open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Feedback Request: Anomaly Changes
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

Author Topic

Imigo Montoya
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.20 20:09:00 - [91]
 

I don't rat much so the direct effect to me is so far minimal, but what I am seeing, and hearing from a lot of people that I'm talking to, is


  1. That the new system is not working as advertised (even in good truesec systems, few high end sites are spawning)

  2. That combat plexes are few and far between regardless of upgrades

  3. That there seem to be a lot of fire sales of T2 ships in the nullsec markets (one possible explanation is that people are selling up to leave for some reason)

  4. People are looking for new ways to make ISK



Basically this is making it harder for people who have trained up combat pilots (usually because they enjoy the combat side of EVE) to make ISK and making them drastically change their play. It could be that they will be forced to discover the joys of the other activities in EVE (mining, manufacturing, research, trading), but I doubt this - if they enjoyed that kind of play they would be doing it already.

P0le Dancer
Posted - 2011.04.20 22:13:00 - [92]
 

Quote:
Report

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally by: P0le Dancer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Every country has the government it deserves."
JOSEPH MARIE DE MAISTRE
I guess it applies to the Eve Community as well.

We get it already. NC and friends (CSM 6) should be able to dictate terms to the rest of null sec and the anom nerf erodes at their ability to build a zillion gajillion member alliance.
It's unfortunate that you're using your CSM status as a passive agressive means of forwarding the NC agenda, but I guess it's to be expected.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Originally by: Marconus Orion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally by: Viribus
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BAAAAWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Is what I heard.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Keep up this kind of infantile behavior, going directly against the rules of the thread and I will ask the board moderators to give you a forced vacation from the forums. Stay on topic, stop mud-slinging.


Infantile behavior? Get over yourself. It's obvious that you're not used to being disagreed with, but your threat to ban me for doing so is infantile in itself. Grow up whitetree. Leave your dictates for your own forums. This is eve online.... deal with it!

Marconus Orion
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2011.04.20 22:39:00 - [93]
 

Originally by: P0le Dancer
Quote:
Report

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally by: P0le Dancer
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Every country has the government it deserves."
JOSEPH MARIE DE MAISTRE
I guess it applies to the Eve Community as well.

We get it already. NC and friends (CSM 6) should be able to dictate terms to the rest of null sec and the anom nerf erodes at their ability to build a zillion gajillion member alliance.
It's unfortunate that you're using your CSM status as a passive agressive means of forwarding the NC agenda, but I guess it's to be expected.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Originally by: Marconus Orion
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Originally by: Viribus
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BAAAAWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Is what I heard.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Keep up this kind of infantile behavior, going directly against the rules of the thread and I will ask the board moderators to give you a forced vacation from the forums. Stay on topic, stop mud-slinging.


Infantile behavior? Get over yourself. It's obvious that you're not used to being disagreed with, but your threat to ban me for doing so is infantile in itself. Grow up whitetree. Leave your dictates for your own forums. This is eve online.... deal with it!



Leave GM White Tree alone!!!

White Tree
Gallente
Broski Federation
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.04.21 01:16:00 - [94]
 

Originally by: P0le Dancer

Infantile behavior? Get over yourself. It's obvious that you're not used to being disagreed with, but your threat to ban me for doing so is infantile in itself. Grow up whitetree. Leave your dictates for your own forums. This is eve online.... deal with it!



All I asked for was feedback. Constructive feedback. I am well used to being disagreed with. I didn't threaten to ban you, I don't have the power nor the will too. I threatened to report you through a feature that is available to every individual on this forum. It is not a 'dictate' to ask for civil discussion.

FishermansFriend
Posted - 2011.04.21 02:05:00 - [95]
 

Originally by: White Tree
Originally by: P0le Dancer

Infantile behavior? Get over yourself. It's obvious that you're not used to being disagreed with, but your threat to ban me for doing so is infantile in itself. Grow up whitetree. Leave your dictates for your own forums. This is eve online.... deal with it!



All I asked for was feedback. Constructive feedback. I am well used to being disagreed with. I didn't threaten to ban you, I don't have the power nor the will too. I threatened to report you through a feature that is available to every individual on this forum. It is not a 'dictate' to ask for civil discussion.


