These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Tritis Mentari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1141 - 2014-01-16 15:34:26 UTC
Tahnil wrote:

ESS is meant to be an incentive to actually fight. Your argument goes: „Nullbears don‘t fight, they dock up“, CCPs answer is: „We give nullbears a better reason to fight, there will be an incentive“. So the only question that remains is: how large should this incentive be? And how does the mechanic work exactly.


A gang deploying an ESS creates the same effect as a gang without an ESS. Ratters dock up either way. The hostile ESS generates no income for the roaming gang but costs 30 million. If the gang leaves with the ESS still deployed then the ratters undock, destroy the ESS, and go about their business. If the gang hangs around, then the ratters log off and go spend time with their loved ones or something. The ESS generates no fights.

After generating zero isk and zero fights, gangs won't waste the 30 million isk. The end result being a straight 5% nerf to ratting income, everyone moves on, and SonicLover's pet project gets forgotten.
Foo Chan
Sparks Inc
#1142 - 2014-01-16 15:34:28 UTC
Andrea Keuvo wrote:


If a forced fight is what you are looking for a module already exists for this, its called an SBU.


Damn right.

Yes, I can build that.

Eram Fidard
Doomheim
#1143 - 2014-01-16 15:37:12 UTC
greiton starfire wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:

Why would they undock with you in system? They will wait for you to leave and THEN they will attempt to destroy ESS. No more, no less fights than now.



If there is a ESS already in system earning people 120% of the current bounty, a roaming fleet can warp to it and if you are unwilling to fight them off, they get to take any unclaimed tags. You deny them fights and they deny you isk... seems like a fair trade to me.

It's the equivalent of old time highway robbery.

They would never put it up in the first place, it requires far too much reward to ever offset the cost of having it around while you pve.


If anyone was stupid enough to place an ESS in their own space, you can guarantee that alliance will be torn apart by internal struggles after a single noob-alt in an ibis is seen flitting around, 'stealing' income. "Whose alt is that?" "I saw _____ in system at the same time as NoobAlt!!"

Perhaps this is the conflict SoniClover is hoping to generate. The thing is, this type of conflict already exists, in the form of "sneaky awoxing". Once again, nothing added.

Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages.

Aryth
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1144 - 2014-01-16 15:40:01 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:

Because the ISK coming into the game from Null Sec bounties every day is insane and we want to minimize inflation.


Your own economist says otherwise.

Quote:
The next graph showed the money supply. Overall, the money supply is evening out--changes to systems have reduced the ISK supply, so average ISK in active wallets is stable as of November 2012 and the maximum amount may even be peaking. While Mike points out that the leveling-out at the top of the graph is very short, Dr. EyjoG responded that it was the first plateau visible at all. Sinks and faucets are fairly balanced right now, with a bit more faucet than sink to allow for economic growth.


http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/csm/CSM8_August_Summit_Minutes.pdf

This explanation doesn't hold water and you've published something to that effect.


You're comparing apples and oranges here. Eyjo is talking about the overall balance of faucets and sinks. I'm talking about the amount of ISK entering the game through NPC bounties.

I feel I need to clarify what I said, as it seems some people are misunderstanding it, I'm not saying that the ESS is intended to reduce inflation. I'm saying we want to be careful about how much higher than the current 100% we can go. So it's not about trying to reduce the ISK entering the game through NPC bounties, it is making sure it doesn't increase too much.


Swap to LP. Avoid this entire rabbit hole and keep it in the player economy too.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.

Tahnil
Gunboat Commando
#1145 - 2014-01-16 15:41:50 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
Tahnil wrote:
ESS is meant to be an incentive to actually fight. Your argument goes: „Nullbears don‘t fight, they dock up“, CCPs answer is: „We give nullbears a better reason to fight, there will be an incentive“. So the only question that remains is: how large should this incentive be? And how does the mechanic work exactly.


It doesn't sound like you understand this game very well, despite your "years" of experience.

