These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Resource Shakeup in Odyssey: Just don’t call it a Cataclysm + Companion blog

First post First post First post
Author
Frying Doom
#661 - 2013-05-01 13:12:50 UTC
Grippa Dets wrote:
Lots of miners are Lo/null sec alts. And a lot of those are semi-afk. That's who Fozzie is trying to move to null if anyone.

I do hope he succeeds in that, but he definitely did shaft C1-C4 WH miners that is for sure.

Will be interesting to actually see the population levels if the Null alts leave Hi-sec.

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

EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#662 - 2013-05-01 14:17:47 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
A WoW player classic.

"We have loads of time in our no-life, we raid 14 hours a day to grind gear quicker thus we are better".

eve is a competitive game

when you lose, it is very often right and proper that you lost rather than something that means the game design should be accommodated to suit you

there is still plenty of content for you, the low man on the totem pole, and it is not at all unfortunate that there are higher rewards for higher people on the totem pole
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#663 - 2013-05-01 14:30:49 UTC
EvilweaselSA wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
A WoW player classic.

"We have loads of time in our no-life, we raid 14 hours a day to grind gear quicker thus we are better".

eve is a competitive game

when you lose, it is very often right and proper that you lost rather than something that means the game design should be accommodated to suit you

there is still plenty of content for you, the low man on the totem pole, and it is not at all unfortunate that there are higher rewards for higher people on the totem pole


It's not about "losing", because I have 140B in ice bought in the past months so I am certainly not going to /wrist.

However, the *design* of excluding people just with an artificial respawn mechanic is awful and nothing can stop me to say it very loud. It is AWFUL, it's already unrealistic enough to see belts repopping out of magic once a day, making it a staple mechanic kicking it all the time instead of altering the boring and outdated mining mechanic (aka taking the low hanging fruit) is just bad. End of.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#664 - 2013-05-01 14:41:00 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
i am not excluded
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. Or attacks at any subset of players for that matter. ISD Ezwal

but with a limited supply in highsec people will be excluded, and the mechanism of the popping anomolies is an excellent one for ensuring that people are excluded on a semi-random basis rather than specific timezones being excluded
Hershman
Creepers Corporation
#665 - 2013-05-01 14:42:28 UTC
Altrue wrote:
Not permanent Ice belts, but add an ice belt to the list of mining anomalies that can spawn. So that we have a small chance of getting one of them from time to time.


+1

I play EVE every day! Follow me at http://www.twitch.tv/matthershman

Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#666 - 2013-05-01 14:56:36 UTC
Crexa wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
One of the alts sitting by the WH has to have probes out to see a new sig. That's also a cue to warp to the POS. With the new discovery scanner I think that need goes away: It will show you all the sigs from your Barge.

The double webs works with 3 ships: Each ship aims one web on each of the other two. Only the fleet commander needs to be aware: fleet warp everyone.

Cloaked ships create a race: Will the quick lock tackle hit before the fleet commander warps? As I said before "All this helps. A little. I'm not sure it helps enough". After all there are poor gankers, and even good ones do not all use cloaked ships. Even those that do fail. I once had my Viator attacked by 3 stealth bombers. They failed.

Also: "But if all miners simply feel outmatched they will retreat to high and secured null, resulting in less conflict." Which means CCP's effort to get more conflict will fail. (I'm considering a very broad concept of "conflict", covering preparation and strategies, not just the actual encounter).


So i point out issues with what you say are good defenses and you reiterate them. Which is fine. And under the status quo thats perfectly understandable.

Yet the fact is, finding mining ships will become alot easier under the current proposal. No current tactics change that. And it goes back to your last sentence, from your previous post.

"All that will help. A Little. I'm not sure it will help enough."

So where do you stand? I am opposed to such a change. Not because I live in wh space, I don't anymore. But because I am sick of the "want more conflict" rationale being applied without any thought to how. Believe me I do want more conflict, but not defenseless slaughter with no recourse. It doesn't matter if its in WH or high sec.


Id rather they stay signatures. Or at least some of them stay signatures, like the ones with rare ore. But if CCP does all this I may be able to adapt (This pilot lives in W, all my others are in high sec). Im just not sure it will work out, or if we stop mining in W.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#667 - 2013-05-01 15:52:36 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
EvilweaselSA wrote:
i am not excluded
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. Or attacks at any subset of players for that matter. ISD Ezwal

but with a limited supply in highsec people will be excluded, and the mechanism of the popping anomolies is an excellent one for ensuring that people are excluded on a semi-random basis rather than specific timezones being excluded


I bet the belts will reset at downtime, so no, not all are excluded in the same way and yes some time zones will be favored over others. When I lived in Italy I really reaped all the benefits of playing at DT. Now I live on a luxury island P but it's on GMT. Almost as good, just a bit worse. Strictly EvE speaking of course.
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#668 - 2013-05-01 16:48:17 UTC
I am curious as to who is excluded from the current non4 hour ice spawn mechanic right now?

the implication in EvilweaselSA post was that there was someone being excluded now on ice.

