These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Billybob Sheepshooter
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1101 - 2014-01-16 12:22:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Billybob Sheepshooter
DEV: uhm. Boss. They don't seem to like this new deployable that will nerf income for the general pilot in nullsec. I've tried lying to them and give them falsified facts. I even tried to pick the feedback that i though was usefull, not what the players actually think is usefull.
Boss: ignore them, they will eventually go away.
Dev: Ok, how about this new module that i came up with while doing massive amounts of drugs?
Boss: It seems reasonable to beleive that this is a good module, despite what the players say. it's preposterous to think that they know more about nullsec ratting than we do. We are the devs afterall.

Just a normal day in iceland.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#1102 - 2014-01-16 12:22:37 UTC  |  Edited by: War Kitten
CCP SoniClover wrote:

If you use an ESS as a ratter your income will be higher than pre-1.1
...
Because the ISK coming into the game from Null Sec bounties every day is insane and we want to minimize inflation.
...
I'm not saying that the ESS is intended to reduce inflation. I'm saying we want to be careful about how much higher than the current 100% we can go. So it's not about trying to reduce the ISK entering the game through NPC bounties, it is making sure it doesn't increase too much.


So the purpose of the ESS is to increase income, so we should want to use it. However you are already giving us too much ratting income, so in order to increase it, you need to decrease it first.

Sure that makes sense from a numbers and balancing point of view. From a consumer's point of view, it's like those BS Christmas sales where companies say everything is 50% off - after increasing prices by 75%. It's a load of horse manure.

I see what you're trying to do - put some of that isk at risk and use the new deployable toys. But you're doing a poor job of selling it to us, and the design lacks any sort of desirability from our point of view beyond hoping to dodge a 5% nerf.

Please try again.


CCP SoniClover wrote:

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

We hate everyone equally.


Pick a side - humorous inflammatory phrasing is good/bad?

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Speedkermit Damo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1103 - 2014-01-16 12:23:49 UTC
Gorski Car wrote:
What kind of retards still rat in 0.0?


If people didn't still rat, you'd have noone left to hotdrop.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Ashlore
The Cult of Domingo
#1104 - 2014-01-16 12:23:55 UTC
Isbariya wrote:
So here is an idea, all employees will get a salary reduction by 5% because Hilmar thinks he's paying you too much for the crap you come up with. But you are now alloed to place an ESS in your lobby, naturally thisreduces your salary by another 15%. But the full 20% that have been taken off your salary will the be transfered to the ESS. As a boni, if the subscription number have risen, you might get 5% extra, aint that great ? But of course there's a catch, those 20-25% can either be distributed to all employees equally or anyone who enters the building can say, nah the calculation is incorrect, give me a blanko check and I'lldistribute it correctly. Of course everyone will have a tiny LED at his monitor that indicates that someone is entering the lobby, you now have 40sec to get off your desk and run to the lobby, have fun. On a sidenote, the lobby is free of any juristriction, so you could be shot there.

So, all in favor ? Besides, did I mention that that check can be claimed by everyone, even those not working for CCP ?



Nice one...

ESS
What ****** came up with that idea from the start?
Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#1105 - 2014-01-16 12:26:29 UTC
If you're not willing to threadnaught for what you have in ≡v≡ you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.
Muffet McStrudel
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1106 - 2014-01-16 12:27:48 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Muffet McStrudel wrote:
If CCP is so concerned about the introduction of isk inflation in the game then why:

1) Do they not limit the number of players that can join the server?
2) Allow the purchase of in-game isk with real cash?

Seems to me if you want to limit inflation, then you need to limit the ability to create isk out of nothing, which purchasing PLEX allows one to do.
PLEX does not allow you to create ISK out of nothing, and reducing the numbers wouldn't matter — it's a relative measurement anyway and reducing the number of people just makes the absolutes smaller while the relative numbers stay the same.

…and since they've gone back on the inflation problem, it doesn't matter anyway. Now, it's just a pointless nerf.



PLEX does create it in a way because it encourages bot-ratting and bot-mining. Where there might be a person with one account mining or ratting under normal circumstances, the introduction of PLEX basically ensured some would be willing to run 4-5 accounts to support each other. What's easier for the uber space rich? Running 4-5 accounts with PLEX or actual RL dough each month?

But we can agree the new module is pointless, so let's not put it in the game.

This idea is like Obamacare. A very small minority think it's great, the rest hate and don't want it, and the powers that be intend to go forward and shove it down your throat regardless of it's unintended consequences because it's "good" for you.
Muffet McStrudel
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1107 - 2014-01-16 12:30:11 UTC
Shux Legion wrote:
Can't you just tax the top 1% or 10% more like the rest of the real world does?

Daily tax for anyone in a Supercap.

Null ratting is for the blue collar folks just trying to make a living you bourgeoisie pricks.



Ha! Classic. Spit my coffee out on this one.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1108 - 2014-01-16 12:34:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Muffet McStrudel wrote:
PLEX does create it in a way because it encourages bot-ratting and bot-mining.
PLEX still does not create ISK out of nothing — it requires the ISK to be created the old-fashioned way. If that old-fashioned way is being automated through botting, chances are that it'll go away in the end anyway regardless of the mechanism of transfer.

