These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

High sec Mission runners just got completely screwed by CCP

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#1021 - 2014-04-24 14:33:36 UTC
Dinsdale, given how much you seem to hate Eve, CCP, imaginary cartels, etc, I've got to ask - why are you still here? If I disliked a game that much I'd simply quit.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Organic Lager
Drinking Buddies
#1022 - 2014-04-24 14:54:41 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
"Done correctly" missions are 100% safe. If you get ganked, you didn't do them correctly.

Anyway, we're talking about a 3.7% decrease in income, which is nowt compared to the increase in income given by the introduction of MTUs, and less than the null bounty nerf. Considering the upside is fixing and incredibly broken system that holds back development of changes and lead to the introduction of "extra"" minerals on ships, I'd say it's a pretty worthwhile change.

But as with literally any change they make, people will still complain right up until it gets put in, then their complaints will die down when the realise the world didn't end.


You are a liar.
Plain and simple, you are a liar.

Losing mission loot is way way way more than 3.7% of total mission payouts.
I have run enough missions to know that statement of yours is a complete lie.

CCP knows it to, but won't put out the data because they know what the backlash will be.
Oh so you've run a mission, wow. That doesn't mean you inability to do basic math is any less flawed.

OK, so lets say that the average mission is made up from the following components:
1. Bounties
2. Mission Reward ISK
3. Bonus Reward ISK
4. LP
5. Valuable loot (loot that doesn't or can't get reprocessed and is sold whole, meta 3 + 4)
6. Junk loot (reprocessable modules and ammo)
7. Salvage

Now the part that is being reduced is number 6, everything else will be remaining the same. Please indicate to me what percentage of income from a mission comes from each one of those categories.


Sorry buddy but it's simply not. I have been running missions for a very long time and keep a detailed spreadsheet that breaks down my profits by bounties, isk rewards, lp and loot (includes salvage, meta 4s and junk for reprocessing).

Of the missions i choose to loot/salvage (only the best based on isk/min) loot makes up 15-30% of the reward. Of that 15-30% at least half is going to be meta 3-4, implants and salvage. From that we get a very generous 7.5-15% in melt loot and we are taking a 40% nerf with the up coming patch. It will lower my isk/hour by 3-6%.

The people the nerf will really hurt are those with a salvage alt, pro synergy and loot thieves. The average mission runner will see no substantial change.
Dave Stark
#1023 - 2014-04-24 15:02:17 UTC
the average mission runner is probably doing his weekly shopping while his bot program finishes rescuing the damsel.

or am i just being cynical?
Jack Lennox
Grove Street Families
#1024 - 2014-04-24 15:08:40 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
The Geoman wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Folks, read the newest dev blog. The goons in the post are gloating in their posts, so you know it is terrible for high sec.
In a few months, mission runners will now have to invest weeks and weeks of training, plus buy a hideously expensive implant, to get the privilege of a 27.6% nerf to all mission loot refines.


Were you around when they nerfed mission loot, years back? That was quite a hit to mission-running income, for those who looted their wrecks.


Yeah, I was.
This is just another cut in the "death by a thousand cuts" to high sec.
CCP truly does hate the majority of its subscription base.



No, I think CCP just hates you. I was talking to CCP earlier and they were throwing the idea around wondering if they should do it and I was like, "Idk guys, Dinsdale Pirannha might not like that so much," and then they were all like, "Oh word, **** that guy, we'll do it for sure now," then they made that dev blog and then we all went out and got pizza and ice cream and hung out with Batman and went to the movies and had so much fun and you weren't invited.

On a slightly more serious note, if you really think this is "terrible for highsec" (spoiler: it's really not) why not leave? Go to WH space, or maybe null sec, both are significantly better for moneymaking, which seems to be what you're interested in. This is a balance (a pretty decent one in my humble opinion) designed to help nullsec industry, not nerf highsec.

You know what was actually "terrible for highsec?" The safety button. Soooo many missed opportunities, everyone should just roll red, all the time (I'm looking at you, mission runners and carebears)

Been ganked? Robbed? Space feelings hurt?  Now there's something you can do! Fill out a Customer Service Comment Card!  EIther that or contact everyone's favorite Space Detective for an instant ban!
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#1025 - 2014-04-24 15:23:46 UTC
admiral root wrote:
Dinsdale, given how much you seem to hate Eve, CCP, imaginary cartels, etc, I've got to ask - why are you still here? If I disliked a game that much I'd simply quit.