As i understand it the problem with ice is that its boring and take a long time to do.
too long to actually have to watch a screen in null which is why most people do not mine ice in null.
that and the glaring safety issues which are the subject of much trolling and tears on the forums.

are these not the underlying problems of ice or am i missing something?

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.

Crexa
Ion Industrials
#669 - 2013-05-01 16:57:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Crexa
Kusum Fawn wrote:
I am curious as to who is excluded from the current non4 hour ice spawn mechanic right now?

the implication in EvilweaselSA post was that there was someone being excluded now on ice.

As i understand it the problem with ice is that its boring and take a long time to do.
too long to actually have to watch a screen in null which is why most people do not mine ice in null.
that and the glaring safety issues which are the subject of much trolling and tears on the forums.

are these not the underlying problems of ice or am i missing something?




Most people don't mine Ice in null because, its boring as shiat, but more its because they have a huge arse tit to suck called moon mining. It allows them to buy all the ships, items and ice for their drinks that they ever could want. And it comes at the expense of anyone who has ever bought a T2 module or ship.

"F=ma, so obviously they're putting mouths against arses to produce a force." "...its breakfast time and i am very hungry. may i have some of your paint chips?"

EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#670 - 2013-05-01 17:01:07 UTC  |  Edited by: EvilweaselSA
Kusum Fawn wrote:
I am curious as to who is excluded from the current non4 hour ice spawn mechanic right now?

nobody is excluded now, that is changing thanks to it changing from an infinite resource to a capped supply

so once that happens, the people who are too late get no ice until the next ice anom pops
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#671 - 2013-05-01 19:16:26 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

1) The numbers will be out on sisi soon anyways, so I'll go ahead and let you know that the high sec anoms contain 2500 units of their racial isotope ice.


In my opinion , by stating each anom will contain 2500 units, you have overlooked a relevant factor.

You can't just search and replace the current belts with the new ones.

You have in mind to balance ices to a certain percentage of demand. That's fine, as long as you don't forget that ices are created equal but their demand is far from equal.

As is well known, Caldari empire ice is demand and consumption is massively predominating.

With the current "almost infinite belts" there's no problem, all you see is the market volume for white glaze towering over the others by large and that's it.

But once you apply these "horizontal cuts", 2500 units of Caldari ice will not cut it.

If you really want to rebalance on volume demand, you can't just calculate the grand total of ice and take 80% and then evenly distribute the new belts, you have to take into account the various proportions of ice. So it's perfectly possible that applying your method, some hi sec ices (say Gallente's) will provide for 150% of the demand (making your patch pointless) while Caldari's will provide just 20% and then the whole POS network will suffer an HUGE crysis.

Therefore please check the various empires volumes (i.e. a yearly average of volume, you CAN do it, I can myself as a player) and then create as many Caldari belts are required to cover Caldari ice actual 80% of demand, not just a "one quarter" flat proportion.

Linament
Perkone
Caldari State
#672 - 2013-05-01 19:23:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Linament
As I read all of the changes that are coming I cant help but feel that this expansion /update is simply catering to the vocal minority.


Since i have been playing (2007) there has always been this "chipping away of High sec", which is fine, if thats what you want to do. However it seems that the game has devolved into an exercise in supportive psychopathy. If you take the psychopathy checklist and apply it to the game and to what I call the vocal minority of players, it becomes clear that the game is pushing and supporting pyschopathic tendencies and attracting a population of players that are mentally unnhealthy and find solace amongst others of likemindedness. Whether this is intentional or a simple nature of the beast its quite visible and no attempts are made at trying to mask it or otherwise spin this behavior into a more positive light. Indeed its the basis of the game. The game stopped being a sandbox game a long time ago..if indeed it ever was one. Psychopathy Checklist


Now the point is not to attack anyone or any group of players...its simply to place, into perspective, what I and others are seeing from a long term player perception.

There was a lot of talk in one of the CSM meeting minutes about CCP not going to worry about player retention and focus on new players. There was also talk of CCP working on counting actual human players vs accounts. There was also a lot of talk about the next 2 years, 5 years even 10 years down the road. CCP wanted the CSM's to be in on that high level conversation. There was also some talk of removing some of the barriers to entry for 0.0 and other areas where it has become obvious that newer and some older players cannot access...large alliances / corporations ect ect ect.


And maybe its not advertised that much anymore but for a long time CCP advertised EVE as a game thats "not for everyone". And thats still true today...its not a game for everyone.


So given the above ill post a few questions for a dev to answer -

How does the upcoming expansion relate to -
Removing barriers to entry,
Set a path to the next few years of EVE development as a product,
Not catering to long time veteran players /alliances /corporations in 0.0 (largest share of the vocal minority),
Increasing new player accounts,
Reducing the "Drowning in Minutia" syndrome (Spreadsheets for everything and an excel based UI),
Making the game "a game for everyone"


Also one last note here....In order to make EVE a game "for everyone" instead of "not for everyone" CCP will have to move away from the Psychopath model to something more people can relate to. There are only so many people that can tolerate / like /understand/ or succeeed inside this model and as long as CCP continues to build upon this model, then by default, they are undermining thier own goals. CCP are the ones saying this..im just wondering how this update relates to those goals..the vison that they were trying to convey to the CSM. As at first glance, with the info provided, it certainly looks like those goals that were listed and spoke about in the CSM meeting minutes I read, have been discarded and its the same ole same ole.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#673 - 2013-05-01 19:26:49 UTC
It's not a game for everyone.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#674 - 2013-05-01 19:36:43 UTC
Linament wrote:
As I read all of the changes that are coming I cant help but feel that this expansion /update is simply catering to the vocal minority.


