These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would happen if CCP finally nerfed hisec?

First post First post
Author
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1541 - 2014-01-28 14:32:31 UTC
Dedee Rediculous wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
To restate.

We have the breakdown of isk faucets from CCP. They released this data at Fanfest. As far as I am aware we haven't received any new release of this data so till next fanfest we won't get updated figures.
This data can be averaged across all 12 months released, though it is actually pretty steady for the most part, but there are a couple of potential trends that another 12 months would make clearer.
We also know from CCP's discussion of the ESS in the German forums that Null Sec accounts for 72% of the bounties/NPC kills in all of EVE. There is dispute over the translation from the people that have translated it, but if it is ship kills since Null Rats on average are more valuable than High Sec Rats then it would be more than 72% of the bounties. Especially if NPC kills also included WH rats & Incursion kills which drop no actual bounty. So we can safely use the 72% of all bounties as a lowest possible figure for Null Sec isk.

So, we can then look at the 72% of bounties and see that it accounts for 42% of the total isk faucets in all of EVE. Insurance, and a few other factors will also add slightly to this. So once these factors are taken into account we can see that Null accounts for somewhere between 42% & approx 50% of all isk faucets in EVE.
WH space accounts for a very clear 20% extra from NPC buy orders.
Leaving High & Low sec Combined somewhere between 30-35%, depending exactly on what percentage of insurance is earned in Null.

So, we have a clear indication that more raw isk is earned in null.

We can then also calculate approximate LP values for High Sec missions & for all incursions.
Incursions are easy to do, and it works out that LP for incursions adds about 25% extra value.
It also works out that if we assume all Incursion sites are HQ sites (Most valuable), that there are 4 HQ sites done per hour on average. This is across every single incursion community. Which clearly shows that the isk/hr people are claiming is sustainable for incursions isn't. Since even if a single fleet of 40 was the only fleet running incursions anywhere in EVE, they still wouldn't make 200 mil/hr. When there are multiple fleets that run incursions, I know of five different HQ communities off the top of my head, and a number more VG communities. Meaning that income is getting split between all of them.

Missions are a bit trickier, but the maths on them can also be done using typical mission rewards and assuming a set percentage of the combined reward/insurance/other category belongs to missions. Refer earlier in the thread for all the maths.

So, taking the above three factors you can then do a comparative check, and while I did make assumptions in the maths because CCP didn't release the full break down, these assumptions were controllable, and I attempted to take the sensible high end of High Sec income (Such as all incursions were high sec, ignoring the odd low/null ones that do get done) while leaning towards the lower assumption of only 72% of bounties, rather than ship kills for Null.

And this came out with Null Sec earning more in pure isk than High sec was earning in both isk & LP combined.
Given High Sec has a much larger population, this obviously means that per capita, null is vastly ahead in earnings, since if per capita you earned the same, High Sec would have a much larger gross figure.

Obviously I didn't get into the industrial side, which even I'm suggesting Null should get certain limited buffs on such as better refining without needing to blow advanced upgrades on it, but I also didn't get into the moon goo/PI/loot/high end ores. Which Null obviously wins in hands down compared to High.
So, it's probably not a 100% perfect analysis, but it certainly is good enough to say that Null vs High income is not in the state some people are claiming.

Additionally Null has just received a change to their income, that potentially could increase peoples earnings by up to 25%, and at most is a 5% drop from current. So until we see how that plays out in the actual Meta game, we won't know how much Null Income is really buffed by. My bet is overall somewhere between 10-15% actual increase, since any isk stolen is also likely to be income for someone in null, just income while doing PvP rather than PvE.

So, no data suggests a needed nerf to high sec PvE at present, and no data suggests high sec industry needs a direct nerf, just that Null needs some buffs, and that there is an issue between POS manufacturing in any sec space & Outpost/Station manufacturing costs (in any space)


Lol

Every conclusion in that block of crap is flat wrong.

Starting with basing by bounties, bounties ARE NOT how you push in high sec you dolt.




Well, some people need to convince themselves that their denial of reality is not actually denial lol. Me , I don't get it, the imbalance is easy to test, and easy to see by the numbers of us (sov allaince pilots) with high sec/FW/wormhole alts.

