These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[June] Fighter Damage Reduction

First post First post First post
Author
Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2201 - 2017-06-13 18:46:22 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:
CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone.


CCP isn't and should not be responsible for people's bad gameplay choices. Like if someone finds a way to use a ship to make 3 billion isk per tick and I skill inject into that ship despite having enough sense to know that CCP is going to nerf that as soon as they are aware of it, CCP would owe me nothing when they fixed the thing i was stupid enough to spend money on.

I still remain amazed at the fact the people can play EVE for years watching CCP ruthlessly nerf stuff that is too good and they STILL can't grasp the idea that going for the next big flavor of the month is a stupid idea.

Isn't this supposed to be a game with virtually no "bad gameplay choices"?
Melisa Zeal
Ni Industries
Requiem Eternal
#2202 - 2017-06-13 18:46:40 UTC
This didn't impact carrier pvp at all. The only thing this accomplished was hurt the people who rat in carriers.
Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2203 - 2017-06-13 18:52:08 UTC
Feracitus wrote:
The underlying problem is the infinite nature of the ISK currency. Limit the money supply by actually limiting the money supply. Transform ISK in a blockchain based cryptocurrency with a market cap and limited supply.

They could just make NPCs start getting involved in the economy, we already have NPC miners now, why not NPC ratters that CCP can use to fluff the market by forcing the AI to set floors on the prices?
Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#2204 - 2017-06-13 18:54:17 UTC
Valdr Auduin wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:
CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone.


CCP isn't and should not be responsible for people's bad gameplay choices. Like if someone finds a way to use a ship to make 3 billion isk per tick and I skill inject into that ship despite having enough sense to know that CCP is going to nerf that as soon as they are aware of it, CCP would owe me nothing when they fixed the thing i was stupid enough to spend money on.

I still remain amazed at the fact the people can play EVE for years watching CCP ruthlessly nerf stuff that is too good and they STILL can't grasp the idea that going for the next big flavor of the month is a stupid idea.

Isn't this supposed to be a game with virtually no "bad gameplay choices"?


Who in the five hells ever said that? And even if someone did, how could it possibly be misconstrued into the idea that CCP must be responsible for people bad gameplay actions?

If you skill inject into a flavor of the month thing because everyone is doing it when you KNOW that CCP is well known and notorious for nerfing things like that, that's no one's fault but your own. This is why I own neither Rorqual nor Super Carrier (no offence intended to intelligent Rorq and SuperCap pilots, ALL Offense intended to the stupid ones).
Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2205 - 2017-06-13 19:03:11 UTC
Nana Skalski wrote:
Maybe if all the bounties would be moving from killed anomaly pirates to a carrier that is doing the killing, people would actually hunt more for those carriers. How to move bounties to make them claimable by others? Maybe chips that fill with data of pirates automatically as they are killed? And they would appear in cargo space of carrier. Then they would have to be transported to a location to be sold.

Bounty chips for null. \o/

Or just those tags that you have to collect like in some missions.

I like it, make bounty operate like an actual bounty.
Cismet
Silent Industry
Silent Company
#2206 - 2017-06-13 19:05:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Cismet
Mossyblog Barnes wrote:
Cismet wrote:
Mossyblog Barnes wrote:
*sigh*

Can you please hire a someone who understands statistical analysis.

Taking a "snapshot" from 5 days in "June" is like looking at your bank account during St Paddys day and declaring you have a years worth of drinking behaviour.

Qualitative Analysis. Please please get a book on this and come back to us with some concrete evidence that doesn't orbit Delve and Goons.


Actually, 5 days would be a fine sample to use given the number of people playing during the period. It would be over 150k people in the sample given an average 35k online in any given day, likely more over a timezone rolling period. The sample size is more than adequate to be representative within a single-digit margin of error with ease.

More data would be nice, but ultimately, it'll only likely be a few percent off in either direction.


This implies the data has stability and equates to a consistent median behaviour... .. which...we all can surely see is not the case?


Statistics wasn't your forté was it? With a sample size of data, the larger the sample size, the closer you will get to the ideal spread of that data in reality. Or to put it another way, a sample size of 100% of the available data will match exactly with the observed results because it will be the actual data. 50% of the data as a set taken randomly from all the available data will get you pretty close to the actual behaviour when modelled.

Generally speaking, the more data you have the better your statistical model will match with the reality in observation from the whole possible dataset, but over 150k data points will give you a pretty close approximation as long as you've taken it at random. The data was for the whole of the first five days across the whole game (excluding wormholes which don't give any bounties) and so should be fairly representative of the month as a whole. Well, unless the whole game somehow steps up their ratting for the last 5 days of the month just to mess with CCP. I can't see it myself, but you never know now.....

