These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

PvE C1 to C4

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#121 - 2014-09-24 15:00:04 UTC
Zappity wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Zappity wrote:
I always find that visualising the data helps to spot the meaningful bits so I have made what I think of as a ‘Wormholes ISK/Risk Chart’ from the information in this thread:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1upBapVRDG255R8DNZLOZXZthFnfurOr_mSHjSKBFjJU/edit?usp=sharing

Explanatory points:
1. ISK/hour/character is y-axis, everything else is secondary y-axis (the one on the right).
2. ISK/hour/character is from corbexx’s and Jack’s (C5) data. Top marks for effort btw.
3. Cost of fleet is corbexx's Tengu or similar for C1-3, Marauder for C4 (although I’d very much like to see triple RR fleet comp data for C4) and C5 is a guess because I've never lived in one.
4. Cost of gank (hours) is a simple calculation based on number in fleet (one for C1-4 vs six for C5).
5. There is no C6 data so I haven’t included it.

The ‘cost of gank’ seems like an easy way to visualise risk but doesn’t account for the reward if you manage NOT to get ganked. If I had to put a metric on risk I would use ISK/hour/character divided by cost of gank (hours) - think of this as a 'Risk Indicator' where higher is better (I should have thought that through really - let's call it the 'Reward Indicator' instead):

C1 = 5
C2 = 3
C3 = 24
C4 = 15
C5 = 81

As you can see C3 and C5 stand out from the others, although C5 leads by a long margin. C1 and C2 are just rubbish by whatever metric you look at and C4 is also out of balance. This is not just because I live in one but rather because the risk of getting ganked does not increase as you go from C1 to C5. This also does not account for the ratio of MNR to Blue Loot which is an additional risk (by market exposure) for C1 and C2 holes in particular.

Suggested actions:

1. Buff C1-C4 loot tables.
2. Nerf C5 ISK/hour/character.
3. Buff C1, C2 Blue Loot to reduce market exposure.

You can see an example of what (I think) would make wormholes healthier overall if you scroll down in the chart. The ‘cost of gank (hours)’ indicator is much smoother in this scenario and actually has a sweet spot around C1-C3 while C4 and C5 payouts are elevated but at greater cost if you get ganked.

The Reward Indicator is also much more even:

C1 = 33
C2 = 51
C3 = 67
C4 = 60
C5 = 64

In summary, where the current wormhole design falls over is that it assumes risk of getting ganked increases greatly with wormhole class. I don't see any reason to assume that now that wormholes are thoroughly understood and a typical chain will contain all types of holes.


This is interesting, but connectivity is a major, if not the Major risk factor, the class of wormhole in itself does not increase risk. C2 and now C4 space since Hyperion, for example can be particuarly dangerous because of this. Ship class availability also changes the risk factor.(C5/C6)
C5 and C6 income seems artificially high, but accordingly needs larger corporations to function well, the income available needs to scale accordingly for them not to become areas where players individually starve, unable to replace losses.


Whilst I agree with your conclusions that income availability needs to rise in lower class wormholes, the loot drop is only one component, time overall spent to attain that income is the critical factor, and remember once the sites are exhausted, one needs to farm the connecting holes, which is NOT like just Jumping the gate to the next system, as many outside of wormhole space assume, it is a whole new ball game......

I agree that it is not simple. But proposing a broad set of mechanical changes about how the risk actually works is less likely to be acted upon than just changing the loot tables. So that's why I went in that direction.

I also entirely agree about connectivity being the key risk. I'm not sure that C4 and C2 are more risky because of that, though, since you can still shut them off just as effectively as a single static hole.

If you really want to link risk and reward you need to reward people for running sites with open connections. Maybe in the loot drop or perhaps spawn rate.



Yes, the whole issue is really quite complex, and since the frigate holes were introduced, one really cannot seal oneself off from the outside world.

In some ways that is an overall good, but the rewards do need to reflect this.

In short, post Hyperion, rewards and sites should assume that they will be run with the hole open, and the time needed in the running of the site and the extraction of the loot and appropriate rewards should be all considered in the design.

The site designs, of C1-C4 now, post hyperion, leave one exposed to assault for far too long for the rewards given.
Do not nerf C5 they are probably a better balance point to reach for the rest of wormhole space. They allow the replacement of losses, within the wormhole environment.

