These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Nerfs, and the coming of the second shard

First post
Author
Josef Djugashvilis
#261 - 2015-02-12 14:20:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Josef Djugashvilis
Here we go yet again, folk are not playing the way I want them to, so Eve is dying.

If only CCP would make folk play the way I want them to, the game would have zillions more active accounts.

Don't like null-sec don't go there.

Don't like lo-sec don't go there.

Don't like worm-holes, don't go there.

Don't like hi-sec don't go there.

This is not a signature.

Black Pedro
Mine.
#262 - 2015-02-12 14:26:39 UTC
Lupe Meza wrote:

The first point is a bit of an oversimplification though. It sounds like you link a particular playstyle with the reason people leave the game, or are saying this is what CCP says and they view it as a bad thing. Whenever I've read any comment from CCP they are fine with people leaving the game if the game is not suited to them. There are players that mission almost or totally exclusively and play for years, the same way there are vets that PVP and get still get tired and leave. Isn't that what the SOV and jump changes were about? PVP aspects of the game are hardly perfect in and of themselves.

That is what CCP says and they think it is a bad thing hence the push to get people in social groups. CCP Rise went over that last Fanfest: http://www.themittani.com/news/fanfest-new-player-experience-1 or you can watch the whole thing online on Youtube.

Lupe Meza wrote:

The second point is more than a little divorced from reality since there are safer areas of the game than High Sec to make a lot more ISK than High Sec for a lot less risk. I was in a WH about 2 months after playing in a WH corp making more ISK than I new what to do with for virtually no effort and no risk. You occasionally had invaders but it was (not sure about now) easy to repel them with only a handful of guys, or get safe if you couldn't. Null is riskier? When the residents can rat in carriers and run anoms in afktars in peace because there are allies and blues for days surrounding them? When they have so much isk and free time they can only thin of using it to go back to high or low sec and make ALT corps to leverage their assets against targets unwilling or unable to effectively fight back? But High Sec is the only place with a risk/reward risk aversion issue? I don't buy it. Just sounds like the usual propaganda to me.

Proving definitively this point would require statistics that CCP hasn't released. Anecdotally though, I have heard of many a lowsec, wormhole or even nullsec players who have an "Incursion alt" that they use to make thier ISK in highsec. CCP themselves acknowledges this may be a problem (CSM 9 Summer Minutes, page 125). If players are preferring to run incursions in highsec to earn ISK rather than stay in lowsec or the wormhole where they live to make an income, there is clearly a problem with the risk vs. reward balance of the game. If someone from CCP says the statistics don't match my experiences, then I will stand corrected.
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#263 - 2015-02-12 14:27:27 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:
nadir, and other smart stuff
You had me at 'nadir'. Big smile

You actually convinced me, I understand my own point of view is biased because of my personal playstyle (atm): make ISK manufacturing and trading - though not in highsec, ugh! - and spend it on glorious, but mindless PVP.

Indeed the meaningful-spaceship-conflict-over-resources part of EVE should be preserved and enhanced. I see why highsec ISK-making deserves a nerf, but more than that let's hope the rest of New Eden gets buffs in meaning and value.

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#264 - 2015-02-12 14:29:59 UTC
Lupe Meza wrote:


Gatecamps on every major route to every major tradehub. Gankers, Ninja Looters, Mercs, AWOXERS, attracted to the area like moths to the flame BECAUSE of a lot players of live there? And they have it TOO easy? Thankfully at least CCP has better perspective given the changes they are making.



I will never understand the thinking behind this kind of perspective. I've heard it before, especially people talking about how 'safe' null is because of intel channels. They fail to consider that intel channels mean squat for people coming out of wormholes or passing through empty systems. In high sec you don't even need to watch local, all you need to do is tank enough to let concord arrive.

High Sec is the safest part of EVE hands down. It is mechanically so. magical space police materialize out of thin air-less space to blap people who just look at you wrong. Meanwhile the ONLY safety a person has outside of high sec is safety provided by human effort.

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#265 - 2015-02-12 14:31:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Here we go yet again, folk are not playing the way I want them to, so Eve is dying.

If only CCP would make folk play the way I want them to, the game would have zillions more active accounts.

Don't like null-sec don't go there.

Don't like lo-sec don't go there.

Don't like worm-holes, don't go there.

Don't like hi-sec don't go there.