If you're going to make an argument, at least make it based on reality… unlike the OP. Oops. Inflammatory again.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#1109 - 2014-01-16 12:35:00 UTC
Muffet McStrudel wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Muffet McStrudel wrote:
If CCP is so concerned about the introduction of isk inflation in the game then why:

1) Do they not limit the number of players that can join the server?
2) Allow the purchase of in-game isk with real cash?

Seems to me if you want to limit inflation, then you need to limit the ability to create isk out of nothing, which purchasing PLEX allows one to do.
PLEX does not allow you to create ISK out of nothing, and reducing the numbers wouldn't matter — it's a relative measurement anyway and reducing the number of people just makes the absolutes smaller while the relative numbers stay the same.

…and since they've gone back on the inflation problem, it doesn't matter anyway. Now, it's just a pointless nerf.



PLEX does create it in a way because it encourages bot-ratting and bot-mining. Where there might be a person with one account mining or ratting under normal circumstances, the introduction of PLEX basically ensured some would be willing to run 4-5 accounts to support each other. What's easier for the uber space rich? Running 4-5 accounts with PLEX or actual RL dough each month?

But we can agree the new module is pointless, so let's not put it in the game.

This idea is like Obamacare. A very small minority think it's great, the rest hate and don't want it, and the powers that be intend to go forward and shove it down your throat regardless of it's unintended consequences because it's "good" for you.
Sorry what?
No the Plex does not create ISK, no matter what ridiculous correlation you come up with.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Fix Lag
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1110 - 2014-01-16 12:47:33 UTC
Well, it's getting to be about lunch time in Iceland. I know I can't be the only one expecting some kind of response from CCP at this point.

CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1111 - 2014-01-16 12:48:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Andrea Keuvo wrote:

^ This. Don't forget that most of nullsec, especially renter space, is a vast spaceghetto made up of -0.1 to -0.4 space. In these areas it is even worse, they can support 1, maybe 2 people ratting. Any more than that and you are below level 4 mission income. If you really expect the one active person in a PvE ship to deploy and defend an ESS when a 10 man roaming fleet in PvP ships with a proper FC could show up at any time to rob it then you are so ignorant of 0.0 life/mechanics that it is a waste of time to even have a discussion. Not to mention that with only 1-2 people ratting it is impossible for this ESS to pay a proper return on the risk in a reasonable amount of time.

This module is one of two things:

1. if the 5% income reduction remains on the TQ release it is a module which will never be used and results in a 5% income nerf to all nullsec ratters.

2. if the 5% income reduction is removed on the TQ release it is a module which will never be used and was just a waste of dev time

Both are bad options, but option 2 is the less bad one.

Edit: nullsec alliance leaders already have enough headaches herding cats and will just outright ban the deployment of these by their members. Nobody wants their mailboxes filled with complaints because Joe Spaceprick logged on and looted the ESS that had been active all day. How many ways do nullsec residents have to say it? THESE MODULES WILL NEVER BE USED


Oh well, i doesn't really matter if a few risk avers renters leave the null sec.

Only time will tell if these things will be used or not.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#1112 - 2014-01-16 13:15:50 UTC
Post consisting of profanity was removed.

ISD Tyrozan

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

@ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL
Cor Six
The Northerners
Pandemic Horde
#1113 - 2014-01-16 13:18:42 UTC
I just hope that we get a good awnser from a dev soon on how they are going to fix this module. Mynas really had the best idea so far if you ask me. Good way to not nerf income but will lead to less inflation.

My hope is just that they make a bottom-up tax system for alliances soon.
ISD Tyrozan
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#1114 - 2014-01-16 13:20:47 UTC
Trolling post with veiled attack on CCP has been removed.

ISD Tyrozan

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

@ISDTyrozan | @ISD_CCL
Kendarr
The Congregation
OnlyFleets.
#1115 - 2014-01-16 13:23:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Kendarr
Tippia wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:
I feel I need to clarify what I said, as it seems some people are misunderstanding it, I'm not saying that the ESS is intended to reduce inflation. I'm saying we want to be careful about how much higher than the current 100% we can go. So it's not about trying to reduce the ISK entering the game through NPC bounties, it is making sure it doesn't increase too much.

Great. That means the 5% blanket nerf to incomes can be outright removed since it doesn't really serve any purpose.



You just sed yourself CCP SoniClover that it is an uneccessary nerf.

Don't drop the bounty by 5%. Please?

Question

The ESS is a good idea but nerfing the overall income is not! I should have the choice on to use one. not have to use one because of a nerf.

Thank you

Zebra-Corp
ORLICZ
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1116 - 2014-01-16 13:24:37 UTC
FistyMcBumBasher wrote:
Contrary to many of the other posters in this thread, I actually like this idea. It has the ability to create content and drive conflict when deployed both offensively and defensively. It can even function as an anti botting mechanism.

