These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Shrinking Sandbox - Eve by numbers

First post First post First post
Author
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#481 - 2015-05-08 03:45:34 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Except that isn't the thread that was originally linked.
It originally linked to the thread for the proposed new icons.

No, I never changed the link, nor posted off topic.

Maybe you had a different tab open or something, but the link was not edited. You even quoted it, so click the one in your quote.

LOL, if you read my reply.. I DID respond to the link you posted, it starts out - As for the new icons.
Maybe is was a misdirected URL but that is the thread the link took me to. I would not have commented on the icons otherwise, I had not at the time seen the thread about them.

That aside. The newest proposal for the sov team is getting closer to good.
Still missing that "something" to encourage new comers to vie for sov.
In fact this latest iteration of "prime time, vulnerability windows" is an absolute deterrent to any new group entering the sov game.

18 hours per day vulnerability for at least the 1st week (longer if your sov is actually being contested) is just way too much.

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.

DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#482 - 2015-05-08 03:52:21 UTC  |  Edited by: DaReaper
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Except that isn't the thread that was originally linked.
It originally linked to the thread for the proposed new icons.

No, I never changed the link, nor posted off topic.

Maybe you had a different tab open or something, but the link was not edited. You even quoted it, so click the one in your quote.

LOL, if you read my reply.. I DID respond to the link you posted, it starts out - As for the new icons.
Maybe is was a misdirected URL but that is the thread the link took me to. I would not have commented on the icons otherwise, I had not at the time seen the thread about them.

That aside. The newest proposal for the sov team is getting closer to good.
Still missing that "something" to encourage new comers to vie for sov.
In fact this latest iteration of "prime time, vulnerability windows" is an absolute deterrent to any new group entering the sov game.

18 hours per day vulnerability for at least the 1st week (longer if your sov is actually being contested) is just way too much.



no its not. you can get both the industry and military index to like 1 maybe 2 in a day. that would shrink your 18 hours down to like 8.

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#483 - 2015-05-08 04:22:04 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
LOL, if you read my reply.. I DID respond to the link you posted, it starts out - As for the new icons.
Maybe is was a misdirected URL but that is the thread the link took me to. I would not have commented on the icons otherwise, I had not at the time seen the thread about them.

I have never even looked at the icons thread.
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#484 - 2015-05-08 06:50:44 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Seems to me like quite a bit of feedback was taken on board, but it seems like you're determined to lose before the game even starts, so contrary facts aren't relevant.
The very basis of it, that one ship can flip a station in under an hour is broken.
The whole approach is flawed and will be griefer's paradise.

Instead of swinging at the coalitions with a sledge hammer, they should create space where smaller groups could grow to challenge the Null alliances.

The current plan will be:
1) Too annoying to defend
2) A great honey trap
3) Leave people wide open for extortion

It is all built on the premises that
1) people will fight,
2) it will be just the two engagements
3) people will actually want the SOV.

Instead, the best approach is to just let them take the system, then come back and keep annoying them until they give up or just flip it blue later from free port.
Base out of NPC Null or Low Sec, control moons and just mess with the Null SOV.

You need ratting and mining indexes high but at the same time Infrastructure Hubs are going to pop so easily that you can't get those indexes up.
It is going to be an absolute nightmare for any smaller sized group to develop with all the larger coaltions stomping them for "tears" and "lulz".


Not to mention that any small group trying to set up a foothold will be forced to do it in the useless space left outside of the big groups' territory.

Those who hold worthy territories can defend them and those willing to hold uncontested territory will be forced to do it against the larger groups and without income because only barren lands are left uncontested. What could go wrong? Roll

There is no way in which a Sovereignty system is useful to small groups and acceptable to the big guys. The moment the big guys agree to any new Sov system, small groups are screwed by it.

"In other news, the old system which required large amounts of ships, a thorough organization and holding key territories, will be replaced with a completely new system which favors having large amounts of ships, keeping a thorough organization and holding key territories."

And now remember: this amazing feat of prowess to change everything in Sovereignty so everything in Sovereignty stays the same is taking resources from everything else in the game.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#485 - 2015-05-08 06:59:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Not to mention that any small group trying to set up a foothold will be forced to do it in the useless space left outside of the big groups' territory.

That has been the core of a lot of feedback though, that unless the space is worth having, why go take it?

CCP seem to at least be listening to that. I agree with them that no region should be independent of others as resource shortages help fuel conflict, but there definitely needs to be more than an epeen reason to take sov for a small group.

They need to be able to survive and thrive in their space too. That will only encourage them to defend it better.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#486 - 2015-05-08 07:15:45 UTC
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:


Not to mention that any small group trying to set up a foothold will be forced to do it in the useless space left outside of the big groups' territory.


Delve, Fountain, Querious are "useless space", you heard it here first, folks!

