These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: More Deployables from Super Friends

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vald Tegor
Empyrean Guard
Tactical Narcotics Team
#2081 - 2014-01-24 04:23:43 UTC
I'm still wondering why this thing needs to siphon 20% of the bounties in the first place. I get that you want thieves to convert them into "ISK tags". They are then expected to die with them in the cargo for the loot fairy to create another ISK sink. But overall, this is going to be an insignificant amount.

If ISK faucets are really too much for the health of the game, go ahead and nerf bounties by 5%. All bounties across the game, as an initiative that is separate from this deployable. It will still hit null the hardest of the regions, but will not feel as arbitrary and targeted.

Then forget the bounty siphon idea and pay out the full, globally reduced bounty to each ratter, whether the ESS is deployed or not. Store 100% of this new LP incentive inside the active ESS instead of granting it directly to the characters on bounty ticks. Let the "fight" happen over the LP stored in the ESS. This actually makes some sense and it feels like an interesting new feature. One that can later be potentially expanded to higher security space without as many abuse cases.

If the player is to risk more personal funds in the process, increase the cost of the module and/or design them to die more frequently. That will also increase the sink of it coming from npc buy orders, without needing "ISK tags". Other locals will still have incentive to come defend it, as they have personal LP at stake inside. This reduces the impact of it as a blue griefing tool and will prevent large alliances from considering banning it.

There is still another issue with it being racial. One per system means someone else can deploy one for a faction who's LP others in system don't care for. This will likewise create friction among friendly ratters over already scarce territory. This leads to some people potentially not joining the formup, in an attempt to let an unwanted ESS get killed. It is counter-productive to the small gang design goal of this module. You want it to bring people together. This can be alleviated by making it uniform LP of one particular store. That could be concord, SoE, or whatever other corporation is chosen or created. If a new one is created, it could further allow exchange to a limited subset of LP stores similar to concord LP. The amount granted can be scaled to balance, based on the quality of the LP being awarded.

As a future expansion of the module, higher meta versions could be created for higher LP payout (sink) at significantly higher ISK cost (sink).
Danalee
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2082 - 2014-01-24 07:50:22 UTC
Loving the deployables overall and the newest addition in particular Lol

The ESS will rock some nullbear socks for sure (look at them squirming... oh noes, we might not be 100% safe ratting in null anymore).
For me it looks like the first small step towards enforcing to hold only the space you are willing/capable to defend.
We need more things like this, really.

D.

Bear

Proud member of the Somalian Coast Guard Authority

Member and Juror of the Court of Crime and Punishment
Treborr MintingtonJr
S.N.O.T
S.N.O.T.
#2083 - 2014-01-24 08:59:02 UTC
Danalee wrote:
Loving the deployables overall and the newest addition in particular Lol

The ESS will rock some nullbear socks for sure (look at them squirming... oh noes, we might not be 100% safe ratting in null anymore).
For me it looks like the first small step towards enforcing to hold only the space you are willing/capable to defend.
We need more things like this, really.

D.

Bear


To take a quote from a well known eve leader and adapt it.

"Nullsec is worth fighting for."
Speedkermit Damo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#2084 - 2014-01-24 12:53:41 UTC
Does the ESS fix sov?

Because that's the only thing CCP should be doing right now.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Gizan
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2085 - 2014-01-24 12:55:22 UTC
how about you take this ESS garbage and shove it up your butts...

CCP: I have an idea, lets force the null sec PEOPLE (no the sheeple) back to highsec becasue we dont want them ratting in 0.0
Gizan
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2086 - 2014-01-24 12:56:18 UTC
if you are going to try to get new people, making it harder for them to play the game is not the way to go, neighter is forcing more people into the lagfest that is fights, by advertising them to the public.
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#2087 - 2014-01-24 16:46:13 UTC
Vald Tegor wrote:
I'm still wondering why this thing needs to siphon 20% of the bounties in the first place. I get that you want thieves to convert them into "ISK tags". They are then expected to die with them in the cargo for the loot fairy to create another ISK sink. But overall, this is going to be an insignificant amount.