Ratters don't dock up to be risk averse pansies -- they dock up because they don't want to fight a PvP fit in their ratting PvE fit - because that would be stupidity.

Also if you are coming in with an entire gang, as you say, it would be even more stupidity for them not to dock up.

There's nothing "manly" or "tough guy" about fighting a PvP fit in a PvE fit - and ratting isn't inherently a "carebear" activity, it's just a way to make ISK....And if you stop making ISK, you stop being able to PvP -- so pretty much everybody has to make ISK in some way or another.


…and…

Funless Saisima wrote:
Except that you don't PVP in PVE ships. If you try to dock up (instead of POSing up and waiting) to switch ships, there might be a bubble there from that random neut.


ESS doesn‘t require you to fight in your PvE fit. Not at all. PvE ratters should be able to dock / POS up and switch to suitable combat ships, maybe even call for reinforcements from nearby systems. (That‘s one of my main concern with the current mechanic of the ESS. A fixed timer doesn‘t cut it. Depending on the situation it is either too short or too long. Right now it‘s too short. ESS can be robbed long before the defenders are able to react. Therefore the „take all“ option should be a payment over time, not a single payment after a timer. For example the attacker could get one tag for every x seconds that he‘s willing to wait at the ESS module.)

Eram Fidard wrote:
Except for, as stated dozens of times in this thread, by people with backgrounds and experience in all areas of eve, this does not do that. The idea is so fundamentally flawed that it would never do that.


No. The idea behind ESS isn‘t flawed at all. It is a good idea, but the proposed mechanism seems to be flawed in several ways.

Andrea Keuvo wrote:
Facepalm. There is no incentive for nullbears to fight. Look, the deployment of these will be banned by all major alliances and even if they aren't, ratters wont deploy them. Putting this in your system is an open invite for hostiles to disrupt your ratting activities. People don't want hostiles in their ratting system, they want to rat. People don't want to do emergency PvP in their ratting system, they want to PvP in a properly organized fleet and on a roam. There is no chance that these will be deployed by any locals in a ratting system.


I‘ve got news for you: NULL SECURITY SPACE is not designed for undisturbed ratting. I don‘t care that inhabitants want to rat in peace. Not at all :-) Your complaint is in no way different from hisec carebears demanding an end of ganking, war decs and other activies disturbing their mission running and mining.
Cheekything
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1146 - 2014-01-16 15:42:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Cheekything
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
It would be nice to get some dev &/or CSM feedback on the issues brought up.

also: Why wasn't this first released in the F&I forum for feedback. Does CCP consider the proposed version a final draft?


Based on feedback, we're looking at three things:
- Time to get loot - lot of good points that the time needs to be increased
- Interceptors too good - we're looking at ways to decrease the efficiency of using an interceptor to steal
- Too effective as warp bubble - we're looking at making it less viable

Thanks for the feedback so far. Any test feedback from Sisi would also be much appreciated.



Negatives:
Income isn't worth the risk
Too useful as a Harassment too.
Tags

Positives:
It's a great idea as a concept I love the idea
isk
small gang pvp

Solutions:
Changes to how the module functions:
-Make it required to be placed next to an ihub
-Change Tags to just isk
-Increase the reward amounts but increase how long it takes per increase, i.e. up to 120% but would take multiple days solo ratting.

This change makes it worth using for ratters, risk and reward, the Ihub makes it only usable in a system that is owned, as NPC 0.0 should remain unaffected by this change.

Change the way you remove isk:
- Lock the ship to the Module for 90 seconds
- To withdraw you need to press the button and wait 120+ second (and announced in locals in all of the constellation)

This change gives people enough time to kill an ceptor while at the same time giving small gangs a nice message that there is an easy kill to be had in 2 minutes time in X system.
Tahnil
Gunboat Commando
#1147 - 2014-01-16 15:42:36 UTC
MasterAsher wrote:
I dont think there is anyway to mitigate the large amount of risk of this item the way interceptors work now.

