which we all know how ended. Any minor alliance/corporation without decent connections and supercapital fleet wont hack it in 0.0 no matter how much devs want it.

CCP simply decided that their Dominion project wasnt what they thought it will be in the long run ( no surprise here ) and decided to scrap it under another "improvement of 0.0 space" and a cover story about upcoming GOOD FIGHTS for the "good" space.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.05 15:19:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Better Than You
So you all promised to protect the interests of those of us who hack it out in null sec. Now CCP is on a null sec nerfing rampage. What is CSM 6 going to do about it?


hey maroon if you're going to be edgy and use other colors you should probably pick one that's readable on a dark grey background

Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.04.05 16:30:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: Vile rat
They've dropped the bottom out and made owning that space worthless instead of "worth less".


Confirming that if your not making 100+ million ISK/hr farming sanctums it means your making 0 ISK/hr. Rolling Eyes

Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.05 17:55:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Marconus Orion
Originally by: Vile rat
They've dropped the bottom out and made owning that space worthless instead of "worth less".


Confirming that if your not making 100+ million ISK/hr farming sanctums it means your making 0 ISK/hr. Rolling Eyes


Ok what are you farming in a -.01 truesec system?


Blake Zacary
Volatile Nature
White Noise.
Posted - 2011.04.05 20:09:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Vile rat
Originally by: Marconus Orion
Originally by: Vile rat
They've dropped the bottom out and made owning that space worthless instead of "worth less".


Confirming that if your not making 100+ million ISK/hr farming sanctums it means your making 0 ISK/hr. Rolling Eyes


Ok what are you farming in a -.01 truesec system?


Carebears ! seriously though I don't think it'll be as bad as people think,I think more of the nah sayers are just a knee jerk reaction without really looking at the changes and how they might work.People seem more concerned with their own individual wallets than having a game that works well.We survived np before we had anoms and plenty of 'worthless' space was well used,as I said before take the way CVA ran Provi as an example.With the plex boost and the supposed l4 nerf it should hopefully make null sec more attractive than empire,even the lower end systems.Both balancing the risk v's reward and reducing the isk coming into game thus reducing market prices.It might also be interesting to see if larger alliances drop sov to save isk and then we have the possibility of attackers taking advantage of those sovless systems to cause havoc.

I do agree it might not work out to plan but we shouldn't let fear of change rule our efforts to get a good,balanced,fun game Very Happy

Alekseyev Karrde
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2011.04.05 22:04:00 - [18]
 

Where is this "lvl 4 nerf" people keep referencing? They're buffing them if anything, removing the % chance of non kill missions and increasing the number of viable agents (which will make ninja loot/salvagers camping hubs much more difficult)

Idonis Callor
Posted - 2011.04.05 22:42:00 - [19]
 

CSM should do a barrel roll, go home and become a family man.

Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.06 10:59:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Blake Zacary
Originally by: Vile rat
Originally by: Marconus Orion
Originally by: Vile rat
They've dropped the bottom out and made owning that space worthless instead of "worth less".


Confirming that if your not making 100+ million ISK/hr farming sanctums it means your making 0 ISK/hr. Rolling Eyes


Ok what are you farming in a -.01 truesec system?


Carebears ! seriously though I don't think it'll be as bad as people think,I think more of the nah sayers are just a knee jerk reaction without really looking at the changes and how they might work.People seem more concerned with their own individual wallets than having a game that works well.We survived np before we had anoms and plenty of 'worthless' space was well used,as I said before take the way CVA ran Provi as an example.With the plex boost and the supposed l4 nerf it should hopefully make null sec more attractive than empire,even the lower end systems.Both balancing the risk v's reward and reducing the isk coming into game thus reducing market prices.It might also be interesting to see if larger alliances drop sov to save isk and then we have the possibility of attackers taking advantage of those sovless systems to cause havoc.

I do agree it might not work out to plan but we shouldn't let fear of change rule our efforts to get a good,balanced,fun game Very Happy


I'd be a lot more on board with this change if it upped good systems but left the worst systems upgradable to have sanctums (at high cost) if you wanted to develop it enough. I want to see people living in that garbage space and not in empire which I thought was the point. You can surely have better space without reducing the value of not 'better space' to near zero.

Blake Zacary
Volatile Nature
White Noise.
Posted - 2011.04.06 11:43:00 - [21]
 

We already have too much isk coming into game and not enough going out , just increasing the incoming isk will hinder the game even worse than the proposed changes.

Vile rat
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.06 12:49:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Blake Zacary
We already have too much isk coming into game and not enough going out , just increasing the incoming isk will hinder the game even worse than the proposed changes.


This isn't increasing incoming isk, the patch would reduce it from standing levels as opportunity is removed(in theory, in reality people will adjust and the isk flow will likely remain constant).

The reduction of isk in this game and the introduction of economic scarcity is vitally important, I'm just not convinced this is the best way to accomplish that.

