These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[June] Fighter Damage Reduction

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1901 - 2017-06-12 19:30:49 UTC
Romulus XII wrote:
"22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers
24.2% (2.6T) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers
19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers

Just under half (46.5%) of the bounties earned during the time period was generated by Supercarriers and Carriers, meaning a small percent of the population received a huge portion of the total bounties."

Is this total subscriber-omega character population or "active" ( a certain level of activity) rolling a month/several-months?

He stated 5 days in June - So last week, includes Alpha's (T1 cruisers, which is far higher income for risk, isk outlay than the other 2 combined) and a total number known only to him.

Again this is CCP using a statistic THEY created with announced income reductions, to justify those income reductions. Using statistics created AFTER announcing nerfs is really poor, underhanded workmanship.



Lets set players up to grind isk at an unusual rate, then use those same statistics to justify nerfing that income.
Larrikin, You're a fukin genius (shame you're using it for evil)

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1902 - 2017-06-12 19:33:58 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:

  • We are working on changes to Anomalies that will reduce the effectiveness of Carriers and Supercarriers. These changes will be announced at a later date.[/list]


    • Noticed this part. I'll be paying special attention to this, because this is the area where everyone can get messed up.
    Kaze Mester
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #1903 - 2017-06-12 19:34:43 UTC
    Ronan Davaham wrote:
    They're only doing this to make people buy more PLEX and skill injectors. Nerf carriers and Rorquals into oblivion so we have to find other avenues of ISK making. Such avenues would require retraining and possible PLEXing/injecting. Next they're gonna nerf ship production under the guise of it's an "ISK faucet", ect. ect. ect.


    As I said a couple hundred posts ago... it doesn't matter what we'll find to make isk (well not me, coz i unsubbed) they will nerf that next.
    That is the only prediction you can make with this game. CCP will tell you numbers and stuff to make it look like it's ok to do the nerf, but they are lazy enough not to do anything with the main causes, such as injectors, sov, and all the stuff mentioned in this post.

    Aaaand that just pushes this game to an end soon.

    (Im still waiting for that sub-unsub chart that i was asking for though CCP...)
    Londi
    Pator Tech School
    Minmatar Republic
    #1904 - 2017-06-12 19:35:56 UTC
    CCP Larrikin wrote:
    [Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players.
    Our secondary goal is that Carriers and Supercarriers are too effective in PvP, even for the investment it takes to create them. This change will shift the PvP balance, but we’re confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP


    So, you've repeatedly made the claim that it is a small population that is earning the majority of the bounties. Could you wquantify this by releasing the numbers on how many supers contributed to the super income, how many carriers contributed to their respective category and then how many subcapital drone boats for theirs?

    I think that would go a long way towards elaborating your concerns to the eve players instead of making broad comments.

    Also- could you point to any examples of where Supercarriers are overpowered when it comes to PvP, as opposed to say- dreads with capital energy neuts?
    Sgt Ocker
    What Corp is it
    #1905 - 2017-06-12 19:38:17 UTC
    SurrenderMonkey wrote:
    Sgt Ocker wrote:
    CCP Larrikin wrote:
    Reserved

    As you never use your "reserved" spots, I'll do it.

    The %'s you used are so misleading - Try using numbers that actually correlate with your claims. 1.4% of what, 4.6% of how many players?
    And why do your % stop at 22.8% of players, who made the other 34.4% of bounties.



    Uh, the data given accounts for 65.6% of the bounties. There is no "other 77.2% of bounties". There's another 34.4% of bounties, earned by 77.2% of the players.


    Fixed

    My opinions are mine.

      If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

    It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
    Ian Hestia
    Garoun Investment Bank
    Gallente Federation
    #1906 - 2017-06-12 19:39:23 UTC
    Londi wrote:
    CCP Larrikin wrote:
    [Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players.
    Our secondary goal is that Carriers and Supercarriers are too effective in PvP, even for the investment it takes to create them. This change will shift the PvP balance, but we’re confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP


    So, you've repeatedly made the claim that it is a small population that is earning the majority of the bounties. Could you wquantify this by releasing the numbers on how many supers contributed to the super income, how many carriers contributed to their respective category and then how many subcapital drone boats for theirs?

    I think that would go a long way towards elaborating your concerns to the eve players instead of making broad comments.

    Also- could you point to any examples of where Supercarriers are overpowered when it comes to PvP, as opposed to say- dreads with capital energy neuts?