That would seem the ...sane... response :) .

But at the risk of doing some internet psycologizing (lol), i think that some people just need an enemy to rail against, in games and in real life. Without that all powerful 'other' messing everything up, how will people like that measure themselves?

And some people just need to see things 'change' no matter if that change is needed or not. The funny thing is that if things do change like they say thiey want, the quickly get bored with the situation and more on to 'fix' something else that needs changing. As it is with the Dinsdales of EVE, it is with the ex-girlfriends of real life Twisted

I'm like you, if I just needed a space game but couldn't stand all the things that poster routinely complains about I'd be playing Star Trek Online, a game that takes a harsh stand against 'griefers' and has no non-consensual anything at all (I do play STO part time still, it's not a bad game and and i hate for my Klingon Lt. General to go to waste lol).
Utremi Fasolasi
La Dolce Vita
#1026 - 2014-04-24 17:44:00 UTC
Toshiro Ozuwara wrote:
Ninja looters have been taking it in the butte for about 18 months now.


Seriously what a mesa things has been made eh.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1027 - 2014-04-24 18:22:25 UTC
Organic Lager wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
"Done correctly" missions are 100% safe. If you get ganked, you didn't do them correctly.

Anyway, we're talking about a 3.7% decrease in income, which is nowt compared to the increase in income given by the introduction of MTUs, and less than the null bounty nerf. Considering the upside is fixing and incredibly broken system that holds back development of changes and lead to the introduction of "extra"" minerals on ships, I'd say it's a pretty worthwhile change.

But as with literally any change they make, people will still complain right up until it gets put in, then their complaints will die down when the realise the world didn't end.


You are a liar.
Plain and simple, you are a liar.

Losing mission loot is way way way more than 3.7% of total mission payouts.
I have run enough missions to know that statement of yours is a complete lie.

CCP knows it to, but won't put out the data because they know what the backlash will be.
Oh so you've run a mission, wow. That doesn't mean you inability to do basic math is any less flawed.

OK, so lets say that the average mission is made up from the following components:
1. Bounties
2. Mission Reward ISK
3. Bonus Reward ISK
4. LP
5. Valuable loot (loot that doesn't or can't get reprocessed and is sold whole, meta 3 + 4)
6. Junk loot (reprocessable modules and ammo)
7. Salvage

Now the part that is being reduced is number 6, everything else will be remaining the same. Please indicate to me what percentage of income from a mission comes from each one of those categories.
Sorry buddy but it's simply not. I have been running missions for a very long time and keep a detailed spreadsheet that breaks down my profits by bounties, isk rewards, lp and loot (includes salvage, meta 4s and junk for reprocessing).

Of the missions i choose to loot/salvage (only the best based on isk/min) loot makes up 15-30% of the reward. Of that 15-30% at least half is going to be meta 3-4, implants and salvage. From that we get a very generous 7.5-15% in melt loot and we are taking a 40% nerf with the up coming patch. It will lower my isk/hour by 3-6%.

The people the nerf will really hurt are those with a salvage alt, pro synergy and loot thieves. The average mission runner will see no substantial change.
So 3.7%, on average, sounds about right then. Since that was taken from a breakdown of supposedly thousands of missions, which worked out that just over 8% of mission income is reprocessing loot.

And sure, people who choose to go after only one section of missioning will lose out more, but since missions are balanced as a whole, the overall change will be small. Considering how much more efficient loot gathering is following the introduction of the MTU, it won't even come close to as bad as it was before, when people would leave fields of loot behind constantly.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1028 - 2014-04-24 18:23:44 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I am not wasting any more time with a liar.
So in short, you can't prove your ridiculous claims of this being some huge world changing nerf. That in fact does not surprise me. Now ask yourself if perhaps there is a reason that nobody listens to you when you come in screaming and demanding changes.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#1029 - 2014-04-24 18:24:30 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I am not wasting any more time with a liar.

Where's the lie? All I see is you evading a very simple question. You claim that the reduction in income will be huge. Everyone who has presented actual large-scale data show that it is not. You don't have a leg to stand on, and no, anecdotal evidence and screaming does not count.

Quote:
I have run enough missions to know that statement of yours is a complete lie.
No, you have either run enough missions to have completely lost track of where your income comes from (hint: melted loot is not an important part of it), or you've run so few missions that you have yet to learn how to run them efficiently (hint: melted loot is no part of it).