Since i have been playing (2007) there has always been this "chipping away of High sec",


Fun fact: no there hasn't.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#675 - 2013-05-01 21:07:56 UTC
There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.

True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Holderof Corp
Doomheim
#676 - 2013-05-01 21:12:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Holderof Corp
CCP Fozzie wrote:
There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.

True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.


le sigh, makes me want to post some ascii art from Delve '10.

It is also not about killing, rather changing the emphasis so that earning a living is becoming less possible in highsec. You cannot deny by not touching the dark glitter belts in nullsec there is an obvious bias in isk generation?

I would also suggest that if plex was not available (how many people use plex prices as their guide for income?) and the game was back to subs only there would be more emphasis on fun rather than isk generation.
Skex Relbore
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#677 - 2013-05-01 21:28:02 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.

True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.



Seems that someone wrote an article on some gaming news site that talked about that, that person might even be active in this thread.

Thank you for not surprising anyone with the direction you plan on taking to address the imbalance in null anomalies. I mean it is so comforting to see the normal process of saying "gee people like doing this one type of content and avoid all the others. Obviously the solution is to make forsaken hubs suck just as much as all the others" rather than simply adjusting the other anomalies to be more like hubs and perhaps encourage people to spend more time out ratting where maybe they might get blown up.

Sarcasm aside it's amusing to see all the highsec tears about ice and the ranting about how much CCP is trying to push people to null in the very same thread where the intention of killing off the a major income source of null sec grunts is announced.

Holderof Corp
Doomheim
#678 - 2013-05-01 21:34:12 UTC
Skex Relbore wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.

True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.



Seems that someone wrote an article on some gaming news site that talked about that, that person might even be active in this thread.

Thank you for not surprising anyone with the direction you plan on taking to address the imbalance in null anomalies. I mean it is so comforting to see the normal process of saying "gee people like doing this one type of content and avoid all the others. Obviously the solution is to make forsaken hubs suck just as much as all the others" rather than simply adjusting the other anomalies to be more like hubs and perhaps encourage people to spend more time out ratting where maybe they might get blown up.

Sarcasm aside it's amusing to see all the highsec tears about ice and the ranting about how much CCP is trying to push people to null in the very same thread where the intention of killing off the a major income source of null sec grunts is announced.



Ah, but to use an overused rejoinder so popular with the null crowd, adapt or die. Adding in a few elite frigates does nothing but slow you down, so rather than 8 minutes it now takes you 9 to complete a FH. Removing ice to anom and reducing them to 23 mining hours with a 4 hour respawn is a tad bit more serious, both economically and to the foundation of POS ownership. Remember earlier in this thread currently 99% (ish) of ice products are produced in highsec, so please a small balance of an open isk tap is not really in the same league as the ice changes.
Linament
Perkone
Caldari State
#679 - 2013-05-01 21:38:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Linament
CCP Fozzie wrote:
There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.

True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.


No interest in frogs...but point taken. Could you then speak to the following?

How does the upcoming expansion relate to -
Removing barriers to entry,
Set a path to the next few years of EVE development as a product,
Not catering to long time veteran players /alliances /corporations in 0.0 (largest share of the vocal minority),
Increasing new player accounts,
Reducing the "Drowning in Minutia" syndrome (Spreadsheets for everything and an excel based UI),
Making the game "a game for everyone"

Or for that matter how does it relate to anything in the meeting minutes that were posted from the CSM ?

I mean you guys are the ones tossing out this word salad stuff and CCP is the one that keeps pushing this CSM stuff...we just got through with an election....why go through all this if its ..well meaningless. Is the CSM and the meeting you have some kind of internal CCP meta game?...let me be clear..im no fan of the CSM..i personally think its a complete waste of everyones time and if what is being posted in the meetings is just lip service or some other layer of garbage..then whats the point.

Im not really attacking anything or any idea here..its that if the updates and expansions are not going to match what were being told through the CSM...why bother with it at all.

So if you could..could you just elaborate a bit more on how this expansion / update relates to any of the CSM discussions.
ChYph3r
Omni Defense Corp.
#680 - 2013-05-01 21:40:21 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
There's a group of people thinking we're "boiling the frog" to try and kill highsec, and there's a group of people who think we're "boiling the frog" to try and make highsec dominate the game.

True fact: no frogs will be harmed in the making of this expansion.



I say dissect the frogs, learn from them!

Want to find all the podcasts around EVE Online visit http://evepodcasts.com @chyph3r  on Twitter