Once again and I can't believe that this needs saying, CCP have no need to lie about the figures. I don't know why they didn't provide them in the first place as part of the reasoning, it would have produced a very different thread, but they don't need to lie. They've reduced the level of the nerf as a stop-gap, which is fair enough. It buys them a little time to deal with the problem more creatively than nerfing into the ground.

Though the graph for money in has been steadily rising for nigh on a year now, so why they didn't have something proposed prior to now is anyone's guess....
Marcel Garsk
#2207 - 2017-06-13 19:06:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcel Garsk
Hi, guys!

How are your today's ticks?
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#2208 - 2017-06-13 19:24:53 UTC
Valdr Auduin wrote:
Feracitus wrote:
The underlying problem is the infinite nature of the ISK currency. Limit the money supply by actually limiting the money supply. Transform ISK in a blockchain based cryptocurrency with a market cap and limited supply.

They could just make NPCs start getting involved in the economy, we already have NPC miners now, why not NPC ratters that CCP can use to fluff the market by forcing the AI to set floors on the prices?


Why?

The way bitcoin works is not applicable to this game. Bitcoin creation is governed by an algorithm. With respect to ISK CCP wants players to play the game and produce ISK, but it can't be too much or too little. Too much and inflation can get out of hand. Too little and deflation can curb stomp the economy. Inflation has the potential for a positive feedback loop, and deflation a negative one. That is, this system may not be self-correcting. Most market activities are self-correcting in that once you start to incur losses it is just a matter of time before you have to stop. Profits will ensure people keep going and provide and incentive for people to get into that market and pursue innovation and invention. Money has always been a tricky thing in economies in that governments rarely can keep their damn hands off of it, thus often mucking it up more than stabilizing things.

Case in point, CCP revamped carriers and supers and turned them into ISK printers. Where a small number of players can create as much ISK as a much, much larger number of players.

And there have been other instances where governments have screwed up money and prices. The most recent example is Venezuela where hyperinflation and price controls have destroyed the economy and people are going hungry in a nation rich with natural resources.

To CCP's credit they see the problem: too much ISK coming into the economy. One can argue their suggested fix is good or bad, but that much ISK entering the economy cannot be allowed to continue. This isn't an issue with an ISK faucet it is an ISK fire hose.

consider this...the amount of new ISK created was around 64 trillion. The overall total amount of ISK is a bit over 1 quadrillion. The previous amounts of ISK entering the economy was around 9.5T ISK/month. So, at that rate to double the amount of ISK in game it would take 105 months or 8 years and 9 months. Last month 64 trillion ISK entered the economy. The amount of ISK in game would double in 1 year and 3.5 months. It took 67 months to add 620T ISK to the game. Now we'll do it in just under 10 months. With absolutely no negative consequences?

Now we'll add NPCs to the market...why? What is this going to accomplish?

Again: Just turn off the ISK fire host. That is the most simple and elegant solution. No need to dance around implementing silly ideas.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Cismet
Silent Industry
Silent Company
#2209 - 2017-06-13 19:41:38 UTC
Huren Ogeko wrote:
On a side note I am wondering how badly this nerf is really affecting ratting. One of my corp mates reported this morning that his has the same ticks now as before and the only change is takes 2-3 volley's to take out a battleship now. Pre-patch he showed an average of 102mil ticks and after patch his first tick was around 106 mil. Maybe this nerf took away the overkill making less dps wasted on small ships and did little to affect the overall site times.

Does anyone else have any hard results in how it affects their ratting?


You won't get any accurate data on that. People will base the answers on their feelings, much like the placebo effect. The only way to get data would be from CCP. I would hope that CCP might release some figures in a weeks time at the delta for bounties as a percentage over the timeframe, but people's perception of their bounty changes will rarely marry up with the data.
Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2210 - 2017-06-13 19:44:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Valdr Auduin
Teckos, stop rambling and propose a solution that limits the printability of carriers without destroying their combat ability, that or demonstrate that even under a full nerf the combat ability isn't actually being harmed and the reduction is really necessary for PvP purposes as well, if you can't do either with any competence then I would strongly argue the issue is in how bounty payouts work and not how carriers function. I'm an invisible hand advocate so all of your economics flourishes don't really sway me at all, active interference in markets ruins everything they're supposed to do.
Agfro Er
Secret Wormhole Authority Group
#2211 - 2017-06-13 20:08:30 UTC
Thank you for scaling back some of the damage nerfs. I actually kinda like the nerf to fighter dps (as long as it's low to moderate) because it makes support fighters more valuable to launch. Please consider buffing the fighter's hit points or something like that if further dps nerfs are necessary.