Quote:
This is just another cut in the "death by a thousand cuts" to high sec.
CCP truly does hate the majority of its subscription base.
What majority is that? And how does constant improvements constitute a death by a thousand cuts?

Quote:
CCP knows it to, but won't put out the data because they know what the backlash will be.
Yeah, see… here's the contradiction: you claim (without evidence) that CCP has the data, and you are very fond of claiming (without evidence) that CCP is just a bunch of goon puppets. So why is it so hard for you to believe that maybe the goons have the right data if the two are so closely linked?
Malthuras
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1030 - 2014-04-24 19:03:33 UTC
I picked the absolute perfect time to drop 2 grand on a new rig and set up a 15 account mining fleet while playing FFXIV on the side...miner power! kekekeke
Nalelmir Ahashion
Industrial Management and Engineering
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#1031 - 2014-04-24 19:42:53 UTC
I used to run L4s...

this entire reprocessing shenanigans is utter useless.

1. main income is LPs + bounties!! some missions I used to get 20-40 mill bounties doing pretty much nothing but shooting stuff which couldn't kill me while I was 100km away.
2. Loot wise the loot which you reprocess is cheap trash items... so trash the total value of those items (if u trash anything cheaper then 100k) is 2% of your loot table from L4s.
3. if you loot with noctis and salvage the wrecks after missions you make so much isk its ridiculous.

The practice was get pimped BS, snipe in 100 km radius.. once in an hour do noctis patrol on saved bookmarks.
I did pretty much 100s of millions in matter of less then 72 hours time frame....

thing is mission running is bad boring sucks. I even prefer mining over mission running.
mission running creates magical pocket of resources which you harvest via brain dead ai killing.. it's so utter boring I couldn't take it any longer :x
Organic Lager
Drinking Buddies
#1032 - 2014-04-24 20:01:42 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Organic Lager wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
"Done correctly" missions are 100% safe. If you get ganked, you didn't do them correctly.

Anyway, we're talking about a 3.7% decrease in income, which is nowt compared to the increase in income given by the introduction of MTUs, and less than the null bounty nerf. Considering the upside is fixing and incredibly broken system that holds back development of changes and lead to the introduction of "extra"" minerals on ships, I'd say it's a pretty worthwhile change.

But as with literally any change they make, people will still complain right up until it gets put in, then their complaints will die down when the realise the world didn't end.


You are a liar.
Plain and simple, you are a liar.

Losing mission loot is way way way more than 3.7% of total mission payouts.
I have run enough missions to know that statement of yours is a complete lie.

CCP knows it to, but won't put out the data because they know what the backlash will be.
Oh so you've run a mission, wow. That doesn't mean you inability to do basic math is any less flawed.

OK, so lets say that the average mission is made up from the following components:
1. Bounties
2. Mission Reward ISK
3. Bonus Reward ISK
4. LP
5. Valuable loot (loot that doesn't or can't get reprocessed and is sold whole, meta 3 + 4)
6. Junk loot (reprocessable modules and ammo)
7. Salvage

Now the part that is being reduced is number 6, everything else will be remaining the same. Please indicate to me what percentage of income from a mission comes from each one of those categories.
Sorry buddy but it's simply not. I have been running missions for a very long time and keep a detailed spreadsheet that breaks down my profits by bounties, isk rewards, lp and loot (includes salvage, meta 4s and junk for reprocessing).

Of the missions i choose to loot/salvage (only the best based on isk/min) loot makes up 15-30% of the reward. Of that 15-30% at least half is going to be meta 3-4, implants and salvage. From that we get a very generous 7.5-15% in melt loot and we are taking a 40% nerf with the up coming patch. It will lower my isk/hour by 3-6%.

The people the nerf will really hurt are those with a salvage alt, pro synergy and loot thieves. The average mission runner will see no substantial change.
So 3.7%, on average, sounds about right then. Since that was taken from a breakdown of supposedly thousands of missions, which worked out that just over 8% of mission income is reprocessing loot.

And sure, people who choose to go after only one section of missioning will lose out more, but since missions are balanced as a whole, the overall change will be small. Considering how much more efficient loot gathering is following the introduction of the MTU, it won't even come close to as bad as it was before, when people would leave fields of loot behind constantly.