    I want to know, too.
    lorddlo25
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #1907 - 2017-06-12 19:41:12 UTC
    Londi wrote:
    CCP Larrikin wrote:
    [Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players.
    Our secondary goal is that Carriers and Supercarriers are too effective in PvP, even for the investment it takes to create them. This change will shift the PvP balance, but we’re confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP


    So, you've repeatedly made the claim that it is a small population that is earning the majority of the bounties. Could you wquantify this by releasing the numbers on how many supers contributed to the super income, how many carriers contributed to their respective category and then how many subcapital drone boats for theirs?

    I think that would go a long way towards elaborating your concerns to the eve players instead of making broad comments.

    Also- could you point to any examples of where Supercarriers are overpowered when it comes to PvP, as opposed to say- dreads with capital energy neuts?


    would also be great to know the hours of which is used and for how long as someone in a super could be ratting 10-12 hours and a T1 cruiser 2-3 hours which then those stat's would miss represent everything and show that super's are not the issue at all nor carriers....
    John Revenent
    Revenent Defence Corperation
    Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
    #1908 - 2017-06-12 19:45:17 UTC
    Keep up the good work CCP. It was more fun when we were all poor.

    No, I'm not being sarcastic.

    Ishukone Loyalist - Private Contractor

    "Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned."
    SurrenderMonkey
    State Protectorate
    Caldari State
    #1909 - 2017-06-12 19:46:50 UTC
    Sgt Ocker wrote:
    SurrenderMonkey wrote:
    Sgt Ocker wrote:
    CCP Larrikin wrote:
    Reserved

    As you never use your "reserved" spots, I'll do it.

    The %'s you used are so misleading - Try using numbers that actually correlate with your claims. 1.4% of what, 4.6% of how many players?
    And why do your % stop at 22.8% of players, who made the other 34.4% of bounties.



    Uh, the data given accounts for 65.6% of the bounties. There is no "other 77.2% of bounties". There's another 34.4% of bounties, earned by 77.2% of the players.


    Fixed


    Ok, but you see the problem with the underlying question, right?

    The answer is, "The other 34.4% of the bounties were made by the remaining 77.2% of the players." While they probably could give more resolution on those values, you already know that you're talking about a majority of players earning a minority share of bounties, so it's unlikely to be very interesting. Meanwhile, a very slim minority of players using carriers and supercarriers account for almost half of the bounties, all by themselves.

    I'd imagine the rest are mostly divvied up between mission runners and the like, probably mostly BS and T3s with a smattering of other ships. Ishtar probably makes a reasonable showing in there somewhere, as well.

    "Help, I'm bored with missions!"

    http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
    Nevyn Auscent
    Broke Sauce
    #1910 - 2017-06-12 19:48:59 UTC
    Sgt Ocker wrote:

    He stated 5 days in June - So last week, includes Alpha's (T1 cruisers, which is far higher income for risk, isk outlay than the other 2 combined) and a total number known only to him.

    Again this is CCP using a statistic THEY created with announced income reductions, to justify those income reductions. Using statistics created AFTER announcing nerfs is really poor, underhanded workmanship.



    Lets set players up to grind isk at an unusual rate, then use those same statistics to justify nerfing that income.
    Larrikin, You're a fukin genius (shame you're using it for evil)

    There haven't even been five days since the first post, so there is no way the statistics he used for this maths can be entirely after the announcement. And that is assuming they pulled the last five days fresh off the server rather than running the maths on the first five days of June. So.... Yeah.

    As for total number of players, you really expect CCP to provide that data? Best analysis I've seen of their financial reports says somewhere between 300-400k though, based on the 1.5 ratio of accounts to players they released a while back. Alpha's will add to that but not in a significant manner from appearances.

    To break that income CCP Larakin posted down a little better.
    1% of the population using Supers earned 15.9% of all bounties.
    1% of the population using carriers earned 5.0% of all bounties.
    1% of the population using T1 cruisers earned 1.15% of all bounties.
    This means Supers earn 13.8 times more isk on average than a T1 cruiser does. Yeah....... Not seeing T1 cruisers earning an unfair amount of income here.