Once wormholers need to go to KS to replace losses by earning there, then wormhole space is disfunctional.
We have arrived at that point in lower class wormholes. Adaptation in this manner is not a matter of pride, it is a sign of failiure.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Marox Calendale
Xynodyne
The Initiative.
#122 - 2014-09-24 15:05:26 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
This is interesting, but connectivity is a major, if not the Major risk factor, the class of wormhole in itself does not increase risk. C2 and now C4 space since Hyperion, for example can be particuarly dangerous because of this. Ship class availability also changes the risk factor.(C5/C6)
C5 and C6 income seems artificially high, but accordingly needs larger corporations to function well, the income available needs to scale accordingly for them not to become areas where players individually starve, unable to replace losses.

Sorry, but the whole discussion seems to me that most people are thinking like this:

C1/C2 = HS
C3/C4 = LS
C5/C6 = 0.0

It isn´t!

With the whole connectivity which comes with hyperion and like everything from the unknown is known today, it is just one big J-Space, with connections to every part of K-Space. We don´t have chains anymore. It´s a great network.
We live in a C2, but we don´t have 1 day when LS or 0.0 aren´t able to be reached within 4 or 5 WH jumps. Closing all connections doesn´t work well anymore, because of the increased amount of wandering wormholes.
Agrippa Arkaral
Rogue Inferno.
Pandemic Horde
#123 - 2014-09-24 15:25:38 UTC
p-p-p-p-pplease don't nerf my capital escalations

how can i survive in eve without my 2b/hour backbone
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#124 - 2014-09-24 15:29:08 UTC
Marox Calendale wrote:


With the whole connectivity which comes with hyperion and like everything from the unknown is known today, it is just one big J-Space, with connections to every part of K-Space. We don´t have chains anymore. It´s a great network.
We live in a C2, but we don´t have 1 day when LS or 0.0 aren´t able to be reached within 4 or 5 WH jumps. Closing all connections doesn´t work well anymore, because of the increased amount of wandering wormholes.


This is an important point and has added a lot of interest in everyday wh life, there's more to explore and more opportunities. It does increase the time spent scanning, but it's a reasonable price to pay for better chains.

epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#125 - 2014-09-24 15:45:21 UTC
Marox Calendale wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
This is interesting, but connectivity is a major, if not the Major risk factor, the class of wormhole in itself does not increase risk. C2 and now C4 space since Hyperion, for example can be particuarly dangerous because of this. Ship class availability also changes the risk factor.(C5/C6)
C5 and C6 income seems artificially high, but accordingly needs larger corporations to function well, the income available needs to scale accordingly for them not to become areas where players individually starve, unable to replace losses.

Sorry, but the whole discussion seems to me that most people are thinking like this:

C1/C2 = HS
C3/C4 = LS
C5/C6 = 0.0

It isn´t!

With the whole connectivity which comes with hyperion and like everything from the unknown is known today, it is just one big J-Space, with connections to every part of K-Space. We don´t have chains anymore. It´s a great network.
We live in a C2, but we don´t have 1 day when LS or 0.0 aren´t able to be reached within 4 or 5 WH jumps. Closing all connections doesn´t work well anymore, because of the increased amount of wandering wormholes.



This is true, the seperation between lower class wormholes and higher is now really down to the sites they contain, the strength of the effects, and the mass limits of the holes.

Closing holes, is now a very different concept post hyperion, isolation is more of an illusion than it ever was before, and less achievable.

All areas need to be able to support it's residents, if Hyperion had occured with an overall redesign of sites and rewards, then it would have made sense, in isolation, it was just disruptive and made things less enjoyable for no good end.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
corbexx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#126 - 2014-09-24 16:01:11 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
I may very well get shouted down for this.

But I feel that wormhole space, as a rule, should be more profitable then highsec incursions.


I don't think you will get shouted down on that, in this forum thats for sure.

Corbexx for CSM X - Wormholes still deserve better
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#127 - 2014-09-24 16:52:19 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Quote:
Saede Riordan wrote:
I may very well get shouted down for this.

But I feel that wormhole space, as a rule, should be more profitable then highsec incursions.


I have Absolutely no problems with incursion runners earning good money.

However.

With the risks, real risks involved, Wormhole rewards, per player, should match or exceed them, and as there is no opportunity to chain them, the site rewards should be higher to match.

When new players come into run them then the PVP risk will rise to match. If anyone thinks of them as an isk fountain, then they should see how it draws the predators to the prey.

The ONE certainty of wormholes is that if there is something to hunt, then there are hunters to hunt them................