Yes correct, i replied to the wrong post :). I was trying to support the fact that it is an insignificant nerf to mission runners and I have the data in excel to prove it.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1033 - 2014-04-24 20:07:24 UTC
Organic Lager wrote:
Yes correct, i replied to the wrong post :). I was trying to support the fact that it is an insignificant nerf to mission runners and I have the data in excel to prove it.
:D It happens.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dealth Striker
Perkone
Caldari State
#1034 - 2014-04-25 00:55:50 UTC
Their game.
Their rules.
My money!
Striker Out!!
Flex Carter
Caldari Independant Mining Association
#1035 - 2014-04-25 03:33:31 UTC
Another good reason why I give Leadership the "Bird" when they demand I stop leaving cans all over our constellation... Plus I hear it helps balance the server out when there are blobs in other regions.
Pestilen Ratte
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1036 - 2014-05-04 17:11:40 UTC
The attraction of any game lies in discovering the complex methods of solving problems.

And picking on the weak, for the mentally disturbed. But leaving bully fantasies to one side for a moment, a game is a game because it presents problems and ways to solve them.

Having read a significant part of this thread, the biggest "problem" in Eve just now seems to be the entrenched power of the large alliances in NullSec. It seems to be a problem, because it isn't changing. It isn't chaining because.....

So why isn't this situation changing?

Why are the power brokers in NullSec so secure in their tenure?

Why is life in NullSec one of obedience to established powers?

I don't know, but it does seem weird that these people are so powerful, for so long, in a game where changing circumstances are supposed to present new problems to be solved.

It is also highly unrealistic. If four Empires exist, dominated by established cultures of law and order, why would they allow childish alliances to remain secure in such vast expanses of space?

A possible way to bring back the challenge for the Nullbears would be for the Empires to begin demonstrating imperial mandates.

For example, it would be both realistic and interesting if the major empires started recruiting expeditionary forces to go and "clear" certain neighbouring null sec regions. Such expeditions would be temporary, for the most part, and the aim would be to stop essentially lawless and barbarian organisations to flourish nearby. Because that is what Empires do. It is sort of their business model.

If the major empires were to begin these "clearance" missions into null sec, it would give the high sec bears a way of engaging in fleet war without becoming the cattle of the null bear elite.

It would also force the Nullbears to fight for their space, instead of inheriting it from groups of null bears they have successfully sucked up to. As all we hear from the null bears are that they live to fight, they should embrace the cause.

If the Gallente Empire made a call to clear out an alliance of null bears from a given region of space, I would jump at that chance.

Not because I think Nullbears are cowards who prey on the weak and who think being territorial about digital space is good fun. Rather, I want to share the joy of problem solving, as it forms the basis of all games.

The null bear elite have had their day in the sun, and they are boring the pants of the rest of us. The back story of eve is paralysed, and the empires are not acting as empires should.

Please consider, nothing is as absurd as the notion that the goons are more powerful than the Gallente. Or the Ammar. Or any backstory empire, whose story covers thousands of generations.

Let the Empires man up, and make life interesting in Null sec.
Penguinizer Illat
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1037 - 2014-05-04 18:35:47 UTC
How exactly would it let highsec players engage in warfare like you claim? Turn it into faction warfare space temporarily? I don't really understand how it'd work as far as gameplay mechanics go. How would it not turn out like the last live event, where the highsec players got torn to shreds by organized pvp fleets?

As for lore, I can't really speak either way about that.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#1038 - 2014-05-04 18:43:18 UTC
Pestilen Ratte wrote:
The attraction of any game lies in discovering the complex methods of solving problems.

And picking on the weak, for the mentally disturbed.


First point +10

Second point -100

Confirmed, wolves lions and sharks are "mentally disturbed"

As are military strategists

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Dave Stark
#1039 - 2014-05-04 19:37:43 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Pestilen Ratte wrote:
The attraction of any game lies in discovering the complex methods of solving problems.

And picking on the weak, for the mentally disturbed.


First point +10

Second point -100

Confirmed, wolves lions and sharks are "mentally disturbed"

As are military strategists


TIL, only the mentally disturbed take advantage of opportunities when they present themselves.
Hoshi Sorano
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1040 - 2014-05-06 18:26:33 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
[
Confirmed, wolves lions and sharks are "mentally disturbed"


If you want to equate your intelligence level to that of mere beasts who function primarily on instinct, then I suppose that's your call.

We tend to expect more from humans than we do animals.