"forced vacation" means banned.

Brakoo
Posted - 2011.04.21 02:05:00 - [96]
 

I have a few corpmates that can no longer afford to plex their accounts because of the Anom Nerf. The Truesec of tribute doesn't allow for any more sanctums than I can count on my hands. They simply don't have the time to go make enough isk to support a plex and are considering leaving eve because they literally can't afford the opportunity cost that is now necessary for eve.

Less people in 0.0 means Less conflict. If we don't have a crowding of null then there is no need for people to fight in order to gain space.

Antihrist Pripravnik
Scorpion Road Industry
Posted - 2011.04.21 03:27:00 - [97]
 

Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 21/04/2011 03:29:35
Sanctums, especially because they are paid for by the owners of the system, should be available just like level 4 missions are available to anyone in high security space. Nothing less, nothing more. Having an alt in empire just to spin a couple of missions is a ******ed excuse for a game mechanic. Removing the easiest way to get to some quick PvE content is not a way you develop your game.

To CCP: next time you decide to throw market and general PvP data to the lead economist and think about nerfing legitimate player's income for the sake of a "greater good", please include statistics about how many bots were active in the observed period and calculate their impact on the global economy. Thank you.

Ze Beeblebrox
Amarr
Negotium Holding
Negotium Alliance
Posted - 2011.04.21 04:12:00 - [98]
 

Hi gentlemen !

My observation: 0.0 got vastly depopulated in a very short timespan. Many are very angry at CCP.

My own alliance: we have found ways to adapt, but we had to immediately write off xx bil ISK of now unused and worthless Upgrades and Infrastructure which never paid for itself by now.

I see a huge impact on classic renters, because:
Reasons for and against Renters in a Powerblock-Space:
+ Renters do pay rent
+ Renters could increase fleet numbers, but then they pay less rent eventually
+ Renters harvest space, which would not be harvested and bring the same value otherwise
- Renters do whine (e.g. about the cloaky parking in system, about unfriendly Roamings, ...)
- Renters do cause trouble (e.g. you need to deliver them logistics for IHUBs, large Upgrades, ..)
- Renters tend to be illoyal and potential spies
- Renters could create conflict of their own disturbing general business
- Renters demand visible profit, most renters were there for maximal profit with minimal risk.

Short: A Powerblock takes renters as long as the income generated by them is worth the trouble.

Pre-Nerf-Situation was that most renters obviously were worth the trouble.

Post-Nerf-Situation is that most are no worth the trouble / not willing to pay the amount of rent to be worth the trouble.

Gone for good are:
- Renters which were only there for huge profits with minimal risk (no Ninja-Salvagers, no Ganks, a master you can whine at for even the slightest bit of trouble you should be able to handle yourselves)
my opinion: many of them were just greedy parasites.

Gone for bad are:
- Small alliances who tried to get a foothold in 0.0, who tried to get at least some decent income so their members could afford more shiny and powerful ships, as e.g. Capitals, Faction-Ships, etc. who would use those ships for conflict and PvP on their own or for their masters.

In my alliance we have adapted:
- You can optimize your ships for other kinds of anomalies still there in worst truesec, so you may still get decent ticks.
- You may revert to more mining and production, away from no-brains-stupid-shooting-easy-ISK to have-a-plan-do-something-with-brains-ISK
- If you don't want to pay the same rent as before, be of some military value to your master. Be PET not Renter, do some dirty and mercenary-style jobs for them, get involved into their business and help them, become part of them. Throw out some rebelling renters for them, be the first line of defense to unfriendly neighbors.


To be honest: the absolute main and disastrous problem for CCP is their total disregard of any kind of respect towards their customers and their total lack of decent communication and reasoning.

In consequence people do overreact in anger instead of adapting and I expect some percentage to be done with EVE for a while.

CCP could have done better:
- publicly discuss the changes in advance
- give more time to prepare, so all investitions could have been written off.
- be more honest about the real changes (Devblog is in part outright lying at CCP customers)
- rebalance just Bounty/Loot first, if changes were urgent to reduce ISK-inflation

I am of the opinion that this changes, especially the accompagnying lack of competent communications with their customerbase has lost them credibility and I bet that it will cost them dearly in cancelled subscriptions and reduced overall growth.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.04.21 06:26:00 - [99]
 

Originally by: Bagehi
Still think hauler spawn anoms are where it is at as far as a reasonable solution that no one will outright hate.