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Lifelongnoob
NerdHerd
#487 - 2015-05-08 09:54:44 UTC
i wonder what impact destructible stations will have on null sec?

without more npc null sec systems scattered around the outer fringes of new eden i suspect sov null inhabitants will drop once sov null outpost are destructible.

people wont want to risk leaving their stuff in sov null and then having to go salvage a station wreck to get their stuff back.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#488 - 2015-05-08 16:39:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenshae Chiroptera
Scipio Artelius wrote:
... but there definitely needs to be more than an epeen reason to take sov for a small group. ....
It is not for ISK.
Yes, I am in Provi, however, High Sec Incursions and WH diving far out strip mining, ratting or exploration in Null Sec.
Null Sec is a great big sucking hole for ISK. The ships you lose, the structures you put up, all the hidden costs, just wait until infrastructure hubs have to be replaced every five minutes and many ships are lost doing Entosis defenses with SRP to see the costs really sky rocket.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Halet Cu
Unemployed Pilots Association
#489 - 2015-05-08 19:59:47 UTC
CCP Falcon, I would be really interested to hear whether your perspective of the new and improved "Eve by numbers" has changed your "opinion" as quoted above.[/quote]

I'm glad you feel that way so here goes. ( sorry I didn't quote everything CCP Falcon said, but I wouldn't have room for what I needed to say)Top of thread if your interested.

CCP Falcon,I don't believe anything you said in your response really addresses the concerns of the OP. Anyone who plays Eve knows it can be a ball-buster at times. That kinda goes without saying. However, ball busting IN GAME is different than getting your balls busted because CCP is making multiple rapid fire changes that have a huge impact of things like sov. Please note that I DON'T object to the changes (well most of them) only the RATE of change.

Patches are coming out fast and furious. While I don't spend the majority of my time in null sec I feel for those who do. I think most players can/will adapt to their corporations being uprooted for various reasons... every now and then. But when you add in things like nerfs to cap ships that force null sec corps make major changes in deployment of resources while simultaneous turning those cap ships "white elephants" thereby forcing many corporations to give up large amounts of hard won territory too, then it becomes problematic. That has nothing to do with Eve being a rough and tumble game, it has to do moving the goalposts around.

That said, I have enormous respect for the devs, their commitment to the Eve community and their desire to make a good product even better. My only recommendation would be if you're going to make big changes that have large strategic and logistical consequences, take it slowly. The cap ship and sov changes could have been spaced further apart to avoid patch whiplash.

Eve has proven it's durability over the last 12 years and will likely be around for at least another decade. What's the hurry?

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#490 - 2015-05-09 07:09:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
Just one funny fact.

The price and traded amount of white glaze and Caldari fuel blocks in Jita are going down, and have been for months.

Less demand for ore + less demand for fuel = less towers consuming it + less industry? Question

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#491 - 2015-05-09 07:23:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Just one funny fact.

The price and traded amount of white glaze and Caldari fuel blocks in Jita are going down, and have been for months.

Less demand for ore + less demand for fuel = less towers consuming it + less industry? Question

Could be people mining and consuming more of their own locally. Could just as easily be a sign of increased industry activity.

It could also be a sign of increased industry activity in stations following the changes to blueprint requirements with POS use.

It's not really conclusive one way or the other.

Only CCP's metrics could say conclusively.
Eve Solecist
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
#492 - 2015-05-09 07:28:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Eve Solecist
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai wrote:
Just one funny fact.

The price and traded amount of white glaze and Caldari fuel blocks in Jita are going down, and have been for months.

Less demand for ore + less demand for fuel = less towers consuming it + less industry? Question

Could be people mining and consuming more of their own locally. Could just as easily be a sign of increased industry activity.

It could also be a sign of increased industry activity in stations following the changes to blueprint requirements with POS use.

It's not really conclusive one way or the other.

Only CCP's metrics could say conclusively.

Haven't you heard? The game is losing subs.
The 40k we almost reached last week on sunday mean nothing.

Absolutely nothing.

Of course.


Do you notice how people blend out everything and pick every little straw
they find to get someone to tell them they're right?

No matter how many points have been debunked,
any small detail that might indicate anything even indirectly related to their point ...
... no matter the actual context ...
... suddenly proves them right.


Again and again.

...

Hey, you're right!
Eve is dying!

Thanks for letting us know.

/thread.
  • All incoming connection attempts are being blocked. If you want to speak to me you will find me either in Hek local, you can create a contract or make a thread about it in General Discussions. I will call you back. -
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#493 - 2015-05-09 10:09:56 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Scipio Artelius wrote:
... but there definitely needs to be more than an epeen reason to take sov for a small group. ....
It is not for ISK.
Yes, I am in Provi, however, High Sec Incursions and WH diving far out strip mining, ratting or exploration in Null Sec.
Null Sec is a great big sucking hole for ISK. The ships you lose, the structures you put up, all the hidden costs, just wait until infrastructure hubs have to be replaced every five minutes and many ships are lost doing Entosis defenses with SRP to see the costs really sky rocket.

