These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: More Deployables from Super Friends

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#681 - 2014-01-15 16:26:14 UTC
The unintended use of the ESS as a better medium bubble is completely lol-worthy. This alone should get it pulled.

The risk vs reward is totally unbalanced for ratters, especially when they can just go to hisec and run missions, incursions, or losec for FW.

And as much fun as I thought it would be to drop these in ratting systems and blops drop anyone that comes to it, the possibility of locals simply warping a covops in and establishing a perch from where they can blap it with snipers pretty much screws this idea. That being said, a lot of nul-bears are pretty dumb and/or lazy and won't think of that.

I am still curious to see how many ratting systems actually use them. Mark my words: some will.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#682 - 2014-01-15 16:27:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
It would be nice to get some dev &/or CSM feedback on the issues brought up.

also: Why wasn't this first released in the F&I forum for feedback. Does CCP consider the proposed version a final draft?
Andrea Keuvo
Rusty Pricks
#683 - 2014-01-15 16:29:46 UTC
Good god, anyone who thinks this deployable will create any PvP content in nullsec is either stupid or completely ignorant of how nullsec works. Let me break it down for you:

1. PvE content in eve is such a tedious, god awful grind that tbh most days I can barely talk myself into warping to a site and pressing F1 on my drone bunny ship. So with this deployable introduced I can either accept a 5% income nerf or I can spend 30m on a deployable which must sit there for hours for me to get a return, requires additional tedious mechanics for me to print tags, requires me to babysit it, and can be looted/destroyed before I can dock/reship by any of the multitude of risk-averse interceptor gangs that come through nullsec every day. As a result, NOONE who actually resides in nullsec will use one of these. No PvP opportunities here, moving on...

2. Roaming gangs will not use this deployable because when neutrals enter a system, everyone ratting docks up. Since noone is ratting there is no reduction in income for the local residents to worry about and no isk generated by the ESS. Nullbears that do not normally engage in home defense will not start all of the sudden because the ESS exists. With the deployable generating no income and no PvP the gang can either sit there all day and camp (boring for them) or move on. If they leave the ESS behind the locals will just warp to it and destroy it as soon as they leave. No PvP opportunities here either.

The mechanics of how this deployable works do not matter one bit. This can't be played with and "fixed". There is literally no reason to use it (other than the low skill superbubble mentioned earlier) for either locals or roaming gangs. Therefore it amounts to nothing but a 5% income nerf for all nullsec ratters while accomplishing none of the "intended" outcomes of deploying the module.

Anyone on CSM who supported this - do you even play this game? Please do us all a favor and resign.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#684 - 2014-01-15 16:31:43 UTC
FaulEnza N00bist wrote:
Sean Decker, former EA Executive, now with CPP, enter CCP headquarter:
Emplyee: "Is that you or it is getting dumber in here?"
Decker: "Pirate"

Conclusion: since Decker/EA works with CCP, the total number of stupid ideas shoots through the clouds.

Prediction: there will be no more rage quits, we will see more reason quits.

if only players warned about that....oh wait.....Roll

sorry CCP, my wallet as a brain, and he says NO, 2 account remaining, 1 expire in 4 days, the last is runing till march - april i think, don't expect me to resub. wondering if i should since last year, the answer become more clear as deadline is coming up
Zircon Dasher
#685 - 2014-01-15 16:35:00 UTC
seth Hendar wrote:
FaulEnza N00bist wrote:
Sean Decker, former EA Executive, now with CPP, enter CCP headquarter:
Emplyee: "Is that you or it is getting dumber in here?"
Decker: "Pirate"

Conclusion: since Decker/EA works with CCP, the total number of stupid ideas shoots through the clouds.

Prediction: there will be no more rage quits, we will see more reason quits.

if only players warned about that....oh wait.....Roll

sorry CCP, my wallet as a brain, and he says NO, 2 account remaining, 1 expire in 4 days, the last is runing till march - april i think, don't expect me to resub. wondering if i should since last year, the answer become more clear as deadline is coming up


Can I haz stuff?Big smile

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#686 - 2014-01-15 16:35:30 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Isn't there any legacy code that could stop you from introducing pointless stuff like ESS and/or MMJD?