I take it you have added this suggestion to the industrialization thread? Would fit nicely in a revamp of null industry as a supplement to mining.
Then again it would need some tweaks as the hauling required just for current hauler spawns is almost as tedious as mining itself .. perhaps special versions of scrap metal (most hated drop in Eve!) that give very high yields in reproc.
Originally by: Ze Beeblebrox
My observation: 0.0 got vastly depopulated in a very short timespan. Many are very angry at CCP...

Freeloaders are prone to anger when their ride comes to an end, nothing new there. Would have had the exact same response with a bounty/loot nerf instead as the end result is similar.

It was announced what 3-4 weeks prior to the change going through? Ample time to start cooking the books to balance the loss of income in the short term.

Elmore Jones
Electric Monk inc
Redrum Fleet
Posted - 2011.04.21 06:36:00 - [100]
 

I'm not in any kind of high position in my corp or alliance so I have no feedback from the bosses about changes to corp revenue, but for many of the grunts this has removed some of their capability to reship quickly and expand personal assests. This affects new 0.0 players much more than those out there for 6 months or more before the changes. This also hits the people with little time to play quite hard as there is more competition than before for the bounty sites to spam for an hour or two before logging off.

Our leadership do a very good reimbursement program, and when coupled with insurance our players don't loose much isk to a ship loss but processing claims can take time. A new nullsec player thats lost a few ships quickly might end up very poor very fast; reimbursement on the way doesnt help if I can't reship now and get back into the fun and not every corp is as cool as ours about this. Some of us have multiple characters to speed up isk making, many however don't and its these guys that feel the pinch. The vaunted 'push button - recieve bacon' at fanfest has slipped up on the greasy kitchen floor; one of the principal reasons for the change stated was "to allow small aliances more access to 0.0" when in fact this change makes it an awful lot harder for the new guys coming out to fund their operations -facepalm-.

A final point is I now have no idea what level 5 military upgrade actually does aside from fill up some dots on a bar. Answers on a postcard?

Alternatives are there of course - extra plex types and mining can be viable for those with the right skills in place and if the situation stays as is we will of course adapt; as a large corp in a large alliance we have the flexability to do this. Smaller and newer guys will, to repeat my point earlier, suffer this the most :(

Shivus Tao
Minmatar
Broski Enterprises
Elite Space Guild
Posted - 2011.04.21 10:06:00 - [101]
 

Edited by: Shivus Tao on 21/04/2011 10:10:59
Pre nerf I ran sanctums and havens exclusively, and even during crowded hours, could run them almost consecutively at times only having to jump to another system to find one that was open. It was quite easy for me to make 30-35 mil in a half hour barring the random hostile that would run through the area. This actually led to a great deal of fun in the form of impromptu home defense fleets. After the change I was shocked at the number of havens in extremely low truesec systems. It wasn't so bad during non peak hours. But at peak times said system(s) were full to the brim and it was impossible to find an open haven or sanctum. Before the change I would have just gone next door, or a few down into an out of the way system. But it's no longer an option now since those systems are below the threshold for even havens to spawn.

From what I've seen, those out of the way or pipeline systems that formerly had people running anoms are now desolate and lifeless. I actually transferred money back to my old highsec alt to buy a tengu and blitz L4's since its guaranteed, sustainable and really quite good income compared to jumping clear across a region just to find one of the few systems with open havens and sanctums. Since the change I've actually made substantially more isk from PI than I have from running nulsec anoms. Not because PI is fantastic, but because I'm usually on my highsec alt when I need to make some isk. This has the unfortunate consequence of robbing the corp and alliance of tax revenue.

If I may, the change in itself was not a terrible idea, however the issue arises from the average truesec threshold that was chosen to spawn havens and sanctums. The result renders a vast majority of nulsec systems to be trash for those that want to run anoms for their isk. A possible solution could be to re-evaluate the threshold for high value anoms, and/or to cause them to spawn in a given constellation based on a constellation average truesec rather than the truesec of the individual system. Additionally, the risk/reward could be looked at again to more accurately reflect their rarity.