o7
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#2212 - 2017-06-13 20:23:33 UTC
Valdr Auduin wrote:
Teckos, stop rambling and propose a solution that limits the printability of carriers without destroying their combat ability, that or demonstrate that even under a full nerf the combat ability isn't actually being harmed and the reduction is really necessary for PvP purposes as well, if you can't do either with any competence then I would strongly argue the issue is in how bounty payouts work and not how carriers function. I'm an invisible hand advocate so all of your economics flourishes don't really sway me at all, active interference in markets ruins everything they're supposed to do.


I already have. Train reading comprehension....Hell, inject the skill.

Possible solutions: no change at all the carriers/supers, but they can no longer enter any anomalies. Or they can enter the anomaly, but can't lock rats. Baltec had something like when a carrier warps in a capital rat warps in with no bounty. Thus, the ISK printing is slowed down. Some have suggested carrier/super only anomalies that can be balanced in terms of how much they inject into the economy.

In general I'd be happy with the following:

1. Code in ban on carriers and supers entering anomalies today (tomorrow is acceptable).
2. Look for a better longer term solution that preserves PvP capabilities but does not trash the economy.
3. Maybe remove the ban depending on the solution.

For 2 there are probably a wide number of solutions, some might be implemented together. I have even suggested that CCP listen to their players, not the butthurt raging ones, but the ones who can see the problem and trying to suggest helpful solutions.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Axhind
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#2213 - 2017-06-13 20:33:03 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Axhind wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:
CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone.


If the skills were rendered useless you might have a point. They aren't so you don't. The only thing you really have is that you are excessively butthurt and you think that justifies your petulance. Take all that ISK and be happy.

Or how about this:

CCP gives you the SP, but takes any and all ISK you made ratting?


White knighting for CCP must be a new low for AMOK.


Wanting something for nothing is pathetic.

Ignoring the huge problem sitting in front of you is stupid.


Issue is that they finally made PvE that can't be multiboxed and is somewhat engaging and are now killing it by nerfing fighters that already barely work in TiDi fights. Ticks are a bit high but if they land around 80 mil that will be perfectly fine and they can just lower bounties if you are using a capital as CONCORD feels it's less risk and thus pays less. That way bounties can be brought down without removing good PvE or completely murdering fighters in PvP.

In any case CCP have not given us a single reason to back them up lately as most of the changes have been beyond terrible (audio change is still amazing level of stupid even for CCP) as has been their behaviour towards us, their customers. So please find someone else to white knight for.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#2214 - 2017-06-13 20:40:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Axhind wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Axhind wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Heleana Commodus Luyseyal wrote:
CCP should keep on mind that if ppl skilled up for something and invested their real money into it, when they nerf bat that same thing to uselessness, they should refund skill points that are thrown by players. Or at least that is what other companies are doing, like for example blizzards hearthstone.


If the skills were rendered useless you might have a point. They aren't so you don't. The only thing you really have is that you are excessively butthurt and you think that justifies your petulance. Take all that ISK and be happy.

Or how about this:

CCP gives you the SP, but takes any and all ISK you made ratting?


White knighting for CCP must be a new low for AMOK.


Wanting something for nothing is pathetic.

Ignoring the huge problem sitting in front of you is stupid.


Issue is that they finally made PvE that can't be multiboxed and is somewhat engaging and are now killing it by nerfing fighters that already barely work in TiDi fights. Ticks are a bit high but if they land around 80 mil that will be perfectly fine and they can just lower bounties if you are using a capital as CONCORD feels it's less risk and thus pays less. That way bounties can be brought down without removing good PvE or completely murdering fighters in PvP.

In any case CCP have not given us a single reason to back them up lately as most of the changes have been beyond terrible (audio change is still amazing level of stupid even for CCP) as has been their behaviour towards us, their customers. So please find someone else to white knight for.


Except that the ISK supply grew in month at a rate that is comparable to six months of ISK growth last year. Yeah, other than that...nothing.

And I have been opposed to simply nerfing the DPS of carriers. I think that is ham handed. I'd prefer a temporary ban on carriers/supers ratting (at least a month, the upside is we can see what happens to ISK growth, if it doesn't drop to a more reasonable number then there maybe other problems too) and look for an alternative solution that preserves the PvP capabilities and does not trash the economy. Maybe limit carriers to capital anomalies where the ISK payouts can be adjusted to keep things on a reasonable basis.