If they nerf bounties to lets say 60% or lower without ess all you will do is completely drive people from 0.0 because it wont be worth it. ( a lot of people have high sec alts already this will just cause all pve to move out of 0.0 into highsec or low sec fw alts)

On the other had lets say you make the carrot bigger and you get like 50-60% more isk for deploying this. Whats to stop awoxers from stealing all your isk or random douchbags from doing it? This will cause way too much drama for any isk gain that's worth it.


Did you ever live in wormhole space? What you are describing there is daily business over there. People do live together in a POS, sharing a lot of equipment, stockpiling sleeper loot until it can be sold safely in hisec, etc. Drama is an essential part of EVE. If somebody chooses to set up an ESS, there is a certain chance for drama. And that‘s positive. It seems there are not only autistic players in hisec, but in nullsec also, only in a different way. Everybody should have to deal with these problems.
Turelus
Utassi Security
#1148 - 2014-01-16 15:45:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Turelus
Andrea Keuvo wrote:

Facepalm. There is no incentive for nullbears to fight. Look, the deployment of these will be banned by all major alliances and even if they aren't, ratters wont deploy them. Putting this in your system is an open invite for hostiles to disrupt your ratting activities. People don't want hostiles in their ratting system, they want to rat. People don't want to do emergency PvP in their ratting system, they want to PvP in a properly organized fleet and on a roam. There is no chance that these will be deployed by any locals in a ratting system.

If a hostile comes to deploy this, ratters will remain docked as always until the gang moves on and gets bored. They either scoop their ESS and take it with them or it will get blown up in 30 seconds after they are gone and before any ratting starts.

If a forced fight is what you are looking for a module already exists for this, its called an SBU.


In this single post I have highlighted every reason why the ESS is a flawed module and wont be used, thank you to Andrea for giving me a simple way to yet again post the same points which CCP seem to be missing in this whole debate.

If this is released into EVE the only thing it will achieve is to become a NullSec wide nerf to income and an occasional griefing tool which is yet another structure grind.

Turelus CEO Utassi Security

Eram Fidard
Doomheim
#1149 - 2014-01-16 15:46:10 UTC
Tahnil wrote:
Everybody should have to deal with these problems.


And everyone does, it's called "AWOXing"

Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages.

Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1150 - 2014-01-16 15:46:17 UTC
Tahnil wrote:
ESS doesn‘t require you to fight in your PvE fit. Not at all. PvE ratters should be able to dock / POS up and switch to suitable combat ships, maybe even call for reinforcements from nearby systems.


And by this time, all the loot in the ESS is gone because the people coming in just warped to it and clicked the TAKE ALL button while you screw around changing your fit, dock, undock, "call for reinforcements" etc.

Now do you understand why nobody will use them?

While they go to change their ship, you can just go straight to the ESS.
Rdubs
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1151 - 2014-01-16 15:49:19 UTC
I have followed this forum for years, played EVE on and off for a while since 2009 and never felt the need to post. So this is my first post to the EVE forums, and I am using it to say that if CCP goes through and actually rolls out this ESS after this kind of player/customer feedback, it will be an act of developer hubris unseen since the ending of Mass Effect 3. I see this a lot in my line of work, someone comes up with an idea they think is so great that they impose it top-down and anyone who doesn't like it just doesn't understand the brilliance of the idea. Sure people generally don't like change and will normally whine, but there are such things as bad ideas. That's how the ME3 ending happened - the executive producer and lead writer decided they wanted to write the ending themselves and didn't need the input of the other writers, and then would not let any of the other writers see it until after the voice actors recorded it (so by then it was a fait accompli). They bypassed the peer review process that all the other writing underwent because they didn't think the other writers would grasp the creative brilliance, but in reality they were just afraid the other writers might expose it for the crap it was and they didn't want to hear negative feedback on their work product.

