These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

isk faucet nerf which would you prefer?

Author
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#1 - 2012-03-26 03:50:33 UTC
soo inflation is prudy bad and mean old soundwave wants to reduce bounties on all npc's by 10%...

this is mainly because drone regions are loosing thier combat mining and getting bounties so expect inflation to get even worse if nothing is done...

so how does the community feel about this?

Personally i think if you want to reduce isk income why not make the npc's harder to kill and make them hit harder aswell? give them a modified sleeper a.i. that way you reduce isk per hour but keep bounties untouched? make npc's pod you in 0.0

or is it just simpler to reduce bounties? but i feel that reduction in bounties makes it like... ok old players who are already rich you get to stay rich but all those new players well tuff deal with it type of thing?

discuss....

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Selinate
#2 - 2012-03-26 03:52:16 UTC
NERF INCURSIONS!
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2012-03-26 03:53:59 UTC
reduce q20 l4s
remove concord from incursions
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#4 - 2012-03-26 03:54:22 UTC
Selinate wrote:
NERF INCURSIONS!


already happening but TBH incursions are a problem but a small part of the ISK faucet pie...

by far missions complexes and annoms/ratting are where most of the isk comes from in eve...

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Selinate
#5 - 2012-03-26 03:56:27 UTC
On a more serious note, I'd rather see them buff isk sinks.

MOAR TAXES.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#6 - 2012-03-26 03:56:59 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
reduce q20 l4s
remove concord from incursions


what like make best l4 q15 or something like that?

i would like the whole mission system to be revamped...

make missions alot more harder with less payout but make them more engaging from a story line perspective... make thier eventual progression to push you into Faction warfare and PVP... heck make L4 mission have a pvp component in them...


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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#7 - 2012-03-26 03:58:55 UTC
Selinate wrote:
On a more serious note, I'd rather see them buff isk sinks.

MOAR TAXES.


what like if you want to take the nefarious superhighways you have to pay a tax eq to your ships mass? that way it would be cheaper to either stay in your region or try to be sneaky in low sec?

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Selinate
#8 - 2012-03-26 04:00:43 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Selinate wrote:
On a more serious note, I'd rather see them buff isk sinks.

MOAR TAXES.


what like if you want to take the nefarious superhighways you have to pay a tax eq to your ships mass? that way it would be cheaper to either stay in your region or try to be sneaky in low sec?


I'd say put a tax in low sec also, just because it would be hilarious.

"YARGH, WE BE PIRATES"

"Sorry sir, you can't jump through for the booty until you pay the jump toll"

"argh....."
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2012-03-26 04:03:45 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
reduce q20 l4s
remove concord from incursions


what like make best l4 q15 or something like that?

no I mean just go back to when there was a far smaller amount of Q20 L4 agents so ninja salvagers/suicide gankers/general guys who troll highsec bears have a lot easier time for it because they're all bunched up in a handful of systems
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#10 - 2012-03-26 04:05:24 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
Selinate wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Selinate wrote:
On a more serious note, I'd rather see them buff isk sinks.

MOAR TAXES.


what like if you want to take the nefarious superhighways you have to pay a tax eq to your ships mass? that way it would be cheaper to either stay in your region or try to be sneaky in low sec?


I'd say put a tax in low sec also, just because it would be hilarious.

"YARGH, WE BE PIRATES"

"Sorry sir, you can't jump through for the booty until you pay the jump toll"

"argh....."



actually that could be cool... like in 0,0 you own sov of the system and keeping a working stargate system can be expensive... think isk sink... so now you tax people when they jump threw your systems...

of coarse there would have to be ways to bypass this like having a hacking mod or skills that can reduce the price... or a system to exempt people based or relations... like if you are our ally then you dont get charged...

so what i am thinking is well if more isk is comming into eve make more isk sinks to take it away?

like wadges for your ships crew?

more personal upkeep costs...

cleaning lady cost to keep your CQ clean?

tip for exotic dancers... lol

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#11 - 2012-03-26 04:07:10 UTC
Assuming majority of generated ISK is from the spawnable sites in null, nerf Sanctums!

Oh wai... already tried that and null emo-raged until CCP backtracked, causing another spike in prices for everyone not botting/ratting in null.

Across the board, everywhere in Eve:
Half of existing ISK bounties to be "paid" in material goods. Alleviates some of the "Need more workers!" woes as miners are not exactly crawling out of the woodwork, makes sense that more stuff drops considering the PvP drop chances, easier to modify for CCP as items represent an indirect and market determined value thus people won't get insta-ulcers and have veins popping all over the place if/when tweaked.
Hell, mix it up why don't we .. Thar be Pirates! Have some drop 'treasure maps' infrequently (read: bookmarks) to whatever type of site the rat in question is associated with .. exploration by killing stuff, what is not to like
* Note: Sites should not be as good as actual exploration!
Grumpy Owly
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2012-03-26 04:08:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Grumpy Owly
I'm in favour of applying the adjustments where the problems are.

