These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#821 - 2014-01-15 23:45:00 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Tippia wrote:
So, I'm just going to have to ask (again)…
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? If you have, could you please present it for general scorn and derision critique?

The entire idea behind this addition hinges on such a nerf being at all sensible, and you have so far not managed to explain why it is. This makes the entire addition senseless as it currently stands.

Put another way: what is the underlying design goal here? What are you trying to accomplish?


I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.

blammeaux

I have to give up some sympathy here -- attempting to find any meaningful feedback in such a pile of entitled vitriol must be an arduous task indeed.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Fix Sov
#822 - 2014-01-15 23:46:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Fix Sov
CCP SoniClover wrote:
I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.

I fail to see what the point is supposed to be behind this deployable. If what you guys want to do is to make nullsec more rife with PVP action, then surely fixing the sov system would be a much better expenditure of your dev time.

The current sov system is too heavily reliant on the defender saving systems by stuffing as many people as possible into the system for the final timer, instead of incentivizing attacking (and defending) multiple systems at the same time by splitting their forces into multiple fleets and using actual intelligence/strategy. This must change.
blackpatch
Eighty Joule Brewery
Goonswarm Federation
#823 - 2014-01-15 23:47:38 UTC
well, that's the genius of it. sticking a 5% cut in nullsec income behind the ins and outs and ups and downs of a complicated new deployable means that you can ignore questions about the 5% cut in nullsec income in favor of arguments about the arcane peculiars of the ESS.
AIric Vitex
Room for Improvement
Good Sax
#824 - 2014-01-15 23:49:20 UTC
Querns wrote:
A thing a lot of you naysayers are missing is that anyone can deploy these ESSes in a system. Say I've got an inkling for messing with folks. I duckwalk into a system owned by hostiles and deploy my own ESS. Suddenly, I am sapping 20% of the bounties of the system. If you are a sovhaver, you have to deploy these items defensively to prevent this from happening to your systems, unless you want your space to be worth four-fifths of its current value.



So if you don't want someone to nerf your system to 4/5 its value by planting one of these..... you plant one of these and nerf it to 4/5 its value your self???? it would be at full value I guess assuming no one from in corp or out of corp steals it all for themselves....

so please goons put these in all your systems so I don't have to plant them myself and can just steal from your ESS
Lady Naween
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#825 - 2014-01-15 23:49:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Lady Naween
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Tippia wrote:
So, I'm just going to have to ask (again)…
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? If you have, could you please present it for general scorn and derision critique?

The entire idea behind this addition hinges on such a nerf being at all sensible, and you have so far not managed to explain why it is. This makes the entire addition senseless as it currently stands.

Put another way: what is the underlying design goal here? What are you trying to accomplish?


I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.


maybe it is because I am blonde and a woman but where will the fight be?

As I outlined in my post there wont be any new fights. There MIGHT be one short structure bash, and that is it. And for what reward? None that I can see, nor can those with more math then I.

so.. can you please explain where the conflicts will be? Help us please understand your vision because I think a lot of us are missing it.

please?

Linda

EDIT: I r guud spellur.
Andrea Keuvo
Rusty Pricks
#826 - 2014-01-15 23:54:19 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Tippia wrote:
So, I'm just going to have to ask (again)…
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? If you have, could you please present it for general scorn and derision critique?

The entire idea behind this addition hinges on such a nerf being at all sensible, and you have so far not managed to explain why it is. This makes the entire addition senseless as it currently stands.

Put another way: what is the underlying design goal here? What are you trying to accomplish?


I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.



Yes, we are in here fighting to keep this heap of dung module out of the game that WE, YOUR CUSTOMERS, pay to play. I think the way you come into this thread and completely ignore 700+ posts detailing how bad this module is and why it should not become part of eve while cherry picking points to address out of one of the 3-5 positive posts in this thread may have come off as dismissive and condescending, resulting in posts becoming increasingly more inflammatory.

Maybe if you just acknowledge that this might be a bad idea it would help. It's no big deal, people have bad ideas from time to time. Kill it now and in 2 weeks no one will remember it. Force this thing onto TQ and your name will be attached to this heap of crap for years to come.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#827 - 2014-01-15 23:54:45 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Raminather wrote:
How about instead of further screwing with stuff that is working you finish the station walking that was supposed to be done already.....

Priorities in the dev department are flawed. Fix the current content and finish the stuff promised before adding new stuff to further screw people.


W.i.S is not a priority... and hasn't been for quite some time.