Yea! it's not like EVE is a one shard game where everything in interconnected. So screw you high sec server guys, im going to the null server where nothing you can do has an affect on me.

Oh....wait.....
Black Pedro
Mine.
#266 - 2015-02-12 14:40:03 UTC
Gully Alex Foyle wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:
nadir, and other smart stuff
You had me at 'nadir'. Big smile

You actually convinced me, I understand my own point of view is biased because of my personal playstyle (atm): make ISK manufacturing and trading - though not in highsec, ugh! - and spend it on glorious, but mindless PVP.

Indeed the meaningful-spaceship-conflict-over-resources part of EVE should be preserved and enhanced. I see why highsec ISK-making deserves a nerf, but more than that let's hope the rest of New Eden gets buffs in meaning and value.

Actually that would work too. Buffing the hell out of the rest of the spaces might play havoc with the economy, but would be a way to fix the imbalance without touching highsec.

I think a slight toning down of ISK in highsec (especially incursions), and a good buff of income elsewhere would go a long way to draw people away from highsec again. Throw in a slight increase in risk perhaps from NPCs (sleepers podding players Blink) and removing the faction police (Empires losing control Blink), and fix wardecs (and add a social corp to keep the new/casual players safe), and you might even have things back on track.
Anthar Thebess
#267 - 2015-02-12 14:42:34 UTC
At least in nullsec you can shoot to every one you want.

Can flipping still works, but guys in exhumers run leaving their cans Twisted
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#268 - 2015-02-12 14:47:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Black Pedro wrote:

Actually that would work too. Buffing the hell out of the rest of the spaces might play havoc with the economy, but would be a way to fix the imbalance without touching highsec.


High sec people, in their zeal to preserve their advantages under an unbalanced system, always suggest this same thing (don't nerf my high sec, buff everything else). It seems their greed blinds them to elementary school level economics: buffing everything else has the same net effect as nerfing the one thing that is the problem.

All of which is moot. A few years ago, CCP buffed null sec anomalies using an 'EHP per isk' formula that resulted in a specific class of anomalies (Forsaken Hubs) being able to generate 500 million isk per hour if you use a Titan paired with a Scimitar (or even just a single super carrier). The results on the economy were swift and vicious. CCP had to quick-nerf everything about it to prevent New Eden becoming "Space Zimbabwe". Faction Warfare pve rewards damn near did the same thing.

And yet the high sec people (in their selfishness) think that repeating this terrible mistake that would screw ALL of us is preferable to simply bringing high sec pve (incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing, COSMOS farming etc) into proper line. Goes to show that greed and selfishness overpower reason every single time.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#269 - 2015-02-12 14:56:10 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Black Pedro wrote:

Actually that would work too. Buffing the hell out of the rest of the spaces might play havoc with the economy, but would be a way to fix the imbalance without touching highsec.


High sec people, in their zeal to preserve their advantages under an unbalanced system, always suggest this same thing (don't nerf my high sec, buff everything else). It seems their greed blinds them to elementary school level economics: buffing everything else has the same net effect as nerfing the one thing that is the problem.

All of which is moot. A few years ago, CCP buffed null sec anomalies using an 'EHP per isk' formula that resulted in a specific class of anomalies (Forsaken Hubs) being able to generate 500 million isk per hour if you use a Titan paired with a Scimitar (or even just a single super carrier). The results on the economy were switch and vicious. CCP had to quick-nerf everything about it to prevent New Eden becoming "Space Zimbabwe". Faction Warfare pve rewards damn near did the same thing.

And yet the high sec people (in their selfishness) think that repeating this terrible mistake that would screw ALL of us is preferable to simply bringing high sec pve (incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing, COSMOS farming etc) into proper line. Goes to show that greed and selfishness overpower reason every single time.


Nerfing blitzing of regular mission would not be that hard and the same is true for incursion but blitzing burner? I though they had very few ships in the first place so it would be hard to nerf doing them fast.
Lupe Meza
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#270 - 2015-02-12 14:56:51 UTC
Black Pedro wrote:

That is what CCP says and they think it is a bad thing hence the push to get people in social groups. CCP Rise went over that last Fanfest: http://www.themittani.com/news/fanfest-new-player-experience-1 or you can watch the whole thing online on Youtube.


Well I tend to avoid most player sites for news but may check out the conference on youtube if someone has a timestamp for that particular bit.