One additional statement:

As I understand it, the reason given for the change was to break the perceived stability in nulsec and give different empires a reason to invade and conquer better space outside of access to better moons, or just better truesec systems. Unfortunately in the current state of the game, no one is going to launch an alliance or coalition wide invasion of a region just because they want to run sanctums. The anoms are, if you will, an additional reward for controlling space and not the primary reason. In other MMO's when you raid, you raid for the big ticket items. In eve this would equate to controlling the high end moons and the space itself. The anoms are essentially the lesser items that drop along the way to the boss, and the big ticket loot. Yes they're nice to have, but at the same time they aren't worth raiding for on their own, in fact, they aren't even a determining factor in whether to raid. What I'm trying to get at I guess is that from where I sit, it seems havens and sanctums are not nearly relevant enough from an alliance perspective to prompt the massive military and logistical commitment involved in taking over and defending a system, constellation, or region from another established power.


Dodgy Past
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Posted - 2011.04.21 10:34:00 - [102]
 

Edited by: Dodgy Past on 21/04/2011 10:34:51
Originally by: Shivus Tao
I actually transferred money back to my old highsec alt to buy a tengu and blitz L4's since its guaranteed, sustainable and really quite good income compared to jumping clear across a region just to find one of the few systems with open havens and sanctums. Since the change I've actually made substantially more isk from PI than I have from running nulsec anoms. Not because PI is fantastic, but because I'm usually on my highsec alt when I need to make some isk. This has the unfortunate consequence of robbing the corp and alliance of tax revenue.
You talk of blitzing for LP being a guaranteed sustainable income and demonstrate that you fail to understand one of the reasons why anoms were hit so hard yet L4 missions weren't.

Since you're blitzing the majority of your income is now coming from selling items to the market rather than putting your cup under a pure isk faucet. Also you should be aware that as more people run missions the value of the LP will reduce due to competition to sell the items that you receive. So the market will to an extent balance the income differences between L4s and anoms making those anoms appear more valuable than they do at this time.

As a result of this the anomaly nerf is also an L4 mission nerf that many have been crying for. Also I see as a result you've started putting more effort into PI, as will many others now... this is a good thing as it will also feed into the market reducing not only the prices of PI goods, but also goods that rely on PI products, e.g. POS running costs ---> cheaper drugs and T2 components / mods.

The reality of this is that you won't be able to afford every shiny ship you ever wanted by repeating a brainless activity ad infinitum, but instead these 'treats' will still be available to those who use their brains and adapt.

Guilliman R
Gallente
Northstar Cabal
Important Internet Spaceship League
Posted - 2011.04.21 10:43:00 - [103]
 

Originally by: Dodgy Past
Edited by: Dodgy Past on 21/04/2011 10:34:51
Originally by: Shivus Tao
I actually transferred money back to my old highsec alt to buy a tengu and blitz L4's since its guaranteed, sustainable and really quite good income compared to jumping clear across a region just to find one of the few systems with open havens and sanctums. Since the change I've actually made substantially more isk from PI than I have from running nulsec anoms. Not because PI is fantastic, but because I'm usually on my highsec alt when I need to make some isk. This has the unfortunate consequence of robbing the corp and alliance of tax revenue.
You talk of blitzing for LP being a guaranteed sustainable income and demonstrate that you fail to understand one of the reasons why anoms were hit so hard yet L4 missions weren't.

Since you're blitzing the majority of your income is now coming from selling items to the market rather than putting your cup under a pure isk faucet. Also you should be aware that as more people run missions the value of the LP will reduce due to competition to sell the items that you receive. So the market will to an extent balance the income differences between L4s and anoms making those anoms appear more valuable than they do at this time.

As a result of this the anomaly nerf is also an L4 mission nerf that many have been crying for. Also I see as a result you've started putting more effort into PI, as will many others now... this is a good thing as it will also feed into the market reducing not only the prices of PI goods, but also goods that rely on PI products, e.g. POS running costs ---> cheaper drugs and T2 components / mods.

