These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

EVE Online Development Strategy (CSM Public)

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#201 - 2012-11-27 06:58:20 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Actually if you look at the history of tritanium you will see that yes the volumes sold are now lower then last year but also that the price this time last year was at a sell price of below 3.5, it did not go over 5 till the nerf was announced.


You can't consider prices during the periods when bots were rampant. The only reliable times to use to gauge the old pricing is right after the various anti-botting campaigns. There's no pre-Christmas time before this year that did not sport massive botting.


Frying Doom wrote:

As to L4 Missions, yes that is a huge isk faucet much like incursions. They are a massive isk faucet, which leads me to believe that it is the L4 and incursions that may need some alterations to the faucet level (some better goods but less isk) compared to stuffing around with the drone regions again and stuffing up the mineral markets again.


L4 *by my and another guy's initiative* got nerfed five times since 2009, feel free to go to the old forums and see the drama and the hate on the missioning forum when we kept proving missions yielded too much ISK and minerals.

But now no, L4s lost the minerals, the mods, got the bounties trimmed down, now L4s are the most fair ISK per hour than ever.
With the faction stuff getting implemented in the regular markets, missions rewards got another severe hit. I was there to sell the CN invulns and CNRs of old time.
With the faction stuff getting implemented in FW, missions took another hit.

Incursions, once again feel free to look back the GD threads showing me in first line to get them nerfed. And they got nerfed enough that now it's normal to pass through incursion systems that stay invaded for half week+.

It's time to stop with the endless nerfing, I have *4* missioning characters and you know what? ATM they are all 4 *mining* because it's just so low effort vs the ISK to be made and L4 income is now low enough that blitzing L3s in oversized ships yields more ISK per effort.


What are we short now? Minerals.
What do we have too much now ISK.

What did drone regions nerf do? Remove (lots of) minerals and add (lots of) ISK, expecially in farmable hi sec missions.

The logical step is obvious and it's not nerfing L4 missions AGAIN.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#202 - 2012-11-27 13:04:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Gillia Winddancer
Bah...nvm...

You know, I truly hate this draft feature. I really really do.
Borascus
#203 - 2012-11-27 17:20:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Borascus
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Actually if you look at the history of tritanium you will see that yes the volumes sold are now lower then last year but also that the price this time last year was at a sell price of below 3.5, it did not go over 5 till the nerf was announced.


You can't consider prices during the periods when bots were rampant. The only reliable times to use to gauge the old pricing is right after the various anti-botting campaigns. There's no pre-Christmas time before this year that did not sport massive botting.


Frying Doom wrote:

As to L4 Missions, yes that is a huge isk faucet much like incursions. They are a massive isk faucet, which leads me to believe that it is the L4 and incursions that may need some alterations to the faucet level (some better goods but less isk) compared to stuffing around with the drone regions again and stuffing up the mineral markets again.


L4 *by my and another guy's initiative* got nerfed five times since 2009, feel free to go to the old forums and see the drama and the hate on the missioning forum when we kept proving missions yielded too much ISK and minerals.

But now no, L4s lost the minerals, the mods, got the bounties trimmed down, now L4s are the most fair ISK per hour than ever.
With the faction stuff getting implemented in the regular markets, missions rewards got another severe hit. I was there to sell the CN invulns and CNRs of old time.
With the faction stuff getting implemented in FW, missions took another hit.

Incursions, once again feel free to look back the GD threads showing me in first line to get them nerfed. And they got nerfed enough that now it's normal to pass through incursion systems that stay invaded for half week+.

It's time to stop with the endless nerfing, I have *4* missioning characters and you know what? ATM they are all 4 *mining* because it's just so low effort vs the ISK to be made and L4 income is now low enough that blitzing L3s in oversized ships yields more ISK per effort.


What are we short now? Minerals.
What do we have too much now ISK.

What did drone regions nerf do? Remove (lots of) minerals and add (lots of) ISK, expecially in farmable hi sec missions.

