These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Merge Archeology and Hacking

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dino Zavr
Shadow Owls
#21 - 2015-07-27 20:27:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Dino Zavr
The idea is good.
My exploration ship is fit for "relic only", e.g. only relic rig, archaeology implant slot 9 and i completely skip data sites, as they really do not worth the time wasted to hack them. Even nullsec data sites are at least five times less profitable than relic sites and decreasing data goodies volume did not fix the "garbage" issue.

Who might be affected:
Research alts who never undock, because Archaeology 2 (together with Survey 3) unlocks reverse-engineering science skills, while Hacking 2 (with Electronic Updates 3) unlocks T2 invention skills. The effect is minor.

Modules and Rig manufacturers and inventors, as there are both T1 & T2 modules and rigs versions, sure enough there are a plenty of well-researched BPOs for that stuff and thousands of T2 rigs stockpiled at trade hubs

Explorers who were to choose which hardwiring to be plugged into their slot 9

People who had already trained both skills to 5 (eliminating one of them is a loss of 10-14 days of training depending on remap and implants)

I'd like to see both science and salvage nodes in one site, but, please, let's make "cherrypicked" (e.g. sites with only few nodes hacked) to despawn faster in like ten minutes after warping out, or implement ghost-like model: 10 minutes to hack all you can after first warp-in (regardless if cloaked of not) before the entire site despawns. I understand this idea would grief cloaky T3 pilots who are happy to to ambush exploration frigates, but anyway, even exploration T3 ship has no chances against pvp-fitted T3. It is still possible to probe down exploration sites in advance and to locate explorer in a site. Frequently despawining sites (because someone cloaky warps into them) would probably produce additional load on servers, but, I hope that's still affordable.

Also, hardwiring slot 9 may give bonus to virus strength, while slot 10 to virus hp.
Rayzilla Zaraki
Yin Jian Enterprises
#22 - 2015-07-27 21:59:49 UTC
I support/endorse this product/service.

Gate campers are just Carebears with anger issues.
Murkar Omaristos
The Alabaster Albatross
Unreasonable Bastards
#23 - 2015-07-27 22:01:29 UTC
+1, absolutely. This needs to be a thing.
Zepheros Naeonis
TinklePee
#24 - 2015-07-27 22:10:57 UTC
Seeing as CCP has overhauled exploration quite a bit and archeology/hacking still remain identical, there is zero reason for this merger to happen. Either do it, or vastly differentiate the two. Period.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2015-07-27 22:42:55 UTC
Daya sites being generally poor does not mean that CCP needs to drop data hacking. It means they need to balance the sites properly. The sleeper caches are the best exploration change recentlyand that requires excellent hacking skills of both flavours to run effectively. Exploration should be extended along these lines, not cut down and simplified.
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#26 - 2015-07-27 23:02:25 UTC
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:
Daya sites being generally poor does not mean that CCP needs to drop data hacking. It means they need to balance the sites properly. The sleeper caches are the best exploration change recentlyand that requires excellent hacking skills of both flavours to run effectively. Exploration should be extended along these lines, not cut down and simplified.


All right, but in what meaningful way are using data and relic analyzers in these sites different? If they were just called Data Analyzer Alpha and Data Analyzer Beta would it be any worse?

You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Garai Nolen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#27 - 2015-07-27 23:42:24 UTC
+1 here too. Merge them, it would leave exploration in a very good place and it's a relatively simple and quick change. I don't agree with the calls here to try and differentiate them... I would rather see CCP spend a bit of that effort to improve the hacking mini game and the rest of that effort independently creating a completely new and unique pve activity separate from explo. Explo doesn't need much iteration from here or any new gimmicks really; it's a pretty solid and well-balanced activity.
Sean Crees
Sean's Safe Haven
#28 - 2015-07-27 23:47:15 UTC
+1, great idea. And because it is such a great idea i'm sure that means CCP will never do it.
Vakarian Sammag
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2015-07-28 00:41:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Vakarian Sammag
Also as a novice explorer I can't say I like the merger idea. It makes more sense to me just make them more distinct of each other (different minigames instead of a two-step hacking game?) and rebalance the loot (+1 dropping skillbooks from data sites).

To be honest, the whole idea of beating a minigame in a relic site is what *feels* wrong to me... it's a relic site, it should be more like Salvaging than Hacking itself.
Rossi Tenmar
Decadence.
RAZOR Alliance
#30 - 2015-07-28 00:54:03 UTC
No.

It gives you so much easy ISK, it should take some time to train the skills.
CorryBasler
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#31 - 2015-07-28 01:02:10 UTC
+1 from me. Ive never personally done any of these things described, but it seems to make sense to combine them given the points given.
Garai Nolen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#32 - 2015-07-28 01:02:22 UTC
Rossi Tenmar wrote:
No.

It gives you so much easy ISK, it should take some time to train the skills.