It takes moral courage to listen to feedback and walk back an idea, and hopefully the guys at CCP who came up with this have that. Granted the dev's are aware of the "vocal minority" aspect, and no doubt only a small fraction of subscriptions write on this forum, but to just ignore this wave of displeasure because the complainers supposedly don't get the creative genius is a bad idea. Others smarter than me have posted ideas on this thread about how to modify the item if the dev's would lose too much face just shelving it completely, but please don't let it roll out the way currently designed and even more importantly, please don't try to coerce more people into using it by increasing the penalty from 5% to something higher. Turning up the magnitude because your product isn't having the desired outcome usually results in more unintended consequences and customer anger than it does help the "problem" of your product isn't doing what you hoped.
NinjaStyle
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1152 - 2014-01-16 15:50:27 UTC
CCP SoniClover wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
CCP SoniClover wrote:

Because the ISK coming into the game from Null Sec bounties every day is insane and we want to minimize inflation.


Your own economist says otherwise.

Quote:
The next graph showed the money supply. Overall, the money supply is evening out--changes to systems have reduced the ISK supply, so average ISK in active wallets is stable as of November 2012 and the maximum amount may even be peaking. While Mike points out that the leveling-out at the top of the graph is very short, Dr. EyjoG responded that it was the first plateau visible at all. Sinks and faucets are fairly balanced right now, with a bit more faucet than sink to allow for economic growth.


http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/csm/CSM8_August_Summit_Minutes.pdf

This explanation doesn't hold water and you've published something to that effect.


You're comparing apples and oranges here. Eyjo is talking about the overall balance of faucets and sinks. I'm talking about the amount of ISK entering the game through NPC bounties.

I feel I need to clarify what I said, as it seems some people are misunderstanding it, I'm not saying that the ESS is intended to reduce inflation. I'm saying we want to be careful about how much higher than the current 100% we can go. So it's not about trying to reduce the ISK entering the game through NPC bounties, it is making sure it doesn't increase too much.


holy **** bro you basicly just said: we really need a thing that can generate pvp to keep you guys happy but since we really cant give you anything in return we gotta nerf your income first so we can try to give you some incentive to try this out but it wont actually be worth the effort we know this hence the nerf is REQUIRED.

do you even know how bad that is?
Yeep
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1153 - 2014-01-16 15:52:11 UTC
How about this:


  • Drop the 5% global decrease in bounties and any ability to increase bounties above 100%
  • Make the deployable siphon 20% of all bounties across the whole constellation its deployed in (perhaps even make a hauler sized one that does a whole region)
  • Have anyone in range able to take all siphoned ISK directly into their wallet


People not watching intel channels might continue to rat. People stuck in anoms or escalations will probably continue to rat. Attackers get some ISK and a fight if they stick around. Defenders have to go fight you or lose multiple systems of ratting space.
Tahnil
Gunboat Commando
#1154 - 2014-01-16 15:54:24 UTC
Pinky Hops wrote:
Tahnil wrote:
ESS doesn‘t require you to fight in your PvE fit. Not at all. PvE ratters should be able to dock / POS up and switch to suitable combat ships, maybe even call for reinforcements from nearby systems.


And by this time, all the loot in the ESS is gone because the people coming in just warped to it and clicked the TAKE ALL button while you screw around changing your fit, dock, undock, "call for reinforcements" etc.

Now do you understand why nobody will use them?

While they go to change their ship, you can just go straight to the ESS.


As I stated repeatedly in this thread, I also think that the timer is a big problem. That‘s why I would ask for a payout over time instead of a payment after a timer as my top priority change request. It means after an attacker accessed the ESS he gets one tag every x seconds, and not all tags at once after a fixed amount of time. Therefore the attacker has to stay at the ESS as long as possible in order to get the maximum amount of ISK or tags. And the defender‘s time to react would be in direct proportion to the greed and annoyance of the attacker.
Andrea Keuvo
Rusty Pricks
#1155 - 2014-01-16 16:02:54 UTC
Tahnil wrote:


ESS doesn‘t require you to fight in your PvE fit. Not at all. PvE ratters should be able to dock / POS up and switch to suitable combat ships, maybe even call for reinforcements from nearby systems. (That‘s one of my main concern with the current mechanic of the ESS. A fixed timer doesn‘t cut it. Depending on the situation it is either too short or too long. Right now it‘s too short. ESS can be robbed long before the defenders are able to react. Therefore the „take all“ option should be a payment over time, not a single payment after a timer. For example the attacker could get one tag for every x seconds that he‘s willing to wait at the ESS module.)

