These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#1061 - 2014-05-10 06:11:39 UTC
Quote:
Its a less than 5% drop in income to people who kill and loot everything. It is a lower nerf to income that was seen to null anoms a few months back, yet I didnt see you against that nerf.


In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

There's Darwinism and there's suicide, I'm a fan of the former, not the latter.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Dave Stark
#1062 - 2014-05-10 06:18:31 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

source?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1063 - 2014-05-10 06:24:46 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

source?


When I started flying megathrons they cost 80 mil for the hull...

The extra mineral costs dont make up the bulk of the extra cost. I can belive that inflation is resposible for 70-80% of the added cost.
Dave Stark
#1064 - 2014-05-10 06:30:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
baltec1 wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

source?


When I started flying megathrons they cost 80 mil for the hull...

The extra mineral costs dont make up the bulk of the extra cost. I can belive that inflation is resposible for 70-80% of the added cost.


and when you started flying megathrons the game was probably also flooded with drone alloys.

edit: look at robotics, between the start of 2011 and now, it has had peaks and troughs but generally hasn't exhibited an upwards trend that you could associate with inflation.
it's easy to scream "oh noes inflation" when you cite things that have had their supply/demand constantly ****** with the past few years.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1065 - 2014-05-10 06:44:20 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Dave Stark wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

source?


When I started flying megathrons they cost 80 mil for the hull...

The extra mineral costs dont make up the bulk of the extra cost. I can belive that inflation is resposible for 70-80% of the added cost.


and when you started flying megathrons the game was probably also flooded with drone alloys.

edit: look at robotics, between the start of 2011 and now, it has had peaks and troughs but generally hasn't exhibited an upwards trend that you could associate with inflation.
it's easy to scream "oh noes inflation" when you cite things that have had their supply/demand constantly ****** with the past few years.


When I was churning out drakes the isk inflation was noticable. CCP were not messing with buildcosts or mineral distribution at the time, it was all down to the crazy levels of isk being injected by things like incursions.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#1066 - 2014-05-10 06:50:27 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

source?


Market, PLEX as gold standard.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Dave Stark
#1067 - 2014-05-10 06:51:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Cipher Jones wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

source?


Market, PLEX as gold standard.


supply and demand =/= inflation.
also, i just cited the market as proof that there is no inflation. so unless you've got more evidence than "market" i'm going to have to conclude that you agree with me, there is no inflation.
also this graph shows that the only time an index goes up or down is when there's a change to the game, otherwise the price indexes are pretty stationary.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#1068 - 2014-05-10 07:23:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Cipher Jones
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

source?


Market, PLEX as gold standard.


supply and demand =/= inflation.
also, i just cited the market as proof that there is no inflation. so unless you've got more evidence than "market" i'm going to have to conclude that you agree with me, there is no inflation.
also this graph shows that the only time an index goes up or down is when there's a change to the game, otherwise the price indexes are pretty stationary.



You can candy coat it anyway you want, inflation is up and subs are down. Your chart is nice but fails to illustrate the trillions of ISK tied up in things that don't come from production or minerals.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Dave Stark
#1069 - 2014-05-10 07:31:43 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

source?


Market, PLEX as gold standard.


supply and demand =/= inflation.
also, i just cited the market as proof that there is no inflation. so unless you've got more evidence than "market" i'm going to have to conclude that you agree with me, there is no inflation.
also this graph shows that the only time an index goes up or down is when there's a change to the game, otherwise the price indexes are pretty stationary.



You can candy coat it anyway you want, inflation is up and subs are down. Your chart is nice but fails to illustrate the trillions of ISK tied up in things that don't come from production or minerals.



i haven't candy coated anything, i just flat out proved you wrong.
you've yet to provide a source for inflation.
also, source for subs being down?

if you're going to make absurd claims, you're going to have to back them up with something.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1070 - 2014-05-10 07:31:43 UTC
Cipher Jones wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Cipher Jones wrote:
In the 5 years I've played, inflation well is over 100%.

source?


Market, PLEX as gold standard.


supply and demand =/= inflation.
also, i just cited the market as proof that there is no inflation. so unless you've got more evidence than "market" i'm going to have to conclude that you agree with me, there is no inflation.
also this graph shows that the only time an index goes up or down is when there's a change to the game, otherwise the price indexes are pretty stationary.



