These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#1101 - 2017-06-10 07:39:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Khara Hirl wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Luc Chastot wrote:
Incursions, bounties and all other faucets are the things you should be looking at to fix the money supply; reduce them and find other ways to reward players. EVE also needs more sinks and greater incentives to fight and lose stuff.

It boggles me how uncreative this solution is.


You shouldn't post on the forums, it removes all doubts about the low levels of your intelligence. NPC bounties are by far and away the single largest ISK faucet in the game.

Last month bounty prizes lead to over 69 trillion ISK entering the economy. By comparison incursions lead to just under 10 trillion ISK. In other words, incursions produce 1/7th the amount of ISK that bounty prizes produce. In fact, bounty prizes are 1.6x larger than all other ISK faucets combined. You really come across as an entitled jackass with this post. "Don't nerf my ISK making, literally nerf everyone else's."



So you lower the amount of bounties on the npc's... this really isn't that damn hard. They have 5 economists working for them. CCP has some other ploy they are going to bring in later with some real life currency trade to make carrier ratting better, just watch. There is something else behind this.

How do I know? Because if there was 150k people online versus 35k this issue would of came and gone, they are lying about something.


Right and then you nerf the income of those not in carriers or supers. Again, that is not balance that is unbalanced. It is shifting the game in favor of players with carriers and supers.

And have you even bothered to look at the graph of the money supply? In terms of it's angle it is somewhere between 90 degrees and the 45 degree line...probably around 67 degrees...which is about how many trillion ISK were added to the economy. It was perhaps the single largest gain in ISK in game in the last 4 years.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Sidrat Flush
Deep Core Mining Inc.
#1102 - 2017-06-10 07:44:37 UTC
If CCP wants to improve the balance of the game, perhaps there should be more than five pve sites that people run.

Find out why people ignore the other goodness knows how many. What would get them to run that content? Who was the content designed for?

Ship balancing is all well and good, but you also need to balance the content around it and not balance ships around less than a quarter of that PVE content that's bringing ISK to the wallet of players who are actually presenting themselves as targets for the roaming gangs.

On the other topic, you CCP wanted people to use space with the introduction of the ADM index. People use their space but you don't like the income it has generated. That is not a ship balancing issue, that's a content issue.

For years null sec was barren and people were questioning why hold it. Now we have a reason to hold it and grow rich and risk more in combat regardless of the reason for the conflict it makes the game vibrant and alive.

In regards to Rorquals, I thought it was a great idea to have as many ships costing 10+B Isk in the same system seven days a week. That must have been a great thing for any hunting packs, knowing where there was generally some potentially juicy target and at least some are in a different fleet, poorly fitted or totally AFK and exempt from warp. Such is life.

The trouble with balancing a game retroactively is that you're stopping people from planning too far ahead so they may start not thinking about their long term goals in this great but awful game that we so love to hate and read about even when not subscribing or logging in to.

Instead create new PVE content for sub caps and caps, the PvP capabilities of each can then be measured. It really depends what CCP wants.

If they want a PvP game let all the players own all the money and don't worry about it. If they want a PvE experience just go right ahead and turn off PvP and create more danger and escalation and surprises from the AI.

It's your game and we're only along for the ride until we get bored or too frustrated to stay on. It's up to you. The players will remain loyal to the friends and community they've built up over the years.

Its time to stand up against the bad empire based CEO telling falsehoods about what new characters can accomplish and pushing them towards an in game experience of drudgery and loneliness keeping them in the shadow of ignorance for at nest their own profit at worse apathy towards all the experiences that Eve has to offer.

