These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: No Honor Among Thieves - Siphon Units in Rubicon

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Callduron
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#421 - 2013-10-17 21:34:55 UTC
Aryth wrote:
I do love to call the ball and then smug later about being right. So let me explain how this plays out to you.

Everyone will transfer valuable moons to closer holders who are then taxed or rent increased to offset this. So null blocs won't be impacted that rent or that have good C&C. However, this also means everyone is going to enter into doughnut pacts and you are going to watch null blue up and stagnate even more so than it is.

This is a terribly flawed design. We withheld judgement when this was first released thinking you would do this one right and it was an interesting mechanic and had the possibility for some fun interactions. You got it wrong on balance with multiple siphons and costs.


Ha ha , is that your plan? Pass the pain on to your renters?

These siphons look amazing fun and it'll be great to see how they play out. The fact that people with a vested interest in reactions are so busy panicking suggests it's a good feature even before it's gone live.

I write http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/

I post on reddit as /u/callduron.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#422 - 2013-10-17 21:35:36 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
MeBiatch wrote:
Krios Ahzek wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
this is what i can gather goons will do...

they have a huge stock pile of moon mins

they know that even if the collect 0 of the mins there is going to be an automatic 20% loss just off the bat.

so that means they are going to try and reduce the moon mins by 20% which means that demand will go up and they have the supply...

so that is the only way i can see goons making loads of isk from this



Thanks for restating everything Aryth and Mynnna are already telling everyone.

If we mercilessly siphon every R64 moon in the universe that isn't ours, and we lose some R64s to enemy siphon, all while toying with the R64 markets since months ago, there's no way we aren't making trillions and annihilating affordable T2 prices.



well if they get rid of the 20% loss then that would put a dent into your nefarious plans.

moreover alchamy poses will increase invalue because you cant shyper them...

i plan on getting stupid rich with you guys... cheers!


Contrary to all the whining from the poors about how moons are some hugely valuable and completely AFK wealth generator, they are in fact a wealth generator that would make a newbie in highsec laugh. A moon generates 100 units per hour. Right now, Dysprosium is the most valuable mineral in the game, at about 50k per unit. Go ahead, do the math on the hourly income, then calculate 60% of that. I'll wait. When you find that number, that's your take for dropping one.


Basically, I'm saying you ain't getting rich on these, kid.

Callduron wrote:
Aryth wrote:
I do love to call the ball and then smug later about being right. So let me explain how this plays out to you.

Everyone will transfer valuable moons to closer holders who are then taxed or rent increased to offset this. So null blocs won't be impacted that rent or that have good C&C. However, this also means everyone is going to enter into doughnut pacts and you are going to watch null blue up and stagnate even more so than it is.

This is a terribly flawed design. We withheld judgement when this was first released thinking you would do this one right and it was an interesting mechanic and had the possibility for some fun interactions. You got it wrong on balance with multiple siphons and costs.


Ha ha , is that your plan? Pass the pain on to your renters?

These siphons look amazing fun and it'll be great to see how they play out. The fact that people with a vested interest in reactions are so busy panicking suggests it's a good feature even before it's gone live.

We have a vested interest in moon mining. I actually feel bad for reactors, since that's almost always a personal income thing, not an alliance income thing. It's a pretty decent example of a field on a farm in the farms & fields concept, and CCP is coming along and salting it. Lol

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#423 - 2013-10-17 21:36:02 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
Krios Ahzek wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:


So 3) makes me laugh. Goonswarm has a lot of players, but they certainly don''t have the ISK to sustainably do what they are proposing.


Some minor scratchpaper math shows that for them to even put a minor dent, they would have to spend TRILLIONS of ISK, and then the question is:

Does the raise in profitability from their own moon goo operations offset their spending trillions of ISK on on siphons?

Unlikely -- especially considering their own operations will be far less efficient.



3) Hahahahahahahahahahaha

Your math: hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


start filling it in

1) how many do you need to plant to just negatively affect a single tiny region, let alone a meaningful amount of total area

2) how often will they be discovered/eliminated

3) how much ISK per day does it cost to maintain a sustained large attack

keep going, and yes, the numbers add up hilariously fast.


http://evemaps.dotlan.net/region/moons

Count for yourself.

1) Number of R64s times two.

2) Don't care, they're is always more and they can't check their POSes every hour of the day.

3) A few hundred million isk per region at most. It's trivial.