If their solution to the issue is to incorporate anew tool to positively reinforce and place incentives on behavior they feel is more desireable that's fine. It is more of a constuctive solution than strong arming a player into playing a particular way of playing by instead offering an attractive new option.

Quote:

Proving definitively this point would require statistics that CCP hasn't released.


Playing the game is all the game a while is all the proof you need, as well as the "lawyering up" nature of this statement. I'd be hard pressed to find someone say that it isn't true,or even probably true.

Suffice to say it doesn't really matter since I know CCP is fully aware of player habits and trends; it is just curious as to why there is usually such uproar when they make changes having these unknowable quantities at their disposal, and having a vested interest in improving their product, so many claim these same maneuvers are to the detriment of EVE. Based on things that they can't prove definitely that would require statistics CCP hasn't released ironically.

Quote:

Anecdotally though, I have heard of many a lowsec, wormhole or even nullsec players who have an "Incursion alt" that they use to make thier ISK in highsec. CCP themselves acknowledges this may be a problem (CSM 9 Summer Minutes, page 125). If players are preferring to run incursions in highsec to earn ISK rather than stay in lowsec or the wormhole where they live to make an income, there is clearly a problem with the risk vs. reward balance of the game. If someone from CCP says the statistics don't match my experiences, then I will stand corrected.


And I say that is a byproduct and consequence of null renting out their space, forming huge alliances preventing fights and the possibility to get more resources and content for their own members. So naturally they flock to High to find just about anything to do or make any money at all because there are only so many rats and anomalies to go around. Of course I can't definitely prove this since I don't have access to CCP's data. They don't return my calls. But let's just pretend it's true.

The solution then is to not so much nerf incursions to force them to scurry back to bear it up in Null, the solution is to examine how SOV works; maybe power projection, how difficult it is to hold space....and maybe the other stuff sorts itself out. Which I expect is exactly what they are doing.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#271 - 2015-02-12 14:58:04 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:


And yet the high sec people (in their selfishness) think that repeating this terrible mistake that would screw ALL of us is preferable to simply bringing high sec pve (incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing, COSMOS farming etc) into proper line. Goes to show that greed and selfishness overpower reason every single time.


good thing most of those things you listed are available in low sec and some even in null sec. along with someof them having greater rewards
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#272 - 2015-02-12 15:05:43 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:


Nerfing blitzing of regular mission would not be that hard and the same is true for incursion but blitzing burner? I though they had very few ships in the first place so it would be hard to nerf doing them fast.


Burner missions are blitzed the exact same way lvl 5 (and really all level missions) are. get super high standings, have alt in fleet (and make sure you are set to share rewards, so as you compelte missions the alt gets standings but never any penalties for declining missions), decline missions you don't want, do missions that can be done in a matter of minutes.

Where burners are different is the faction loot drop chance plus the fact that every single one of them can be done in less than 2 minutes with a single frig sized ship.

You can do 250-300 mil per hour doing burner missions for a corp like Sister of EVE playing the "yo-yo standings" game with an alt. Why would anyone win their right mind risk 2 bil worth of carrier ratting in nul when you can risk less than 100 mil in a Jaguar or Daredevil and make better isk. The actual answer is "ignorance and lazyness", null ratters are usually unaware of how to make better isk or simply can't be arsed because undocking a carrier and warping to an anom is easy even if it does pay less.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#273 - 2015-02-12 15:07:09 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


And yet the high sec people (in their selfishness) think that repeating this terrible mistake that would screw ALL of us is preferable to simply bringing high sec pve (incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing, COSMOS farming etc) into proper line. Goes to show that greed and selfishness overpower reason every single time.


good thing most of those things you listed are available in low sec and some even in null sec. along with someof them having greater rewards


And greater danger. Which is why High sec is the only place that has stable incursion communities flying 5 billion isk ships where as most low and null incursions go un-done. The point isn't the profit, it's profit + safety. High sec has too much safety for the amount of isk you can make.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#274 - 2015-02-12 15:09:27 UTC
Lady Rift wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


And yet the high sec people (in their selfishness) think that repeating this terrible mistake that would screw ALL of us is preferable to simply bringing high sec pve (incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing, COSMOS farming etc) into proper line. Goes to show that greed and selfishness overpower reason every single time.


good thing most of those things you listed are available in low sec and some even in null sec. along with someof them having greater rewards


such as?
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#275 - 2015-02-12 15:11:14 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


And yet the high sec people (in their selfishness) think that repeating this terrible mistake that would screw ALL of us is preferable to simply bringing high sec pve (incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing, COSMOS farming etc) into proper line. Goes to show that greed and selfishness overpower reason every single time.


good thing most of those things you listed are available in low sec and some even in null sec. along with someof them having greater rewards


such as?