No. The idea behind ESS isn‘t flawed at all. It is a good idea, but the proposed mechanism seems to be flawed in several ways.

I‘ve got news for you: NULL SECURITY SPACE is not designed for undisturbed ratting. I don‘t care that inhabitants want to rat in peace. Not at all :-) Your complaint is in no way different from hisec carebears demanding an end of ganking, war decs and other activies disturbing their mission running and mining.



Look, we have already established that even the best ratting systems in nullsec can support at most 4-5 pilots ratting at one time. So for the ratters to deploy an ESS they would have to expect that they can defend the ESS against any hostiles that come into the system. I don't care how you monkey with the payout system or what you increase the timer for payouts to, the bottom line is the ratters have 4-5 pilots in system to defend the ESS vs. a roaming gang which would likely be 5-20 people in PvP fit ships already set up in a proper fleet, and may have a cyno or blops capabilities as well. So in the time it takes for you to get pilots in from other systems and organize a large enough defense fleet the roaming gang will have robbed the ESS blind and moved on.

I mean tbh, I can barely talk myself into ratting so if my options are to take a 5% income nerf or interact with this god awful deployable and possibly get an 20% nerf along with the drama of alliancemates robbing it and hostiles camping it I'm gonna take the 5% nerf. The real question is does nullsec need a 5% bottom-up income nerf and the answer is no.
Azrael Dinn
Nano Rhinos
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#1156 - 2014-01-16 16:03:37 UTC
Yes I'm saying it and no you can't have my stuff or isks... if I some day find my self quitting this game I will trash all my belonging and say screw you nerds go get your own stuff.

So back to business...

This game is just getting more and more desirable to play. All these siphons and other crap you pour out from your dev department just shows you are starting to run out of ideas how to balance the game properly.

After centuries of debating and justifying... Break Cloaks tm

Pinky Hops
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1157 - 2014-01-16 16:11:58 UTC
Tahnil wrote:
Pinky Hops wrote:
Tahnil wrote:
ESS doesn‘t require you to fight in your PvE fit. Not at all. PvE ratters should be able to dock / POS up and switch to suitable combat ships, maybe even call for reinforcements from nearby systems.


And by this time, all the loot in the ESS is gone because the people coming in just warped to it and clicked the TAKE ALL button while you screw around changing your fit, dock, undock, "call for reinforcements" etc.

Now do you understand why nobody will use them?

While they go to change their ship, you can just go straight to the ESS.


As I stated repeatedly in this thread, I also think that the timer is a big problem. That‘s why I would ask for a payout over time instead of a payment after a timer as my top priority change request. It means after an attacker accessed the ESS he gets one tag every x seconds, and not all tags at once after a fixed amount of time. Therefore the attacker has to stay at the ESS as long as possible in order to get the maximum amount of ISK or tags. And the defender‘s time to react would be in direct proportion to the greed and annoyance of the attacker.


I simply don't agree with the design philosophy behind it.

Even if there was no passive ratting nerf involved, I still think it's a poor idea. No matter how you monkey the numbers, it's a poor idea.

It's a strange, unnatural creation that no logical person or entity would create within the game itself.

Contrast this to any other income generating activity, in nullsec or even wormhole space.

In either case, your loot is near where you are. If somebody comes into the system, you know it takes them time to find you/scan you down/warp to you. You can then assess the situation and decide what you want to do about it....

In wormholes for instance, you would first see them on dscan, but then you would be watching out for probes, and you would have a rough idea of how long it will take them to probe you down. You can then leave, put your loot in your POS, etc.