Peter Ska
True Faces Hungary
Goonswarm Federation
#1103 - 2017-06-10 08:00:14 UTC
With this change, carriers won't be able to kill npc dreads, and income won't be significantly more than with a rattlesnake, which doesn't seems to be balanced to me counting skill requirements and ship prices.
On the other hand, supers will remain OP, fighter ratting micromanagment remain a pain in the @#$, and increased fighter aggro instead drone aggro is discrimination.
There wouldn't be this many capital pilots if there were no injectors. Most players don't even start skilling 2 years into caps. Now that they have the easy way, you can't blame them.
God save our fighters, but I'll imagine there's a CCP dev in each one when they die to rats lol
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#1104 - 2017-06-10 08:02:11 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
JC Mieyli wrote:
well after seeing the monthly report and reading ccp quant reddit post
it doesnt seem so much like a conspiracy anymore
but probably still a pretty bad move for ccp
i cant say i mind though at least people wont drop carriers on me

But if it's true that it's the 1% of the 1% according to CCP Quant, then how can this be a threat to the economy, which is CCP Larrikin's contention in the OP of this thread?

Even taking the PCU from each day around 40,000.

1% of 1% is 4 people online at any moment in time.

Something in the information CCP is feeding us is not right. Quant's post is the most likely one that is a generalization (even though he claimed it as a literal statement), in which case, CCP are pissing off way more than 1% of 1%.

Screw CCP for f'ing up PVP. Find a different solution if there is a problem. Literally, if 4 people online threaten the EVE economy, then fighter DPS isn't the problem. There's far deeper problems then that.



Well, it isn't the number of players but how much ISK they are bringing into the economy.

Now, lets consider that CCP Quant is right, that it is a very small number of players responsible for this large increase in the money supply. You are correct that the solution CCP is embracing is not good in that it is overly broad. As I noted with simply nerfing bounties, CCP is doing something that may be less broad, but may be overly broad. Some players may not be using their carriers/supers for ratting, but do like/want to use them in PvP and this change adversely effects them.

A better solution would be one that is more targeted. One that gets at those who are pumping up the money supply.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1105 - 2017-06-10 08:03:57 UTC
how are you guys still this mad
Gabriel Karade
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
#1106 - 2017-06-10 08:04:07 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
[img]http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/newssystem/media/71813/1/GermanFlag33.png[/img]  [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/devblog/FLAG_-_RUSSIAN-33.png[/img]

Hi Space Friends,
Coming with our release on Tuesday, we’re significantly reducing the damage output of Fighters.

Why:
We are making this change because Carriers & Supercarriers are too strong in PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is primarily due to NPC Bounties.

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.

We also think that Carriers and Supercarriers are a bit too effective in PvP now. This change will significantly change the PvP balance, but we’re confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP.

What:
  • Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
  • Light Fighters (Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage.
  • Support Fighters: No Change
  • Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage.
  • Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage.
  • Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
  • NPCs are 15% more likely to shoot at fighters than they are currently.


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

The root cause to your problem, is NPC's sitting in one place to be farmed to the extreme. Conceptually, why would any military organisation keep on feeding meat into the grinder once it becomes clear it's hopeless?

(i.e. make NPC activity dynamic, so that they gradually 'give up' and leave an area, moving elsewhere)

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Analius Glover
The Fatal Visionaries
Honorable Third Party
#1107 - 2017-06-10 08:06:03 UTC
One more thing. Currently when ratting in carreir/super you have to pay much attention not to miss the cycle or decycle figters to avoid incoming dps. It's engaging its demanding but it's fun especially after latest rocky haven changes. Now you wanna increase by 15% NPC shooting rate and nerf the fighters dps. Let me remind you that the set od heavy fighters costs around 450 mil. While nerfing dps clearing the wave will take more time and a simple mistake will make them to volley out the fighters. Comparing this situation with afk VNI ratters when you can make same sites not even payin attenation to the monitor is insane.

Why don't you fix first main known problem - fighters stop moving after NPC dies - i know you're aware of that problem but you haven't provided any solution so far
Kaze Mester
Perkone
Caldari State
#1108 - 2017-06-10 08:07:02 UTC
Sidrat Flush wrote:
at least some are in a different fleet, poorly fitted or totally AFK and exempt from warp. Such is life.

The trouble with balancing a game retroactively is that you're stopping people from planning too far ahead so they may start not thinking about their long term goals in this great but awful game that we so love to hate and read about even when not subscribing or logging in to.