The logical step is obvious and it's not nerfing L4 missions AGAIN.


Why as an accountant do you always want nerfs?

Now I'm gonna look a bit daft here, agiven....


If you noticed a reason to nerf Drone Regions back then, and Trit prices rose by as much as is quoted here around that time, which meant that the reward / risk in the Drone Regions was *Solely* ISK, how did you miss AF-Karriers in Anomalies being the biggest faucet?

More on topic, would the reversal of the Drone Region nerf now only serve to illustrate that CCP Games took the step of removing alloys from Drones, only long enough for mineral reserves within any alliance to fall low enough to make them vulnerable? Even though that was never CCP's intention.

Previously the Drone poo was working well, it fed enough minerals into the economy to sustain long-term PvP. Even though drone poo as the only source of these minerals was never CCP's intention. The argument back then should have been "scale down the drone alloys by 15%" instead of "remove Drone alloys 100%, wait, reduce BP costs by 15%". As for the Donchian channel on trit, you have to admit you can only sell it for the price someone is willing to pay for it. This was the same for reprocessed Drone poo hence the 3.5isk price.
Jake Warbird
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#204 - 2012-11-27 19:01:46 UTC
Looks for constructive criticism, posts on GD.

Sugar Von MurdererTits : Jake Warbird gets my vote for most intriguing and attractive male character in Eve.
Christy D Floyd
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#205 - 2012-11-27 19:37:52 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Falcon
Do not discuss moderation on the forums - CCP Falcon

Money is better than poverty, if only for financial reasons.
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#206 - 2012-11-27 20:32:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Krell Kroenen
I am amused that I have been pigeon holed in to the 10% Shiny, 90% Iteration demo-graph because of my character's age. When in reality I am more of a 50/50 kind of person and always have been. I guess that must mean I am on the edge of bitter-vet status I suppose.

I haven't lived in Null since the days of the Old NC. That was during the height Anoms and system upgrades and truth be told it was a pretty good life. The day to day risks where rather low for most of it. Between intel channels and local you had to be rather careless to be killed. The risk to me in Null came in the form of actively defending it. From taking part in Home defense fleets all the way to events like the Max 2 campaign. Elements you don't have to do in Highsec to have a place to rat and mine. Though I suppose if you didn't take part in defending your space Null could be consider rather safe based on my experiences where I lived in null and our infrastructure at the time.

I have to say I enjoyed being in Null until a battle in M-O against the Russians where in I lost a ship an hour after I logged out in a safe pos. That event left me feeling that the game was too broken to reliably play. So I took a break from Eve, but I came back after a few months, but by then the NC was gone and my corp was moving to Highsec/Wormholes again. And that is pretty much where I have stayed. Dabbling here and there as my corp withers away around me.

I sit here now and I wonder what would get me back out to Null, I am not really sure what would. It wouldn't be isk though, I haven't chased that in some time. I haven't needed to, between my nest egg I had when i left null and selling my pointless dread I have been coasting along even with my occasional ship loses. Perhaps if the political clime and sov structure of null changed or new styles of play outside of blobs showed up I would be willing to go back.

Maybe CCP can do that before my corp dies and I truly become a bitter vet as defined in that letter.
CCP Falcon
#207 - 2012-11-27 20:37:31 UTC
Keep moderation discussion off the forums.

Back to regular broadcasting.

Thanks.

CCP Falcon || EVE Universe Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon

Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#208 - 2012-11-27 20:48:09 UTC
Excellent document.

I fully support the direction and guidance being offered here.

Thumbs up CSM!

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#209 - 2012-11-27 21:19:52 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Actually if you look at the history of tritanium you will see that yes the volumes sold are now lower then last year but also that the price this time last year was at a sell price of below 3.5, it did not go over 5 till the nerf was announced.