Arch is already a x3 train that you need at V to run a t2 analyzer. Data sites are currently bad enough that no one wastes time currently training Hacking to V. Merging these would do nothing to change the average train time of the average explorer pulling average income.

And if it's that bothersome then make the merged Arch/Hacking skill a x5, merge the total SP of both individual skills to migrate a char, and refund any leftover, which would malcanize this change and screw newbs which seems to be the only way to get bittervets on board.
Max Groote
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2015-07-28 01:14:35 UTC
I disagree, it would be more impactful to actually make the archaeology minigame substantially different from hacking rather than simply removing half of the surveying skills and modules.
Sakey Isu
Dirt 'n' Glitter
Local Is Primary
#34 - 2015-07-28 01:51:44 UTC
+1 I agree make it easier for new players to make some income.
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#35 - 2015-07-28 01:55:50 UTC
Rossi Tenmar wrote:
No.

It gives you so much easy ISK, it should take some time to train the skills.


Yes, "data sites make too much ISK" is the complaint of many an explorer.

You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2015-07-28 02:04:14 UTC
Chance Ravinne wrote:
Rossi Tenmar wrote:
No.

It gives you so much easy ISK, it should take some time to train the skills.


Yes, "data sites make too much ISK" is the complaint of many an explorer.

That may be true but lowering the bar devalues the sites even more than current.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#37 - 2015-07-28 02:19:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Ransu Asanari
Short Answer

No, we don't need to merge these skills, or remove one branch. In fact, it wouldn't be worth the effort to do this.

Long Answer

There is a lot of complexity in the current system which is good. As others have pointed out, we have hard fitting choices when needing to fit both modules onto ships, we have T1 and T2 module and rig manufacturing, and different implants. For example, if you want to fit a T2 Data and Relic Analyzer on a decent Astero build, you either need to use a fitting module/rig, or a Sisters Core Probe Launcher.

The skill progression for Hacking and Archaeology is fairly shallow as well. I don't think it's beneficial to remove one of the skills and make the skill progression even more shallow. There is only the one skill for each Hacking and Archaeology to train to 5, and then you're done. There's no "Advanced" skill tree, or additional supplementary skills needed. We could even add in a skill, such as one that gives you more range to your hacking module. There is no need to give newbies a break, as a lot of the exploration sites can be done with a T1 hacking module and low skills.

Yes, the basic frigate skill is needed, cloaking, and scanning skills. But when you compare this to the depth of SP investment for mining (for example) to get to an Exhumer with T2 Strip Mining and Ice Lasers, you can see where the investment for Hacking/Archaeology really isn't that much. On top of that, the Astero/Stratios have made it easier to get into decently bonused ships much faster than having to train Frigate 5 and then Covert Ops.

CCP have cleverly created a new tier of exploration with the Sleeper Cache sites where it requires Hacking and Archaology 5 to leverage the SP investment , as well as very good scanning skills to access them. This puts a higher SP bar to access and complete these sites, as well as the more difficult ones requiring very good tanking skills, as well as Cruiser level ships such as a Stratios or T3 Cruiser.

The new Covert and Besieged Covert sites added also require one of the modules, as well as a good tank and DPS (in the case of defeating the Mordu's Legion ships).

On top of this we have the new Drifter Complexes which require two teams equipped with Data Analyzers to access the central Hive. This is probably more to CCP's intent in Odyssey with the "loot spew" (now removed) where they wanted Exploration activities that encouraged teamwork.

When you look at the effort involved in removing one of the modules, industry components, the skills, and modifying all of the sites - I just don't see the benefit to us as a result of this effort on the part of CCP.

More details on what actual changes we could use in next post.
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#38 - 2015-07-28 02:21:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Ransu Asanari
The problem is really twofold - the Data Sites currently don't have a comparable loot value to Relic Sites, and the Faction Sites and hacking minigame are uninteresting. Lets take this one at a time.

1. Many of us have commented on the problems with the Data site values and the need for changes. Team Space Glitter attempted to fix some of the problems in Phoebe, and made some good quality of life changes, like reducing the size of most of the drops, but the value of the site is still low compared to Relic Sites. I've outlined my thoughts in detail here:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=422641&p=2

Data Sites are really going to have to be looked at closely before the new Citadel Structures are introduced, and given a very clear direction. A lot of the rare loot drops in Data/Relic sites are from the Faction POS towers and module drops, and these will eventually be phased out for Citadels. In addition, CCP already mentioned at Fanfest that they wanted to revisit how datacores are generated - potentially tying them to research facilities in citadels rather than coming from Data Sites, Faction Warfare, and Research Agents. That really only leaves Decryptors as the unique drop for Data sites, and they aren't rare or significantly valuable in most cases.

I'd suggest looking closely at making Data Sites - from the Faction Data Sites, Wormhole Sleeper Data Sites, and Limited Sleeper Cache sites all contain components for building Citadel components and structures. All of the Industrial Goods (High-Tech Data Chip) and the neglected Faction Materials (Electric Conduit) could become manufacturing components for the Citadels.