The reality of this is that you won't be able to afford every shiny ship you ever wanted by repeating a brainless activity ad infinitum, but instead these 'treats' will still be available to those who use their brains and adapt.


Which still makes more isk then 0.0, just not in terms of "printed isk".

Everyone of us doesnt give a **** where isk comes from, as long as we get it for being in 0.0 I wouldn't mind if all bounties were changed to LP, at least we can still rat.

I totally agree that the isk faucets needed to be nerfed, but they should have made some sort of new LP system instead of making 90% of 0.0 worse for isk making compared to highsec.

Dodgy Past
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Posted - 2011.04.21 10:51:00 - [104]
 

Edited by: Dodgy Past on 21/04/2011 10:59:41
Originally by: Guilliman R
Which still makes more isk then 0.0, just not in terms of "printed isk".
You did read the bit about LP coversion income being dramatically reduced?

The LP conversion on IN EAMS has already halved.

You're post basically demand easy access to lots and lots of isk, and then makes up some random figures about hi-sec L4s to justify why you should be allowed to rat your way to an SC without engaging your brain.

The reality is that getting rich in Eve is achieved by getting involved with the market.

White Tree
Gallente
Broski Federation
Tactical Narcotics Team
Posted - 2011.04.21 10:55:00 - [105]
 

Originally by: FishermansFriend

"forced vacation" means banned.


It means probation.

Shivus Tao
Minmatar
Broski Enterprises
Elite Space Guild
Posted - 2011.04.21 11:10:00 - [106]
 

The free market is incredibly resilient. When the profit of one LP item drops, people will shift to another. The constant hunger for faction ammo makes it possibly the most sustainable of all lp items but it too is subject to ups and downs. People will adapt to market changes, this is the core principle that ensures blitzing level 4's remains profitable.

There is additionally a disconnect between what people want and expect between hi-sec and nulsec. I am personally in the camp of nulsec should be risky, but profitable, at least more profitable than hi-sec. The issue is with adaptation hi-sec is a never ending faucet of profit.

I do not disagree that a change had to be made. What I do disagree with is the severity and how it was made. Despite ccp touting eve as a social networking tool this change seems to endorse a playstyle of use anonymous npc hisec alts for your money making, then jump back to your nulsec pvp main. It's not terrible for fountain, deklein, or generally any residents in a region with some good truesec systems. I just ran some havens tonight because the system was nearly empty. The change seems to harm small alliances that may have to settle for terrible space. If anything, it seems to endorse a nulsec powerbloc napfest. Fear is one of the most powerful emotions we have. In this case, the fear of losing what decent space a group may have trumps a desire to attempt to upgrade to slightly better space.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.04.21 11:16:00 - [107]
 

LP = Redistribution of ISK, Bounties = Printing of ISK.
Former will balance itself as it were in due time, latter leads to ever increasing prices.

High-sec mission LP will probably end up around 500-750/LP once the dust settles (was around that level immediately prior to infinite-ISK patch, aka. Dominion) and with the promised dynamic agent quality the overall LP intake will drop as well ..
Originally by: Dodgy Past
...The reality is that getting rich in Eve is achieved by getting involved with the market.

Or getting involved with someone involved in the market .... and then robbing them blind Twisted Evil

Lord Zim
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.21 11:29:00 - [108]
 

Edited by: Lord Zim on 21/04/2011 11:34:01
Edited by: Lord Zim on 21/04/2011 11:29:37
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
LP = Redistribution of ISK, Bounties = Printing of ISK.
Former will balance itself as it were in due time, latter leads to ever increasing prices.

This. I really don't see why it couldn't just be modules which would have to be sold to convert it into ISK. It would solve the isk printing malarkey. vOv

Disclaimer: I don't rat because I find it mindboggingly boring. I've better avenues for getting ISK.

Edit: And it would make it slightly more of a chore to actually get ISK from bots, it would make it easier to grief people by salvaging their anoms/missions and it would drive up the demand for the noctis.