I guess they think we're stupid or something, or that we're so insane that we can't count the actual isk in our actual wallets when doing actual PVE activities lol.
Good Posting
Doomheim
#1542 - 2014-01-28 14:45:41 UTC
Well if sov players can't make enough isk i feel sorry for them. No one is pointing a gun to their head and if they are there is because they want, so enjoy the big plays of eve... eve eve eve ONLINE! ONLINE! ONLINE! ONLINE! Pilot your ship, SHIP!
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1543 - 2014-01-28 14:48:02 UTC
Good Posting wrote:
Well if sov players can't make enough isk i feel sorry for them. No one is pointing a gun to their head and if they are there is because they want, so enjoy the big plays of eve... eve eve eve ONLINE! ONLINE! ONLINE! ONLINE! Pilot your ship, SHIP!


Who said anything about not making enough isk?
Good Posting
Doomheim
#1544 - 2014-01-28 15:05:23 UTC
Oh hai there Jenn

*wink wink*
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1545 - 2014-01-28 15:08:00 UTC
Good Posting wrote:
Oh hai there Jenn

*wink wink*


So you're not going to answer my question? Why post then.

Again, who said anything about not making enough isk?
Good Posting
Doomheim
#1546 - 2014-01-28 15:09:59 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Good Posting wrote:
Oh hai there Jenn

*wink wink*


So you're not going to answer my question? Why post then.

Again, who said anything about not making enough isk?



What question?
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1547 - 2014-01-28 15:14:13 UTC
Good Posting wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Good Posting wrote:
Oh hai there Jenn

*wink wink*


So you're not going to answer my question? Why post then.

Again, who said anything about not making enough isk?



What question?


You surrender is accepted, I rename you France.
Good Posting
Doomheim
#1548 - 2014-01-28 15:23:28 UTC
Les enfants de la patrieeee la la la la laaaa

Ok, i like France. And Achura gurls.
La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1549 - 2014-01-28 16:12:34 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
:words: no sources :words: no data :words: plenty of fallacies :words:


So in other words you have no data or sources to back anything up and are wildly flinging things at the wall hoping one will stick. No amount of wall of text can fix that problem you actually have to provide sources and data to back up the things you say.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1550 - 2014-01-28 16:34:29 UTC
La Nariz wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
:words: no sources :words: no data :words: plenty of fallacies :words:


So in other words you have no data or sources to back anything up and are wildly flinging things at the wall hoping one will stick. No amount of wall of text can fix that problem you actually have to provide sources and data to back up the things you say.


"I assure you, *insert random mathematical term* will show that I'm right and you're wrong and ugly"

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#1551 - 2014-01-28 20:42:59 UTC
Removed some off topic posts. Please keep it on topic and civil. Thank you.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Sean Apollo
No.Mercy
Triumvirate.
#1552 - 2014-01-28 22:09:39 UTC
Would just like to say that High sec has been nerfed! Concord on strike today!

Most people hate me...

Thirtythousand
#1553 - 2014-01-28 23:25:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Thirtythousand
La Nariz wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
:words: no sources :words: no data :words: plenty of fallacies :words:


So in other words you have no data or sources to back anything up and are wildly flinging things at the wall hoping one will stick. No amount of wall of text can fix that problem you actually have to provide sources and data to back up the things you say.


Oh, hai, I found the subscriber numbers you asked for, something came up and was more interesting then arguing here.

subs charts for 100k-1m http://users.telenet.be/mmodata/Charts/Subs-2.png

active logged in accounts, single shard. http://users.telenet.be/mmodata/Charts/PCUShard.png

A blog post that has some logged in account numbers. http://www.ninveah.com/2014/01/blog-banter-52-other-side.html?m=1

As well as info I got from eve offline.

since 2013 data hasn't been released officially. Looking at gllobally, including Chinese servers, CCP hit an estimated 500k subs in 2013.

Tq server subs had been up(ISH) year after year. Considering the avg player has need of multiple accounts, and the lack of wether or not trial accounts are included in the numbers. The highest point in subs and the last spike for tq in subs around the time that incursions was released.

The only other games to mimic eve online continual yearly increase was runescape, dofus and second life. most other MMOs spike then drop.outside of wow that hit a plateau, then dropped then jumped with expansions.