You can candy coat it anyway you want, inflation is up and subs are down. Your chart is nice but fails to illustrate the trillions of ISK tied up in things that don't come from production or minerals.


Last info we got showed subs are growing still.

I am also interested in what inflation has to do with what I stated.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#1071 - 2014-05-10 07:54:57 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

Last info we got showed subs are growing still.



First off, nice to see that this thread has been necro'ed.
Guess my prophecy resonates.

Secondly, CSM votes:

2012: 59 K
2013: 49K
2014: 31K

I am sure that a 48% drop in CSM votes in 24 months has zero correlation to the number of subs in the game.
In fact, let's check the latest dev blog to confirm the numbers...oh wait.
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1072 - 2014-05-10 07:58:44 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Last info we got showed subs are growing still.



First off, nice to see that this thread has been necro'ed.
Guess my prophecy resonates.

Secondly, CSM votes:

2012: 59 K
2013: 49K
2014: 31K

I am sure that a 48% drop in CSM votes in 24 months has zero correlation to the number of subs in the game.
In fact, let's check the latest dev blog to confirm the numbers...oh wait.

Why do you think the number of people voting has anything to do with the number of active subscriptions?

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#1073 - 2014-05-10 08:08:13 UTC
Chribba told me and Hilmar confirmed it.

No seriously, is there anyone that started playing post Incarna that needs it explained?

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#1074 - 2014-05-10 08:11:13 UTC
Rhes wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Last info we got showed subs are growing still.



First off, nice to see that this thread has been necro'ed.
Guess my prophecy resonates.

Secondly, CSM votes:

2012: 59 K
2013: 49K
2014: 31K

I am sure that a 48% drop in CSM votes in 24 months has zero correlation to the number of subs in the game.
In fact, let's check the latest dev blog to confirm the numbers...oh wait.

Why do you think the number of people voting has anything to do with the number of active subscriptions?


Oh, here we go....because a 48% percent drop in players voting is ridiculous to pawn off on CSM disillusionment exclusively.
If I am wrong, CCP can make me look like a fool, and publish the sub numbers from today and 12 months ago.

But hey, in the meantime, you get your spin doctors all revv'ed up.
Rhes
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1075 - 2014-05-10 08:14:11 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Oh, here we go....because a 48% percent drop in players voting is ridiculous to pawn off on CSM disillusionment exclusively.
If I am wrong, CCP can make me look like a fool, and publish the sub numbers from today and 12 months ago.

But hey, in the meantime, you get your spin doctors all revv'ed up.

You put way more faith in high sec pubbies caring about the CSM than I do apparently.

EVE is a game about spaceships and there's an enormous amount of work to do on the in-space gameplay before players (or developers) are ready to sacrifice it for a totally new type of gameplay - CCP Rise
Dave Stark
#1076 - 2014-05-10 08:25:33 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Oh, here we go....because a 48% percent drop in players voting is ridiculous to pawn off on CSM disillusionment exclusively.
If I am wrong, CCP can make me look like a fool, and publish the sub numbers from today and 12 months ago.


no it isn't, especially when the csm notes were both late, and intentionally useless. couple that with ccp's recent addiction to posting every change in an F&I sticky, effectively bypassing the CSM... easy to see why nobody gives a **** about them.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1077 - 2014-05-10 09:14:54 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Rhes wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Last info we got showed subs are growing still.



First off, nice to see that this thread has been necro'ed.
Guess my prophecy resonates.

Secondly, CSM votes:

2012: 59 K
2013: 49K
2014: 31K

I am sure that a 48% drop in CSM votes in 24 months has zero correlation to the number of subs in the game.
In fact, let's check the latest dev blog to confirm the numbers...oh wait.

Why do you think the number of people voting has anything to do with the number of active subscriptions?


Oh, here we go....because a 48% percent drop in players voting is ridiculous to pawn off on CSM disillusionment exclusively.
If I am wrong, CCP can make me look like a fool, and publish the sub numbers from today and 12 months ago.

But hey, in the meantime, you get your spin doctors all revv'ed up.