Dodgy Past
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Posted - 2011.04.21 11:29:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Shivus Tao
The free market is incredibly resilient. When the profit of one LP item drops, people will shift to another. The constant hunger for faction ammo makes it possibly the most sustainable of all lp items but it too is subject to ups and downs. People will adapt to market changes, this is the core principle that ensures blitzing level 4's remains profitable.
Rolling Eyes

If there is more LP in circulation then the value of that LP is worth less.

Augustina Maxima
Posted - 2011.04.21 12:00:00 - [110]
 

Pre-nerf: 2Sanctums 2 Heavens each system worked fine.
after-nerf: We've kinda lucked out on it due to having 3 Systems with Security Class 7 (-0.8 to -1.0 our best), the -1.0 has 3 Sanctums 6-7 Havens same applys to the -0.92 and -0.8 but out -0.73 has only 1 sanctum and 4 heavens.. And I for one concider -0.73 fairly high so I dunno what CCP was thinking with this. The other problem this change has brougth along our good systems are now being perma camp't by AFK Cloakers.. In my opinion CCP shoudnt have rolled out this terrible patch without also patching AFK Cloaking. Way to go..

my2cent: I'm not asking them to make it like it was before but atleast patch it to a level where it makes sense. Instad of binding the number of annos to the sec status why not bind annomaly bountys to the sec status that would make space different and ppl would still be able to make a living in zero space. And maybe you get a bonus sanctum/heaven if system has a station.. or something like that of if you hold const sov.. something along the way.

Anddeh McNab
Cadre Assault Force
Posted - 2011.04.21 12:01:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Doug Drafto
I think the changes have been awesome. It should be difficult and dangerous to live in 0.0. As another mentioned the risks are high as are the rewards. Even with out sanctums there is plenty reward in 0.0 and tons of reasons to live out there. People SHOULD be ratting in belts where there is danger of being scanned and the like. Its 0.0 not empire. The changes have been great, keep up the good work!


Unfortunately, this is part of the problem. Why go find a decent/quiet ratting system when you can sit in Empire and spam Level 4's? Why have the hassle of constantly watching your scanner and/or local when you can mindlessly spam Level 4's?

The trouble is that Level 4's are reliable and uncompetitive. You don't have you battle against corp mate's or alliance members to be the first to logon on get into the belts/anoms. No matter how many people missioning the agents just keep doling out the missions.

Dodgy Past
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Posted - 2011.04.21 12:08:00 - [112]
 

Edited by: Dodgy Past on 21/04/2011 12:08:32
Originally by: Anddeh McNab
The trouble is that Level 4's are reliable and uncompetitive. You don't have you battle against corp mate's or alliance members to be the first to logon on get into the belts/anoms. No matter how many people missioning the agents just keep doling out the missions.
Unless you're making isk off LPs then baseline income from L4s is pretty poor, once you get into LPs it gets very competitive. Loot and salvage is also competitive and subject to disruption by other players.

This thread is going exactly the same way as the last one, lots of players who were used to an endless sources of easy isk are only prepared to move onto another source of easy isk. Not even realising that the grass they're heading for is about to get massively over grazed because is it does matter how many people do missions. Sadly figuring this out requires a brain and those whining here haven't had to use theirs for too long.

Anddeh McNab
Cadre Assault Force
Posted - 2011.04.21 12:39:00 - [113]
 

Originally by: Dodgy Past
Edited by: Dodgy Past on 21/04/2011 12:08:32
Originally by: Anddeh McNab
The trouble is that Level 4's are reliable and uncompetitive. You don't have you battle against corp mate's or alliance members to be the first to logon on get into the belts/anoms. No matter how many people missioning the agents just keep doling out the missions.
Unless you're making isk off LPs then baseline income from L4s is pretty poor, once you get into LPs it gets very competitive. Loot and salvage is also competitive and subject to disruption by other players.


Oh this is very true. I personally didn't get involved with LP or salvage when I was running level 4's and as such would make around 100mill a day if the RNG was kind to me.

But you're right, for the more "hardcore" mission runners I guess there was alot competition over selling goods.

Now living down in a null-sec pipe system making the ISKies is alot more problematic. Alot of through traffic and not many anoms in NPC space. Lots of shooting and getting shot at though, which is fun.