No, but our long term goal is to have the ESS code become a legacy code that kills good ideas 7 years down the road.


7 years lolol.....you have been giving us pointless crap like this for ages instead of fixing some of the broken stuff that has been there for years...

And you are all so smug about it.....jeez
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#687 - 2014-01-15 16:40:32 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:
675 posts in the first 25 hours, that's 27 posts/hour.
Not all of them are equally outraged, some posters entirely misunderstand the ESS and/or NullSec. and are positive, but most posts are somewhere between *facepalm* and "set CCP HQ on fire". I hope it will take CCP less than 23 hours to figure out how to backpedal on this one!
Although I find it funny that CCP stopped posting yesterday, and has not responded AT ALL today.
Makes you wonder if they know what kind of landmine they placed, turned on, and immediately jumped upon ...

they did the same for unified inventory, for the jump animation, for the odyssey explo / loot spew, or.....well, you get the picture

they'll just ignore the player again, and release it more or less as it is, without any single bit of consideration for the players.

unfortunately, unless something big enought happen, without a massive protest, the'll just continue doing so.....
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#688 - 2014-01-15 16:41:45 UTC
I think I have to agree that the incentive to set one up isn't great enough. 105% isn't all that much for the risk considering you can just lose 5% instead.

I know people claim 20 - 25 mill ticks in null sec ratting so you're looking at an extra 4 mill a tick at the very most with the risk of losing about 5 mill from what you get from ratting now.

The increased payout should be closer to 110% or if you're going to release higher meta levels of this structure the more expensive ESS versions should push this to 110%.
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#689 - 2014-01-15 16:41:47 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
seth Hendar wrote:
FaulEnza N00bist wrote:
Sean Decker, former EA Executive, now with CPP, enter CCP headquarter:
Emplyee: "Is that you or it is getting dumber in here?"
Decker: "Pirate"

Conclusion: since Decker/EA works with CCP, the total number of stupid ideas shoots through the clouds.

Prediction: there will be no more rage quits, we will see more reason quits.

if only players warned about that....oh wait.....Roll

sorry CCP, my wallet as a brain, and he says NO, 2 account remaining, 1 expire in 4 days, the last is runing till march - april i think, don't expect me to resub. wondering if i should since last year, the answer become more clear as deadline is coming up


Can I haz stuff?Big smile

no, stuff will be handed to my corp, in the intend to help the new players, sorry
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#690 - 2014-01-15 16:43:52 UTC
Alphea Abbra wrote:
675 posts in the first 25 hours, that's 27 posts/hour.
Not all of them are equally outraged, some posters entirely misunderstand the ESS and/or NullSec. and are positive, but most posts are somewhere between *facepalm* and "set CCP HQ on fire". I hope it will take CCP less than 23 hours to figure out how to backpedal on this one!
Although I find it funny that CCP stopped posting yesterday, and has not responded AT ALL today.
Makes you wonder if they know what kind of landmine they placed, turned on, and immediately jumped upon ...


They are too busy hi5ing around the office and with CSM over skype and they all take photos in front of wall full of 5 year roadmap.

Invalid signature format
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#691 - 2014-01-15 16:48:20 UTC
Innominate wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
The problems with this implementation basically boil down to two major issues:

1) Interceptors exist

Interceptors are currently bubble immune and cannot be locked before they warp off. They invalidate nearly any defense you'd put up to guard your ESS. A lot of the balance here assumes you can guard it, which isn't really the case. There's no real viable way to kill an interceptor before it gets there, and with the ability of the interceptor to steal, warp out, and warp back in in 40s to get its tags the inty is virtually unkillable. This may be more of an issue that giving bubble immunity to interceptors was simply a mistake, but it makes the intended balance here not work.

