These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New dev blog: Anomalies revisited

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dalton Vanadis
Imperium Technologies
Sigma Grindset
#61 - 2011-11-16 16:17:45 UTC
Largo Coronet wrote:
So how does the improved sites compare to running Level IV missions in highsec?


It used to be low-end sites (as in current TQ) gets you about the same ISK/hr as level IV's if you're smart about how you choose the sites. This will probably jump it up to beat out the level IV's.

However, the real concern is more anom's v. incursions. As with incursions, a good fleet can easily pull in 100 mil every hour and a half. Low end anoms and level IV's are not even close to this currently, so we shall see how that plays out since they're tweaking how much ISK you can make off the low-ends...
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#62 - 2011-11-16 16:21:22 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Second, yes, there was a huge angry forum thread for the first blog and I ignored it. That was also a mistake (obviously, in retrospect). This happened partly because I was too focused on looking for reasoned critiques to appreciate the significance of the huge outburst that it generated, but mainly because I've been increasingly withdrawn from the forums for the last year or two. It's a pretty draining experience reading page after page after page of angry posts, about all kinds of topics but all ultimately driven by the same core concerns of abandonment and neglect, and agreeing with those concerns, and not being able to do much of anything about it. As a result, I've been avoiding listening to the forums and focusing on doing the best work I can, but the former occasionally precludes the latter. On the bright side, it feels like the mood on the forums has been improving hugely in the last month or two, and I'm making an effort to read and post more as a result. Whether or not this is a good thing is of course a matter of personal opinion ;)



When all of the Jita spammers stop for 2-3 hours the morning that ship spinning was back, and at least 2-3 people I personally know made comments of "omg, ship spinning I miss you, I'm crying here" -I think something profound and positive definitely happened and the mood is getting better.


People are generally going to be bastards, but EVE has always had a positive attitude of bastard. It has been a bit ugly the last year mostly.


The work you guys have been doing to enact completion of your goals in the last couple months since the 'mea culpa' is truly great - there is no reason that this kind of work has to be mutually exclusive of other advancements with CCP. I'm excited to see all the great things you have lined up - and that includes WOD and Incarna interiors once we get EVE into a place that it deserves to be - with advancements that it deserves to have and resources that will open up the experience to more subscribers as well.







Where I am.
Takon Orlani
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#63 - 2011-11-16 16:22:53 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Vicar2008 wrote:
You have buffed the Anoms, great sure, but in that Blog maybe i am reading it wrong, but are the way they are being distrubuted being relaxed also? Or are they still being reserved in the True sec status regions, aka 0.00 systems still seeing non, -0.40 mabe seeing one and the -0.80 to -1.00 getting the best?



We're not changing the distribution at this time, BUT we're not changing it because a lot of the "not-good" sites are being upgraded to "really very good". 0.00-ish systems will have the same sites in, for example, but those sites should be considerably better than they currently are.


What about NPC null-sec? What about moon distribution?

Some NPC null needs love, some is perfect, and some are just awful for isk (Great Wildlands, Syndicate).

Tech moons, what else do I need to say. You want more money in other people's pockets? Put a few tech moons in every region in eve. Leave the majority in one spot, but give the other regions something to fight over. Especially the NPC regions.

Better idea: Move all tech moons to NPC null.
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
#64 - 2011-11-16 16:27:30 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Also, a couple of things I'm expecting people to ask about that I want to clear up in advance:


First, this blog was entirely my idea; the original implementation was badly designed and I have no problem admitting that. We make mistakes, we learn from them, and we do things better next time around.

Second, yes, there was a huge angry forum thread for the first blog and I ignored it. That was also a mistake (obviously, in retrospect). This happened partly because I was too focused on looking for reasoned critiques to appreciate the significance of the huge outburst that it generated, but mainly because I've been increasingly withdrawn from the forums for the last year or two. It's a pretty draining experience reading page after page after page of angry posts, about all kinds of topics but all ultimately driven by the same core concerns of abandonment and neglect, and agreeing with those concerns, and not being able to do much of anything about it. As a result, I've been avoiding listening to the forums and focusing on doing the best work I can, but the former occasionally precludes the latter. On the bright side, it feels like the mood on the forums has been improving hugely in the last month or two, and I'm making an effort

to read and post more as a result. Whether or not this is a good thing is of course a matter of personal opinion ;)



your second point here is where i still feel like shooting you in the face tbh(move me to jove space and i will..lol).

there was so many constructive comments in the anom nerf feedback that you didnt comment on, you switched off. all we got was im right your wrong now fo responce. while i can understand not wanting to read negative feedback. you have to face the fact that it was you that fucked0.0 with that change and turned it back into an empty wasteland in the most part, while at the same time screwing the groups you claimed to help the most.

with that said, i do hope your plans to improve it work out. i hope this is just the tip of the changes and those changes include reducing payouts inhigh sec incursions to below the payouts of anoms.

