These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Radar sites were nerfed after patch, Why?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Earth Keeper
Uprising Star
#1 - 2011-12-14 11:55:49 UTC
After patch were done 4 radar open space sites in Angel area. The drop from all 4 of them was pathetic Ugh and 3/4 of cans were totally empty Evil . Comparing to the pre-patch drop, it was almost close to the usual drop from one anomaly, as at least one item was found in can.
Why to nerf the sites that were non profitable pre-patch and now became a total FAIL!
Where is the result of your significant work you have done on "improving and increasing the drop"?
Better rollback to where it was pre-patch..
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#2 - 2011-12-14 11:57:12 UTC
Come back when you've done them 40 times?
Earth Keeper
Uprising Star
#3 - 2011-12-14 12:01:57 UTC
Not even going to do them 40 times, 4 was enough, statistics wouldn't change, as see no reason for wasting my time on opening 3/4 of empty cans.
Is like another failure from CCP like "customs office giving away to NC corp" instead of reassigning them to system owning corporation by claim.
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#4 - 2011-12-14 12:05:35 UTC
Earth Keeper wrote:
Not even going to do them 40 times, 4 was enough, statistics wouldn't change, as see no reason for wasting my time on opening 3/4 of empty cans.
Is like another failure from CCP like "customs office giving away to NC corp" instead of reassigning them to system owning corporation by claim.


That would be too easy, now wouldn't it? P
What do you think lowsec and wormhole residents would say to that?
Earth Keeper
Uprising Star
#5 - 2011-12-14 12:10:27 UTC
Few good advises in this case:
"If you have no idea how it's made better leave as it is"
"The best is the enemy of good"
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2011-12-14 12:32:33 UTC
CCP said they improved drop rates on low and nullsec Magnetometric sites (the ones that use Analyzer and Salvager modules). They didn't mention anything about changing Radar (Codebreaker) sites.

Radar sites dropping crap loot or even no loot at all in all their cans happens, that's how it goes. Sometimes you strike it lucky, sometimes you don't.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#7 - 2011-12-14 12:41:46 UTC
Earth Keeper wrote:
After patch were done 4 radar open space sites in Angel area. The drop from all 4 of them was pathetic Ugh and 3/4 of cans were totally empty Evil . Comparing to the pre-patch drop, it was almost close to the usual drop from one anomaly, as at least one item was found in can.
Why to nerf the sites that were non profitable pre-patch and now became a total FAIL!
Where is the result of your significant work you have done on "improving and increasing the drop"?
Better rollback to where it was pre-patch..


Quote:

Not even going to do them 40 times, 4 was enough, statistics wouldn't change, as see no reason for wasting my time on opening 3/4 of empty cans.
Is like another failure from CCP like "customs office giving away to NC corp" instead of reassigning them to system owning corporation by claim.


Site sample size: 1

Can sample size: 4

Sounds legit Straight
Chocolate Roll
Buck Fryce Heavy Industries
#8 - 2011-12-14 12:59:26 UTC
I do a lot of low and null sec exploration. I do keep records of my findings, and have for the last 4 months.

Since Crucible was released, I have completed 97 low sec radar sites. I have experienced a general downturn in profit, but then, like the guys above me correctly pointed out, how big a sample do we need to prove it? Much bigger than the data I have available to me.

Sometimes I'll go 2 or 3 days where every box is empty, other days I'll make 100mil a site. Luck of the draw.

If the odds are proving to be too unreliable for you, stop doing them and find something better :)
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2011-12-14 13:13:44 UTC
Plus, not only would you need a ridiculously large sample size, you'd need to have data from everyone running the sites, not just yourself before you can say exploration is broken :P
Sir Livingston
Doomheim
#10 - 2011-12-14 15:55:29 UTC
Earth Keeper wrote:
After patch were done 4 radar open space sites in Angel area. The drop from all 4 of them was pathetic Ugh and 3/4 of cans were totally empty Evil . Comparing to the pre-patch drop, it was almost close to the usual drop from one anomaly, as at least one item was found in can.
Why to nerf the sites that were non profitable pre-patch and now became a total FAIL!
Where is the result of your significant work you have done on "improving and increasing the drop"?
Better rollback to where it was pre-patch..


nerf, buff, nerf, buff, nerf, buff...who cares what they did. Adapt and survive.

Sci-fi games as played by an earthbound human in the 21st century http://www.youtube.com/JonnyPew
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#11 - 2011-12-14 16:29:17 UTC
Sir Livingston wrote:


nerf, buff, nerf, buff, nerf, buff...who cares what they did. Adapt and survive.


Hopefully Darwinism will take care of the OP...
Kilrayn
Caldari Provisions
#12 - 2011-12-14 16:33:00 UTC
St Mio wrote:
Plus, not only would you need a ridiculously large sample size, you'd need to have data from everyone running the sites, not just yourself before you can say exploration is broken :P

I cannot scan space while playing Skyrim. This is evidence enough that exploration is clearly broken. Cool

Also OP, please contract me your useless probes. I lose at least 10-15 a week. Cry

"Music is a mysterious thing. Sometimes it makes people remember things they do not expect. Many thoughts, feelings, memories... things almost forgotten... Regardless of whether the listener desires to remember or not." - Citan Uzuki, Xenogears
mxzf
Shovel Bros
#13 - 2011-12-14 16:48:23 UTC
ITT: OP flipped a coin twice, it came up tails both times, the coin is clearly rigged.
DeMichael Crimson
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2011-12-15 00:05:15 UTC
Funny how whenever someone posts a thread like this, it's always the same few characters posting negative sarcastic replies with no proof to contradict the claims of the OP.