Those alliances who can afford SRP will be ok for the most part. They are generally well established, with reasonable income streams.
For any independent group considering a move to sov nul;
The ever rolling and soon, increasing cost of taking and holding sov only adds further barriers for anyone without a blue army.

The proposed changes are likely to do little more than create a bit of nuisance value for a few months. While at the same time weeding out those who can't afford the upkeep and time required to maintain sov.

There are some very good aspects to the new proposal, as long as they are implemented in the right way.


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.

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#494 - 2015-05-09 12:43:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
Eve Solecist wrote:


Saturday May 4 2014 @ 18:30: PCU 42,364
Sunday May 5 2014 @ 19:00: PCU 47,313

Saturday May 2 2015 @ 19:00: PCU 37,700
Sunday May 3 2015 @ 18:30: PCU 39,938

I guess you may have a point, but the numbers show nothing. Straight

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Eve Solecist
Shitt Outta Luck - GANKING4GOOD
#495 - 2015-05-09 12:47:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Eve Solecist
You have to take into account:

Banning of multiboxers.
Bannings of botters.
MCT.

You don't.
Thus your numbers are irrelevant.

Because if you weren't such a sad egofreak you would see that we are actually
beyond old numbers, if we take things into account.

Realise already that most other people aren't liars,
hypocrites and constantly twisting things like you do.

Thanks.
  • All incoming connection attempts are being blocked. If you want to speak to me you will find me either in Hek local, you can create a contract or make a thread about it in General Discussions. I will call you back. -
Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#496 - 2015-05-09 13:53:30 UTC
Eve Solecist wrote:
You have to take into account:

Banning of multiboxers.
Bannings of botters.
MCT.

You don't.
Thus your numbers are irrelevant.

Because if you weren't such a sad egofreak you would see that we are actually
beyond old numbers, if we take things into account.

Realise already that most other people aren't liars,
hypocrites and constantly twisting things like you do.

Thanks.


Oh come on. "Old numbers" it's 20% more than now (50,000 on may 2011 vs 40,000 on may 2015). You better produce evidence that one in five pilots is gone because they were bots and multiboxers and skillqueued characters who were logged in just to pump up the numbers... and then tell us that losing 1 in 5 paid accounts is good for a subscription based game.

As for the ad hominems, you should learn to not use them, specially since you're clueless at judging people.

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you

Solecist Project
#497 - 2015-05-09 14:12:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
I produce evidence as soon as you come up with an honest and neutral thought.

That being said... yes, you're right.
I was wrong.

You're right. You are absolutely right. You are flawless.
You always make the right decisions.

When you rage about gankers how they are sociopaths
and monsters you are right. You are a nice, honest and loveable person.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia

Otso Bakarti
Doomheim
#498 - 2015-05-09 15:33:18 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
I produce evidence as soon as you come up with an honest and neutral thought.

That being said... yes, you're right.
I was wrong.

You're right. You are absolutely right. You are flawless.
You always make the right decisions.

When you rage about gankers how they are sociopaths
and monsters you are right. You are a nice, honest and loveable person.
What bug got up your butt?

If you want to play investment banker, suit and tie lackey, then yeah. You can toss out numbers and quibble about the significance of the 3.5k at 2 a.m. Aussie time versus the 2.2k at 4 p.m. Limey time. Or, you could just look at the graph and see the dip. The one says you're not really interested in what the facts are, but more that the facts "say" a particular thing. The other is the kind of common sense we use to hit that hole in the wall called the "doorway" while trying to exit a room.

Another consideration is, a huge influx of gaming gods aged 14 to 20 something have descended upon us and spewed their bile through our precincts. They may play video games, but they can't play EVE, as it takes too much thought. This sort of person swelling the ranks prides himself on paying with PLEX, so CCP wouldn't see any real income rise with their arrival.

EVE, ultimately, is a trademark. You click the launcher. It says, "EVE, baby and I'm ready!" But...there's EVE and then there's EVE. EVE already died. The trademark lives on.

There just isn't anything that can be said!

Gaellia Bonaventure
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#499 - 2015-05-09 16:13:59 UTC
Eve Solecist wrote:

Haven't you heard? The game is losing subs.
The 40k we almost reached last week on sunday mean nothing.

.


CCP need not fear. Alts will keep this game alive.

Bring your possibles.

Ishtanchuk Fazmarai
#500 - 2015-05-09 17:20:01 UTC
Gaellia Bonaventure wrote:
Eve Solecist wrote:

Haven't you heard? The game is losing subs.
The 40k we almost reached last week on sunday mean nothing.

.


CCP need not fear. Alts will keep this game alive.


Just don't tell them that after making easier to have an alt (2011-2013) and easier to spend more money with each account (2013-present) the only thing left is to allow to play without paying forward.

Yes, you read that well.

F2P.

In your EVE.

Why other reason could be to even ~think~ of permadeath? (Well, almost-permadeath. Pay 10$ and you can keep 5 million SP).

Roses are red / Violets are blue / I am an Alpha / And so it's you