    Basically, learn to maths and don't look like an idiot complaining about stats that obviously show the problem.
    Teckos Pech
    Hogyoku
    Goonswarm Federation
    #1911 - 2017-06-12 19:53:45 UTC
    Sassura wrote:
    Teckos Pech

    So let me get this straight....the guy who is having issues paying his sub is going to spend more time ratting (you can't totally AFK rat in a VNI no matter how much you guys lie about it) AND he is going to have more accounts.

    Maybe he should...oh I don't know....go get a better job or something instead of spending more time in his mom's basement. [:roll: wrote:






    When you have to resort to comments about peoples real life jobs and 'moms basement' comments it seems that you are out of reasonable and factual comments. Your posts read more like reddit posts.
    There are people whose opinions I do not necessarily agree with that I enjoy interacting with, ingame and on the forums. Their posts give me fresh insight into other perspectives and widen my thinking. It's a pleasure to banter with them. They in turn, for the most part. can express themselves without falling back to insults. It's a shame that you Sir, are not one of those people. It would give your posts more credibility.


    It is called better allocating your time...like an adult. If you are having that kind of difficulty, then playing MORE of a video game is not really a very responsible choice.

    Further, "balancing" the game around such players is also not very reasonable as it has the potential to wreck the in game economy.

    Maybe if all the butthurt players threatening to quite actually became more reasonable we could have that civil discussion. But most people here have their heads firmly ensconced between their buttocks and are working over time to pretend this problem is not a problem.

    A 757% increase in the growth rate of the money supply over the average is nowhere near Goddamn reasonable.

    "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

    8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
    C0ATL
    Renegade Stars
    Stellae Renascitur
    #1912 - 2017-06-12 19:54:10 UTC
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    C0ATL wrote:
    PenguinBacon wrote:
    I too can massage data to justify a false conclusion!

    Per Quant's 2015 presentation
    1.5% of the games population logged in and ran incursions

    This group accounted for at the time 8.36T worth of income

    Assuming linear growth of the player base based on the increase in incursion income
    May 2017th Income is 9.92T.

    This was a growth of 18.68% of income. The estimated population of incursion runners is 1.66%.

    So Rounding up to 1.7% to be consistent with the chart made by Quant.
    We have 1.7% of the games population accounting for 9.92T income.

    To compare this with the numbers posted by Larrikin in the first post
    22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers
    24.2% (2.6T) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers
    19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers

    Incursion runners are about 21% more of a player base than SuperCarriers but result in 331% more income per character.


    THAT ^ ^ ^

    It begs the question...how true are those numbers? Why didnt we get a nice graph like the ones in the report? Why wasnt a bounty income per ship type graph included in the monthly report (didnt even need to include all 200 ships...just cruiser/battleships/capitals/supercapitals)? And most important of all...why weren't these numbers given in the original post?


    Because it's CCP and they never anticipate the about of nerd rage that's about to come at them...


    Nonsense... Why did they do it several years back? Hell, they would explain things to the most minute details and even give responses to potential question in anticipation of what ppl would reply.... Not 4 day notices to heavy handed nerfs without any back-up to their explanation other than "We do it cause we think its good for the game.". Its their right to change the game as they wish, cause its theirs, afterall.... but to every action there is always a reaction. This time they got a train-wreck on the forums and reddit so they slowly backed down on.

    If they were so sure and rooted in belief that this would be healthy for the game, while not having any underlying agenda, why did they go back to 10% instead of 20% ? Surely if their game is breaking without these nerfs, should they not implement them, even at the cost of a percentage of subscribers? The whole "Cut the leg to save the rest of the body" situation...

    No... this was all an attempt to get people into buying more injectors to respec out of carriers into the next best hit with ratting or PLEXing multiple acounts to farm with, and when they were called on it, CCP backed up quickly and reconsidered the numbers while still applying a nerf to save face.

    They are making carriers and supercarriers seem like the next worst thing after a plague... but in truth, no game developer would let an element kill their game, even if 6% of their players left. The nerf was never needed.
    sabastyian
    Worthless Carebears
    The Initiative.
    #1913 - 2017-06-12 20:00:47 UTC  |  Edited by: sabastyian
    Quote:
    The Data:
    Let’s set the stage for the decision by taking sample of 5 days in June. During that timeframe 10.6 Trillion ISK was rewarded in bounties. Of that:

    22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers
    24.2% (2.6T) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers
    19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers

    Just under half (46.5%) of the bounties earned during the time period was generated by Supercarriers and Carriers, meaning a small percent of the population received a huge portion of the total bounties.