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Moth Eisig
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2014-09-24 17:49:11 UTC
Marox Calendale wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Of course people should be allowed to do solo exploration in wormholes, do you think that wormholes are somehow instantly populated with fully formed corps with no experience?

That´s a good point and I´ll think about it. But where is the problem to start getting experience as a daytripping exploration group?
I know much corps who first tested wormholes in groups before they decided to settle in it.


You need a really really good reason to completely shut a valid playing style out of an entire area of space, and I don't see one in this case.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#129 - 2014-09-24 18:12:58 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Whilst what wormhole space originated as, is not such an important thing normally, but in this case it never began as something for groups, and not the individual, sure C5 and C6 sites claimed a lot of victims where solo players undertook them, and people learned to run them with additional damage and support, but there is really no basis for removing single players from the game.

We want MORE players in wormhole space, whether solos or groups, all are welcome.
It is not our private club. Run for our benefit alone.

if individuals enjoy it they will bring their friends, and their friends too, and wormhole space comes back to life, we cannot wait for fully formed groups to suddenly "discover" wormholes and move in en masse.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Meytal
Doomheim
#130 - 2014-09-24 20:01:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Meytal
If people can make, in W-space, the income levels they expect to see given the precedents of missions, Hisec incursions, and Nullsec ratting above and beyond any costs required for replacing ships lost due to ganking and day-to-day living costs, they will show an interest in W-space again.

If this doesn't happen, you can kiss W-space goodbye. Agree or disagree all you want and cry on the forums with your own anecdotal evidence; you're seeing the effects of it every day whether you want to admit it or not. Sure, an equilibrium will be reached with a few stubborn people still clinging to W-space and market prices, but not at the numbers that would indicate a healthy environment. Most of that will be (Nullsec?) alt farming corps who only exist to churn out ISK and who behave just like they do in Nullsec: log off at the slightest indication that a non-friendly could be thinking about visiting.

If those changes DO happen, people will start coming back to W-space. The risk then becomes one of alpha-predators feeding upon and driving out the prey before a proper food chain can be re-established; there is a risk of repeating the Lowsec population problems of days past. The randomness of W-space will help counter this to some extent.

Rebuilding will be slow, and has its own risks, but it's possible if CCP is willing to come off their disdain for W-space and the fact that it has become something they didn't want it to become and instead embrace and encourage life there.

Edit: It's up to CCP whether W-space thrives or not.
Thomas Hurt
Future Ventures
#131 - 2014-09-24 21:45:54 UTC
Ratting in W-Space is actually safer than Highsec, in most ways, so W-Space ratting income should be less than that of Highsec.
Fix Lag
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#132 - 2014-09-24 21:52:08 UTC
Thomas Hurt wrote:
Ratting in W-Space is actually safer than Highsec, in most ways, so W-Space ratting income should be less than that of Highsec.


Don't forget that w-space doesn't take much effort to live in either. Do you have any idea how much highsec station repair costs are these days? It's an outrage.

CCP mostly sucks at their job, but Veritas is a pretty cool dude.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#133 - 2014-09-24 21:53:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Miton
Thomas Hurt wrote:
Ratting in W-Space is actually safer than Highsec, in most ways, so W-Space ratting income should be less than that of Highsec.

are you out of your fkn mind?
please, let me know where your entry is next time youre 'ratting' in a WH and i'll come help you out.

PS: when the goons are making fun of your ignorance regarding WHs, you know it's pretty high...

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Thomas Hurt
Future Ventures
#134 - 2014-09-24 22:00:45 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
Thomas Hurt wrote:
Ratting in W-Space is actually safer than Highsec, in most ways, so W-Space ratting income should be less than that of Highsec.

are you out of your fkn mind?
please, let me know where your entry is next time youre 'ratting' in a WH and i'll come help you out.

PS: when the goons are making fun of your ignorance, you know it's pretty high...


Yeah, right. Good luck finding us. Lol
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#135 - 2014-09-24 23:38:17 UTC
The chance of me finding you is very small. the chance of someone finding you? that's a different story.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Incindir Mauser
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#136 - 2014-09-24 23:50:52 UTC
Fix Lag wrote:
Thomas Hurt wrote:
Ratting in W-Space is actually safer than Highsec, in most ways, so W-Space ratting income should be less than that of Highsec.


Don't forget that w-space doesn't take much effort to live in either. Do you have any idea how much highsec station repair costs are these days? It's an outrage.


I agree.