 Though All Men Do Despise Us
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#424 - 2013-10-17 21:36:09 UTC
Jones Bones wrote:
Drone Assist and now Siphons.

Why so serious Goonies? You used to be such fun loving bees. Now you're the guy in the suit and tie who drinks dark coffee every morning and complains about "kids these days". So sad Sad


well not only did they kill bob they became bob...

they are even bragging how they will through thier renters under the bus with shyphon alts...

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#425 - 2013-10-17 21:36:11 UTC  |  Edited by: gascanu
Krios Ahzek wrote:
There are maybe a few hundred R64 moons we don't own.

Let's say there a a thousand of them.

That's still only 20 bil to put two siphons on each. I could bankroll that and I'm basically a newbie. Jewbal-level 1%ers can buy enough siphons to do this hundreds of times. So can our socialist alliance.

This is chump change. It costs even less if we aim at only one type of moon mineral at once.


they can die by the hundreds on a single moon too
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#426 - 2013-10-17 21:37:18 UTC
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
If you want siphons to promote PvP, and not terrible log-in-every-3-hours "gameplay", make them

a) invulnerable to POS guns (even manned)
b) send a mail to POS owner when anchored.

That way you know when an enemy sets them up in your space, and you have to put together a response fleet to take them down or lose income. As an attacker you can use them to bait defenders into a fight they can't just avoid (or they lose moongoo).


Nope

If you want the Siphon Unit to generate Fights you need a timer mechanic, so that the game dictates the time when the package full of juicy stuff can be picked up

a response fleet that just kills siphon units is nothing but smallscale structure grinding and incredibly boring.

a much better implementation of the siphon idea would be something like this:

1: deploy siphon unit
2: invulnerable siphon unit steals from tower for X hours. X can be influenced by the POS owner
3: after X hours, the siphon unit turns into a package full of juicy stuff after that time
4.1: only tower owner shows up - kills the unit, loots the package and gets his stuff (minus the waste) back
4.2: only siphon unit owner shows up - he loots the package and successfully stole from the tower owner
4.3: both partys show up - fight is possible
4.4: all the above + eventual third partys - multitude of possible scenarios

either way, the POS owner, the siphon owner and possible third parties all have strong incentives to actually show up.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#427 - 2013-10-17 21:37:59 UTC
Krios Ahzek wrote:
There are maybe a few hundred R64 moons we don't own.

Let's say there a a thousand of them.

That's still only 20 bil to put two siphons on each. I could bankroll that and I'm basically a newbie. Jewbal-level 1%ers can buy enough siphons to do this hundreds of times. So can our socialist alliance.

This is chump change. It costs even less if we aim at only one type of moon mineral at once.


except there are hidden costs:

1) lost ships

2) you're being 100% naive, but this is excusable, since you are self-admittedly a newbie. nobody is just going to let you walk over to the other half of the universe and perma-siphon their moons. See 1)

3) whatever time you are spending doing this could be spent doing nearly anything else, most of which is probably more profitable and more impactful on the economy than trying to shut off 20% of a moon 40 jumps away, even if you succeed...See 2)

basically: good luck to you...rofl
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#428 - 2013-10-17 21:38:08 UTC
Loving the tears here. Now POS owners will actually have to be in their space expending considerable effort to maintain their holdings.

Own a few regions worth of moons? Better have the manpower and will to check them each day every day. It should never have required less.

Well done CCP. Big smile
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#429 - 2013-10-17 21:38:35 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
If you want siphons to promote PvP, and not terrible log-in-every-3-hours "gameplay", make them

a) invulnerable to POS guns (even manned)
b) send a mail to POS owner when anchored.

That way you know when an enemy sets them up in your space, and you have to put together a response fleet to take them down or lose income. As an attacker you can use them to bait defenders into a fight they can't just avoid (or they lose moongoo).


Nope

If you want the Siphon Unit to generate Fights you need a timer mechanic, so that the game dictates the time when the package full of juicy stuff can be picked up

a response fleet that just kills siphon units is nothing but smallscale structure grinding and incredibly boring.

a much better implementation of the siphon idea would be something like this:

1: deploy siphon unit
2: invulnerable siphon unit steals from tower for X hours. X can be influenced by the POS owner
3: after X hours, the siphon unit turns into a package full of juicy stuff after that time
4.1: only tower owner shows up - kills the unit, loots the package and gets his stuff (minus the waste) back
4.2: only siphon unit owner shows up - he loots the package and successfully stole from the tower owner
4.3: both partys show up - fight is possible
4.4: all the above + eventual third partys - multitude of possible scenarios

either way, the POS owner, the siphon owner and possible third parties all have strong incentives to actually show up.