What is observed is that since 2011 to the end 2012, tq had a decline in subs at the end of the year. With the number of avg logged in players, (2nd graph) keep in mind the number of anti-rmt activity this year, numbers spike for the live event and have not been updated since, the graph does not reflect post live event numbers, but other sources have shown that yearly the avg logged in numbers is down from previous years. serenity numbers are less then stellar showing 3k logged now and 14k max logged in the last 24.

What can we take away from this? Clearly there is a market for pve games, and eve online is not the only MMO having this year on year sub increase.

The most successful mmos (read: profitable) are pve focused.

Ignoring pve only players, the non risk takers, the pubbies and care bears, is not going to improve null sec. Not removing the safety levels and allowing people to just enjoy their work without constant intervention of others isn't detrimental to eve.

News posts like this are
http://www.mmomeltingpot.com/2012/03/the-mittani-calls-for-another-player-to-be-harassed-into-suicide-blogger-reactions/
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2012/03/26/ccp-investigates-eve-online-fanfest-panel-mocking-suicidal-player
http://m.slashdot.org/story/113879

GSF may have helped advertise eve, but also hurt the game too.

Pve content has helped eve, wether its in null, low, high sec. Some people enjoy doing pve without intervention which was the topic of the op. Forcing PvP on people who dont want to do it could be the very thing stopping people from staying beyond trial accounts.

Support the updating of rookie ships! Join the discussion https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4222786#post4222786

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#1554 - 2014-01-29 00:50:47 UTC
La Nariz wrote:


So in other words you have no data or sources to back anything up and are wildly flinging things at the wall hoping one will stick. No amount of wall of text can fix that problem you actually have to provide sources and data to back up the things you say.

Actually I posted the data sources and actual maths back about 20-30 pages ago, and I can't be bothered reposting it for people that can't be bothered to read. I simply posted a written explanation of the maths that I had posted.

So, Data, Check.
Sources direct from CCP. Check
Plenty of evidence. Check.
Wild Fallacies. Nope, none of those.

Again, the only people wildly throwing 'mud' here are the Goons denying the maths. Throwing accusations trying to bury it.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#1555 - 2014-01-29 00:56:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Tauranon
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
La Nariz wrote:


So in other words you have no data or sources to back anything up and are wildly flinging things at the wall hoping one will stick. No amount of wall of text can fix that problem you actually have to provide sources and data to back up the things you say.

Actually I posted the data sources and actual maths back about 20-30 pages ago, and I can't be bothered reposting it for people that can't be bothered to read. I simply posted a written explanation of the maths that I had posted.

So, Data, Check.
Sources direct from CCP. Check
Plenty of evidence. Check.
Wild Fallacies. Nope, none of those.

Again, the only people wildly throwing 'mud' here are the Goons denying the maths. Throwing accusations trying to bury it.


Would you mind linking your maths post. All your hurfblurf poasting has buried it so far that I can't find the maths post in your posting history.

Unless its that terrible one Jenna linked. Which does not have isk/hr in it.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#1556 - 2014-01-29 01:17:23 UTC
Isk/hr isn't discussable. Because all we have are various peoples assertions as to what isk/hr actually is achievable. And we have claims for 500 mil/hr for null isk/hr in the forums also. None of which, High/Low/Null, have been backed by any actual hard evidence to show that it's a sustainable rate of income, simply peoples personal assertions.

The only point I've touched on isk/hr is the fact that the data shows the claims for incursions clearly aren't sustainable, because there isn't enough made on incursions for even 40 people to earn the claimed 200 mil/hr. Let alone the number of fleets that actually run incursions. Exactly what the average isk/hr is across all the pilots involved, I don't know for sure, since I don't have figures on wait time trying to get into fleets vs time in fleets, or how many people are involved in that figure. I only know my personal average.


Like I said, I've stayed inside the bounds of the actual data available to us. If you have some kind of data showing how many hours pilots who rat in null spend online vs how many hours pilots who mission spend online, I'd love to see it.