Yet it is the only hope for eve's continued survival. CCP need to wake up and smell the coffee when it comes to wis and fulfil their future vision.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Omanth Bathana
Doomheim
#828 - 2014-01-15 23:57:51 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Tippia wrote:
So, I'm just going to have to ask (again)…
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? If you have, could you please present it for general scorn and derision critique?

The entire idea behind this addition hinges on such a nerf being at all sensible, and you have so far not managed to explain why it is. This makes the entire addition senseless as it currently stands.

Put another way: what is the underlying design goal here? What are you trying to accomplish?


I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.



For the benefit of those who don't want to go back a page: "If you're not willing to fight for what you have in EVE, you don't deserve it and you will lose it" is the signature.

What a lot of the feedback here is saying and what seems to be left out of the discussion is the mechanism by which the Dev team thinks this will generate those fights. We have heard from 0.0 residents from every corner of the galaxy saying that this won't generate those fights. We have also heard from those same people that deployables like this are concerning, since they represent a breakdown in the processes that players have come to rely on to vet additions like this to the game (namely the CSM and the various feedback forums).

To residents of 0.0, this represents a flat 5% reduction in bounty payouts since, as the module is currently designed, the risk/reward calculations will never favor friendly use of the module. The way the dev blog was phrased, this deployable is presented as a fun and interesting addition that is usually favorable to 0.0 ratters who trust the people they rat with. This means that the persons responsible for developing this module and the population of null-sec have very different ideas about how the risk/reward calculations are done and turn out in 0.0 space. This has very concerning implications for how 0.0 residents and their income streams ill be treated in future expansions.

Let me be clear, I don't like this deployable. I think it will see very little use in 0.0 space as it does not represent a valuable investment for either a 0.0 ratter or group of ratters or a roaming gang trying to disrupt 0.0 income. But that's not the real problem here. The real problem is that this is not a farms and field deployable. This is not what The Mittani meant when he talked about farms and fields. The real problem is that this deployable currently represents a lack of either inclination or willingness to meet with the player base on level ground and talk about the game in a meaningful way.
Kismeteer
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#829 - 2014-01-16 00:00:40 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.


Referencing: “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”

Why are null sec people the only people that have defend it? Why couldn't you do this module in high sec, where it could actually make for interesting game play? Or low sec, which this seems ideal for, if anyone ratted there.

If you're avoiding posts with inflammatory phrasing, is that your excuse why you're avoiding most of the posts in this thead?
Hatsumi Kobayashi
Perkone
Caldari State
#830 - 2014-01-16 00:00:41 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Tippia wrote:
So, I'm just going to have to ask (again)…
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? If you have, could you please present it for general scorn and derision critique?

The entire idea behind this addition hinges on such a nerf being at all sensible, and you have so far not managed to explain why it is. This makes the entire addition senseless as it currently stands.

Put another way: what is the underlying design goal here? What are you trying to accomplish?


I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.


Do you also tend to avoid answering (or reading) posts expressing opinions opposed to yours?

No sig.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#831 - 2014-01-16 00:00:53 UTC
Lady Naween wrote:
Conflict driverow?

I see several posters saying this will create pvp.. it wont.

I been down to 0.0 several times now (I live in lowsec myself.. yes people do live there) and most of the time the ratters pos up as fast as they can and wont come out to fight no matter what.

If we drop this piece of junk, they will still stay docked until we leave and then go out, nuke it and return to ratting/anoming... so.. no new pvp.

Or. they form up a fleet and we have epic pew pew.. but.. they would do that regardless of this module or not. (see above).

no ratter in their right mind will go out to shoot this thing while we are still in their system and they sure as HELL wont keep ratting when we are there. not for long anyway.

THIS WONT CREATE PVP!!

it just adds a boring structure grind if the agressors drop one, and considering how short time it takes them to melt it. why would we leave one in space and waste the isk?

and it has been proven several times how stupid it is for the ratter to use one, since most of the time us roaming in 0.0 will be in ceptors. and just go.. trololol to steal the isk. what.. they will undock to defend their module? nope, not unless they are numerous to take us on, and if they where and wanted to pew.. they would pew us anyway!!!

the only ones i see going, "this is a good idea" are highsec carebears, and i dont use the term negatively. i used to be one for ages :) but the ones saying this is good, are the ones that will NEVER use or interact with one. so it is pure Schadenfreude, and seriously that isn't a good basis for feedback.. haha sucks to be you.. is a childish reaction. most of us care about EVE even areas we don't visit.

