These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Fighter Damage Reduction

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Thead Enco
Thunderwaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#961 - 2017-06-09 23:05:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Thead Enco
"This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players."


No one plays this god awful game anymore, what the hell are you talking about? So having less subs paying subscription is "sustainable" for a subscription based model in the year 2017? Ok that's some Bernie math there....2011 wants your business model back....
Ralen Zateki
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#962 - 2017-06-09 23:07:12 UTC
Kalain Kamerov wrote:
Guys,
Before y'all go rantzerker, please look at the economic report. CCP is nerfing it because ratting incomes have more than doubled over the last year.

Peace is good for business it seems.Incomes Loss/Gains by Type


I'm not really arguing that the bounty payout issue is an unsustainable problem. It's the ******** solution combined with the announce Friday implement Tuesday approach that blows my mind. Especially when you are talking about capital ships that take a player so much time and investment (assuming they aren't just Plex-ing into it... a capability which has a not so coincidental correlation to the beginning of Bounty inflation.)

And in the meantime the approach to "engaging PVE" is to drop the latest iteration into goon space and have them troll you by blowing it up with a fleet of.... punishers. :golfclap:

Yea, we're the problem CCP.
btOw Ragnarson
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#963 - 2017-06-09 23:11:21 UTC
Just stop wow to come to eve and now i gona back to wow nice job and whem d3 come half of eve going to it 2 nice job ccp for just try make people stop play eve =(
ValentinaDLM
SoE Roughriders
Electus Matari
#964 - 2017-06-09 23:11:38 UTC
These changes seem bad because they don't really address the issues at hand. Carriers don't do too much damage, they apply their damage far too well. How should a capital weapon hit frigates perfectly? My fighters track elite frigates better than my heavy drones do, so there is a serious problem there IMO, but that isn't the big one.

Without adding a respawn penalty to null anoms, and some meaningful way to make isk in lowsec and NPC nullsec, nothing is going to change. Rich powerful null empires will continue to crank out insane amounts of isk. The solutions of course are respawn penalities, a proportional ihub bill that has a fairly high floor to discourage holding systems that are unused. Also fix FW and make systems upgradeable instead of the terrible tier system, and add something to make l5s and other lowsec revenue streams worthwhile to pursue.

As for carriers in PVP aside from being able to track anything for no good reason, they don't really seem overpowered at all to me, but it feels like this is going to make it dreads/supers or GTFO, but I admit it is hard to know how the meta will play out. In PVE I hate how safe carriers are but, they are much better than the almost AFK abilities of the VNI/Ishtar/rattlesnake, at least carriers can't just get 5 accounts and assign fighters to a trigger ship.
Cismet
Silent Knights.
LinkNet
#965 - 2017-06-09 23:13:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Cismet
Reddit subthread that Quant (rather foolishly) tried to wade into this discussion on has a great idea from a Goonswarm member who quite rightly points out that this hurts the single-account players more than most others. The ones that worked to get to carrier without multi-boxing the AFK Ishtar or VNI etc. and have a not-unreasonable expectation that a Capital ship should be better than a sub-capital ship in most circumstances.

The idea they had was an excellent one and was simply to apply diminishing returns on ratting bounties. The exact level of returns would probably need some tweaking, but Carriers damage projection would be unhurt for the first few hours, then would taper off. Would impact every other bounty isk source in a consistent manner and result in a moderated and equalised lowering of the isk inflation and bounty problem across the board once diminishing returns dig in.

I think we're missing context here, we have no idea where CCP pulled these figures from (for money generation or the figures for the nerf as we haven't been provided the thought processes behind them, they've just been delivered like a hammer), though Quant's 780 M per hour per account seems utterly ludicrous given the concentration required for one Super/Carrier, perhaps the data could be provided for this? I'd be amazed if even a single Super/Carrier could get more than about 500 M per hour, but then I've seen stranger things I suppose.