You know, ~things~ and stuff.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff

Black Pedro
Mine.
#276 - 2015-02-12 15:11:54 UTC
Lupe Meza wrote:

The solution then is to not so much nerf incursions to force them to scurry back to bear it up in Null, the solution is to examine how SOV works; maybe power projection, how difficult it is to hold space....and maybe the other stuff sorts itself out. Which I expect is exactly what they are doing.

No, the solution is to nerf Incusion income so rational players are not forced to come back to highsec to make ISK as it is the most efficient way.

I suspect you are right though. From the minutes it is clear CCP knows this is a problem, but is probably holding out until the sov rework and the player-built stargates thing goes online. These are massive changes to the game and will significantly influence where players choose to live and earn ISK.

Just so we are clear though, I am not saying we should remove Incursions from the game - in fact I think the collaborative and competitive aspects make them better PvE content than most. They just pay far too much in highsec for the small (no?) amount of risk and are drawing players back from the other spaces because of that.
Lady Rift
His Majesty's Privateers
#277 - 2015-02-12 15:16:43 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


And yet the high sec people (in their selfishness) think that repeating this terrible mistake that would screw ALL of us is preferable to simply bringing high sec pve (incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing, COSMOS farming etc) into proper line. Goes to show that greed and selfishness overpower reason every single time.


good thing most of those things you listed are available in low sec and some even in null sec. along with someof them having greater rewards


such as?



incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing,

L5 carrier blitzing received a huge buff with the limit to how far others can jump.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#278 - 2015-02-12 15:19:14 UTC
admiral root wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


And yet the high sec people (in their selfishness) think that repeating this terrible mistake that would screw ALL of us is preferable to simply bringing high sec pve (incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing, COSMOS farming etc) into proper line. Goes to show that greed and selfishness overpower reason every single time.


good thing most of those things you listed are available in low sec and some even in null sec. along with someof them having greater rewards


such as?


You know, ~things~ and stuff.


In addition, the things that poster claims have 'greater rewards' actually don't.

Incursions are a great example. Low and null incursion pay more per site. BUT no one in their right mind would take a fleet of 5 billion isk vindicators and nightmares to low sec to do them like they do in high.

So the fact that you HAVE to use lesser ships in low and null means that it's actually High Sec incursions that (for all practical purposes) pay better, because you have the safety to do them in uber-kill boats.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#279 - 2015-02-12 15:22:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Lady Rift wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Lady Rift wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:


And yet the high sec people (in their selfishness) think that repeating this terrible mistake that would screw ALL of us is preferable to simply bringing high sec pve (incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing, COSMOS farming etc) into proper line. Goes to show that greed and selfishness overpower reason every single time.


good thing most of those things you listed are available in low sec and some even in null sec. along with someof them having greater rewards


such as?



incursions, mission blitzing, burner mission blitzing,

L5 carrier blitzing received a huge buff with the limit to how far others can jump.


L5 carrier blitzing reqires a capital ship to make slightly more than you could make using a FRIGATE sized ship blitzing burners in high sec. Low sec burner blitzing is good, till you get stuffed by a sebo Thrasher gate camp.

And see my previous post about incursions. Low and null do NOT pay better than high sec incursions because of the ships used. The existence of CONCORD is what makes high sec incursions as profitable as they are. My ISN or TVP shiney fleet Vindicators cost 5 bil and I'd never use them outside high sec.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#280 - 2015-02-12 15:33:12 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Lady Rift wrote:



incursions


They dont get run in null anywhere near to the scale and efficiency as in highsec. Most are abandoned.

Lady Rift wrote:

mission blitzing


Missions don't exist in the vast bulk of null.
Lady Rift wrote:

burner mission blitzing,


cant be blitzed due to things such as Sebo sabers and nasty little things called bubbles.
Lady Rift wrote:

L5 carrier blitzing received a huge buff with the limit to how far others can jump.


They die to local dreads rather than PL's.