CCP, your feedback on this thread so far has made it quite clear you are feebly trying to defend your idea in the face of overwhelming negative feedback. It is ok to say, ok.. we will scrap this idea. It wont make you the weaker person, it takes a strong person to admit they are wrong. Being told your idea is bad hurts, of course it does. But lashing out with irrational .. we will fix this later.. that is just silly. we all know you dont. you even make.. arrogant little jokes about how you dont. Can't you see how that makes us, the playerbase feel?

Linda


Well said, agreed on all points. Null bears will just hide and ignore the module or elect to accept lower bounties. It's not really a conflict driver unless it can be deployed in all security statuses, then it's just a griefing tool.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
CCP SoniClover
C C P
C C P Alliance
#832 - 2014-01-16 00:01:07 UTC
Lady Naween wrote:

maybe it is because I am blonde and a woman but where will the fight be?

As I outlined in my post there wont be any new fights. There MIGHT be one short structure bash, and that is it. And for what reward? None that I can see, nor can those with more math then I.

so.. can you please explain where the conflicts will be? Help us please understand your vision because I think a lot of us are missing it.

please?


If you use an ESS as a ratter your income will be higher than pre-1.1. If hostiles enter the system you have various choices in how to respond, some of them can lead to fights, it´s up to you. Don´t assume that anyone that stumbles into the system will automatically be able to steal everything, again, the likelihood of this is up to you. It´s only a nerf if you choose it to be.
ner00n
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#833 - 2014-01-16 00:01:30 UTC  |  Edited by: ner00n
CCP Phantom wrote:
With the coming point release EVE Online: Rubicon 1.1 we will add more deployable structures:

  • Two new siphon variants, one to more efficiently stealing refined components and one to steal polymers
  • One unit to be deployable in nullsec called Encounter Surveillance System (ESS)


The bounties in Nullsec are lowered by 5%. An active ESS lowers the bounty payout even more down to a total of -20%. Interacting then with the ESS gives you back between 20% and 25% so that you end up with 100% to 105% bounty of the current bounty value. Interacting with the ESS will allow you then to cash in the collected bounties in form of tags which can be sold to the Empires. You can choose to take all the bounties for yourself or share the bounties amongst every contributor.

Please read the latest blog by CCP SoniClover which contains all the details about those new structures!


Firstly i am sorry if anyone finds this offensive but this idea of a deploy-able mod that nurfs null sec bounties is the dumbest thing i have ever heard from ccp and i serious wonder if the dev team that though this is a good idea is on crack or something else thats really strong. ratting in null sec is dangerous as it for the money you get compared to running incursions now and mission spamming. AS there is alot more dangers in null sec than in low sec and especially high sec ( hostile gangs hot drops , black ops , clocky gangs )

This mod will be easily abused by black ops gangs and cloaky fags and if anyone thinks this a a good idea your simply a idiot.

it will take alot more effort to remove them than a cloaky guy spamming them in systems.

I advise scrapping the idea of this mod compleatly as its just going to upset / **** off so many people and its makeing it to easy to harass and cripple null sec.
Turelus
Utassi Security
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#834 - 2014-01-16 00:02:10 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Tippia wrote:
So, I'm just going to have to ask (again)…
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? If you have, could you please present it for general scorn and derision critique?

The entire idea behind this addition hinges on such a nerf being at all sensible, and you have so far not managed to explain why it is. This makes the entire addition senseless as it currently stands.

Put another way: what is the underlying design goal here? What are you trying to accomplish?


I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.

CCP SoniClover I understand that you're getting a lot of posts which are close to attacks on you and that must be frustrating but ignoring Tippia's inflammatory phrasing in the post s/he had a valid point.

Right now we're struggling to see what the goal or point of these modules is from your (CCP's) point of view.
Even with some of the more poorly written and ridiculous posts there have been a lot of constructive ones outlining issues which neither you or any member of your team have come and answered for us.

* Why the 5% loss in bounties instead of just making the module appealing on its own?
* Why isn't it a seeded BPO/BPC instead of buy it now item?
* Why should we risk 20% of our members income for such a small gain?

Turelus CEO Utassi Security
CCP SoniClover
C C P
C C P Alliance
#835 - 2014-01-16 00:04:48 UTC
Kismeteer wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:
I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.


Referencing: “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.”