With the ESS, it weirdly and inexplicably deposits loot into an ATM Machine somewhere in the system that you then have to warp to retrieve. Do you not see the fundamental difference and weirdness behind this?

What the hell?
Funless Saisima
Hole Punchers
I Could Do Better
#1158 - 2014-01-16 16:13:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Funless Saisima
Tahnil wrote:


ESS doesn‘t require you to fight in your PvE fit. Not at all. PvE ratters should be able to dock / POS up and switch to suitable combat ships, maybe even call for reinforcements from nearby systems. (That‘s one of my main concern with the current mechanic of the ESS. A fixed timer doesn‘t cut it. Depending on the situation it is either too short or too long. Right now it‘s too short. ESS can be robbed long before the defenders are able to react. Therefore the „take all“ option should be a payment over time, not a single payment after a timer. For example the attacker could get one tag for every x seconds that he‘s willing to wait at the ESS module.)


If someone actually makes a ping to defend an ESS, they will get laughed at and have their ping privileges removed.
Tahnil
Gunboat Commando
#1159 - 2014-01-16 16:14:00 UTC
Andrea Keuvo wrote:
Look, we have already established that even the best ratting systems in nullsec can support at most 4-5 pilots ratting at one time. So for the ratters to deploy an ESS they would have to expect that they can defend the ESS against any hostiles that come into the system. I don't care how you monkey with the payout system or what you increase the timer for payouts to, the bottom line is the ratters have 4-5 pilots in system to defend the ESS vs. a roaming gang which would likely be 5-20 people in PvP fit ships already set up in a proper fleet, and may have a cyno or blops capabilities as well. So in the time it takes for you to get pilots in from other systems and organize a large enough defense fleet the roaming gang will have robbed the ESS blind and moved on.

I mean tbh, I can barely talk myself into ratting so if my options are to take a 5% income nerf or interact with this god awful deployable and possibly get an 20% nerf along with the drama of alliancemates robbing it and hostiles camping it I'm gonna take the 5% nerf. The real question is does nullsec need a 5% bottom-up income nerf and the answer is no.


I see it different. In the current state of nullsec, a roaming gang of 5-20 people can‘t do **** to provoke a fight. Yes, it‘s possible to gank somebody, and if you‘re really, really lucky you find a gang of locals willing to fight. But this will happen once in like five roamings. At least this is my experience from small scale roamings, twice or three times weekly, in different parts of the nullsec regions.

The sad truth is: if a smallscale roaming gang enters nullsec, all ratters dock up, and all other inhabitants don‘t care at all.

It is simply a necessity that roaming gangs are able to do SOMETHING that hurts the local inhabitants. Right now they are mostly ignored, and for good reasons.

The idea behind ESS – at least as I understand it – is to give nullsec ratters a new deployable that potentially increases their income, but with a price. A part of their income will be at risk. CCPs job is to balance it properly. Risk vs reward.

Whenever there is even a small amount of extra profit, some people are willing to risk more in order to get it. Sometimes they are aware of the risk, sometimes not. That‘s only natural. CCPs job is to balance it such that enough people are willing to take this risk.

Therefore we should only talk about the right balance, and the exact mechanics of the module, not if it should exist at all. There has to be some kind of ESS!

And a TCU doesn‘t cut it, and it‘s quite obvious. No small or mid scale roaming gang could ever do anything to harm a TCU.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#1160 - 2014-01-16 16:14:35 UTC
Foo Chan wrote:
Andrea Keuvo wrote:


If a forced fight is what you are looking for a module already exists for this, its called an SBU.


Damn right.


This is the wrong scale....

A small gang can't attack a POS, they can't deploy and/or defend an SBU... This game DESPERATELY needs small gang oriented objectives. Something that the locals find worth defending, and any small (<10 cruisers) can achieve. Otherwise, your small gangs are relegated to "hunting ratters" which safe up and don't fight because they have no reason to fight.