OMG when can i get a pic here
Tekota
The Freighter Factory
#65 - 2011-11-16 16:32:01 UTC
Dierdra Vaal wrote:
My question for greyscale and the other CCP devs that worked on this is the following:

Quote:
Specifically, we determined a target average ISK value for every site and then tuned each one upwards (every site bar one ended up needing a buff of some kind) to meet the target goal


Given that the eve economy is already suffering from a lot of inflation, to the point where both your CEO and your lead economist have said that the economy is 'broken', how do you justify increasing ISK faucets even more when you should be doing the opposite?

Has any research been done in how this increased income will affect the game and the economy as a whole?



This is definitely something that's crossed my mind. I guess there's a fairly substantial sink coming in the form of four new BPOs which will be bought in their thousands, I can see that removing several trillion isk in the first month or so but I'd guess that to be a fairly spikey sink, trailing off fairly rapidly to a low background level.
Ethilia
Freelance Excavation and Resistance
#66 - 2011-11-16 16:32:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Ethilia
You're accidentally'ing the Eve economy!!!1!

You have some secret plan to rebalance the isk faucet / sink ratio that this massive buff of 0.0 anomalies is going to make even worse right? The Dev Blog by CCP Dr.EyjoG (see below) showed 0.0 rat farming was responsible for this huge imbalance. You either need to massively nerf isk payouts for rats and replace them with shiny items and/or consumables or you need to create a gigantic isk sink (seriously massive, it needs to be 2-3x the size of all current sinks given the #'s out of Dr. Eyjo's blog just so that the isk faucet isn't more than double all sinks combined). Inflation isn't a problem in theory any longer. PLEX prices have already risen past 500m and you're going to make that a lot worse.


Dr. EyjoG's Q4 2010 QEN
Quote:
EVE Central Bank has been monitoring the money supply closely and is becoming increasingly
concerned about the rate of growth in the total money supply and the subsequent risk of inflation
increase (see next section). The bank has therefore proposed that in 2011 there should be a focus
on increasing ISK sinks in order to curb potential inflation.
Dalton Vanadis
Imperium Technologies
Sigma Grindset
#67 - 2011-11-16 16:33:13 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Vicar2008 wrote:
You have buffed the Anoms, great sure, but in that Blog maybe i am reading it wrong, but are the way they are being distrubuted being relaxed also? Or are they still being reserved in the True sec status regions, aka 0.00 systems still seeing non, -0.40 mabe seeing one and the -0.80 to -1.00 getting the best?



We're not changing the distribution at this time, BUT we're not changing it because a lot of the "not-good" sites are being upgraded to "really very good". 0.00-ish systems will have the same sites in, for example, but those sites should be considerably better than they currently are.


Have you considered, if I may, the possibility that distribution is one of the main problems in null? By grouping the best into pockets of null you encourage mega-alliances to control those specific pockets leaving surrounding areas much more devoid. It may be worth considering changing the sec stat of many systems to lower in order to smear the best systems across much larger areas of space... areas too large for the megas to claim all of without stretching themselves too thin. This would open even more space for smaller alliances to try and get a foothold in... space that would really be worth going for and not the sloppy seconds of the megas.

Just a thought.


Doesn't really matter, if they did that the power blocks would just realign their NAP agreements. The Eastern side of the map would just reorient politically within itself, same with the CF coaltion and the western side of the map; moving renters or pets out of the way. Really, doing that might end up hurting the small alliances that come in as renters and pets (as they get the 'crappy' space), so it would be harder for the 'small' alliances to do things like own their own constellation as the big boys will want to have the iHub and sov so they can deal with the upgrades. Really, from a political standpoint what CCP is doing right now seems like it will benefit those small renters and pets; they'll be able to pull more money off of space that their big blue mega alliance friends will still consider relatively unworthy for several aspects.

But I could be blowing smoke on this one.