You can't consider prices during the periods when bots were rampant. The only reliable times to use to gauge the old pricing is right after the various anti-botting campaigns. There's no pre-Christmas time before this year that did not sport massive botting.


Frying Doom wrote:

As to L4 Missions, yes that is a huge isk faucet much like incursions. They are a massive isk faucet, which leads me to believe that it is the L4 and incursions that may need some alterations to the faucet level (some better goods but less isk) compared to stuffing around with the drone regions again and stuffing up the mineral markets again.


L4 *by my and another guy's initiative* got nerfed five times since 2009, feel free to go to the old forums and see the drama and the hate on the missioning forum when we kept proving missions yielded too much ISK and minerals.

But now no, L4s lost the minerals, the mods, got the bounties trimmed down, now L4s are the most fair ISK per hour than ever.
With the faction stuff getting implemented in the regular markets, missions rewards got another severe hit. I was there to sell the CN invulns and CNRs of old time.
With the faction stuff getting implemented in FW, missions took another hit.

Incursions, once again feel free to look back the GD threads showing me in first line to get them nerfed. And they got nerfed enough that now it's normal to pass through incursion systems that stay invaded for half week+.

It's time to stop with the endless nerfing, I have *4* missioning characters and you know what? ATM they are all 4 *mining* because it's just so low effort vs the ISK to be made and L4 income is now low enough that blitzing L3s in oversized ships yields more ISK per effort.


What are we short now? Minerals.
What do we have too much now ISK.

What did drone regions nerf do? Remove (lots of) minerals and add (lots of) ISK, expecially in farmable hi sec missions.

The logical step is obvious and it's not nerfing L4 missions AGAIN.

I'd question the idea that the drone alloy removal did much to add more isk coming into missions. Not all mission runners would run them prior due to the requirement of having to loot and salvage in order to receive the full reward. I imagine many individuals would likely have skipped them and moved on to bounty giving missions to keep income up while not having to break from doing missions for more LP and bounty payouts which require no extra time or effort. For them the change in isk injection would likely be minimal if any at all.
Kainotomiu Ronuken
koahisquad
#210 - 2012-11-27 22:40:19 UTC
Krell Kroenen wrote:
I am amused that I have been pigeon holed in to the 10% Shiny, 90% Iteration demo-graph because of my character's age. When in reality I am more of a 50/50 kind of person and always have been. I guess that must mean I am on the edge of bitter-vet status I suppose.

Obviously such broad brush strokes cannot apply to all the characters defined by those ages. I imagine that the CSM intended it as a rough guide of the typical veteran's interests.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#211 - 2012-11-27 22:49:08 UTC
Borascus wrote:


Why as an accountant do you always want nerfs?


Because it's very easy to introduce mudflation and "power creep", expecially in a game made by many disconnected expansions and "modules" sticked together like EvE is.

Said that, the following statement is incorrect:

Borascus wrote:

If you noticed a reason to nerf Drone Regions back then,


I did not notice a reason to nerf Drone Regions back then and it's why I'd like for it to be restored and just the excess in minerals trimmed down to balance (the 15% - 25% BPO rebalance I stated).

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Borascus
#212 - 2012-11-27 22:51:23 UTC
As for the hinted request for changes to null-sec sovereignty mechanics, this will affect mudflation how?
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#213 - 2012-11-27 22:56:05 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I'd question the idea that the drone alloy removal did much to add more isk coming into missions. Not all mission runners would run them prior due to the requirement of having to loot and salvage in order to receive the full reward. I imagine many individuals would likely have skipped them and moved on to bounty giving missions to keep income up while not having to break from doing missions for more LP and bounty payouts which require no extra time or effort. For them the change in isk injection would likely be minimal if any at all.


The missioneers totally bent on min maxing ISK per hour would blitz the missions anyway, before and after the drone regions nerf.
The drone missions happen so often that unless you are in some lucky Caldari multi-L4-nearby agent system you end up having to wait the 4 hours out or having to do them. The 4 hours timers has an impact, as agents tend to give faction missions as well and you use all the timers to skip those already. And then 3 drone missions in a row happen...