    For may;
    4537 VNI's were lost for around 502.5b
    648 Carriers were lost for around 1.6T
    51 Supers were lost for around 1.41T
    Currently in June;
    1749 Vnis have been lost for 191.66b
    270 Carriers have been lost for 683.73b
    34 supers have been lost for nearly 1.1T
    If you are going to focus on numbers why don't we focus on how many of each ship were lost during the activities as well as looking at fighter losses. If youre so focused on how high tier ships that take ages to train into ( or at the very least a lot of isk for injectors ) because they add to much money, why dont you adress how 19.1-20% of null-sec isk is made by characters that can be trained within 2 months.
    Ramuthra
    Center for Advanced Studies
    Gallente Federation
    #1914 - 2017-06-12 20:03:14 UTC
    Gotta love all these salty tears from no-lifing super ratters that are getting their isk faucet nerfed. The new carrier/supercarriers were overpowered af, for a very few select elite, which is why multiple nerfs were needed. Kudos to CCP for doing the right thing for the EVE Economy as a whole.
    Tessa Sage
    Long Pig Luncheon Meat
    Sending Thots And Players
    #1915 - 2017-06-12 20:05:29 UTC
    SurrenderMonkey wrote:
    Helga Chelien wrote:
    You will be able to lower T1 cruiser? They extract as much isk, how much supercarrier.

    Not on a per-capita basis, they don't.


    sabastyian wrote:
    Supers as a whole netted just under 900b last month
    Carriers as aw hole netted 1t last month
    VNI's/T1 cruisers netted about 1.5T last month.


    Levelized data suggests that capitals are not the culprit. Net after ship replacement from routine PvE is in favor of cruisers taking home the most bounties for the May economic report.
    Frostys Virpio
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #1916 - 2017-06-12 20:06:29 UTC
    sabastyian wrote:
    Quote:
    The Data:
    Let’s set the stage for the decision by taking sample of 5 days in June. During that timeframe 10.6 Trillion ISK was rewarded in bounties. Of that:

    22.3% (2.3T) of the ISK was generated by 1.4% of characters earning bounties, using Supercarriers
    24.2% (2.6T) of the ISK was generated by 4.8% of characters earning bounties, using Carriers
    19.1% (2T) of the ISK was generated by 16.6% of characters earning bounties, using T1 Cruisers

    Just under half (46.5%) of the bounties earned during the time period was generated by Supercarriers and Carriers, meaning a small percent of the population received a huge portion of the total bounties.

    For may;
    4537 VNI's were lost for around 502.5b
    648 Carriers were lost for around 1.6T
    51 supers were lost for 1.41T

    Supers as a whole netted just under 900b last month
    Carriers as aw hole netted 1t last month
    VNI's/T1 cruisers netted about 1.5T last month.
    If you are going to focus on numbers why don't we focus on how many of each ship were lost during the activities as well as looking at fighter losses.


    The rattign data he provided is not a month but 5 days. Your number don't align.
    Frostys Virpio
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #1917 - 2017-06-12 20:07:56 UTC
    Tessa Sage wrote:
    SurrenderMonkey wrote:
    Helga Chelien wrote:
    You will be able to lower T1 cruiser? They extract as much isk, how much supercarrier.

    Not on a per-capita basis, they don't.


    sabastyian wrote:
    Supers as a whole netted just under 900b last month
    Carriers as aw hole netted 1t last month
    VNI's/T1 cruisers netted about 1.5T last month.


    Levelized data suggests that capitals are not the culprit. Net after ship replacement from routine PvE is in favor of cruisers taking home the most bounties for the May economic report.


    Your data is wrong. This "net" data is removing the loss of a month compared to the income of 5 days.
    SurrenderMonkey
    State Protectorate
    Caldari State
    #1918 - 2017-06-12 20:11:59 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
    Tessa Sage wrote:
    SurrenderMonkey wrote:
    Helga Chelien wrote:
    You will be able to lower T1 cruiser? They extract as much isk, how much supercarrier.

    Not on a per-capita basis, they don't.


    sabastyian wrote:
    Supers as a whole netted just under 900b last month
    Carriers as aw hole netted 1t last month
    VNI's/T1 cruisers netted about 1.5T last month.


    Levelized data suggests that capitals are not the culprit. Net after ship replacement from routine PvE is in favor of cruisers taking home the most bounties for the May economic report.