Either way Jibrish's suggestion is an excellent one and provides a fairer application that would apply to the other problem areas of bounty generation, rather than smashing the carrier/super into obsolescence.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/6gaemf/burn_eden_rorcarrieratting_edition/dioy4lk/
Dxella
African Atomic.
#966 - 2017-06-09 23:20:54 UTC
Maybe change the fighter support module.
Give it a siege timer, remove or nerf the scan res bonus?

Add a scan res drawback to the hulls.
Effects both remote and local sebos
The quicker lock than a cruiser silly

Maybe an idea?
Brigadine Ferathine
Presumed Dead Enterprises
Against ALL Authorities.
#967 - 2017-06-09 23:25:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Brigadine Ferathine
Cismet wrote:
Reddit subthread that Quant (rather foolishly) tried to wade into this discussion on has a great idea from a Goonswarm member who quite rightly points out that this hurts the single-account players more than most others. The ones that worked to get to carrier without multi-boxing the AFK Ishtar or VNI etc. and have a not-unreasonable expectation that a Capital ship should be better than a sub-capital ship in most circumstances.

The idea they had was an excellent one and was simply to apply diminishing returns on ratting bounties. The exact level of returns would probably need some tweaking, but Carriers damage projection would be unhurt for the first few hours, then would taper off. Would impact every other bounty isk source in a consistent manner and result in a moderated and equalised lowering of the isk inflation and bounty problem across the board once diminishing returns dig in.

I think we're missing context here, we have no idea where CCP pulled these figures from (for money generation or the figures for the nerf as we haven't been provided the thought processes behind them, they've just been delivered like a hammer), though Quant's 780 M per hour per account seems utterly ludicrous given the concentration required for one Super/Carrier, perhaps the data could be provided for this? I'd be amazed if even a single Super/Carrier could get more than about 500 M per hour, but then I've seen stranger things I suppose.

Either way Jibrish's suggestion is an excellent one and provides a fairer application that would apply to the other problem areas of bounty generation, rather than smashing the carrier/super into obsolescence.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/6gaemf/burn_eden_rorcarrieratting_edition/dioy4lk/

My situation is very close to his and while his suggestion isn't good either(there is NO good option for casual players) it is a FAR better compromise than the nonsense proposed by CCP.
Kodosin
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#968 - 2017-06-09 23:31:50 UTC
From what I've read and understand, people are unhappy about nerfing carriers in general. Here is a suggestion to fix some possible issues with nerfing supercaps, so that ways they aren't nerfed in pvp.

Suggestions

- On supercaps, add a "role bonus" to reduce the bounty rewards of anomaly isk values by x%. This would help reduce the "isk faucet" that is suggested.

- If fighters are involved with any anomaly, add a timer to reduce the amount of isk gained by that person(s) by x%, by bounties.

Just a couple of suggestions on this issue.

On the other side of the coin though, I can relate to those that don't want this change at all. I cannot fly a carrier at all. So once I finally am able to, I would love to be able to get some easy isk, that I have spent my time, skill points, and other efforts, into getting. If those that would have been affected by the changes i suggested above, would include the disappointment in myself as well. And i don't see where that would be a problem. Those that have worked on getting their skill points up that high should be rewarded, in this case, by being able to make a ton of isk, somewhat easily. I mean hell, if you want to drop the normal bounty amounts, and make some harder anomalies with higher rewards imo.
Haile Korhal
Professional Amateurs
#969 - 2017-06-09 23:34:10 UTC
46 pages, not reading through that, but going to put my bit in anyway.

15% increased chance NPC's shoot fighters? Well rip carriers, it seems it's 100% chance already. We have to pull our fighters in immediately after first dropping them because they instantly target them. We still lose anywhere from 10-20 fighters per evening while using them. 1-2 more fighters lost per evening won't change much, but we know what that really means. More like 10-20 squad wipes rather than individual fighters!