If ISK faucets are really too much for the health of the game, go ahead and nerf bounties by 5%. All bounties across the game, as an initiative that is separate from this deployable. It will still hit null the hardest of the regions, but will not feel as arbitrary and targeted.

Then forget the bounty siphon idea and pay out the full, globally reduced bounty to each ratter, whether the ESS is deployed or not. Store 100% of this new LP incentive inside the active ESS instead of granting it directly to the characters on bounty ticks. Let the "fight" happen over the LP stored in the ESS. This actually makes some sense and it feels like an interesting new feature. One that can later be potentially expanded to higher security space without as many abuse cases.

If the player is to risk more personal funds in the process, increase the cost of the module and/or design them to die more frequently. That will also increase the sink of it coming from npc buy orders, without needing "ISK tags". Other locals will still have incentive to come defend it, as they have personal LP at stake inside. This reduces the impact of it as a blue griefing tool and will prevent large alliances from considering banning it.

There is still another issue with it being racial. One per system means someone else can deploy one for a faction who's LP others in system don't care for. This will likewise create friction among friendly ratters over already scarce territory. This leads to some people potentially not joining the formup, in an attempt to let an unwanted ESS get killed. It is counter-productive to the small gang design goal of this module. You want it to bring people together. This can be alleviated by making it uniform LP of one particular store. That could be concord, SoE, or whatever other corporation is chosen or created. If a new one is created, it could further allow exchange to a limited subset of LP stores similar to concord LP. The amount granted can be scaled to balance, based on the quality of the LP being awarded.

As a future expansion of the module, higher meta versions could be created for higher LP payout (sink) at significantly higher ISK cost (sink).


Yeah, I agree with this entirely. Perhaps there should be no bounty rewards at all for all rats whether in high sec, low sec or null sec. Let people get by on salvage, that would make people want to fight over it and drive conflict. Despite the improvements to the ESS I still don't understand why it can't be deployed in HighSec.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...
Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct
Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
#2088 - 2014-01-24 17:02:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Kevin Emoto
Javajunky wrote:
Don't want to do the real work and fix pos code so we'll just tinker with a bunch of stuff. Should I pass the weak sauce? Oh wait I see you already have plenty.



^^^ I don't normally agree with goons, but when I do, Javajunky is on the list!
Kevin Emoto
No Code of Conduct
Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
#2089 - 2014-01-24 17:05:05 UTC
I hope this release has some solution for the huge spike in TiDi (aka server side lag) that has been caused by the previous release of mobile deployables.
Regan Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2090 - 2014-01-24 18:10:39 UTC
I did log into sisi again to try the latest build of this.

I'm sorry I still don't see how this adds to the game. This is going to be another item that is rarely used. Only those with high security and large roaming defence fleets will bother. ie: the rich get richer

Not only that but the game mechanic itself has zero fun value. This does not make me want to play more, in fact if deployed would make me play less. It is not interactive....provides zero group play fun...does zero to address POS or SOV issues.

If your going to spend time on these new modules CCP the I suggest you look at them from that point of view.

For example create a scanning enhancement module...it would give a boost to core scanner probes to find those ultra rare sites or special ghost sites. Make these sites super hard with tons of rats that require group play.

In addition it would boost combat scanners to find ships so people teamed up in these rare sites could be found quickly. As well as allowing combat probes to seek out cloaked ships. Make it easily destroyed and take some time to deploy and 'warm up. Make a couple versions with increasing cost to boost ratio. Easily destroyed and expensive. But put good loot in the rare sites. Risk....Reward.

That is something new....that is something that could bring small groups/teams together. ESS is simply changes to an existing mechanic that nobody asked for. I won't say ratting is fun...but it does help all sizes of corps and alliances afford the ships and resources to do the pvp fun things that we love.

Even with the recent changes to ESS ... It is better than it was but still is no fun...changes nothing and probably adds to your code maintenance issues.