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2011.04.06 21:16:00 - [23]
 

Edited by: Bagehi on 06/04/2011 21:22:19
Originally by: Blake Zacary
People seem more concerned with their own individual wallets than having a game that works well.We survived np before we had anoms and plenty of 'worthless' space was well used,as I said before take the way CVA ran Provi as an example.

It really isn't individual wallets, it is the amount of isk alliances and corps spent on systems based on the new mechanics only to have them changed six months later.

For instance, my corp built a station and fully upgraded a system mostly as a location for members to rat so they could afford to continue throwing ships at the DRF forces we have been fighting for the better part of a year now. Now, this near-hundred billion isk investment will not pan out and will negatively impact our corporation and many other smaller corps like ours for months to come. That was a lot of isk that would have been better spent on drugs and hookers, let alone something useful, because CCP changed their mind far too late. Older corps already were established in more neg space and had funds stashed away that can be blown on CCP's mistakes. This little adventure did little more than to give hope to smaller, newer corps only to throw it in their face as soon as they had fully invested in it.

As always, game changes favor the wealthy, older players at the expense of those less fortunate.

Drive conflict my ass. The smaller guys would've been better off to move to take better space if CCP would've left the game as it was a year ago.

Better Than You
Posted - 2011.04.07 06:30:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Better Than You on 07/04/2011 06:32:00
It's simply devs favoring anyone that is not in the NC yet again. My question is why do they hate a player developed null sec so much? If you don't want it used CCP just remove it from the game already.

Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.04.07 06:45:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Bagehi
Edited by: Bagehi on 06/04/2011 21:22:19
Originally by: Blake Zacary
People seem more concerned with their own individual wallets than having a game that works well.We survived np before we had anoms and plenty of 'worthless' space was well used,as I said before take the way CVA ran Provi as an example.

It really isn't individual wallets, it is the amount of isk alliances and corps spent on systems based on the new mechanics only to have them changed six months later.

For instance, my corp built a station and fully upgraded a system mostly as a location for members to rat so they could afford to continue throwing ships at the DRF forces we have been fighting for the better part of a year now. Now, this near-hundred billion isk investment will not pan out and will negatively impact our corporation and many other smaller corps like ours for months to come. That was a lot of isk that would have been better spent on drugs and hookers, let alone something useful, because CCP changed their mind far too late. Older corps already were established in more neg space and had funds stashed away that can be blown on CCP's mistakes. This little adventure did little more than to give hope to smaller, newer corps only to throw it in their face as soon as they had fully invested in it.

As always, game changes favor the wealthy, older players at the expense of those less fortunate.

Drive conflict my ass. The smaller guys would've been better off to move to take better space if CCP would've left the game as it was a year ago.




Is all I hear.

/ear plugs

Habaticus
Gallente
Posted - 2011.04.07 06:45:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Better Than You
Edited by: Better Than You on 07/04/2011 06:32:00
It's simply devs favoring anyone that is not in the NC yet again. My question is why do they hate a player developed null sec so much? If you don't want it used CCP just remove it from the game already.



Geez - Could you use yellow - green - purple - pink - anything but that red. Going blind trying to read it

Kazanir Talih
Eighty Joule Brewery
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.07 09:33:00 - [27]
 

Originally by: Vile rat
I'd be much more comfortable with this if the goal were a little more balanced and kept some mechanism in place to make worthless space "worth something" which encourages people to use it. These changes appear to just correct a perceived imbalance that they never intended (great space no matter where you are) which is fine, but the original concept of making space worthwhile was a good one and shouldn't be fully revoked.


Yeah, logging in to quote this. The point is that nerfing "bad" space back to "worth 20% of running L4s in empire" is a terrible design choice -- NOT because of the intra-0.0 balance but because of the balance of 0.0 against empire space. Making some space worth more than others is a good thing, but if players invest a billion ISK into a system's upgrades 2 sanctums and 2 havens should be the MINIMUM they are getting out of it, with better truesec enabling more of those, more frequent faction spawns, more plexes, and so forth.

FinnAgain Zero
Roving Guns Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.04.07 10:22:00 - [28]
 

Originally by: Marconus Orion

Is all I hear.


So, he took the time to explain the flaws in CCP's schedule of changes, the random, haphazard and fickle way that they introduce changes, the lack of forethought and analysis that goes into such major changes, the undue deleterious effects those have on the playerbase... and your response is to simply troll?

It's predictable but not terribly amusing.
It does, however, show that you're absolutely unable to answer in any real manner, which is why you can only troll about it.

JitaPriceChecker2
Posted - 2011.04.07 11:11:00 - [29]
 

BECAUSE OF LVL4

Swynet
State War Academy
Posted - 2011.04.07 11:24:00 - [30]
 

What do you guys think the CSM can do about patches or fail patches or fail-fail patches?

Nothing! -they wait like you and download the new version like you nerds.
Feedback thread is opened to every one, do you expect the CSM to be your secretary?

Let them work on serious business for what they are intended to. wtf now?


Pages: [1] 2

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