I agree with the OP and see no reason to do 100, 1000 or even a million Radar sites.. 10 sites is more than enough to ascertain a basic conclusion.

Since the expansion there is indeed a big difference in the amount of loot gained and the amount of cans holding loot in the Radar sites.. Basically it's now about 1/3rd that has loot whereas before the expansion it was about 2/3rds that would have loot.

This is something that's easily noticed and doesn't require completing 1000's of sites to confirm.



'The Plan' | California Eve Players | Proposal - The Endless Battle
Gianath
Gallentian Legitimate Businessmen
#15 - 2011-12-15 00:26:56 UTC
Saying you should go do something else with your time is a hugely insensitive thing to say about exploring. True, you can get a casual exploring ship and basic skills for high sec sites inside of a week. But most people who are serious explorers have devoted 4-8 months *Just* for the specialized scanning ships and scanning skills.

Yes, people in marauders and T3 cruises have more time invested, but these are skills you can constantly use to mission with and earn back ISK while you are learning them in safe space. Exploration skills and scanning-focused ships offer very little payoff until you put a massive number of points into them, and even then only pay off when you take them into significantly riskier territories, unlike high sec missions.

In my opinion that is a huge investment to just give up on and "go do something else". I've been hit by the various exploration glitches where everybody kept saying I was crazy because sites weren't spawning, and a month later CCP will confirm there's an issue and I've wasted the last month bothering to explore. I am not so quick to blame the original poster and too would like to see more data before everybody jumps to conclusions.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#16 - 2011-12-15 03:26:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Emperor Salazar
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Funny how whenever someone posts a thread like this, it's always the same few characters posting negative sarcastic replies with no proof to contradict the claims of the OP.

I agree with the OP and see no reason to do 100, 1000 or even a million Radar sites.. 10 sites is more than enough to ascertain a basic conclusion.

Since the expansion there is indeed a big difference in the amount of loot gained and the amount of cans holding loot in the Radar sites.. Basically it's now about 1/3rd that has loot whereas before the expansion it was about 2/3rds that would have loot.

This is something that's easily noticed and doesn't require completing 1000's of sites to confirm.





Funny how whenever someone posts a thread like this, its always the same character white knighting them...And try reading the op. He didn't do 10, he did 4, with 3 out of 4 cans being empty. Pretty standard. Additionally, its not on us to contradict the OP. Its on the OP to provide substantial evidence that there might be an issue for us to take him seriously and consider the possibility that there is something wrong. None of us want exploration to be broken. Thus, if there is a serious and evident problem, we will address it. Unfortunately, most of the time its people like the op with evidence like 3 out 4 cans in 1 site. You really think thats valid reason to come to the forums complaining about a possible nerf?

Also, lol at your anecdotal "1/3" post patch and "2/3" pre patch observations.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#17 - 2011-12-15 03:28:21 UTC
Gianath wrote:
I've been hit by the various exploration glitches where everybody kept saying I was crazy because sites weren't spawning, and a month later CCP will confirm there's an issue and I've wasted the last month bothering to explore.


In the past 2 years I have been exploring, every patch people have complained about drop/site spawn nerfs. The "glitch" you are referring to literally happened 1 of those times, CCP acknowledged it and fixed it.
St Mio
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2011-12-15 05:39:39 UTC  |  Edited by: St Mio
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Funny how whenever someone posts a thread like this, it's always the same few characters posting negative sarcastic replies with no proof to contradict the claims of the OP.

I agree with the OP and see no reason to do 100, 1000 or even a million Radar sites.. 10 sites is more than enough to ascertain a basic conclusion.

Since the expansion there is indeed a big difference in the amount of loot gained and the amount of cans holding loot in the Radar sites.. Basically it's now about 1/3rd that has loot whereas before the expansion it was about 2/3rds that would have loot.

This is something that's easily noticed and doesn't require completing 1000's of sites to confirm.

I'd like to respectfully disagree: if I look at my records (yes I keep track of how much loot I get from sites), I've had times when I've gotten an average of 7m per site from 10 consecutive Radars, followed by an average of 16m per site from the next 10 immediately after. There's just too much deviation per site to use such a small sample size Straight
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#19 - 2011-12-15 06:25:46 UTC
ITT: People not understanding basic math.

4, even 10 sites is not going to be enough to prove ****.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#20 - 2011-12-15 06:35:54 UTC
DeMichael Crimson wrote:
Funny how whenever someone posts a thread like this, it's always the same few characters posting negative sarcastic replies with no proof to contradict the claims of the OP.
That's because the OP never provides any proof himself — just a completely insignificant sample that tells us exactly nothing.

The sarcasm comes from the fact that this abject failure to understand even the basics of random distribution keeps showing up, no matter how often people explain it. It's particularly warranted in this case since the OP comes back and explains that he has no interest in understanding the issue and thus refuses to provide any proof to actually support his silly claim.
123Next pageLast page