These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Revisting ISK faucet %'s...post-ban-hammer
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#1 - 2012-04-21 17:29:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Panhead4411
Now that you (CCP) have removed what, over 3,000 botters, where does that put "Bounties" on the relative spectrum of ISK Faucets? I know there were some areas that saw a ten-fold drop in NPC kills after one of the first ban waves this year. In which case, is it not logical to assume the subsequent bounties generated were also significantly decreased?

I bring this up b/c the main objection to nerfing High-sec Incursions was the argument that Incursions was a small % compared to that of Bounties. I'm sure someone at CCP has the knowledge of what the 'new' %'s are for ISK faucets, since there are alot fewer bots farming things now.

--edit--
Had a time table thing, but discovered i had the wrong idea in my head of what happened when. I have been corrected, and thus have deleted the erroneous information.

*gets out marshmallows and waits for flames*

http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing    < Unified Inventory is NOT ready...
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#2 - 2012-04-21 17:30:39 UTC
CCP only has to remove warp to 0 and there will be a massive new isk and mineral sink.

Solve economic problems with violence everyday in EVE.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
supersexysucker
Uber Awesome Fantastico Awesomeness Group
#3 - 2012-04-21 17:32:02 UTC
Ya ccp only has to remove what they added because people made so many bookmarks it was killing the server...

Any other bight idiots dimwit?
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#4 - 2012-04-21 17:33:23 UTC
supersexysucker wrote:
Ya ccp only has to remove what they added because people made so many bookmarks it was killing the server...

Any other bight idiots dimwit?


All you have to do is make it a serious, bannable, offense to make said bookmarks.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Lapine Davion
Outer Ring Applied Logistics
#5 - 2012-04-21 17:34:51 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
supersexysucker wrote:
Ya ccp only has to remove what they added because people made so many bookmarks it was killing the server...

Any other bight idiots dimwit?


All you have to do is make it a serious, bannable, offense to make said bookmarks.


Yes, I too see CCP removing a feature that was added for very specific reasons and was universally lauded by the playerbase when it was introduced.

[b]Don't worry about posting with your main!  Post with your brain! "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."[/b]
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#6 - 2012-04-21 17:35:26 UTC
Ban bookmarks. Well thought out there skippy.
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#7 - 2012-04-21 17:37:04 UTC
KrakizBad wrote:
Ban bookmarks. Well thought out there skippy.


Not every bookmark, just ones that can be used to warp to 0 when you're not allowed to, because warping to 0 would become an exploit.

Also, removing no warp to 0 may be one of the worst design choices in this game. Totally messed up the idea of risk vs reward.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#8 - 2012-04-21 17:37:08 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
CCP only has to remove warp to 0 and there will be a massive new isk and mineral sink.

Solve economic problems with violence everyday in EVE.

Technically no.

It would be a mineral sink and ISK faucet.

Ships go boom which destroys minerals but adds insurance ISK.
Adacia Calla
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2012-04-21 17:37:19 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
supersexysucker wrote:
Ya ccp only has to remove what they added because people made so many bookmarks it was killing the server...

Any other bight idiots dimwit?


All you have to do is make it a serious, bannable, offense to make said bookmarks.

So you want everyone that has bookmarks within 100km of a gate to be banned?

Forums need a "I dislike this post because the poster is stupid."

Test signature....forum not applying settings :(
masternerdguy
Doomheim
#10 - 2012-04-21 17:38:24 UTC
Corina Jarr wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
CCP only has to remove warp to 0 and there will be a massive new isk and mineral sink.

Solve economic problems with violence everyday in EVE.

Technically no.

It would be a mineral sink and ISK faucet.

Ships go boom which destroys minerals but adds insurance ISK.


It would also be a time sink. By making everything take longer (since you have to burn to the object from 15km instead of landing ontop of it) you reduce everyone's earning power.

Things are only impossible until they are not.
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#11 - 2012-04-21 17:39:39 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
CCP only has to remove warp to 0 and there will be a massive new isk and mineral sink.

Solve economic problems with violence everyday in EVE.


Last time I have to read your not thought trough (troll) posts.
I.o.w. you are blocked. P
J3ssica Alba
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2012-04-21 17:40:12 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
CCP only has to remove warp to 0 and there will be a massive new isk and mineral sink.

Solve economic problems with violence everyday in EVE.


You fail at trolling because you fail at basic understanding of isk sinks.
This is my signature. There are many others like it, but this one is mine.  Without me, my signature is useless. Without my signature, I am useless
Corina Jarr
en Welle Shipping Inc.
#13 - 2012-04-21 17:41:36 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
CCP only has to remove warp to 0 and there will be a massive new isk and mineral sink.

Solve economic problems with violence everyday in EVE.

Technically no.

It would be a mineral sink and ISK faucet.

Ships go boom which destroys minerals but adds insurance ISK.


It would also be a time sink. By making everything take longer (since you have to burn to the object from 15km instead of landing ontop of it) you reduce everyone's earning power.

It would only really effect those who travel a lot, traders, whos income comes from others, not from NPCs.

And would make courier missions even more pointless.
Yatama Kautsuo
Tencus
#14 - 2012-04-21 17:42:15 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
CCP only has to remove warp to 0 and there will be a massive new isk and mineral sink.

Solve economic problems with violence everyday in EVE.

Technically no.

It would be a mineral sink and ISK faucet.