2) A massive inbalance in the risk/reward that makes it a bad bet

You're asking people to risk 15% of their income for a 5% boost. That's a bad bet, especially considering point 1: you can't really do anything to affect the odds. You're going to wind up in the red most of the time, and 5% is not enough for people to want to play this game. Plus, the fact you are dumb enough to deploy an ESS means you're suddenly going to get a lot more interceptors in your space and you will lose a lot more often: word will spread about the people dumb enough to drop ESS that you can steal from and interceptors will decend on your space, losing you the money you risked for the ess, and losing you the money you'd have made while you safe up because hostiles are in your ratting system.



There is a third and larger problem.

3) Much effort goes into being able to rat in nullsec with a measure of safety. When bad ratters are losing ships to hostiles, they are acting as a beacon to draw more hostiles into the region which negatively impacts everyone's income. When smart ratters don't feed kills, fewer people show up to cause trouble. The ESS is essentially giving every roaming fleet free, guaranteed isk, paying them to trample through your space. There is no level of risk vs reward, or level of exposure for the attackers where the ESS becomes desirable for the ratters.

As a bounty-siphon, an undesirable hostile module, the ESS could be made to work. Trying to pretend that it will ever be in any way beneficial to the ratters makes me think that whoever designed this has never actually spent any time ratting in nullsec.


Or actually playing Eve. I honestly believe that some of these Devs have never actually undocked.

Come on CCP, give us the name of the bright spark who thought this one up, he/she is a real catch.
Xaerael Endiel
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#692 - 2014-01-15 16:55:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Xaerael Endiel
A thing has just popped in my head in regard to the risk = reward side of the ESS.

Right, picture the scene. You're in a smoky bar on the bad side of town. A man with a badly fitting suit and two fingers missing sits at the table across from you and puts a revolver down with a smirk on his face and says "Hey kid, you wanna play a little roulette?" $200 buy in, you get $1000 per trigger pull.

Maybe it's the drink, or maybe you want to impress someone, or maybe you just want to buy that car you saw earlier today, you agree. The man picks up the gun, pops the chamber open and slides a single bullet in. He looks up at you and says "How about we make it more interesting... we put another bullet in, the prize goes up to $1050.

Yep.
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#693 - 2014-01-15 17:06:08 UTC
Major Templar wrote:
greiton starfire wrote:
im suggesting leave plenty of risk. the timer would be kept short enough to form a quick fleet, but if you are going into enemy space you should be bringing more than 1 or 2 interceptors. the attackers have the advantage of already being organized and having guys on. the defenders would have to respond rapidly to get their fleet into the fight. getting a fleet to a system 10 jumps out takes time. so they wont wait for huge numbers they will throw out a quick fleet. also, hitting groups in off timezones will have major advantages.


Defenders have the advantage as the ones having the jumpbridges and since when is it CCPs responsibility to make your vast empire of nothing but ratters more secure? Honestly, look at it like this. Your coalition are the ones who chose to keep expanding and have their main force far away from your ratting/mining systems. How is it then you say that you want more time to form up and come from 10+ jumps away to defend it? No. If you are going to give timers, then take away jump bridges. Simple.



Oooohhh... someone from test posting... so ..you still exist.....
Callic Veratar
#694 - 2014-01-15 17:06:56 UTC
Unfortunately, this is the same group of devs behind wardecs, which are also a stupid mechanic that don't generate conflict in they way it's intended. I expect that the ESS will go forward as announced with no modifications whatsoever.

Those who use it will occasionally benefit, but most of the time will have their money stolen by inteceptors. Much in the same way that wars occasionally result in interesting conflicts, but most of the time result in a corp logging of for a week.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#695 - 2014-01-15 17:22:05 UTC

There is a lot of unjustified hate in this thread!

Wardecs don't cause conflict? Really? That statement is simply moronic!