I don't even plan ahead with this game until it is as predictable as a "normal" economy.
The only prediction is that when you find a way to earn a fair ammount of isk it will soon be nerfed...so don't even think about it.
Pocket Avalhar
Spartan Vanguard
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#1109 - 2017-06-10 08:07:23 UTC
so does this mean I am going to get reimbursed for all those skill injectors costing tons of isk that I had to work like a dog to save up for? Now there was literally no point in my skilling into this useless carrier. I could have stuck with my rattlesnake and not spent all that isk. So are we who used our time with a normal skill que or spent wads of isk to buy sill injectors going to get reimbursed? A carrier is of little use to me now, what am i actually meant to do with it?

blow it up at the sun with a effigy of ccp dev inside it maybe but that's about it
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#1110 - 2017-06-10 08:11:53 UTC
Mazzalan Otoro wrote:
I've played eve for over 10 years and I just have to say CCP, WOW... .. .. ..... .. .um,huh

Of course there's more isk coming in!!!

You introduced skill extractor/injectors (people hit the ratting/mining fields, active accounts came back and people spent a little more RL money buying plex for injectors to train those long skills, CCP went \o/ << THE MISTAKE

oh wait, What! {no more actually having to actually "train you skills" I just need enough isk}
= more capital pilots ( Stupid easy to get into the largest ships in the game what used to take months now can be done in 5min with enough isk,)

= "Everyone" now from the 1 day old toon to the vet's can fly what ever they want when ever they want!

Don't put a band aid on something that isn't the issue...


What is wow is your bad post.

Skill injectors play, at best, a secondary role in ISK creation. The buying and selling of skill injectors does not create ISK. And the SP in the skill injectors has to come out of a character, as such there is an upper limit to how much SP are on the market at any one time. Or to put it differently to buy more SP you'd have to pay increasing amounts to ISK to induce players to part with their character's SP.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#1111 - 2017-06-10 08:14:19 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
how are you guys still this mad


Carrier ratting is apparently serious business.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Mad Bosnian
Lotek Academy
#1112 - 2017-06-10 08:26:36 UTC
Atm I can earn 70 million with my Thanatos

After patch I could earn around 55-60 million per tick.


So, can this "help economy"? You took 30 million ISK less per hour and that's nothing, you need to nerf it even more. Roll

You moved 2 carriers from "almost useless" to "don't touch that"


So, you guys didn't do anything, I will still buy PLEX and I won't give you a single dime
chraal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1113 - 2017-06-10 08:36:34 UTC
You have already stated this is curb the top 1% of players, however, a loss of income for the top 1% does not effect the top 1%. They have the buying power to offset these nerfs indefinitely with the isk already accumulated, through your own game design. (Need more toons farm more, need skills for more tons just buy more injectors, need more rorqual's to offset the nerf, easy as pie, ect, ect ad nauseam). AS DO THE PEOPLE THAT MAY POSSIBLY RMT, what business model destroyers game play for the majority of players based on the sphere of concern of RMT?

Who ultimately pays with IRL money for the items required (extractors for ghost training? )for the top 1% to continue unabated or the possible RMT'rs?

All you are doing is effectively destroying emergent game play for the 99% of the player base you currently have by effecting smaller groups, who never could and never will really reliably be able to compete with the top 1% or stop the possibility of RMT.

This will by your own admission continue out of control due to a total lack of content and conflict drivers created by your own lack of thought in long term development.

It will not stop the growth of fortress delve (Citadels are not intergrated into any from of conflict drivers), it will not stop the cold war. (What is the purpose of industry if there is nothing to stop the entire community, from stockpiling more and more resources and using those resources without something to drive conflict?)

Do the economists talk to the devs about the impact of changes, when introducing things like the rorqual or citadels that are static in relation to what should or will drive conflict?

You have nothing in your game desing that really drives conflict, this is the ultimate issue here, a total LACK of intergrated systems that drive conflict for all this farming that is currently happening. Untill you adress this fundemental issue with your game then this cycle of nerfs will continue unabated.

What is the drive for me as a customer to buy nuPLEX and buy extractors to sell full well knowing than majority will probably go the top 1% or buying Plex to sell on open market (Why should i support ghost training?). You will never prevent the top 1% from being the top 1%, nor will you be able to stop their buying power. You should as a business be designing intergrated systems, with intergrated change that creates emergent game play. Not changing a facet of gameplay for majority of your customer base, based on what appears to be short sighted cash grabs, or ill thought out game design (what content do i spend isk on?)
Kryas
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1114 - 2017-06-10 08:51:26 UTC
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
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.