Also, many are like me, who like to "gun mine" for prodicing T1 and T2 modules, I actually welcomed those missions because I could "flash" through them (they tend to be very easy) and then bring home some amount of high ends.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
mkint
#214 - 2012-11-28 01:05:58 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I'd question the idea that the drone alloy removal did much to add more isk coming into missions. Not all mission runners would run them prior due to the requirement of having to loot and salvage in order to receive the full reward. I imagine many individuals would likely have skipped them and moved on to bounty giving missions to keep income up while not having to break from doing missions for more LP and bounty payouts which require no extra time or effort. For them the change in isk injection would likely be minimal if any at all.


The missioneers totally bent on min maxing ISK per hour would blitz the missions anyway, before and after the drone regions nerf.
The drone missions happen so often that unless you are in some lucky Caldari multi-L4-nearby agent system you end up having to wait the 4 hours out or having to do them. The 4 hours timers has an impact, as agents tend to give faction missions as well and you use all the timers to skip those already. And then 3 drone missions in a row happen...

Also, many are like me, who like to "gun mine" for prodicing T1 and T2 modules, I actually welcomed those missions because I could "flash" through them (they tend to be very easy) and then bring home some amount of high ends.

Gun mining = all kinds of stupid as far as a balanced game goes. No. It should never be brought back. You want minerals, you mine them as is intended.

As far as inflation, I have read nothing from CCP saying inflation is a serious problem right now. It's always something to be aware of, but unless you work in the CCP statistics department, you are not qualified to say it's a problem.

Your drone suggestions are a self serving ploy to make yourself richer at the cost of gutting an entire game mechanic, and those strange enough to enjoy it. You are not worth it. Plz stop.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#215 - 2012-11-28 04:22:16 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Evelgrivion wrote:

nobody ever started playing an Eve Online trial because of how amazing High Security Space is.



Your pompous arrogance is showing. People that don't play the way you do are not "real" EVE players?

Hi sec is LOADED with causal gamers, who have no desire to play the 0.0 politics and blob fest. We just want to mine, build, maybe run some missions, operate a POS.... carve out a little niche in a place mostly free of the hard-core, EVE is life, PVPers.


I could just as easily say "nobody every started playing EVE Online to do a two hour titan conga line, be inundated with a text penile contest in local, or be out blobbed by the hard-core, well established, join us or die, mega power block."


I was looking for the part where you made an effort to refute my argument, but I couldn't find it. I never said High-sec doesn't prove attractive to people looking to play Eve Online, but I dare say that 99% or more of them wouldn't have heard of Eve Online in the first place if it wasn't for the power plays that take place in dangerous space.

What I did say about high security space is that the gameplay in high-security space is in pretty good shape, and thus warrants a smaller portion of CCP's attention than the less healthy parts of the game do. At this time, in this case, that means 0.0 space.
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#216 - 2012-11-28 04:25:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
mkint wrote:
Evelgrivion wrote:
This does not fix the existing problem of compressed materials being fundamentally bad for making it easy to transport bulk material from point A to point B, which directly enabled supercap proliferation.


Super caps were going to proliferate one way or the other, and I'm pretty certain reprocessing alloys on site is probably one of the least effective ways of getting one built.


Reprocessing minerals takes no time to do; the bottleneck is, and has been from the beginning, the transportation of the requisite materials. Did you know that the alloys that would yield an Avatar could fit inside of a single jump freighter?
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#217 - 2012-11-28 04:34:18 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
I'd question the idea that the drone alloy removal did much to add more isk coming into missions. Not all mission runners would run them prior due to the requirement of having to loot and salvage in order to receive the full reward. I imagine many individuals would likely have skipped them and moved on to bounty giving missions to keep income up while not having to break from doing missions for more LP and bounty payouts which require no extra time or effort. For them the change in isk injection would likely be minimal if any at all.