    1. Sabastyian screwed up and used 5 day's worth of bounty data Vs. an entire month's worth of lost ship data.

    2. The problem isn't just how much ISK the players earn, the problem is how much new isk is introduced to the economy. Pretty sure dead supers actually net positive on the amount of isk in the economy.

    "Help, I'm bored with missions!"

    http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
    Sgt Ocker
    What Corp is it
    #1919 - 2017-06-12 20:12:43 UTC
    SurrenderMonkey wrote:
    Sgt Ocker wrote:
    SurrenderMonkey wrote:
    Sgt Ocker wrote:
    CCP Larrikin wrote:
    Reserved

    As you never use your "reserved" spots, I'll do it.

    The %'s you used are so misleading - Try using numbers that actually correlate with your claims. 1.4% of what, 4.6% of how many players?
    And why do your % stop at 22.8% of players, who made the other 34.4% of bounties.



    Uh, the data given accounts for 65.6% of the bounties. There is no "other 77.2% of bounties". There's another 34.4% of bounties, earned by 77.2% of the players.


    Fixed


    Ok, but you see the problem with the underlying question, right?

    The answer is, "The other 34.4% of the bounties were made by the remaining 77.2% of the players." While they probably could give more resolution on those values, you already know that you're talking about a majority of players earning a minority share of bounties, so it's unlikely to be very interesting. Meanwhile, a very slim minority of players using carriers and supercarriers account for almost half of the bounties, all by themselves.

    I'd imagine the rest are mostly divvied up between mission runners and the like, probably mostly BS and T3s with a smattering of other ships. Ishtar probably makes a reasonable showing in there somewhere, as well.
    Are you sure?
    I ran incursions for a long time and made around the same isk PH (more if you include Concord LP) out of them as I do ratting in my super. For a lot less isk outlay, less competition for sites and way less risk..

    I see the problem as; A dev using a statistic that does not correlate with "actual earnings" as the reasoning for a nerf.

    Yes those 2 do account for a larger than normal amount of income - Because those who use them are out to make as much as possible in a short period of time in the knowledge it will be their last opportunity to do so. Post patch Tuesday carrier and super ratting will all but cease - VNI's and Ishtars will be the primary earners followed by Snakes and T2 BS's.

    Do keep in mind, this change to ratting will affect many more players than the ratters themselves. It also affects builders of capitals and fittings plus a quite large impact on miners. Personally I think the surplus minerals that will start appearing in the market place as capital production is cut back is going to drive prices even lower.

    My opinions are mine.

      If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

    It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
    Teckos Pech
    Hogyoku
    Goonswarm Federation
    #1920 - 2017-06-12 20:13:34 UTC
    Hogeron Amelan wrote:
    you guys from CCP have to learn how to read graphs...

    When you average the increase in ISK since the citadel upgrade, aka since carriers and supers can generate ISK the way they do now (May 2016 - June 2017), roughtly estimated 1085T-960T=125 T ISK in 13 months what equals 9,6T or lets say rougly 10T ISK/month since May 2016.

    When you compare the months before, (Oct 2014- Apr. 2016) thats about 790-600T = 190T in 17 months, what equals about 11,2T per month so thats over 10% more than we have now. So in which mathematical universe you are living to say that 11,2 is less than 10 that the actual income situation is not tolerable when there was even more income generated per month before the carrier change?
    Of cause when you see the smooth lines before the citadel patch and the edgy lines after it, you can see that people are struggeling with a constant method for income, meaning that the game content is rapidly shifting between making Isk and loosing it.

    Would you please add a 30-day-playtime cost development graph to that one please? Maybe then you will find out why people are up to increase their income in short periods of time and you may think about it how to introduce game mechanics for a more stable economy.
    Instead of fine-tuning with a precision tool you are ripping of vavles and soldering rips in the pipes of the material flow...


    The average growth rate in the money supply up to Nov. 2016 is about 7 trillion. After that there is considerably more volatility. However, for May 2017 the money supply for just characters grew 53 trillion. That is a huge increase. Using the updated OP and the ratios there as a crude measure of that 53 trillion about 24-25 trillion came from carriers, about 10 trillion from T1 cruisers. And the rest from all other ships. And if there were 2,000 characters ratting in carriers and supers, that is over 12.3 billion on average per character for one month.

    "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

    8 Golden Rules for EVE Online