Rika Jones
Amarr
Warp Storm Industries
Posted - 2011.04.21 14:21:00 - [114]
 

Originally by: Antihrist Pripravnik
Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik on 21/04/2011 03:29:35
Sanctums, especially because they are paid for by the owners of the system, should be available just like level 4 missions are available to anyone in high security space. Nothing less, nothing more.


So you agree with this change?

Level 4 "combat" agents are spread out, though not to the point where they are rare, and the quality varies widely.

Better Than You
Posted - 2011.04.21 14:31:00 - [115]
 

Because of this overly ******ed change. Now my corp has moved back to empire. Thanks a lot CCP. Hope this is what you wanted! Giving in to the cry babies once again.

buri2
Posted - 2011.04.21 15:14:00 - [116]
 

simply, fact is that now the old bad 0.0 ( witch bevore upgrades nobody wants) is bad again, not as bad but still bad, while old good one (-0,8 and down) is even bedder. Ok that there need to be a divrence i understand, but such a? So old richt Systems even ged richer! And the upgrate system is nonsense now, only produce coasts in bad systems. So i only see 3 points, to change. First i understand CCP afford to make the true sec more important again, and by this reducing the gained money in 0.0 a littel, fact is 0.0 was in compare to emp to rich, clearly it must give more money because of risks but this was too much. So what can we do:
1. make the sanctums(witch are the highest) spawn down from every system witch has 0,2 (0,3 or so must be discussed) to lower, with 1 more every 0,2 less securety. So a 0.2 has 1, 2 havens, 3 to 4 hubs and small rubish. a 0.4 gets 2 witch 3 haven etc, always make haven (second incoming rate) 1 more thant sanctum, hub witch is also ok make 1 or 2 more than haven. So a -1 would have a total number of 4 sanctums, clearly more than rest but still ok and the gap is not so big like now (0.2 0 sanctums, -1 like 8, WTF) and also second make the payout of the pirates more depended on the true sec, now i only see while chaining like it makes 500k less max bounty, do more there! in 0,2 it would be ok if a howle sanktum only gives 18 to 20 Million ISK, in -1 30 to 35

Second option:
make everything like bevore, 4 everywhere but change even more massive the outcoming like in 0.0 its only 15 in -1 its 35 to 40.

third (withc i like most because it would even push mining better even as i do not mine)
Change regions, so every region has at least 2 to 4 -1, 3 to 5 -0.9, 5-7 0.8 etc. so even close areas get bedder, clearly this again will lead into all want this but ok. You cane mike it depend a littel on the range to high sec, like a area like peroid basis, where you have to fly thorugh at least 2 other to get into emp, gets a factor withc increases the number of total -1 systems by 1,5 or so. And allwys its only a % of total systems in area witch are so, so we still have diverences but will have not the problem like now, tribute has only 12 systems witch sancutms left (and also with very vew) and tenal has like 40 to 50 and over 12 witch are bedder than all tribut once.

CommanderData211
Posted - 2011.04.21 16:13:00 - [117]
 

To everyone freaking out about the change, you must realize that this needed to happen. CCP changed something they thought would work. Turns out it injected ISK into EVE faster than a hooker with a turkey baster. CCP noticed this and pulled the plug to a certain degree.

With that said however, this solution is not ideal without some form of making 0.0 more self-sustainable. There is a reason 425's get shipped into 0.0 in a Jump Freighter in order to build supercaps. While I applaud the EVE community on this innovative workaround to the logistical nightmare of very large build orders, the industrial worth/aspect of systems should be looked at as well.

I'm not going to give my own anecdotes past/present involving the change/nerf because I don't believe them to be a valuable metric on figuring out whether or not this was a good change. In the end, look at the numbers. The faucet was opened hard and gigantic injections of ISK into the system is a bad thing. I repeat, a very bad thing.

The discussion of whether or not more money can be made doing lvl 4's also needs to be thrown out of the discussion. Lvl 4 missions are fine because while the individual players are making more money potentially, LP's are a sink. Lvl 4 missions do not inject a disproportionate amount of ISK directly into the system, they just serve to funnel ISK into different areas. Also, with more players running to the hills to do missions in high-sec, this should mean less players in null running anomalies, and a deflated value for LP's making them even less profitable. Win win.