If we lose that much dps from fighters there's even less incentive to bring them out in pvp. The small group has to lean so heavily on expensive ships because that's the only way they can face the blob. I have a feeling this just makes carriers an overly expensive battleship.

Also the arbitrary, yay making changes that target nullsec but actually hit everyone everywhere.

Egregious Spreadsheet Services - For Spreadsheets as a Service to businesses, corporations, and higher, look no further!
Sassura
Sassy's Corporation
#970 - 2017-06-09 23:34:16 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Aldent Arkanon wrote:
CCP Quant wrote:
What we have here is literally the top 1% of the top 1% screaming their lungs out over these nerfs, while trying to convince the rest of the player-base to think that CCP is ruining the game for everyone. What we are really doing is keeping it from becoming yet another hyper inflated virtual economy at the cost of pissing off a particular group of players. Prior to this patch, a relatively small group of players were making the same amount of isk in npc bounties as the entire player-base did a year ago.
Anyone closely following the MERs will know that NPC bounties are out of control and have been spiralling that way since Citadels. What sort of balanced gameplay is it when you can safely sit in a super making up to 260M ticks? Of course we know that supers are not solely to blame, VNI's, Ishtars, and basically every decent drone platform is responsible for a massive chunk of the bounty pool but not at nearly the same efficiency.
This isn't only screwing with the money supply but it's dramatically increasing RMT. When you can reliably sit and make 500-780M pure isk/hr** pr. account** (hence the number of "unsubbing 17 accounts" threads), some people choose to look at it this way: you can be making over minimum salaries in some countries in RMT.
Then people complain about us nerfing mining when the mineral price index has been in a freefall for a long time and the only reason it's not worse is that the massive increase in mining volume is directly feeding into the e.g. the massive increase in super demand to get in on the bounty grind.
Sure pass some of that rage over to me, I'd be happy to take some heat off CCP Larrikin's and Fozzie's shoulders.


Apparently carrier users are the top 1% of the top 1%. Really makes you think...

I also don't know where you got the idea that supers make 260 mil ticks but that has literally no basis in reality whatsoever.

Sure, there was a problem, and yes it needed a solution, that doesn't mean that you should deploy the first solution without thinking it through. Not to mention that you waited until 3 days prior to the change to announce it, not that you care about feedback anyways.


Nothing he said is really inaccurate, and definitely justifies a nerf to carrier/super ratting.

It's really just the, "Oh, and uh... they'retoostronginPvPtoosowhatever" tacked onto the end, coupled with the magnitude of the nerf, that I find troubling.


Plenty of what he said was inaccurate, including the suggestion that people are making up to 780 mil per account with 17 accounts which will now rage unsub.. Carrier/super ratting with one account melts your brain in an hour, I'd love to know who is doing it with 17 accounts. I suspect no one is.
Keno Skir
#971 - 2017-06-09 23:36:54 UTC
I'll be interested to see how much attention is paid to this incredibly bad response.

Black Lanterns Blog <- Read my ramblings -.-

250,000 Bonus SP when you start an Alpha Clone HERE <---
Analius Glover
State War Academy
Caldari State
#972 - 2017-06-09 23:43:14 UTC
Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage. - really? Are you out of your mind? Just canceled the subscription on my all accounts. Have fun CCP
Ryzelll
Moonlit Marshmallow
No Therapy
#973 - 2017-06-09 23:44:37 UTC
I'm just going come out and say it. CCP is skating a fine line here between Supers and Suntans / Girlfriend's oh Lordy! Amen brother
Kaze Mester
Perkone
Caldari State
#974 - 2017-06-09 23:44:37 UTC
Keno Skir wrote:
I'll be interested to see how much attention is paid to this incredibly bad response.