Whilst I'm not adverse to CCP adding to sinks as an example if bounties are an issue then reduce them. Just boosting taxes to pay for disproportionate bounty incomes means someone else could end up having to foot the bill for a problem not directly relevant to themselves.

So in short apply remedies accordingly accross the board as a shared aspect based on the level of the problems they are causing. Surely this is the most sensible and logical way to eleviate those problematic features accordingly at the same time?
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#13 - 2012-03-26 04:09:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiny Corrupted
It's never solely about ISK faucets. Think about it: there are other types of faucets as well, such as mineral faucets, moon goo faucets, etc. What needs to be done is that all of these faucets become properly balanced against one another. This most likely entails a moderate nerf to high-sec incursions and null-sec anomalies, a slight boost to null-sec ratting (which at the same time nerfs botting, by making the money come from selling dropped tags from each rat for example), and a significant boost to all types of belt mining.

Getting rid of ISK generation entirely is deathly wrong.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Adunh Slavy
#14 - 2012-03-26 04:09:49 UTC
Let the drone drop change and prices run thier course and see where things land. If mining becomes more valuable than shooting rats, the monetary expansion will slow down.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2012-03-26 04:14:48 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Assuming majority of generated ISK is from the spawnable sites in null, nerf Sanctums!

Oh wai... already tried that and null emo-raged until CCP backtracked, causing another spike in prices for everyone not botting/ratting in null.

you should read up on CCP Screegs' presentation on botting - 75% of bots are in highsec.
not that i'd expect a cva member to actually rat in their lousy space
Falin Whalen
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2012-03-26 04:24:42 UTC
Selinate wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Selinate wrote:
On a more serious note, I'd rather see them buff isk sinks.

MOAR TAXES.


what like if you want to take the nefarious superhighways you have to pay a tax eq to your ships mass? that way it would be cheaper to either stay in your region or try to be sneaky in low sec?


I'd say put a tax in low sec also, just because it would be hilarious.

"YARGH, WE BE PIRATES"

"Sorry sir, you can't jump through for the booty until you pay the jump toll"

"argh....."

So something like this?

"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves." The Trial - Franz Kafka 

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#17 - 2012-03-26 04:25:08 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Assuming majority of generated ISK is from the spawnable sites in null, nerf Sanctums!

Oh wai... already tried that and null emo-raged until CCP backtracked, causing another spike in prices for everyone not botting/ratting in null.

you should read up on CCP Screegs' presentation on botting - 75% of bots are in highsec.
not that i'd expect a cva member to actually rat in their lousy space

What does CVA have to with anything? Smile

You have a link to his stats, the only thing of his I can find is the useless "we are on it" blog with a picture of dried fish. At any rate, I'd reckon the high-sec bots are miners pumping out lowends whereas null bots are doing raw ISK .. damage to Eve from ISK bots is higher I think.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2012-03-26 04:30:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Veshta Yoshida wrote:

You have a link to his stats, the only thing of his I can find is the useless "we are on it" blog with a picture of dried fish. At any rate, I'd reckon the high-sec bots are miners pumping out lowends whereas null bots are doing raw ISK .. damage to Eve from ISK bots is higher I think.

no problem

https://twitter.com/#!/Seleene_EVE/status/183181587096158208/photo/1/larg

more botters were found in The Forge then in all of nullsec combined. who knew that 23/7 npc corp concord protection would prove to be an incentive to botters
Herping yourDerp
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#19 - 2012-03-26 04:40:12 UTC
much higher wardec cost, no more griefing a corp for 2mil or alliance for 50mil
more taxes, this will also make market skills more useful.
nerfing vanguards a bit
more LP rewards in the LP stores<- these are great isk sinks
nerfing bounties across the board i don't mind a whole lot but i think it should be the last resort thing.
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#20 - 2012-03-26 04:49:38 UTC
Herping yourDerp wrote:
much higher wardec cost, no more griefing a corp for 2mil or alliance for 50mil

Now, I'm not saying 2 million war fees are entirely fair, but bear with me on this.

What you're saying is essentially that honest empire pvpers (we're not talking morality here, but exploitation of game mechanics via botting) should be penalized by having to pay off the excessive ISK that their targets, many of whom make heavy use of bots, generate. How is this a good way to offset ISK faucet imbalance? War fees might need to get adjusted for balance reasons, but not anything else.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

123Next pageLast page