Look at all these goonie tea

wait I made that joke already.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#430 - 2013-10-17 21:39:47 UTC
gascanu wrote:
Krios Ahzek wrote:
There are maybe a few hundred R64 moons we don't own.

Let's say there a a thousand of them.

That's still only 20 bil to put two siphons on each. I could bankroll that and I'm basically a newbie. Jewbal-level 1%ers can buy enough siphons to do this hundreds of times. So can our socialist alliance.

This is chump change. It costs even less if we aim at only one type of moon mineral at once.


they can die by the hundreds on a single moon too


You do know we have spent literally 100+ billion isk on suicide ships over one weekend in the past, right?

 Though All Men Do Despise Us
Zloco Crendraven
BALKAN EXPRESS
Shadow Cartel
#431 - 2013-10-17 21:40:15 UTC
TBH i have to say that Goonies are right on few points.
The siphons are not that cost effective.
Siphons:
- Should cost less (like 1 million)
- Be able to steal resources of our choosing (even from the silo)
- Be able to steal reactions from the start

This would be the right balance. CCP please take note. Siphons are not worht as they are now. They need buffs from the go.

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#432 - 2013-10-17 21:40:20 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
I mean I think I've made my point: we're arguing with people who don't have the faintest grasp of any of the underlying systems like dr "less moongoo harvested means prices drop" economics, so I'm going to repeat myself once and then stop responding to people who can barely manage to string together two sentences, most of which is misspelled.

The system itself could be neat when siphon costs aren't a rounding error, but the system is poorly balanced as it is because there's no cost to losing a siphon. In addition, being able to chain two siphons to nuke the entire output is not well balanced and that should be looked at. Lastly, alchemy being immune throws things off. Presumably this is because it produces one unit an hour. That should be changed to producing 200 units an hour, and requiring 200 to refine. They can even be .005m3 so that nothing changes size-wise.

Those three things should be looked at and corrected before (not after) they are introduced. Especially the cost, as you say you'll fix it later if it's unbalanced - but you won't, because you won't want to run the risk of people speculatively hording beforehand.

Those three things could be adjusted as you say and the system would still work well I think, although I think that alchemy being immune is actually good thing for now. It will boost the use of alchemy setups and they will also be more profitable than before because, yes, prices will likely go up. Later, if you want to put alchemy set ups at risk as well you'll need to get the right equipment to do so and target them specifically.

My only point is that the grief tactics you describe to help make your otherwise valid points are more than impractical for long term use... even with your reserves of manpower and money.

How long will you and your pilots be content becoming exactly what you despise? Farmers that spend large amounts of time grinding ISK... which is exactly what you will be.

Yes, you can hit every R64 moon, and likely lose them all in the first day as they are trivially easy to find and destroy. So you repeat the process the next day, and the next, and the next... usually not actually getting anything directly for your efforts (although prices are still going to rise and you WILL profit from that).

Basically, you'll be spending your time farming ISK... much of which will actually go into the pocket of those smart enough to raid your siphons whenever they see them. This is a good thing for EVE actually, as it spreads the wealth around and creates a new mini profession.

Of course that profession is essentially farming goons siphons, which I could see you not being to terribly happy about. Smile

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#433 - 2013-10-17 21:40:41 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
Krios Ahzek wrote:
There are maybe a few hundred R64 moons we don't own.

Let's say there a a thousand of them.

That's still only 20 bil to put two siphons on each. I could bankroll that and I'm basically a newbie. Jewbal-level 1%ers can buy enough siphons to do this hundreds of times. So can our socialist alliance.

This is chump change. It costs even less if we aim at only one type of moon mineral at once.


except there are hidden costs:

1) lost ships

2) you're being 100% naive, but this is excusable, since you are self-admittedly a newbie. nobody is just going to let you walk over to the other half of the universe and perma-siphon their moons. See 1)

3) whatever time you are spending doing this could be spent doing nearly anything else, most of which is probably more profitable and more impactful on the economy than trying to shut off 20% of a moon 40 jumps away, even if you succeed...See 2)

basically: good luck to you...rofl

could you do the math on how your hidden costs add up to 980b

wait you said trillions

1980b

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#434 - 2013-10-17 21:42:56 UTC
A comment on the goon renter plans.