The missioneers totally bent on min maxing ISK per hour would blitz the missions anyway, before and after the drone regions nerf.
The drone missions happen so often that unless you are in some lucky Caldari multi-L4-nearby agent system you end up having to wait the 4 hours out or having to do them. The 4 hours timers has an impact, as agents tend to give faction missions as well and you use all the timers to skip those already. And then 3 drone missions in a row happen...

Also, many are like me, who like to "gun mine" for prodicing T1 and T2 modules, I actually welcomed those missions because I could "flash" through them (they tend to be very easy) and then bring home some amount of high ends.

I've never had drone mission recurrence be that problematic. In fact I'm not sure I've ever had 2 drone missions back to back in the last several months at least. the best farmers do have more than one agent available often pulling more than one at a time leaving them a way around less desirable missions. Additionally with high enough standing the bite even for rejections ceases to be an issue when faced with a loss in efficiency.

I to did the drone missions primarily for minerals for ammo and LP reward manufacture, but I've also heard many who don't dabble in industry claim them to be a waste of time for them personally.

That said none of the inflationary considerations justify the fact that i was able to build ships with the scraps that rogue drones dropped in my opinion and reverting that just to reduce a faucet that has much better and more effective potential targets makes no sense from a gameplay balance perspective with regard to gun mining nor an economic perspective because even prior we still had and will still have floods of isk coming in and not going out.
Frying Doom
#218 - 2012-11-28 04:44:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Frying Doom
Evelgrivion wrote:


I was looking for the part where you made an effort to refute my argument, but I couldn't find it. I never said High-sec doesn't prove attractive to people looking to play Eve Online, but I dare say that 99% or more of them wouldn't have heard of Eve Online in the first place if it wasn't for the power plays that take place in dangerous space.

What I did say about high security space is that the gameplay in high-security space is in pretty good shape, and thus warrants a smaller portion of CCP's attention than the less healthy parts of the game do. At this time, in this case, that means 0.0 space.

Well as I explained above the News worthiness of Null over the last year is only slightly higher than that of the CSM and the main articles being published are on things occurring in Hi-sec, such as hulkagedon has made the main stream gaming mags for years, so did burn Jita, other than that it is the occasional story of someone loosing a massive amount of RL money in a kill (normally a hi-sec one) and the latest scams is also another one reported a lot.

Who killed who and who took over what system is rarely if ever mentioned, there is normally a story on each major war, the war in the south for instance.

I will not actually argue with the fact Null is ridiculously broken, but so is corp management, Pos's, Manufacturing, Mission running is as boring as hell and not to mention all the resources that get used due to emergent game play (I am not saying it is bad but every time someone abuses a mechanic or takes it to the extreme things are changed and these changes use resources.

So while Null may have:

  • Crap risk vs reward for individuals
  • Tech moons that should not be there (see above point)
  • Rubbish manufacturing
  • A completely pointless Sov system
  • ect..


All this adds up to a system that allows large alliances the ability to control huge amounts of space that they never use while effectively preventing smaller new alliances into Null. The fact that this is primarily due to the tech moon welfare system is clear to most people who are not from Null apparently.

But as usual there are those few who want their tech moons and higher payouts for players and also apparently drone goo brought back.

So as I have said before Null needs to
a) wait till the crap that has been broken for ever that effects everyone is fixed and
b) have a small dedicated team to study Null and come up with a real solution to fix it once and for all, rather than people pushing CCP, CCP giving in and us getting wasted resources and an even more stuffed Null.

Road Map before implementation.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#219 - 2012-11-28 04:55:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
Frying Doom wrote:
Well as I explained above the News worthiness of Null over the last year is only slightly higher than that of the CSM and the main articles being published are on things occurring in Hi-sec, such as hulkagedon has made the main stream gaming mags for years, so did burn Jita, other than that it is the occasional story of someone loosing a massive amount of RL money in a kill (normally a hi-sec one) and the latest scams is also another one reported a lot.