While I have the time, instead of taking up another forum post: CCP Greyscale, I'm glad you've come back to the forums, I and many of my fellow EVE players have certainly noticed the increased presence of the devs. In regards to this specific announcement, it looks really neat and it looks like it will really help out some of the small guys and do a lot for fixing some of the population movements seen since the first anom nerf.
From my personal view on devs on forums, I f*cking love it. It's always good to know that someone is listening and taking your words seriously. This absolute deluge of information is stellar (though admittedly, you guys dropping stuff on SiSi a week before the dev blog kinda steals the thunder from the dev blogBlink), and overall this past month or two has really increased my confidence with CCP as a whole and the viability of EVE.
So all I can say is, kudos to the entire CCP staff for beginning to renew the confidence of your customer through hard work and great communication; I look forward to being amazed by this awesome game for yet another year now.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#68 - 2011-11-16 16:34:10 UTC
CCP Greyscale, that "ISK per EHP" metric sounds like an interesting measure. What are L4 missions like on that measure? What are Incursions like? (For incursions you need to consider that many sites can be done by just killing the trigger ships, no need to kill all ships).

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Dalton Vanadis
Imperium Technologies
Sigma Grindset
#69 - 2011-11-16 16:44:43 UTC
Tekota wrote:
Dierdra Vaal wrote:
My question for greyscale and the other CCP devs that worked on this is the following:

Quote:
Specifically, we determined a target average ISK value for every site and then tuned each one upwards (every site bar one ended up needing a buff of some kind) to meet the target goal


Given that the eve economy is already suffering from a lot of inflation, to the point where both your CEO and your lead economist have said that the economy is 'broken', how do you justify increasing ISK faucets even more when you should be doing the opposite?

Has any research been done in how this increased income will affect the game and the economy as a whole?



This is definitely something that's crossed my mind. I guess there's a fairly substantial sink coming in the form of four new BPOs which will be bought in their thousands, I can see that removing several trillion isk in the first month or so but I'd guess that to be a fairly spikey sink, trailing off fairly rapidly to a low background level.


I have pondered this as well, though I think a large part of the current ISK inflation is more from being able to pull a billion or more a day in high sec with a dedicated incursion fleet than 0.0 bot at this point (the bots have always been around, but the gigantic inflation spike over the last year coincides nicely with Incursions becoming more cemented)

I would be curious as to what CCP's plan is on this, any giant ISK sink they create is going to **** off a lot of people, turn off an ISK faucet and you get the response you got to the first anom nerf. They would have to create an ISK sink that everyone wants to pour money into willingly, and that would require a lot of ISK to exit the system for it to have any real use... Perhaps using ISK in NPC stations to increase chance of successful invention for T2 BPC's, or maybe an absolutely gigantic ISK requirement to have a special NPC service turn a T2 BPC into a BPO (kind of favors the big alliances, but they hold most of the ISK in game anyway, plus it would likely drop the price on a lot of T2 items; not sure if that's favorable or not, but it might get more people buying them and blowing them up), maybe have any of those T2 BPO's suddenly made have a timer before they expire out (so as many runs as you can fit in a 2 month span, or something) so that you have to keep pouring ISK into the system to maintain the very desirable benefits. Probably stupid infeasible ideas, but hey, might as well try Lol
Gizan
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#70 - 2011-11-16 16:54:15 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Vicar2008 wrote:
You have buffed the Anoms, great sure, but in that Blog maybe i am reading it wrong, but are the way they are being distrubuted being relaxed also? Or are they still being reserved in the True sec status regions, aka 0.00 systems still seeing non, -0.40 mabe seeing one and the -0.80 to -1.00 getting the best?



We're not changing the distribution at this time, BUT we're not changing it because a lot of the "not-good" sites are being upgraded to "really very good". 0.00-ish systems will have the same sites in, for example, but those sites should be considerably better than they currently are.



angel fosaken hubs are already MORE isk/hour then the "factory haven" because there are no frigs to kill...
Nomad I
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2011-11-16 16:55:01 UTC
In many regions to aren't that many system to fight about, because there are to few. Moongoo is the reason to fight about regions for alliances but not anomalies, because the ROI is to bad. And if there is one system in the constelation a cloaky ship with covert cyno ship is waiting on every pilot running anomalies. We did this and others do it to us. But there is no alternative system to make isk. I addition new anomalies spawning not instandly so there is always a lack of new anomalies, that costs ISK. An alliance with 300 active member has to share 2-4 systems and that is a pain, because you have to search for an free anomaly for at least 10min, even when you are in a group, caused by the spawntime.