The ESS is a pretty good idea, it just needs some major tweaks:
-- For these to be used, the reward needs to be worth it and they need to be defensible. Increase the payout (at least 1:1), and increase both the access time (make it 3-5 minutes) as well as the time for the can to drop (another 3-5 minutes). Now anyone that feels they can defend it will use it for the rewards. Those that can't will leave it be. But for this to be a conflict driver, the locals MUST get value in using it, and they MUST have time to form up to defend it.
CCP SoniClover
C C P
C C P Alliance
#696 - 2014-01-15 17:29:09 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
It would be nice to get some dev &/or CSM feedback on the issues brought up.

also: Why wasn't this first released in the F&I forum for feedback. Does CCP consider the proposed version a final draft?


Based on feedback, we're looking at three things:
- Time to get loot - lot of good points that the time needs to be increased
- Interceptors too good - we're looking at ways to decrease the efficiency of using an interceptor to steal
- Too effective as warp bubble - we're looking at making it less viable

Thanks for the feedback so far. Any test feedback from Sisi would also be much appreciated.
Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#697 - 2014-01-15 17:29:36 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

There is a lot of unjustified hate in this thread!

Wardecs don't cause conflict? Really? That statement is simply moronic!

The ESS is a pretty good idea, it just needs some major tweaks:
-- For these to be used, the reward needs to be worth it and they need to be defensible. Increase the payout (at least 1:1), and increase both the access time (make it 3-5 minutes) as well as the time for the can to drop (another 3-5 minutes). Now anyone that feels they can defend it will use it for the rewards. Those that can't will leave it be. But for this to be a conflict driver, the locals MUST get value in using it, and they MUST have time to form up to defend it.


the creation of a loot pinata in space doubling as a ratting booster will never be a good idea.

it's not "fun" to haul around anchorables and use them like this. that's not exciting. it's not interesting, it's not a deep mechanic.

it's contrived and silly.

it doesn't enable anything "new" like siphons or mobile depots etc. it's just an artificial, forced conflict driver. the exact opposite of the kind of emergent sandbox behavior that EVE is known for.
Batolemaeus
Mahlstrom
Northern Associates.
#698 - 2014-01-15 17:32:51 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
It would be nice to get some dev &/or CSM feedback on the issues brought up.

also: Why wasn't this first released in the F&I forum for feedback. Does CCP consider the proposed version a final draft?


Based on feedback, we're looking at three things:
- Time to get loot - lot of good points that the time needs to be increased
- Interceptors too good - we're looking at ways to decrease the efficiency of using an interceptor to steal
- Too effective as warp bubble - we're looking at making it less viable

Thanks for the feedback so far. Any test feedback from Sisi would also be much appreciated.


So, you've not actually looked at any feedback at all?

The specifics of this abomination are irrelevant. The premise you built it on is completely wrong.

I have no idea what you think 0.0 is, but everything you are doing suggests that you have no clue how it works.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#699 - 2014-01-15 17:34:58 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Based on feedback, we're looking at three things:
- Time to get loot - lot of good points that the time needs to be increased
- Interceptors too good - we're looking at ways to decrease the efficiency of using an interceptor to steal
- Too effective as warp bubble - we're looking at making it less viable
Have you looked at the reasoning for a blanket income nerf for rank-and-file null inhabitants?
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#700 - 2014-01-15 17:36:04 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
It would be nice to get some dev &/or CSM feedback on the issues brought up.

also: Why wasn't this first released in the F&I forum for feedback. Does CCP consider the proposed version a final draft?


Based on feedback, we're looking at three things:
- Time to get loot - lot of good points that the time needs to be increased
- Interceptors too good - we're looking at ways to decrease the efficiency of using an interceptor to steal
- Too effective as warp bubble - we're looking at making it less viable

Thanks for the feedback so far. Any test feedback from Sisi would also be much appreciated.

as usual, your idea of integrating feedback is to take whatever goes in your way and discard the rest (rest being 90%+ of the comments telling you, with many details how and why it is NOT a good idea)

meh Sad