Ships go boom which destroys minerals but adds insurance ISK.


It would also be a time sink. By making everything take longer (since you have to burn to the object from 15km instead of landing ontop of it) you reduce everyone's earning power.


will never happen, next
Hamshoe
Doomheim
#15 - 2012-04-21 17:48:08 UTC
Lapine Davion wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
supersexysucker wrote:
Ya ccp only has to remove what they added because people made so many bookmarks it was killing the server...

Any other bight idiots dimwit?


All you have to do is make it a serious, bannable, offense to make said bookmarks.


Yes, I too see CCP removing a feature that was added for very specific reasons and was universally lauded by the playerbase when it was introduced.


It may be a bad idea for any of a number of reasons, but the idea that the introduction of WTZ was "universally lauded" is trivially false.
DarthNefarius
Minmatar Heavy Industries
#16 - 2012-04-21 17:51:22 UTC  |  Edited by: DarthNefarius
Panhead4411 wrote:
Now that you (CCP) have removed what, over 3,000 botters, where does that put "Bounties" on the relative spectrum of ISK Faucets? I know there were some areas that saw a ten-fold drop in NPC kills after one of the first ban waves this year. In which case, is it not logical to assume the subsequent bounties generated were also significantly decreased?

I bring this up b/c the main objection to nerfing High-sec Incursions was the argument that Incursions was a small % compared to that of Bounties. I'm sure someone at CCP has the knowledge of what the 'new' %'s are for ISK faucets, since there are alot fewer bots farming things now.

Also, in the latest Dev Blog, there is a telling graph at the bottom, i find it hard to say "incursions aren't part of the problem" when looking at what the trends were before and since their introduction.

*gets out marshmallows and waits for flames*



You are talking about the link http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=28612 what is most telling in the third graph ( http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/devblog/2012/Escalationf3.png ) is that the T1 price increases were all BEFORE ( leading up to ) the release of Incursion's patch in December 2010. Immediately after that T1 ship prices took a nose dive and actually started deflating in May 2011. With the removal of the mineral faucet of Drone poo I can't possibly believe that mineral & T1 ship prices are going to do the same.
An' then Chicken@little.com, he come scramblin outta the    Terminal room screaming "The system's crashing! The system's    crashing!" -Uncle RAMus, 'Tales for Cyberpsychotic Children'
Kengutsi Akira
Doomheim
#17 - 2012-04-21 17:54:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Kengutsi Akira
Panhead4411 wrote:
Now that you (CCP) have removed what, over 3,000 botters, where does that put "Bounties" on the relative spectrum of ISK Faucets? I know there were some areas that saw a ten-fold drop in NPC kills after one of the first ban waves this year. In which case, is it not logical to assume the subsequent bounties generated were also significantly decreased?

I bring this up b/c the main objection to nerfing High-sec Incursions was the argument that Incursions was a small % compared to that of Bounties. I'm sure someone at CCP has the knowledge of what the 'new' %'s are for ISK faucets, since there are alot fewer bots farming things now.

Also, in the latest Dev Blog, there is a telling graph at the bottom, i find it hard to say "incursions aren't part of the problem" when looking at what the trends were before and since their introduction.

*gets out marshmallows and waits for flames*


soooo lets make it so drones dont drop loot AND dont get bounties and rename the drone regions to "noob 0.0"

Hamshoe wrote:
Lapine Davion wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
supersexysucker wrote:
Ya ccp only has to remove what they added because people made so many bookmarks it was killing the server...

Any other bight idiots dimwit?


All you have to do is make it a serious, bannable, offense to make said bookmarks.


Yes, I too see CCP removing a feature that was added for very specific reasons and was universally lauded by the playerbase when it was introduced.


It may be a bad idea for any of a number of reasons, but the idea that the introduction of WTZ was "universally lauded" is trivially false.


"universally lauded" by ppl that like being able to traverse lowsec

"Is it fair that CCP can get away with..." :: checks ownership on the box ::

Yes
Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2012-04-21 18:00:11 UTC
At OP:

http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/eb6/

"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin
Cpt Arareb
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#19 - 2012-04-21 18:02:50 UTC
Twisted
masternerdguy wrote:
CCP only has to remove warp to 0 and there will be a massive new isk and mineral sink.

Solve economic problems with violence everyday in EVE.

TwistedTwistedTwistedTwistedTwistedTwistedTwisted
MadMuppet
Critical Mass Inc
#20 - 2012-04-21 18:29:43 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
Corina Jarr wrote:
masternerdguy wrote:
CCP only has to remove warp to 0 and there will be a massive new isk and mineral sink.

Solve economic problems with violence everyday in EVE.

Technically no.

It would be a mineral sink and ISK faucet.

Ships go boom which destroys minerals but adds insurance ISK.


It would also be a time sink. By making everything take longer (since you have to burn to the object from 15km instead of landing ontop of it) you reduce everyone's earning power.


People would leave the game rather than waste 15 minutes for absolutely no reason flying around on every mining op, trade flight, mission, etc.... While I understand it would help the pirates at specific points, it would unnecessarily slow the rest of the game down for the large majority of travel where there are no other pilots.

Also, bookmarks would still become necessary because only an idiot would straight warp to 15km from another gate. Even if the mechanic would not allow bookmarks withing 15km, people would have them above, below, and in all directions 15km out from the gate.

This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.

"If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed." -MadMuppet
12Next page