Summary:

1) The ROI for a corp is bad
2) One ship with covert cyno is able to block a -1 system
3) The spawntime causes a lack of new anomalies.
4) Most smaller alliances have no more than 2 valuable systems.

Arte
Harden House Irregulars
#72 - 2011-11-16 17:16:40 UTC
Greyscale wrote:
The first step we're taking is to undertake a thorough review and rebalance of the existing anomaly content. This is something we would have liked to do as part of the initial changes, but we didn't have the time available. We've now made time

That comment is indicative of the trend that was happening at the time that included the public relations howlers on release of incursions.

It kind of reads "we had an idea of balancing something, and should have researched it but didn't have the time so we went ahead anyway without knowing what the impact would be"

I'm glad you've made the time now and are gracious enough to revisit this an accepted error. Keep your current MO going and you'll win a few people back I'm sure. Blink
zxsteel
#73 - 2011-11-16 17:24:31 UTC
This shout is to "CCP Greyscale", since you say your reading the topic's. Shocked sounds good.




What I don't understand is the facts of dronelands get the 5 level spawns, the more you upgrade the more spawns you get. So why can't this idea be added on to other parts of space. Also even the most crap systems NO ONE will ever use. Should place out more income then a level 4 mission in one hour. What's since of running 0.0 complex when I can do so much better inursions.

10.5 million per complex in group - hour 100 million - NO RISK
75 million per set of 10 complexs - soloing level fours - NO RISK
55 million per hour of 12 comples - soloing 0.0 - WITH RISK


So I ask did you really think about how ou beef up the iskes per hour per anomalies ?

mkint
#74 - 2011-11-16 17:38:17 UTC
The number one thing this doesn't fix is trust.

Consider, last batch of small/medium alliances to go out to try and got sov flew out there, invested billions of isk, and had it literally taken away on a whim. All of a sudden, those expensive upgrades became worthless. And why? Because some jackass dev decided he wanted to change something without researching it, thinking through the consequences, or reading any feedback.

When the next batch of alliances starts thinking about moving out to get sov and they ask their more veteran members what to do, the response will be "don't bother. CCP will just f*ck it up again." Then the alliance will get bored, fall apart, and start unsubbing.

This change fixes nothing. It will still be pants-on-head-ruhtarded for anybody to go out and try to get new sov until AFTER they are reasonably confident you (CCP) have abandoned it for long enough for it to be safe.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#75 - 2011-11-16 17:41:21 UTC
With the feeling that this one might go unoticed by Grayscale:

What about the Forsaken Hubs? They are buggy, have been buggy since implementation, and at this moment they make 0.3 to 0.4 null systems quite frustrating.


What bug, you ask? Simple.. they spawn with no rats, and in some cases no amount of GM mojo can make them work again. We have to wait sometimes for 3 consecutive downtimes for them to spawn properly, only to bug out again the next day.

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
Tarsas Phage
Sniggerdly
#76 - 2011-11-16 18:06:29 UTC
BigCountry wrote:
Again you have made changes to the anamolies in the drone regions without mentioning it ...
So I wanna be first to thank you for making even more work for us out here to make money considering i dont see any increase to isk gained from them... All I see is taht drone hordes now take longer , and more work, for the same ISK..


Oh cry me a river. Just how many billions in Plush Compound and other crap does your alliance/blues collectively pull out of the Drone Regions on a weekly basis?

I've been having a ball the past few months taking a close look at what leftovers you haul back to empire, and I swear, compared to the personal income abilities of other 0.0 alliances, you guys have absolutely no room to talk.

If you live in the Drone Regions and have a hard time making ISK by the bucketload, the problem is not CCP, the problem is YOU.

/T
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2011-11-16 18:09:48 UTC
Dierdra Vaal wrote:
My question for greyscale and the other CCP devs that worked on this is the following:

Quote:
Specifically, we determined a target average ISK value for every site and then tuned each one upwards (every site bar one ended up needing a buff of some kind) to meet the target goal


Given that the eve economy is already suffering from a lot of inflation, to the point where both your CEO and your lead economist have said that the economy is 'broken', how do you justify increasing ISK faucets even more when you should be doing the opposite?

Has any research been done in how this increased income will affect the game and the economy as a whole?