But the net result is per capita, Null is earning vastly more than High. It is possible that this is because the Null Pilots are spending more hours. But that goes against the argument the Null players are making that they can only spend a few hours a day ratting because of all the interruptions where as High Sec can run all day. So either the isk/hr claims are off, the interruption claims are off, or there is some other bizarre effect at work.
Taranogas 3rd
Doomheim
#1557 - 2014-01-29 01:54:34 UTC
CCP should just nerf high sec and be done with it, then when people leave and/or it's all bots the l33t gankers will have their way risk free PvP, but the best part will be when all the l33t PvPers are left (and by that those who only engage 10:1 or vs an assured win not even risking 0.5%)

Because you know it ain't PVP unless you have a falcon alt, a link alt, and 250 friends waiting a jump away.

ganker1: "hey why isn't anyone online to shoot?"
ganker2: "man there's no one in high they all up and left the game"
ganker1: "**** what are we supposed to do now?"
ganker2: "idk maybe engage some peeps in low.."
...
...
both: "hahahah you kidding me, we can't engage them we'll lose, besides we/them just dock up as soon as we're spotted"

or better in null

"I've found a target let's engage!"
"we can't engage them they're blue to us!"
"oh so who can we engage out here?"
"wait let me chick our enemy list... hmm seems everyone is blue to us"


btw I love the ranting here "highsec makes too much"
"well show us the data"
"no! you show us the data"

what..
Fact is people want to have fun, they don't have time to blue up everyone or only play when their friends are online, which is why WoW, and high sec is popular, hell which is why high sec pvp (more mercs, structures to shoot) is increasing and CCP will offer more ways for it in the future.

Null and low require a completely different mentality, 90% of players in low have an alt for their pvp income and the players in null are barely online when their team/friends/ops are going on, which is why null is basically empty most of the time except in staging systems, and the blue next door.

No one wants to deal with this bullshit, they want to play when they feel like it, sure there are griefers in high but you can still do at least something of what you want, in low null, have to move all your assets it's boring solo there because everyone is grouped up and afk.

High sec is like a metropolitan it's more busy active (gee who would have though just like real life!) and low sec the ghetto and all that, null is freaking iraq and afghanistan, everything is staged, one super power and that's it.
Mourn LeBlade
Jupiter Roughriders
#1558 - 2014-01-29 02:22:31 UTC
I'd be all for it if they'd remove Local from Null space.

That way all the "easy" buttons would be removed, and me and three other pilots could have the whole game to ourselves.

LTCOL LeBlade 177 Division Live Free or Die

La Nariz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1559 - 2014-01-29 02:30:40 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Isk/hr isn't discussable. Because all we have are various peoples assertions as to what isk/hr actually is achievable. And we have claims for 500 mil/hr for null isk/hr in the forums also. None of which, High/Low/Null, have been backed by any actual hard evidence to show that it's a sustainable rate of income, simply peoples personal assertions.

The only point I've touched on isk/hr is the fact that the data shows the claims for incursions clearly aren't sustainable, because there isn't enough made on incursions for even 40 people to earn the claimed 200 mil/hr. Let alone the number of fleets that actually run incursions. Exactly what the average isk/hr is across all the pilots involved, I don't know for sure, since I don't have figures on wait time trying to get into fleets vs time in fleets, or how many people are involved in that figure. I only know my personal average.


Like I said, I've stayed inside the bounds of the actual data available to us. If you have some kind of data showing how many hours pilots who rat in null spend online vs how many hours pilots who mission spend online, I'd love to see it.

But the net result is per capita, Null is earning vastly more than High. It is possible that this is because the Null Pilots are spending more hours. But that goes against the argument the Null players are making that they can only spend a few hours a day ratting because of all the interruptions where as High Sec can run all day. So either the isk/hr claims are off, the interruption claims are off, or there is some other bizarre effect at work.


So basically you have no proof to refute the well reasoned arguments presented to you so now you default to spamming walls of text that can be summed up as "lol no." Good to know, you've got nothing.

This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Improve the forums, support this idea: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=345133

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#1560 - 2014-01-29 02:37:10 UTC
La Nariz wrote:


So basically you have no proof to refute the well reasoned arguments presented to you so now you default to spamming walls of text that can be summed up as "lol no." Good to know, you've got nothing.

I have more proof than you do as to isk/hr arguments, since I proved that incursions were not sustainable at the claimed levels of income. The rest of it, you have just been throwing wild claims with no backing.

I however, have proved that Null is making vastly more per capita than high is. Exactly how they do this is still open for discussion obviously, but there obviously is not a shortage of isk in Null as a result.

You are the one throwing mud here, I provided actual maths backed by CCP figures. You have provided insults & dismissals just because you don't like what the result was.