Who killed who and who took over what system is rarely if ever mentioned, there is normally a story on each major war, the war in the south for instance.

I will not actually argue with the fact Null is ridiculously broken, but so is corp management, Pos's, Manufacturing, Mission running is as boring as hell and not to mention all the resources that get used due to emergent game play (I am not saying it is bad but every time someone abuses a mechanic or takes it to the extreme things are changed and these changes use resources.

So while Null may have:

  • Crap risk vs reward for individuals
  • Tech moons that should not be there (see above point)
  • Rubbish manufacturing
  • A completely pointless Sov system
  • ect..


All this adds up to a system that allows large alliances the ability to control huge amounts of space that they never use while effectively preventing smaller new alliances into Null. The fact that this is primarily due to the tech moon welfare system is clear to most people who are not from Null apparently.

But as usual there are those few who want their tech moons and higher payouts for players and also apparently drone goo brought back.

So as I have said before Null needs to
a) wait till the crap that has been broken for ever that effects everyone is fixed and
b) have a small dedicated team to study Null and come up with a real solution to fix it once and for all, rather than people pushing CCP, CCP giving in and us getting wasted resources and an even more stuffed Null.

Road Map before implementation.


Your conclusion only seems to make sense if the above problems do not overlap in any sense of the word and if the CSM is dead set on bringing back drone alloys and maintaining the status quo with technetium. Moon resources, starbases, the sovereignty system, the lack of attachment to personal assets, the skewed risk/reward balance, and other issues including difficulties in manufacturing and the deficit of activities that do not pertain to conquest in nullsec could be fixed with a revised, carefully considered re-design of the player owned infrastructure systems of Eve Online and an improved Planetary Interaction mechanic, which would affect every player of Eve Online while offering potential solutions to a significant portion of nullsec's woes.

There is a lot more to what's wrong with 0.0 space than the atrociously designed sovereignty system; I wouldn't consider an effort to fix the greater whole of 0.0's woes to be wasted effort. I really should get around to writing a thorough exploration of the ideas I have for improving industry at starbases.
Frying Doom
#220 - 2012-11-28 05:27:57 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:


Your conclusion only seems to make sense if the above problems do not overlap in any sense of the word and if the CSM is dead set on bringing back drone alloys and maintaining the status quo with technetium. Moon resources, starbases, the sovereignty system, the lack of attachment to personal assets, the skewed risk/reward balance, and other issues including difficulties in manufacturing and the deficit of activities that do not pertain to conquest in nullsec could be fixed with a revised, carefully considered re-design of the player owned infrastructure systems of Eve Online and an improved Planetary Interaction mechanic, which would affect every player of Eve Online while offering potential solutions to a significant portion of nullsec's woes.

There is a lot more to what's wrong with 0.0 space than the atrociously designed sovereignty system; I wouldn't consider an effort to fix the greater whole of 0.0's woes to be wasted effort. I really should get around to writing a thorough exploration of the ideas I have for improving industry at starbases.

Actually I wasn't referring to the CSM about tech, drone goo ect..just what some other null players have insisted must happen (they want a huge buff to Null, with no effort made to balancing those things that our way of track atm. Yes fixing POS's and corporate management would help Null and everyone else too.

As to Null I don't think it would be a wasted effort if it is done right, so it does not need the massive wasted resources we have had so far to produce the smoking heap we now call Null.

As to starbases and POS's I like hearing everyones opinion on those, except for maybe two steps.

Personally I think PoS's and starbases should do a better job refining and manufacturing than any NPC base out there.

A POS refinery should be able to be anchored with any POS and 100% should be possible with skills. While I think NPC stations should be a base 30% at the best. Players pay for their stuff and it should be better than what is provided free of charge.

Oh and I don't much like starbase invunrability.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!