Nerf nano paste.
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation
Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
#137 - 2014-09-25 08:30:02 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
Thomas Hurt wrote:
Ratting in W-Space is actually safer than Highsec, in most ways, so W-Space ratting income should be less than that of Highsec.

are you out of your fkn mind?
please, let me know where your entry is next time youre 'ratting' in a WH and i'll come help you out.

PS: when the goons are making fun of your ignorance regarding WHs, you know it's pretty high...


To be fair to him, you're both right. A fully locked down system is way safer than a HS system. You can't ever discount in HS the chance that the other randoms there aren't going to suicide gank you and you can't run back to station everytime someone new enters local or you'd never get anything done. HS has a low (very low) threat at all times that WS doesn't have.

WS on the other hand, new sig = probably loosing your PvE boat if you don't leave the site.

or shorthand, HS=high potential, extremely low realisation. WS= lower potential, extremely high realisation.
umnikar
Fishbone Industries
#138 - 2014-09-25 10:17:22 UTC
corbexx wrote:


I'd like to include C5 and C6 sites with cap escaltions its pretty easy for me to get info very easily. but again it varies depending on how you do stuff (or if you share) 5 characters multi boxing will be insane isk. while 10 people in a site will be good isk but not insane isk. without the cap escalation it drops off alot. will see if i can get numbers.

I have some NoHo numbers but need to get permission to publish them.

and I have no idea on lvl 4 income but its way way lower than highsec incursions thats for sure.


Well, you choosed to run sites on a minimalistic(min nr. of toons).
It also varies alot how people are running lower class sites. Why should that be different in c5/6 only? How do you come to the point it's tengu and paladin??? I for example never used one of those ships.
Pretty sure you have the experience yourself already for c5/6 and could include the data - no need to ask NoHo. We all apreciate your work on this one, but it's again numbers which will lead to wrong changes made... *sigh*

Just google some **** and you have a good overview:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1270848#post1270848
http://syncaine.com/2012/06/22/eve-c5-isk/
...

Not to say running c1-4 sites solo in a shiny ship is totaly meh - specially after hyperion.
Jessica Duranin
Doomheim
#139 - 2014-09-25 10:18:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Jessica Duranin
BayneNothos wrote:
A fully locked down system is way safer than a HS system. You can't ever discount in HS the chance that the other randoms there aren't going to suicide gank you

WAT?
Unless you fly one of those super bling fit "I have too much ISK" boats the biggest threat in a HS mission is the "socket closed" message.
Even a locked down system is never safe. You can't know who might be locked in there with you.Twisted
corbexx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#140 - 2014-09-25 12:04:20 UTC  |  Edited by: corbexx
umnikar wrote:
corbexx wrote:


I'd like to include C5 and C6 sites with cap escaltions its pretty easy for me to get info very easily. but again it varies depending on how you do stuff (or if you share) 5 characters multi boxing will be insane isk. while 10 people in a site will be good isk but not insane isk. without the cap escalation it drops off alot. will see if i can get numbers.

I have some NoHo numbers but need to get permission to publish them.

and I have no idea on lvl 4 income but its way way lower than highsec incursions thats for sure.


Well, you choosed to run sites on a minimalistic(min nr. of toons).
It also varies alot how people are running lower class sites. Why should that be different in c5/6 only? How do you come to the point it's tengu and paladin??? I for example never used one of those ships.
Pretty sure you have the experience yourself already for c5/6 and could include the data - no need to ask NoHo. We all apreciate your work on this one, but it's again numbers which will lead to wrong changes made... *sigh*

Just google some **** and you have a good overview:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1270848#post1270848
http://syncaine.com/2012/06/22/eve-c5-isk/
...

Not to say running c1-4 sites solo in a shiny ship is totaly meh - specially after hyperion.



If you dont use a tengu or paladin feel free to run all them sites in what ever you use and post up the results for people to see. As for the running minimalistic I've also do c1 to c4 in groups of 1 to 3 people but thats on the csm forum which is nda so that has been taken in to account. the c5 or c6 sites is pretty easy to work out just assume 700m a site and split taht between how ever many people you have. yes if your running with 5 people its going to be alot more than if you run with 10 plus people.

as for the results you have linked there over 2 years old and price of nanos has crashed since then.

As for the no need to ask noho, its common curtacy to ask before publishing stuff. They might not want some stuff publishedon how much we do or do not earn.

Corbexx for CSM X - Wormholes still deserve better