Yes, but perhaps people weren't *running* the prebuffed anomalies, they were just bearing it up in highsec and earning higher ISK/hour values. So the only relevant part for economic inflation is how much more ISK these new anomalies generate compared to equivalent highsec activities.
Spitfork
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#78 - 2011-11-16 18:13:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Spitfork
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Also, a couple of things I'm expecting people to ask about that I want to clear up in advance:


First, this blog was entirely my idea; the original implementation was badly designed and I have no problem admitting that. We make mistakes, we learn from them, and we do things better next time around.

Second, yes, there was a huge angry forum thread for the first blog and I ignored it. That was also a mistake (obviously, in retrospect). This happened partly because I was too focused on looking for reasoned critiques to appreciate the significance of the huge outburst that it generated, but mainly because I've been increasingly withdrawn from the forums for the last year or two. It's a pretty draining experience reading page after page after page of angry posts, about all kinds of topics but all ultimately driven by the same core concerns of abandonment and neglect, and agreeing with those concerns, and not being able to do much of anything about it. As a result, I've been avoiding listening to the forums and focusing on doing the best work I can, but the former occasionally precludes the latter. On the bright side, it feels like the mood on the forums has been improving hugely in the last month or two, and I'm making an effort to read and post more as a result. Whether or not this is a good thing is of course a matter of personal opinion ;)


I can't agree with you. The original implementation is fine, it just doesn't work detached from everything else (i.e. make inferior truesec worse in terms of anomalies, but better in, perhaps, mining?). Of course people will whine if you close down their isk faucet and of course if one type of nullsec is less profitable than another (but equally dangerous at that) you're going to have a non-uniform population.

You're seeing a problem in trying to keep space non-uniform by properties and then you're expecting to see it uniformly populated?

Please try to consider the effects of having more isk faucets. If we see inflation from increased anomaly income that would be a nerf to other isk-making activities. Unless of course you somehow think that anomalies generate too little income and everything else generates more than enough. Somehow, as far as I recall, the absolute majority of isk in the game comes from NPC-shooting. Does it really need to be further boosted?

edit:
Obviously I wasn't the first smartass to think of this, but w/e
BigCountry
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#79 - 2011-11-16 18:14:08 UTC
Tarsas Phage wrote:
BigCountry wrote:
Again you have made changes to the anamolies in the drone regions without mentioning it ...
So I wanna be first to thank you for making even more work for us out here to make money considering i dont see any increase to isk gained from them... All I see is taht drone hordes now take longer , and more work, for the same ISK..


Oh cry me a river. Just how many billions in Plush Compound and other crap does your alliance/blues collectively pull out of the Drone Regions on a weekly basis?

I've been having a ball the past few months taking a close look at what leftovers you haul back to empire, and I swear, compared to the personal income abilities of other 0.0 alliances, you guys have absolutely no room to talk.

If you live in the Drone Regions and have a hard time making ISK by the bucketload, the problem is not CCP, the problem is YOU.

/T




LOL if i read correctly the OP by greyscale they found that sanctums were the best anomolies on TQ ... those arent in the droneregions ... and how much do yall make off of raw bounties and mod drops PLUS faction loot .....

So back to my original post these changes didnt make drone regions anoms more profitable , just more work for the same ISK
Takseen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#80 - 2011-11-16 18:16:30 UTC
zxsteel wrote:
This shout is to "CCP Greyscale", since you say your reading the topic's. Shocked sounds good.
What I don't understand is the facts of dronelands get the 5 level spawns, the more you upgrade the more spawns you get. So why can't this idea be added on to other parts of space. Also even the most crap systems NO ONE will ever use. Should place out more income then a level 4 mission in one hour. What's since of running 0.0 complex when I can do so much better inursions.
10.5 million per complex in group - hour 100 million - NO RISK
75 million per set of 10 complexs - soloing level fours - NO RISK
55 million per hour of 12 comples - soloing 0.0 - WITH RISK
So I ask did you really think about how ou beef up the iskes per hour per anomalies ?


Group activities should net more income per person than solo activities. So I guess it depends whether
-you want more group pve content in nullsec. I get that its harder to do the Incursions there, so perhaps an adjustment could be made there.
-you want solo content in null to outearn group content in highsec. The problem I see with that is the botting issues.. Maybe the best 0.0 anomalies should be rebalanced as C4-6 sleeper sites or standalone Incursion style sites?