Why are null sec people the only people that have defend it? Why couldn't you do this module in high sec, where it could actually make for interesting game play? Or low sec, which this seems ideal for, if anyone ratted there.

If you're avoiding posts with inflammatory phrasing, is that your excuse why you're avoiding most of the posts in this thead?


You can´t expect everything we do to have equal affect on everyone. Yes, the ESS affects null sec more, just like the Hi Sec POCOs we did for Rubicon affected hi sec more. It evens out in the end. We hate everyone equally.
Andrea Keuvo
Rusty Pricks
#836 - 2014-01-16 00:04:54 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Lady Naween wrote:

maybe it is because I am blonde and a woman but where will the fight be?

As I outlined in my post there wont be any new fights. There MIGHT be one short structure bash, and that is it. And for what reward? None that I can see, nor can those with more math then I.

so.. can you please explain where the conflicts will be? Help us please understand your vision because I think a lot of us are missing it.

please?


If you use an ESS as a ratter your income will be higher than pre-1.1. If hostiles enter the system you have various choices in how to respond, some of them can lead to fights, it´s up to you. Don´t assume that anyone that stumbles into the system will automatically be able to steal everything, again, the likelihood of this is up to you. It´s only a nerf if you choose it to be.


Have you ever played Eve and lived in nullsec?
Turelus
Utassi Security
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#837 - 2014-01-16 00:04:54 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Lady Naween wrote:

maybe it is because I am blonde and a woman but where will the fight be?

As I outlined in my post there wont be any new fights. There MIGHT be one short structure bash, and that is it. And for what reward? None that I can see, nor can those with more math then I.

so.. can you please explain where the conflicts will be? Help us please understand your vision because I think a lot of us are missing it.

please?


If you use an ESS as a ratter your income will be higher than pre-1.1. If hostiles enter the system you have various choices in how to respond, some of them can lead to fights, it´s up to you. Don´t assume that anyone that stumbles into the system will automatically be able to steal everything, again, the likelihood of this is up to you. It´s only a nerf if you choose it to be.


Can't we leave the bounties at the normal 100% and ignore the confusing and needless 95% aspect of the mechanics and instead have a module which lowers by 20% and builds up to 110-120% so it's purely an optional gamble and not something we feel forced to use because CCP suddenly decided we all deserve a 5% income nerf.

Turelus CEO Utassi Security
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#838 - 2014-01-16 00:05:33 UTC
Fix Sov wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:
I tend to avoid answering posts using inflammatory phrasing, but I actually think your signature answers your question pretty well.

I fail to see what the point is supposed to be behind this deployable. If what you guys want to do is to make nullsec more rife with PVP action, then surely fixing the sov system would be a much better expenditure of your dev time.


But then they wouldn't have time to work on dust, wod, valkyrie and mobile apps...

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#839 - 2014-01-16 00:08:07 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Lady Naween wrote:

maybe it is because I am blonde and a woman but where will the fight be?

As I outlined in my post there wont be any new fights. There MIGHT be one short structure bash, and that is it. And for what reward? None that I can see, nor can those with more math then I.

so.. can you please explain where the conflicts will be? Help us please understand your vision because I think a lot of us are missing it.

please?


If you use an ESS as a ratter your income will be higher than pre-1.1. If hostiles enter the system you have various choices in how to respond, some of them can lead to fights, it´s up to you. Don´t assume that anyone that stumbles into the system will automatically be able to steal everything, again, the likelihood of this is up to you. It´s only a nerf if you choose it to be.


Unlike many of my peers I am not opposed to this module as a general concept. However, I would suggest you go back and try to understand the EFFORT:ISK and RISK:REWARD for this module and rebalance it.

The ratio as it stands is not appealing to ratters. Black Ops groups sure, ratters no.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Omanth Bathana
Doomheim
#840 - 2014-01-16 00:08:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Omanth Bathana
CCP SoniClover wrote:


If you use an ESS as a ratter your income will be higher than pre-1.1. If hostiles enter the system you have various choices in how to respond, some of them can lead to fights, it´s up to you. Don´t assume that anyone that stumbles into the system will automatically be able to steal everything, again, the likelihood of this is up to you. It´s only a nerf if you choose it to be.


Everything you've posted assumes that the bubble around the module represents an actual deterrent to roaming individuals accessing these modules. Anyone who has spent any time in 0.0 space since Rubicon 1.0 knows that with bubble-immune, instant-warping interceptors and nullified T3s, bubbles are not a significant deterrent to hostile mobility in a sovereign system.