On this I still vote no.
Tarsas Phage
Sniggerdly
#2091 - 2014-01-24 19:42:51 UTC
Tahnil wrote:

Especially with regards to Navy ships, demand is a variable. In fact I remember that in the past some large nullsec alliances used doctrines involving Navy battleships, and I think one problem was supply. Whenever a large fight went south, they needed to replace a large amount of ships fast. If there is not enough supply, prices rise. Or the doctrine dies.


Yes, the prices do rise. Temporarily. When TEST/PL introduced Foxcats during the Querious/Delve campaign against RA and -A-, Napoc prices went up. They went back down even before the conflict ended and the doctrine was put on ice. The same thing happened with more sporadic faction BS doctrines - Navy Domis and Fleet 'pests in particular. Their high ride on the sellers market was rather fleeting (pun intended.) To that end, I've never seen a large alliance discontinue a doctrine because hull supply was too low. The doctrines almost always die early because they just didn't pan out as hoped or something better came along.
Ecoskii
Penal Servitude
#2092 - 2014-01-24 23:14:29 UTC
I don't get how CCP are so naive regarding human nature - this is a dumbass module that will always get blown up on sight particularly until they finally extract a digit and fix afk cloaking.
Tahnil
Gunboat Commando
#2093 - 2014-01-24 23:35:38 UTC
...by removing local chat! I totally agree! PirateP
Rommiee
Mercury Inc.
#2094 - 2014-01-24 23:47:40 UTC
Danalee wrote:
Loving the deployables overall and the newest addition in particular Lol

The ESS will rock some nullbear socks for sure (look at them squirming... oh noes, we might not be 100% safe ratting in null anymore).
For me it looks like the first small step towards enforcing to hold only the space you are willing/capable to defend.
We need more things like this, really.

D.

Bear


You're an idiot.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#2095 - 2014-01-25 03:16:24 UTC
Ecoskii wrote:
I don't get how CCP are so naive regarding human nature - this is a dumbass module that will always get blown up on sight particularly until they finally extract a digit and fix afk cloaking.


In CCP's defense, they aren't the only one's naive about human nature, plenty of people think in terms of what they think people should do, rather than thinking about what people will really do. You can see that here with people who think the ESS is a good idea lol.
Monsieur Leon
Doomheim
#2096 - 2014-01-25 10:20:36 UTC
Vald Tegor wrote:
I'm still wondering why this thing needs to siphon 20% of the bounties in the first place. I get that you want thieves to convert them into "ISK tags". They are then expected to die with them in the cargo for the loot fairy to create another ISK sink. But overall, this is going to be an insignificant amount.

If ISK faucets are really too much for the health of the game, go ahead and nerf bounties by 5%. All bounties across the game, as an initiative that is separate from this deployable. It will still hit null the hardest of the regions, but will not feel as arbitrary and targeted.

Then forget the bounty siphon idea and pay out the full, globally reduced bounty to each ratter, whether the ESS is deployed or not. Store 100% of this new LP incentive inside the active ESS instead of granting it directly to the characters on bounty ticks. Let the "fight" happen over the LP stored in the ESS. This actually makes some sense and it feels like an interesting new feature. One that can later be potentially expanded to higher security space without as many abuse cases.

If the player is to risk more personal funds in the process, increase the cost of the module and/or design them to die more frequently. That will also increase the sink of it coming from npc buy orders, without needing "ISK tags". Other locals will still have incentive to come defend it, as they have personal LP at stake inside. This reduces the impact of it as a blue griefing tool and will prevent large alliances from considering banning it.

There is still another issue with it being racial. One per system means someone else can deploy one for a faction who's LP others in system don't care for. This will likewise create friction among friendly ratters over already scarce territory. This leads to some people potentially not joining the formup, in an attempt to let an unwanted ESS get killed. It is counter-productive to the small gang design goal of this module. You want it to bring people together. This can be alleviated by making it uniform LP of one particular store. That could be concord, SoE, or whatever other corporation is chosen or created. If a new one is created, it could further allow exchange to a limited subset of LP stores similar to concord LP. The amount granted can be scaled to balance, based on the quality of the LP being awarded.