On top of this, Sleeper Relic and Data Sites need a hard look at a loot balance pass. Most of the value is from the blue loot from the combat, but there is nothing unique in the Sleeper Data Sites that you currently need to hack to obtain. The Sleeper Relic Sites have the Ancient Relics needed to reverse engineer T3 Subsystems, but they aren't worth much etiher (a separate problem).

I'd suggest removing the NPC seeded skillbooks for T3 Strategic Cruisers, Subsystems, and T3 Destroyers. Have all of these skillbooks completely seeded from Sleeper Data Sites. This would give Sleeper Data Sites something unique to provide to market, and the scarcity would manage the price and CCP can easily tune the drop rates to make sure the skillbook prices don't go out of control. For a good example of how this works, take a look at the Neurotoxin Control and Neurotoxin Recovery skillbooks. They are both completely seeded from Nullsec Booster Gas Sites.

2. The Faction Data/Relic Sites, and Hacking Minigame needs more depth. So this is a complex point.

a. The Faction Data/Relic sites are pretty basic. You scan the site down successfully, and hack the cans for loot without any kind of time crunch. There are no NPCs (they were removed in Odyssey - a good change) but there's also no actual "exploration".

The added Sleeper Cache sites gave us environmental hazards to avoid, damage to tank, puzzles to unlock, secret rooms to find, and multiple timers to create pressure. The actual hacking minigame wasn't the challenge or the point of the site - it was the time we took running around the site to find everything we possibly could, and unlock the secrets. I really like the way these sites were designed - even if they were done with the old dungeon creator system which doesn't make the site very dynamic.

If anything, if the Faction Data/Relic sites were revamped, I'd like to see more of this kind of content added to challenge us, and keep the sites changing up a bit to be more interesting. What if we scanned the site and warped into it, but we didn't see any cans to hack? We had to fly around in the site to decloak them, or navigate some environmental hazards? Just some food for thought.

b. The hacking minigame is pretty basic, and CCP has admitted they want to make changes but have been fairly slow at iterating. This thread outlines a few of the ideas (keep clicking on the blue dev tag for more posts):

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4954269#post4954269

CCP Bayesian did get the "number of nodes to good stuff" feature added in. The idea of having multiple cores, or more interesting defense software and countermeasures could be something to add depth to the hacking minigame. I'd personally like to see consumables for the hack that we can find, manufacture, and purchase and carry between sites. We could create a mini-economy behind these, and it would make hard decisions when hacking whether to risk using a consumable or not - or having to plug in the consumables you want to use before starting the hack, and not know what you may need and have to play off contingencies or research the sites somehow.

We have to be careful however, as we don't want to make the hacking minigame too twitch/time intensive. Hackers already have to balance their hacking progress with watching local and dscan - especially in wormholes. They also have to manage their distances to site obstacles to be able to cloak up if something comes in, while being able to scoop loot. Keeping at range at 2200 isn't really good counterplay, and you can't align out while hacking as you'll get out of range.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#39 - 2015-07-28 02:27:03 UTC
Ransu Asanari wrote:


I'd suggest removing the NPC seeded skillbooks for T3 Strategic Cruisers, Subsystems, and T3 Destroyers. Have all of these skillbooks completely seeded from Sleeper Data Sites. This would give Sleeper Data Sites something unique to provide to market, and the scarcity would manage the price and CCP can easily tune the drop rates to make sure the skillbook prices don't go out of control. For a good example of how this works, take a look at the Neurotoxin Control and Neurotoxin Recovery skillbooks. They are both completely seeded from Nullsec Booster Gas Sites.

1. Why would an Empire developed T3D have a skillbook only available in sleeper sites? Lets at least have some common sense involved in things here. T3C's *shrugs* Way way too late to do that change as it would be a massive nerf on all new players compared to old players who bought them cheap on the NPC market.

2. Look at how many people use boosters. They are rare as hell (for several reasons admittedly) so using their skillbooks as an argument for RNG luck in being able to use an item isn't a good argument either.
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#40 - 2015-07-28 02:38:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Ransu Asanari
1. There's always a way to work a change like this into the lore. "Because Lore" isn't a good excuse for not doing something. Maybe the initial cache of skillbooks collected has run out due to popularity, and can't be generated by the empire corporations (the man responsible has mysteriously disappeared). Fortunately they can still be found in these sites - or a Sleeper Data Library that we can reverse engineer it from with technology we've found. Because the skillbooks are all NPC generated, they can all be easily refunded for cost so nobody can hoard them and put them back on the market for extreme profit.

2. The Neurotoxin skillbooks are very rare, which is why the price is so high. Booster Gas sites are only found in specific constellations in Lowsec/Nullsec, and only in the combat drug site, and even then have a low drop rate for the skillbooks. Sleeper Data sites are fairly common from C1-C6 so the drop rate can be easily managed to ensure a supply that doesn't cause the prices to rise too high.