The plan to distribute the valuable moons to the renters and make it their problem seems like a knee-jerk reaction which is surprising. The value of moons in the presence of these new units will be devalued relative to current and I doubt that renters will pay 'whatever you tell them', at least after a couple of months have passed.

Second, this would leave you entirely open to economic attack. If you rely solely on rental income, what prevents PBLRD as a bloc from ceasing rental payments and pocketing the moon goo income? Their own revenue stream would be unaffected and I doubt you have the firepower, in the absence of both moon revenue and rental income, to subdue them all in time.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#435 - 2013-10-17 21:43:16 UTC
1. CCP, make the units percentage based and apply a stacking penalty. In their current iteration these will just be dropped to prevent harvesting rather than for theft.

2. CCP, you really need to fix AFK cloaking along with this.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#436 - 2013-10-17 21:43:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Unforgiven Storm
Quote:
The name of the player that deployed the siphon unit is visible in Show Info.


Now this is something I don't like at all.

Lets pretend I need to buy a new leviathan and decide that Mynnna will pay for it, but Mynnna refuses!!!

but since I know where his 80 poses reaction farm is located I decided to go to his ATM machine and make a isk redraw from it, but my name is on the thing...

...

In a more serious note and realist use case, I'm a spy in enemy alliance and move with no problem in their systems, how can I steal my enemy if I leave a finger print everywhere?

Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)
Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#437 - 2013-10-17 21:43:53 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
Krios Ahzek wrote:
There are maybe a few hundred R64 moons we don't own.

Let's say there a a thousand of them.

That's still only 20 bil to put two siphons on each. I could bankroll that and I'm basically a newbie. Jewbal-level 1%ers can buy enough siphons to do this hundreds of times. So can our socialist alliance.

This is chump change. It costs even less if we aim at only one type of moon mineral at once.


except there are hidden costs:

1) lost ships

2) you're being 100% naive, but this is excusable, since you are self-admittedly a newbie. nobody is just going to let you walk over to the other half of the universe and perma-siphon their moons. See 1)

3) whatever time you are spending doing this could be spent doing nearly anything else, most of which is probably more profitable and more impactful on the economy than trying to shut off 20% of a moon 40 jumps away, even if you succeed...See 2)

basically: good luck to you...rofl


Covert ops haulers. Black ops bridges. Bubble immune interceptors. It's going to be trivial to not lose ships. Set up the siphons when no one is in local. The perfect crime.

Don't assume goon newbies are harmless. That would quite simply be moronic. We're part of the lever that lifts the universe (and the T2 prices)

We can shut off 100% of a moon, 20% is what is lost irrevocably even if we fail at siphoning.

Most people have separate combat and ratting alts. That said, I don't think ratting will be more profitable than this. We'll see.

 Though All Men Do Despise Us
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#438 - 2013-10-17 21:44:04 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Contrary to all the whining from the poors about how moons are some hugely valuable and completely AFK wealth generator, they are in fact a wealth generator that would make a newbie in highsec laugh.


Yeah, they are worthless and that is why you have alarm clock CTA in this thread.

Better go write some minutes.

Invalid signature format
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#439 - 2013-10-17 21:44:20 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Second, this would leave you entirely open to economic attack. If you rely solely on rental income, what prevents PBLRD as a bloc from ceasing rental payments and pocketing the moon goo income? Their own revenue stream would be unaffected and I doubt you have the firepower, in the absence of both moon revenue and rental income, to subdue them all in time.

This would be probably the most hilarious thing to happen to EVE since goons forgot to pay their sov bill.
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#440 - 2013-10-17 21:45:21 UTC  |  Edited by: gascanu
Krios Ahzek wrote:
gascanu wrote:
Krios Ahzek wrote:
There are maybe a few hundred R64 moons we don't own.

Let's say there a a thousand of them.

That's still only 20 bil to put two siphons on each. I could bankroll that and I'm basically a newbie. Jewbal-level 1%ers can buy enough siphons to do this hundreds of times. So can our socialist alliance.

This is chump change. It costs even less if we aim at only one type of moon mineral at once.


they can die by the hundreds on a single moon too


You do know we have spent literally 100+ billion isk on suicide ships over one weekend in the past, right?


oh the good old days...Blink

i also remember some CEO starting a war over some moons worth less that 100bil/month, and considering that some sorth of vital income or something...

p.s: look at the bright side: moar killmails Pirate