Explain to me why the idea is bad? It's actually better for casual players depending on how it's implemented:

You come online and rat for 2 hours > Bounty payout = 100% for those 2 hours
You rat for a further 2 hours > Bounty payout is 75% for those 2 hours.
You rat for indefined time thereafter > Bounty payout is 50% for remaining time until next DT which resets the cycle.

If you can't get time, then do it on ISK earned from bounty paid out. First 300 million is 100%, then drop to 75% for second 300 million, then drop to 50% thereafter. In what world does that harm a casual player? Most casual players will only play for a couple of hours in any given day so where does this idea that it's terrible for casual players come from?

The change as proposed by CCP just screws everyone, absolutely everyone, who got into carrier as the end-game of ratting. As has been pointed out, you're now just better off ratting in a sniper fit Rattle. You'll do as much damage and be just as safe. That's a joke for the cost in SP and ISK for the skills and the ship/fit. It doesn't matter which way you want to look at it a Cap should always be better than a subcap in the hands of equally skilled pilots.

Carriers aren't even the problem drone boats are as you have to engage with fighters, you can't just go AFK and let them clear entire sites for you.
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
Already Replaced.
#1115 - 2017-06-10 08:57:00 UTC
I'm a bit confused on this, because a group of players, used the tools provided by CCP and in fact a new system of sov that drives this amount of isk making and now what, punish the players for playing as you made them play?

k k we get the way too much isk being made,, needs to be nerfed so the whole market doesn't shite itself bit.

but this heavy handed nerf an entire line of ships and citadels will hurt way more than just ratting income.

i liked my carrier, it wasn't over powered, it needed to be flown right and needed fleet support in pvp. you promised you'd make them better, give a more meaningful role to this class of ship. I'm not seeing this new role at all.

they can't triage, they can't deal with ecm, they will soon have crap DPS, you can't assign fighters or drones.

what role exactly do you see carriers and supers in CCP?

it appears there is no road map, no plan, just hey,, let's try this and if it's too much we'll nerf the hell out of it.

doesn't make sense, when decreasing the income from bounties on rats would only effect the isk income and not the abilities of the ships that use fighters in every area of the game.

you removed the drone alloys to save industry Roll back in 2011, compare that to this, would be like removing 30% of battleship damage over all to stop people farming the drones.

nope you removed the problem instead of punishing every single player who flew the ship type used to earn the isk.

nerf the bounties, leave the fighters alone.
















Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords
Fraternity.
#1116 - 2017-06-10 08:58:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Destriouth Hollow
Carrier ratting is something people with only a single active char excel at. It was the one way of people without armies of toons to at least somewhat compensate for it by earning as much as 1,5-2 chars with one highly active one, compared to the ppl mining with 13 chars.

I think CCP failed to look at what groups use it here. It was in a good place.
A good option for single-boxers, worthless for multiboxers.

Im not even considering the skill-time and price-tag.

Again: I'm a multiboxer and with perfect carrier skills, but carrier-ratting isnt even lucrative for me.
Kryas
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1117 - 2017-06-10 08:58:47 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Ralph Shepard wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hi Space Friends,
Coming with our release on Tuesday, we’re significantly reducing the damage output of Fighters.

Why:
We are making this change because Carriers & Supercarriers are too strong in PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is primarily due to NPC Bounties.
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.
We also think that Carriers and Supercarriers are a bit too effective in PvP now. This change will significantly change the PvP balance, but we’re confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP.

What:
  • Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
  • Light Fighters (Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage.
  • Support Fighters: No Change
  • Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage.
  • Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage.
  • Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
  • NPCs are 15% more likely to shoot at fighters than they are currently.


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


If you truly wanted to do something with isk generation, you would fix incursions.
Which means this is just an excuse from you.


Incursion payouts are a fraction of pirate bounties.

http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9aaa_top.sinks.faucets.over.time.png
http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/MER/May_2017/9b_isk.float.3.png

But please keep up the histrionics.