The UK has seen a 60% drop in people voting in the euro elections in the last decade. I guss that means we have hade a 60% drop in our population...
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#1078 - 2014-05-10 09:23:05 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Last info we got showed subs are growing still.



First off, nice to see that this thread has been necro'ed.
Guess my prophecy resonates.

Secondly, CSM votes:

2012: 59 K
2013: 49K
2014: 31K

I am sure that a 48% drop in CSM votes in 24 months has zero correlation to the number of subs in the game.
In fact, let's check the latest dev blog to confirm the numbers...oh wait.


If you really want to go full Ripard over this you're going to need to start a blog and gather yourself a bunch of sheep followers.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
Shivanthar
#1079 - 2014-05-10 12:08:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Shivanthar
baltec1 wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Pix Severus wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
and if one does loot most isk comes from meta iv stuff which is crap to reprocess in the first place.


Confirming this. You only reprocess the very cheap stuff (<50k ISK items) anyway, you sell the good stuff directly on the market.

In reality this is an extremely small nerf, and with the amount of nullbear whining we've had over the last few months, it could've been a lot worse.

So suck it up, HTFU, adapt or die, etc etc etc.


Not sure how you are doing your math, but this is a huge huge hit.
Have you seen the value of large smart bombs, 1600 mm armour plates, and 100 Mn MwD's, just for a few examples.
They sell at mineral value.
They are worth between 800,000 and 1 million each.

At first I thought they were taking a 27.6% nerf.
Now, after re-reading the dev blog, I realize it is actually a 45% nerf.
That is monstrous.

So yeah, all the propaganda by the null sec cartels was worth it to them.
This is a huge hit to high sec income.


You earn more running missions when blitzing and ignoring loot.


Isn't this wrong? NOT blitzing and NOT ignoring loot requires the following;

a- Huge time investment compared to ignoring loot and blitzing
b- Loot-gathering skills (salvager II, tbII, ore industrial skill, salvage drone skill, MARAUDER skill counts also, etc...)
c- more combat&weapon&drone based skills, because you've to clear all possible npcs and yes, this also includes spending 5 minutes to destroy those dam'n headquarters...
d- more ship skills! (a person who ignores loots may not be tempted by spending time in angel bonus room for example)

After you see obvious reasons, I am actually up for more income for regular mission runners and nerfing blitzers and loot ignorers? Hmm?

(Neverthless, thank you, you gave me an idea to light up a a thread in ideas&future baltec Blink )

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1080 - 2014-05-10 12:15:42 UTC
Shivanthar wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Pix Severus wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
and if one does loot most isk comes from meta iv stuff which is crap to reprocess in the first place.


Confirming this. You only reprocess the very cheap stuff (<50k ISK items) anyway, you sell the good stuff directly on the market.

In reality this is an extremely small nerf, and with the amount of nullbear whining we've had over the last few months, it could've been a lot worse.

So suck it up, HTFU, adapt or die, etc etc etc.


Not sure how you are doing your math, but this is a huge huge hit.
Have you seen the value of large smart bombs, 1600 mm armour plates, and 100 Mn MwD's, just for a few examples.
They sell at mineral value.
They are worth between 800,000 and 1 million each.

At first I thought they were taking a 27.6% nerf.
Now, after re-reading the dev blog, I realize it is actually a 45% nerf.
That is monstrous.

So yeah, all the propaganda by the null sec cartels was worth it to them.
This is a huge hit to high sec income.


You earn more running missions when blitzing and ignoring loot.


Isn't this wrong? NOT blitzing and NOT ignoring loot requires the following;

a- Huge time investment compared to ignoring loot and blitzing
b- Loot-gathering skills (salvager II, tbII, ore industrial skill, salvage drone skill, MARAUDER skill counts also, etc...)
c- more combat&weapon&drone based skills, because you've to clear all possible npcs and yes, this also includes spending 5 minutes to destroy those dam'n headquarters...
d- more ship skills! (a person who ignores loots may not be tempted by spending time in angel bonus room for example)

After you see obvious reasons, I am actually up for more income for regular mission runners and nerfing blitzers and loot ignorers? Hmm?


If you just said nerf mission blitzing then yes, I agree.