However, back to the industrial aspect of the systems, I think that drop rates for items looted from wrecks should be increased and bounties should be decreased. More salvaging, more looting and melting, and less mindless faucet. Industrial activities are another way of funneling ISK to different places rather than injecting it into the economy. Make mining Tritanium in null-sec worth a damn. Create more sites with the ABC ores'.

On the flip side as well, nerf high-sec a bit. Make it less profitable to AFK/bot mine. Reduce incomes from lvl 4's a tad. Stuff like that. A slight boost to 0.0 and a slight nerf to high-sec might make 0.0 look a bit better than grinding missions just to buy a PLEX just to play the game.

P.S. At CSM. It looks bad when you try and encourage a discussion about the pros/cons of this change when you color the dialog right from the start by suggesting that you have already taken a position on the subject. I'm not trying to imply that you have improperly moderated this thread (tried to keep it on topic) by bullying people into giving you the answers you want to hear; coming at the subject with the idea that by virtue of there being billions of people screaming that this is a bad idea automatically makes it a bad idea is a proclivity I'm not sure you can afford. As my understanding goes, you are the voice of the player-base, but this does not always mean that you should mindlessly heed what they clamor for. If a thread went up from players asking for Officers to spawn in every single system non-stop, and literally every single player in EVE gave it the ole-thumbs-up, it would still not be good for EVE.

Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises
Posted - 2011.04.21 17:00:00 - [118]
 

Originally by: Dodgy Past
Unless you're making isk off LPs then baseline income from L4s is pretty poor, once you get into LPs it gets very competitive. Loot and salvage is also competitive and subject to disruption by other players.

That's probably because you were running lvl 4s for Minmatar back in the day. Sure, LP value is a scarcity thing. However, I honestly didn't get into running anoms much and continued doing lvl 4s like usual on alts because I can run those while doing other stuff, unlike anoms. Everyone went back to the way they had been doing things before.

The complaint is how CCP handled this. It hurt, almost entirely, the smaller/newer corps/alliances and was nothing more than a temporary boost for players in big/old corps/alliances. Because the older guys already had assets in place to take advantage of this, moreover, they also hold good space so they are still benefiting from this change. This accounts for a good chunk of the NC and the Goons. The smaller guys invested in assets based on the mechanics as they were only to get what amounted to a sucker punch with the nerf bat. That is the complaint.

Dodgy Past
Amarr
Digital Fury Corporation
Posted - 2011.04.21 17:16:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: Bagehi
That's probably because you were running lvl 4s for Minmatar back in the day. Sure, LP value is a scarcity thing. However, I honestly didn't get into running anoms much and continued doing lvl 4s like usual on alts because I can run those while doing other stuff, unlike anoms. Everyone went back to the way they had been doing things before.
Rolling Eyes
So you're claiming semi afk single boxed missions without blitzing are good isk. Belt ratting is far better isk than that after some chaining.

I've done both going for bounties ( for decent income you need to dual box and salvage ) and blitzing for LP ( very low ticks ), blitzing has been the most profitable though I dumped all my LP moved into manufacturing when the nerf was announced as it was predictable that the LP market was going to crash as it has started to.

InnerDrive
Shiva
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2011.04.21 17:57:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: SkierX
I'm actively involved in TEST's new player programs. We get many new players who join and move to 0.0 with very few skillpoints. We instruct them to train into salvaging and destroyers and go around to anomalies to salvage for money while they train into battlecruisers. Before this change there was already a shortage in available wrecks to be had, but this has made it much worse. Not only are there less people running anoms and more competition for them it also is forcing new players to go farther and into more crowded systems in order to compete with each other to find wrecks.

I don't have raw numbers, but the amount of "I can't find anything to do" from new players has risen noticeably. New players are our lifeblood in TEST and this change makes it harder for us to keep them around until they can become self-sufficient in null.


THIS made me sad Sad, its exactly the kinda thing that CCP fails to see. And shoud most definatly be brought to their attention. If they want people to get out to 0.0 and get involved in real alliances they need to make it possible for new players to have stuff to do.. nerfing anoms very badly has made it so theres much less stuff for them to do.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6

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