Correct me if I'm wrong but incursion rats have bounties on them as well? That graph just shows the payout from incursions. Incursion bounties would be included in the bounty total because.... well, they're bounties?
Paul Brinkhoff
Know your Role
Pandemic Horde
#1118 - 2017-06-10 09:08:41 UTC
I was actually typing something meaningfull and well written here but then I realized rambeling about citadels, multiboxing, destroying content for the sake of advertising to a shrinking playerbase with new unbalaced and rushed superlatives every month seems to be the go to strategy for eve.

There are two problems that cause the rage atm:

1) As someone allready pointed out on reddit CCP managed to kill conflict drives within the game and it is now better content for us as players to bash CCP than bashing Keepstars.

2) CCP has proven to be out of touch with their own product.

Esp. since CCP officials argue with something like 240m ticks used for RMT. Not even knowing how much isk you can actually make in a super but using isk making in supers as a reason for a nerf is just pathetic on a level that I cant put into words without sounding to insulting.

Also I would like to point out that ratting in capitals or supercapitals is not a way of making isk that scales very well. You have to commit to that task and actively play the game to make your isk. You can not just multibox as much supers as your PC can handle like you can do with more passive forms of ratting ships, or passive income in general.

So if I would want to RMT at the current state of the game I would not want to have to use a super. Regular ratting on a large scale would make more isk and require less input. Sure I coul use 1 (one) super ontop of that but that wont be the main way of making isk.

Nerfing the pvp ability due to pve is absolute nonsense.

Esp. since CCP is bringing more and more stronger capitals, titans and supercapitals to the game with via PIRATE FACTION ships. Sorry that I cant really follow that argument. CCP even puts some effort into makeing regular pirate faction capitals cheaper so that those will potentionally being used in further engagements while nerfing caps in general due to said reasons. **** like that is what comes up when you google bigot.
Even more so since the real money makers that do scale and require less effort to make isk are not touched.

Every game has the porblem that its resources are, compared to the real world, unlimited. But you usually work arround that by making the players waste those resources in conflict. So dear CCP if you are afraid of too much isk in the game dont just slap people in the face by doing your best to reduce destruction but make destruction an actual thing again. Take away our wealth by makeing us lose our assets again. Make us want to fight again, that simple. Allowing big enteties to trutle up and create safe krabbing space is not really what made eve great in the past.

Also I would like to state you can not just grab the cash and waste a franchise in the process like EA likes to do and work arround by either having enough other games to make profit of or bringing up a new game next year anyways. I dont think that this tactic wont work very well regarding your portfolio.

Dont treat us like **** by straight up lying into our faces like CCP_Quant did on reddit. Due to an allready shrinking player base this is not a very smart thing to do to be honest.

You have, dear CCP, something like a CSM, you actually spend money at those dudes completly ignoring them when it comes to changing the game but on the other hand pretending to work with the CSM for advertising the uniqueness of your game when it suits you wont end very well in the longrun either.

Get your **** together.
Destriouth Hollow
Star-Destroying-Warlords
Fraternity.
#1119 - 2017-06-10 09:08:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Destriouth Hollow
This only nerfs nullsec longtime-player single-boxers exclusively. But that's NOT the group of ppl you want to nerf.
They already have a hard time in eve because they restrict themselves to earning isk with only one character.^

I AM a multiboxer myself who doesnt fly carriers. But I want the single-boxers to stay and keep playing eve.
Ti'El
Great White Hunters
Feasting Frenzy
#1120 - 2017-06-10 09:30:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Ti'El
Why don't you remove carriers at all?
It's clear that you don't want anyone using them.

The whole idea of this was keeping fighters dps on par with dreads new high angle weapons dps level. Ensuring that both would be viable options for PVE.

I do believe that dreads have a bit more risk being in siege, thus, they deserve a bit more credit for the risk taken than carriers, and all that but, why don't give them some more dps boost to dreads instead of nerfing carriers and fighters like what? 5 times in a row?

You clearly have an agenda that the community doesn't know... I just hope you don't kill the game.