None.
Knuckle Dragger
Ghosts Beyond The Grave
#975 - 2017-06-09 23:46:33 UTC
Sassura wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Aldent Arkanon wrote:
CCP Quant wrote:
What we have here is literally the top 1% of the top 1% screaming their lungs out over these nerfs, while trying to convince the rest of the player-base to think that CCP is ruining the game for everyone. What we are really doing is keeping it from becoming yet another hyper inflated virtual economy at the cost of pissing off a particular group of players. Prior to this patch, a relatively small group of players were making the same amount of isk in npc bounties as the entire player-base did a year ago.
Anyone closely following the MERs will know that NPC bounties are out of control and have been spiralling that way since Citadels. What sort of balanced gameplay is it when you can safely sit in a super making up to 260M ticks? Of course we know that supers are not solely to blame, VNI's, Ishtars, and basically every decent drone platform is responsible for a massive chunk of the bounty pool but not at nearly the same efficiency.
This isn't only screwing with the money supply but it's dramatically increasing RMT. When you can reliably sit and make 500-780M pure isk/hr** pr. account** (hence the number of "unsubbing 17 accounts" threads), some people choose to look at it this way: you can be making over minimum salaries in some countries in RMT.
Then people complain about us nerfing mining when the mineral price index has been in a freefall for a long time and the only reason it's not worse is that the massive increase in mining volume is directly feeding into the e.g. the massive increase in super demand to get in on the bounty grind.
Sure pass some of that rage over to me, I'd be happy to take some heat off CCP Larrikin's and Fozzie's shoulders.


Apparently carrier users are the top 1% of the top 1%. Really makes you think...

I also don't know where you got the idea that supers make 260 mil ticks but that has literally no basis in reality whatsoever.

Sure, there was a problem, and yes it needed a solution, that doesn't mean that you should deploy the first solution without thinking it through. Not to mention that you waited until 3 days prior to the change to announce it, not that you care about feedback anyways.


Nothing he said is really inaccurate, and definitely justifies a nerf to carrier/super ratting.

It's really just the, "Oh, and uh... they'retoostronginPvPtoosowhatever" tacked onto the end, coupled with the magnitude of the nerf, that I find troubling.


Plenty of what he said was inaccurate, including the suggestion that people are making up to 780 mil per account with 17 accounts which will now rage unsub.. Carrier/super ratting with one account melts your brain in an hour, I'd love to know who is doing it with 17 accounts. I suspect no one is.

I'd like to know how someone is getting some bad ass ticks like 260 mil, also stating that they're multi-boxing carriers means that they are going against the EULA and using ISBOXER the way that should ban you. I see alot of people that are small game guys, Sutonia, and others happy about these changes however, I for one dont think was the best move overall. I bet the CSM guys all bought a **** ton of BPC's and Machs prior to this change to fill their wallets after what came to light. 1% of the 1% really? take Skill injectors/extractors out and problem solved. 1 more thing like this I think its time to find a new game. Sorry CCP, man this hurts.
blaedin jordan
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#976 - 2017-06-09 23:48:03 UTC
Analius Glover wrote:
Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage. - really? Are you out of your mind? Just canceled the subscription on my all accounts. Have fun CCP


It's just an absurd idea they slipped in at the last moment for Lord only knows what purpose. We elect players to represent us for this very reason, to keep the devs from coming up with half-cocked ideas that are absolutely horrible for the players and community. The effectively castrate capital ships in this manner isn't cool. Where are our reps, why weren't they consulted, and why is this being pushed through days before the patch's release?
pots en Welle
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#977 - 2017-06-09 23:48:12 UTC
Kalain Kamerov wrote:
Guys,
Before y'all go rantzerker, please look at the economic report. CCP is nerfing it because ratting incomes have more than doubled over the last year.

Peace is good for business it seems.Incomes Loss/Gains by Type




Assuming all bounties are coming from carriers and people would continue on exactly the same as they would have without a nerf .. that would only drop the bounty to ~1.8tril but continue increasing by the 200bill/month that has been the average since skill injectors became a thing.

All they did was buy themselves 2 months.

That is of course not counting for the number of unsubs...
Kaze Mester
Perkone
Caldari State
#978 - 2017-06-09 23:48:24 UTC
The thing is if they would care about this they would have already closed this topic with a "we will rethink this nerf" message.
Is it closed?



Is it?
Lamajagarn McMyra
State War Academy
Caldari State
#979 - 2017-06-09 23:48:49 UTC
Don't like this change either, rather than just lowering the reward try increasing the risk. Lower the ehp to make them resonably killable by 10 battleships. Add a posibility to instantly counter a cyno, have been sugesting a targeted cynosural disruptor for a long time. With the current system you pretty much have to go afk in a ratting carrier to get caught.
Khara Hirl
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#980 - 2017-06-09 23:49:17 UTC
Knuckle Dragger wrote:
Sassura wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Aldent Arkanon wrote:
CCP Quant wrote:
What we have here is literally the top 1% of the top 1% screaming their lungs out over these nerfs, while trying to convince the rest of the player-base to think that CCP is ruining the game for everyone. What we are really doing is keeping it from becoming yet another hyper inflated virtual economy at the cost of pissing off a particular group of players. Prior to this patch, a relatively small group of players were making the same amount of isk in npc bounties as the entire player-base did a year ago.
Anyone closely following the MERs will know that NPC bounties are out of control and have been spiralling that way since Citadels. What sort of balanced gameplay is it when you can safely sit in a super making up to 260M ticks? Of course we know that supers are not solely to blame, VNI's, Ishtars, and basically every decent drone platform is responsible for a massive chunk of the bounty pool but not at nearly the same efficiency.
This isn't only screwing with the money supply but it's dramatically increasing RMT. When you can reliably sit and make 500-780M pure isk/hr** pr. account** (hence the number of "unsubbing 17 accounts" threads), some people choose to look at it this way: you can be making over minimum salaries in some countries in RMT.
Then people complain about us nerfing mining when the mineral price index has been in a freefall for a long time and the only reason it's not worse is that the massive increase in mining volume is directly feeding into the e.g. the massive increase in super demand to get in on the bounty grind.
Sure pass some of that rage over to me, I'd be happy to take some heat off CCP Larrikin's and Fozzie's shoulders.


Apparently carrier users are the top 1% of the top 1%. Really makes you think...

I also don't know where you got the idea that supers make 260 mil ticks but that has literally no basis in reality whatsoever.

Sure, there was a problem, and yes it needed a solution, that doesn't mean that you should deploy the first solution without thinking it through. Not to mention that you waited until 3 days prior to the change to announce it, not that you care about feedback anyways.


Nothing he said is really inaccurate, and definitely justifies a nerf to carrier/super ratting.

It's really just the, "Oh, and uh... they'retoostronginPvPtoosowhatever" tacked onto the end, coupled with the magnitude of the nerf, that I find troubling.


Plenty of what he said was inaccurate, including the suggestion that people are making up to 780 mil per account with 17 accounts which will now rage unsub.. Carrier/super ratting with one account melts your brain in an hour, I'd love to know who is doing it with 17 accounts. I suspect no one is.

I'd like to know how someone is getting some bad ass ticks like 260 mil, also stating that they're multi-boxing carriers means that they are going against the EULA and using ISBOXER the way that should ban you. I see alot of people that are small game guys, Sutonia, and others happy about these changes however, I for one dont think was the best move overall. I bet the CSM guys all bought a **** ton of BPC's and Machs prior to this change to fill their wallets after what came to light. 1% of the 1% really? take Skill injectors/extractors out and problem solved. 1 more thing like this I think its time to find a new game. Sorry CCP, man this hurts.



Average regular carrier user make 50m tickets. Super carrier maybe double that if they are lucky and can move around fast enough. 22b isk ships don't deserve 400m an hour? I think they should be earning more. Lets say you play 3 hours a day because you work IRL and are not a brain dead snow flake liberal, it would take you a month in ratting in a super just to replace it if you die including insurance. So yeah I'd say it's just fine. More isk in the game means cheaper plex prices which is actually good for alpha retention rate.