Offensively it allows those 'AFK cloakers' in system to do something other than being AFK. Dropping one of these in system will get the inhabitants to either stay docked, continue ratting and trust each other to divide up the bounties, or kill the ESS.

If they stay docked, business as usual

If they continue ratting and divide up the bonus bounties they will have to warp to the ESS, which alerts the whole system, puts them in a bubble, and takes 20 seconds to access the contents. This is plenty of time for a covert ops ship to de-cloak and activate an aggressive module. On top of this, they have to trust each other to not take all of the loot. So far this is looking like a pretty good conflict driver.

If they decide to kill this structure (which has the EHP of a battleship), the system is alerted, and the aggressors are then able to make their move.

As a defensive structure, it takes 60 seconds to print the tags out for yourself (20s to access and 40s to print). This will allow more than enough time for the 'owners' of the system to reship and warp to the ESS to defend their hard earned income.

As an anti-botting mechanic this thing is ingenious. It will increase the difficulty of botting, throw in some player countermeasures, and make the botter return to their computer in order to kill a hostile ESS.

I for one am looking forward to Rubicon 1.1.

TLDR: Stop being so scared of change.




+
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#1117 - 2014-01-16 13:29:02 UTC
I'm glad everyone is so happy with the new siphon units.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Cor Six
The Northerners
Pandemic Horde
#1118 - 2014-01-16 13:35:02 UTC
Zappity wrote:
I'm glad everyone is so happy with the new siphon units.



Siphons is pritty good for the game IF they make a bottom-up income system. Right now Siphons is pritty **** aswell sence moons is the only way for major alliances to be able to supply itself without a masive amount of out of game systems to check for examle how mutch a corp has ratted for and then calc like 5% out of that then get the corp to pay the alliance those 5%....


Make a system were a alliance can tax just as corps can do with there members. Then the siphons are awesome. Decreasing the top-down income is good IF they fix a bottom-up income system.
Muffet McStrudel
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1119 - 2014-01-16 13:40:49 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:


Honestly, most of the posts in this thread can be summed up as:
"Boohooohooo, I don't want to fight for my 5%"


The modules are simply going to be banned in most of 0.0. With inty's essentially being unstoppable in 0.0 no alliance in the game is going to bother to take the hit because they will waste more isk trying to defend these things than what the rewards bring. At best renter corps/alliances will deploy them to help pay for the rent and they will only be used in "safe" 0.0. Everyone else will ban them.

If CCP wants to create more conflict and ISK sinks in 0.0, then go back to the good ol' days when one actually had to use tactics instead of gank hotdropping everyone and to when you couldn't effortlessly look at space data to see who is ratting and where they are doing it. You know, when probing actions, standing fleets and holding sov actually had some value. Now it's rare to see anything larger than a few T2/T3 cruiser gangs / hot dropping SB / inty's in most of 0.0. I ask you what takes more minerals to build? A big ship or small one?

PVP tears are the best. PVPer's cried they couldn't find targets so being able to find the ratting systems data without work was added to the game. PVP'ers then cried that even when the ratters were located and killed, the ships get replaced too easily, so the amount of minerals to build them was increased. They then cried that dscan allowed people to see what ships they had so offensive cloakies were added. Now it appears they are crying because they are finding out ratting in null is actually a more profitable use of someone's time versus pvp and obviously the isk faucets must be turned down. Incidentally, this also seems to be the reason CCP has no intentions of addressing afk null cloakers, one of the biggest, cheapest isk-sinks in the entire game.

Those PVP tears just don't seem to stop do they?
Andrea Keuvo
Rusty Pricks
#1120 - 2014-01-16 13:54:34 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Andrea Keuvo wrote:

^ This. Don't forget that most of nullsec, especially renter space, is a vast spaceghetto made up of -0.1 to -0.4 space. In these areas it is even worse, they can support 1, maybe 2 people ratting. Any more than that and you are below level 4 mission income. If you really expect the one active person in a PvE ship to deploy and defend an ESS when a 10 man roaming fleet in PvP ships with a proper FC could show up at any time to rob it then you are so ignorant of 0.0 life/mechanics that it is a waste of time to even have a discussion. Not to mention that with only 1-2 people ratting it is impossible for this ESS to pay a proper return on the risk in a reasonable amount of time.

This module is one of two things:

1. if the 5% income reduction remains on the TQ release it is a module which will never be used and results in a 5% income nerf to all nullsec ratters.

2. if the 5% income reduction is removed on the TQ release it is a module which will never be used and was just a waste of dev time

Both are bad options, but option 2 is the less bad one.

Edit: nullsec alliance leaders already have enough headaches herding cats and will just outright ban the deployment of these by their members. Nobody wants their mailboxes filled with complaints because Joe Spaceprick logged on and looted the ESS that had been active all day. How many ways do nullsec residents have to say it? THESE MODULES WILL NEVER BE USED


Oh well, i doesn't really matter if a few risk avers renters leave the null sec.

Only time will tell if these things will be used or not.


If the risk averse renters leave and take their barges and pve ships with them who will the risk averse "PvP" interceptor gangs shoot?