As a future expansion of the module, higher meta versions could be created for higher LP payout (sink) at significantly higher ISK cost (sink).


First off the idea of balancing is great if it is implemented correctly. But we are talking about CCP I dont think they know what a balance scale is much less what it looks like.

Some time ago CCP nerfed the drones lands rats by taking away the drone goo because people were bitching that if affected the market prices. So while all other sites in Null sec enjoy wrecks with loot and on occasion faction drops. The drone lands do not. It is quite an imbalance that they have yet to fix


HINT HINT

So if you wanted this module nerfed and all the null sec regions balanced you would not only need to drop the bounties, but also make all wrecks empty and remove any chance of faction drops.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#2097 - 2014-01-25 15:36:53 UTC
CCP Soniclover announces the ESS, threadnaught ensues!

In unrelated news, bidding for CCP Soniclover's corpse hits 500b isk, with top bidder The Mittani. News at 11.
L iriel
Arach-Tinilith
#2098 - 2014-01-25 16:03:25 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Qoi wrote:
Where will you be able to convert ISK tags into ISK?


The empire fleets stations (Federation Navy stations, etc.).



I live in null.....there are no "faction" stations or agents around how is this a good thing again? I have no motivation to use this deployable. I automatically loose ratting isk because of the changes.

But on the plus side I get:

a deployable that any red in system can destroy
a delay to access my lost isk
a warp bubble to prevent me from snatch and grab if a red does jump in to system
LP that I can't use....because I live in null...there are no LP stores out here
isk tags that I can't redeem because there are no faction stations out here
oh, and let's not forget, that you will automatically loose any portion of the isk that is below the smallest tag (10k i believe)

and can someone please explain these two statements from the dev blog

Destroying or scooping the ESS will not affect the system-wide pool. That is only affected by successfully accessing the ESS and choosing to Share or Take all. The system wide-pool stays intact and becomes available again when another ESS is deployed.

• The payout level of an ESS is reset if it is destroyed, scooped or when it is accessed and the system-wide pool is distributed.
thowlimer
Roprocor Ltd
#2099 - 2014-01-25 21:06:55 UTC
L iriel wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Qoi wrote:
Where will you be able to convert ISK tags into ISK?


The empire fleets stations (Federation Navy stations, etc.).



I live in null.....there are no "faction" stations or agents around how is this a good thing again? I have no motivation to use this deployable. I automatically loose ratting isk because of the changes.

But on the plus side I get:

a deployable that any red in system can destroy
a delay to access my lost isk
a warp bubble to prevent me from snatch and grab if a red does jump in to system
LP that I can't use....because I live in null...there are no LP stores out here
isk tags that I can't redeem because there are no faction stations out here
oh, and let's not forget, that you will automatically loose any portion of the isk that is below the smallest tag (10k i believe)

and can someone please explain these two statements from the dev blog

Destroying or scooping the ESS will not affect the system-wide pool. That is only affected by successfully accessing the ESS and choosing to Share or Take all. The system wide-pool stays intact and becomes available again when another ESS is deployed.

• The payout level of an ESS is reset if it is destroyed, scooped or when it is accessed and the system-wide pool is distributed.


First, you only get tags if someone hits the share all option, so that is at least one les hassle for the ratter and more headache for the red trying to steal your isk.

As for those two statements an ESS will give increased payout/rat over time it is this time that is reset, ie if a 800k rat gives 200k payout just after deployment it will give(not sure but think it was in the ballpark of 5% more) after 2 hours which would come to 210k. so after being destroyed and redeployed it would be back down to 200k, but you could still retrieve the isk
earnt during those two hours as long as noone used the share/take all optione before destroying it
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#2100 - 2014-01-25 21:48:58 UTC
thowlimer wrote:


First, you only get tags if someone hits the share all option, so that is at least one les hassle for the ratter and more headache for the red trying to steal your isk.


I'm sure this is just a typo.

Take option, not share option, to get tags.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter