These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[June] Nullsec Asteroid Cluster and Excavator Drone changes

First post First post
Author
Cismet
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#541 - 2017-06-04 11:11:39 UTC
Tipa Riot wrote:
Zetakya wrote:
Tipa Riot wrote:
Zetakya wrote:

The guys it screws over are the new bees.

Then your leaders should take actions against you for screwing up the new "bees".

It's :CCP: that's screwing over the new bees, not our members.

When the game mechanics are fundamentally biased against gate-only miners and in favour of Jump-capable miners... it's the new players who are getting shafted by the game devs.

It's up to you as a player organisation to support your newbros and find ways to involve them. If I remember correctly there are things like jump and Titan bridges, capable of transporting any sub-cap ship ...


Again, I don't often agree with Goonswarm (I'm starting to sound like a broken record), but are you actually saying that it's the responsibility of Goons to find a way to break a developer-induced bias against new bees to get them ISK? You might as well say they should just split their money with the new bros and have done with it. Your argument isn't reasonable. You might as well say that I shouldn't be allowed to use my level V skills to apply more DPS because it's not fair that new bros cannot apply as much DPS as I can.

The difference is that in the latter example it's a function of the game mechanics that is the result of correct progression in-game, whereas in the former it's deliberate changes by the dev team to a functioning economy that have massively disadvantaged newer players.
Tipa Riot
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#542 - 2017-06-04 11:46:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Tipa Riot
CCP nerfed a) an "end-game" playstyle and b) the resource distribution of sov generated ore anomalies in favor of less density. I'm failing to see the bias against new players, because a) Rorquals are not available to new players and b) how and where the available ore is harvested is totally in the hands of the players. So if veterans do not want to give new players a share, it has nothing to do with CCP mechanics.

I'm my own NPC alt.

Fayrouze
Artemis Incorporation
#543 - 2017-06-04 14:20:41 UTC
Currently we are showing a lot of _very predictable feedback_ on what they are doing. Having the perspective of having done this forever, CCP looks at what their players do and less of what they say.

"Innovation" takes time to set in, remember. /sarcasm

The problem here is that CCP is punishing adaptation. Players are using tools that CCP sold them to play around in the sandbox. Now, because some guys are better at using those tools than others, CCP is taking the tools' efficacy away from everybody.

At this rate, it seems that they will not rest until they've balanced the landscape into one flat, monotone plane. The well-off people in large entities can cope with these changes happening at this rate. The people most stunted by this kind of rapid cycling in ships' roles and capabilities are the small entities and the space poor.

If all changes and "balancing" are driven ONLY by the major blocs, then CCP may as well add that as the last step in the NPE - "Now, go join one of the big player factions. You won't accomplish much unless you are under their umbrella. You are here as fodder, know your place."
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers
Already Replaced.
#544 - 2017-06-04 16:57:29 UTC
nerfing everyone just to curb one group of players does not seem to be the way to go here
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#545 - 2017-06-04 17:29:35 UTC
The only part of this that hurts all players is the excavator nerfs. The spawn time is nothing more than an annoyance to smaller groups two can jump between enormous and colossal or between two systems and be fine. If you think this will have a larger impact on small groups more than say 50 man rorq fleets then you are sadly mistaken. It's definitely a nerf intended to curtail the massive amounts of minerals these fleets of rorqs (it's not just goons) are pumping into the system which is in itself a good thing. Though I would have personally just done the spawn timers and left it at that. I'm not sure I see a problem with excavators at all atm.

I'm still of the mind that they need to take a look at rorq build costs since their yeild is being nerfed yet again, rather the excavators since those are what actually keep getting made more and more vulnerable. Time on ROI just keeps getting longer and longer with each passing nerf and that does hurt the small guy more than larger entities since they are the most likely to lose it.
exiik Shardani
Imperial Spacedrill and Logistics
Rezeda Regnum
#546 - 2017-06-04 18:36:27 UTC
when you nerf rorq mining ability by 30%

so why do not you boost rorq mining boosting by 30% ? ... to boost subcaps around it?

sry for my English :-(

marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc.
The Bastion
#547 - 2017-06-04 22:25:48 UTC
While I can understand CCP trying to massage Ore outputs to cover there original mistakes made while trying to mess with the markets, This latest 'Manipulation' smacks more of sour grapes on there part than any real move to slow down output.

Why will this heavy handed 'Nerf' not have the effect CCP believes it's entitled too, 'Fozzie Sov' and all that brings with it, the general ham fisted homogenisation of the Eve environment leaving players with little impetus to fight anyone for anything other than ***** and giggles but more importantly CCP's constant attempts to force players to play this game as group exercise, a game that from it's inception was designed as one of solo enterprise and acquisition, by attacking every form of solo player generated content the game had to offer other than griefing miners.

This is why this Nerf will fail, why the blue doughnuts still exist, why it is so difficult for players to migrate out of empire in numbers that would make a difference, Why huge swathes of the Eve environment are currently almost utterly empty in terms of significant numbers and ultimately why your retention figures are so abysmally low.

Stop it.

Humanity is the thin veneer that remains after you remove the baffled chimp.

Gulmuk
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#548 - 2017-06-04 23:13:58 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

We are also making some more small adjustments to the Excavator drones themselves. In June the changes are:
  • About 9% less yield for Ore Excavators
  • 12.5% lower speed for Ore Excavators
  • About 11% longer cycle time for Ice Excavators
  • 10% lower speed for Ice Excavators


We will continue observing the economy after these changes and making adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players.



WTS Rorqual... Going to be worthless as an income machine after this.. Pretty much already was, but now a ship that costs 34 times the cost of a Hulk, but yields 1.5 times what a hulk yields. DISCREPANCY!!!

Thanks for kililng the game for me.
Panther X
Dreadnoughtz Conclave
Requiem Eternal
#549 - 2017-06-04 23:15:57 UTC
Gulmuk wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

We are also making some more small adjustments to the Excavator drones themselves. In June the changes are:
  • About 9% less yield for Ore Excavators
  • 12.5% lower speed for Ore Excavators
  • About 11% longer cycle time for Ice Excavators
  • 10% lower speed for Ice Excavators


We will continue observing the economy after these changes and making adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players.



WTS Rorqual... Going to be worthless as an income machine after this.. Pretty much already was, but now a ship that costs 34 times the cost of a Hulk, but yields 1.5 times what a hulk yields. DISCREPANCY!!!

Thanks for kililng the game for me.


Will buy, 500m isk.

Seriously where and how much

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Panther X
Dreadnoughtz Conclave
Requiem Eternal
#550 - 2017-06-04 23:23:16 UTC
Fayrouze wrote:
Currently we are showing a lot of _very predictable feedback_ on what they are doing. Having the perspective of having done this forever, CCP looks at what their players do and less of what they say.

"Innovation" takes time to set in, remember. /sarcasm

The problem here is that CCP is punishing adaptation. Players are using tools that CCP sold them to play around in the sandbox. Now, because some guys are better at using those tools than others, CCP is taking the tools' efficacy away from everybody.

At this rate, it seems that they will not rest until they've balanced the landscape into one flat, monotone plane. The well-off people in large entities can cope with these changes happening at this rate. The people most stunted by this kind of rapid cycling in ships' roles and capabilities are the small entities and the space poor.

If all changes and "balancing" are driven ONLY by the major blocs, then CCP may as well add that as the last step in the NPE - "Now, go join one of the big player factions. You won't accomplish much unless you are under their umbrella. You are here as fodder, know your place."


You're right of course, they only want all players to actually use sub battlecruisers. This IS cruisers online, don't forget.

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

oiukhp Muvila
Doomheim
#551 - 2017-06-05 00:08:53 UTC
Just because a feature was launched with certain attributes doesn't mean it will be used exactly as intended. Sometimes players find unexpected usability or undesired amplification of effects that can affect the overall game in detrimental ways.

Emergent game-play isn't always positive or desired.


Sometimes the Devs need to adjust game mechanics when emergent game-play goes outside the expected and or desired.


These "hidden" features or aspects of Eve frequently go by unnoticed or unchanged for years; until one group starts to abuse it on a large scale and noticeably gain some unfair advantage.

Pimpin Drones
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#552 - 2017-06-05 02:50:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Pimpin Drones
If your going to reduce the mining drones then also reduce the **** cost of them. Let make them do less but cost more! CCP needs nerf the darn cost of the ships and or mining drones.
Janeway84
Insane's Asylum
Evil Monkies Incorporated
#553 - 2017-06-05 08:08:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Janeway84
Please leave Fozzie alone!

I think its just BS calling out that this hurts the poor players since poor players wouldn't be flying rorquals by the dozen Smile
Poor players would stick it with their procurers or skiffs etc..
Anyone who spent cash for Plex-Skill injectors to fast track into rorquals wheren't poor then P
This is more CCP being Robin Hood and stealing from the tax man and giving back some to the less fortunate more or less.

Maybe agree with above poster that the price of mining drones could perhaps be reduced if the stats get hit hard.
Though that kind of chance usually takes time before it effects the market anyways.
Orgasmadrone
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#554 - 2017-06-05 11:04:13 UTC
Naomi Shaishi wrote:
Lol, judging by all the salt over here as well as claims of unsubbing - CCP might actually reach part of their goal - increase the mineral prices a bit which for most are like all time low...

The big miners won't add more rorquals because of the new timers - good!

You decrease the yield and make it harder to strip mine with huge rorqual fleets - individual ore prices might actually go up.


Are mineral prices at "an all time low?" - I seem to recall BS's at one time being less than half what they cost now. It was also a very real thing to loot missions to refine for minerals - do you remember drone poo? Those were the times minerals were at an all time low... not sure what exact all time you are talking about? PLease explain.
Burgein
Darwins disciples
#555 - 2017-06-05 11:58:12 UTC
Must be good since goons are crying, well done CCP!
alex tow
Real One Corp
Equinox Space Technologies
#556 - 2017-06-05 12:29:58 UTC  |  Edited by: alex tow
I'm not in Goons and I don't think it's a good idea....10b stationary ship, being an easy target and make less isk than a carrier with more risks (just by loosing one drone you loose HOURS and HOURS of mining profit)....really CCP, please don't do this.

Btw, that's what to get when you allow people to change their skills by paying....huge fleets created at a explosive rate that can change if any nerf comes....nerf the drones and the belt, you'll get hundred of supers in the anoms...
Cade Windstalker
#557 - 2017-06-05 12:30:27 UTC
Orgasmadrone wrote:
Naomi Shaishi wrote:
Lol, judging by all the salt over here as well as claims of unsubbing - CCP might actually reach part of their goal - increase the mineral prices a bit which for most are like all time low...

The big miners won't add more rorquals because of the new timers - good!

You decrease the yield and make it harder to strip mine with huge rorqual fleets - individual ore prices might actually go up.


Are mineral prices at "an all time low?" - I seem to recall BS's at one time being less than half what they cost now. It was also a very real thing to loot missions to refine for minerals - do you remember drone poo? Those were the times minerals were at an all time low... not sure what exact all time you are talking about? PLease explain.


Small point of order here. While "all time low" is incorrect mineral prices *are* at a fairly historic low, since the last time they were anywhere near current levels was years ago, and the prices of most other goods haven't dropped along with the mineral prices, making their *value* (as in, worth relative to a basket of other goods in the economy) certainly at an all time low, at least for lower end minerals.
Orgasmadrone
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#558 - 2017-06-05 12:48:05 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Orgasmadrone wrote:
Naomi Shaishi wrote:
Lol, judging by all the salt over here as well as claims of unsubbing - CCP might actually reach part of their goal - increase the mineral prices a bit which for most are like all time low...

The big miners won't add more rorquals because of the new timers - good!

You decrease the yield and make it harder to strip mine with huge rorqual fleets - individual ore prices might actually go up.


Are mineral prices at "an all time low?" - I seem to recall BS's at one time being less than half what they cost now. It was also a very real thing to loot missions to refine for minerals - do you remember drone poo? Those were the times minerals were at an all time low... not sure what exact all time you are talking about? PLease explain.


Small point of order here. While "all time low" is incorrect mineral prices *are* at a fairly historic low, since the last time they were anywhere near current levels was years ago, and the prices of most other goods haven't dropped along with the mineral prices, making their *value* (as in, worth relative to a basket of other goods in the economy) certainly at an all time low, at least for lower end minerals.



Do you mean lowend HS mineral costs or lowend nullsec mineral costs? I am looking at HS minerals and they seem unaffected except for mexallon which is actually increasing in value - help me understand your point you are trying to make?
Panther X
Dreadnoughtz Conclave
Requiem Eternal
#559 - 2017-06-05 12:59:13 UTC
Janeway84 wrote:
Please leave Fozzie alone!

I think its just BS calling out that this hurts the poor players since poor players wouldn't be flying rorquals by the dozen Smile
Poor players would stick it with their procurers or skiffs etc..
Anyone who spent cash for Plex-Skill injectors to fast track into rorquals wheren't poor then P
This is more CCP being Robin Hood and stealing from the tax man and giving back some to the less fortunate more or less.

Maybe agree with above poster that the price of mining drones could perhaps be reduced if the stats get hit hard.
Though that kind of chance usually takes time before it effects the market anyways.


This has nothing to do with and "Robin Hood-ing" whatsoever, especially since the tax man is CCP, so you are misinformed.

It's not CCP that will "lower the cost" of the Excavator Drones, as they are not the ones selling them. The price is determined by the scarcity of the components to manufacture them. That's the drone regions people I would imagine being market savvy.

The only way CCP can lower the cost of drones is by reworking the manufacturing process, so if you are going to be making suggestions, please understand what you are talking about.

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Lukka
#560 - 2017-06-05 13:20:19 UTC
Just a quick 2 cents worth:

TL/DR: goons will continue mining in Rorquals, the rest of Eve will likely move to alternatives.

For those of you claiming it will hit Goons hard, I will argue it won't. Goons are far more capable of defending their Rorquals than any other group in EVE. With such a concentration of players in a single region, they can hit drop an attacker with whatever it takes in just a couple of minutes. Rorquals are capable of semi-AFK mining making them a perfect choice in a safe environment. The guy with 50 rorquals will still have 50 rorquals. He won't be mining quite so much ore, but he'll still make a solid living (though pay the price in RL electricity costs).

As for the rest of you, at 1.5 times the mining capacity of a Hulk, Rorquals make little economic sense due to their high investment and risk associated. The vast majority of you will need to consider moving to smaller ships or face economic ruin.