One of the points I raise routinely in balance discussions is do not nerf game play for those not causing a problem. If a player has a carrier, uses it for PvP and does not rat in it, then this nerf hits hard and rather unfairly. A more subtle solution is called for, IMO.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

addelee
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#2215 - 2017-06-13 23:03:42 UTC
CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.

What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.

I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.

What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#2216 - 2017-06-13 23:48:38 UTC
addelee wrote:
CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.

What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.

I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.

What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions.


Please tell me how much money it would take to skill into a super, buy the super, and the modules.

Here I'll help. A 25 billion ISK super will cost close to $310. Exactly how many people do you think are plunking that down? Let alone the ISK to fly a super.

And on top of that, all injectors do is move the problem forward in time. If the issue is carriers and supers are efficient at farming ISK...then they'd be just as efficient in 3 years when people have skilled into them the old fashioned way and we'd have the problem then.

See you noticed it too:

Quote:
People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in?


That appears to be the problem. Whether people get their via injectors or time.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2217 - 2017-06-14 00:05:17 UTC
Random Freak wrote:
Marek Kanenald wrote:
You guys still whining about this?

Literally the only nerf that is left is a 10% light fighter basic damage nerf and a 20% heavy fighter basic damage nerf.


Even the proposed rat aggro was scrapped.


Wasn't this what you wanted?


No. What we want is the isk faucet being fixed, not an arbitrary nerf that will only work short term. We want the underlying cause fixed, not the symptoms.


Interesting.

So maybe if they had max ratting/ded sites per space region or constellation in a given day, the equivalent of belts being mined out? This would limit the isk flow rather than nerf ships. Is that what you meant?

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)

Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2218 - 2017-06-14 00:06:18 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
addelee wrote:
CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.

What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.

I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.

What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions.


Please tell me how much money it would take to skill into a super, buy the super, and the modules.

Here I'll help. A 25 billion ISK super will cost close to $310. Exactly how many people do you think are plunking that down? Let alone the ISK to fly a super.

And on top of that, all injectors do is move the problem forward in time. If the issue is carriers and supers are efficient at farming ISK...then they'd be just as efficient in 3 years when people have skilled into them the old fashioned way and we'd have the problem then.

See you noticed it too:

Quote:
People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in?


That appears to be the problem. Whether people get their via injectors or time.

I've seen people drop thousands of dollars on cardboard and plastic, some will do it on a whim two or three times a year. Never underestimate how swiftly a fool and his money will be separated, look at me, I'm poor.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#2219 - 2017-06-14 00:12:54 UTC
Valdr Auduin wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
addelee wrote:
CCP made it super easy for anyone to jump in a carrier or super. The ability to inject SP and buy isk made this a reality. In the past, fly a carrier was a lot of training time and that too of supers (especially the isk). I'm relatively old as a character (my main is 04) and I couldn't afford a super. I now can as I SP farm and thus, gave me a lucrative source of isk.

What did they think would happen? People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in? If so, very naive.

I don't however disagree that something had to change. ISK facets aren't good but I think there still needs to be a risk vs reward element. Taking a rattlesnake out to rat can net you an easy 20 mill tick (normally more) and it's a tiny investment compared to a super.

What we don't need is CCP doing knee jerk reactions.


Please tell me how much money it would take to skill into a super, buy the super, and the modules.

Here I'll help. A 25 billion ISK super will cost close to $310. Exactly how many people do you think are plunking that down? Let alone the ISK to fly a super.

And on top of that, all injectors do is move the problem forward in time. If the issue is carriers and supers are efficient at farming ISK...then they'd be just as efficient in 3 years when people have skilled into them the old fashioned way and we'd have the problem then.

See you noticed it too:

Quote:
People wouldn't take effective ships to go and rat in?


That appears to be the problem. Whether people get their via injectors or time.

I've seen people drop thousands of dollars on cardboard and plastic, some will do it on a whim two or three times a year. Never underestimate how swiftly a fool and his money will be separated, look at me, I'm poor.


I don't doubt it. Some people have plenty of discretionary income....but how many (and I am not one of them, I've gotten my SP the old fashioned way)? And why all of a sudden now, this month? I just don't buy this as a THE problem. Seems to me the problem is an unbalanced ship and whether the person getting into one got there in 5 days by spending a bucket of RL ISK or having started the game 8 years ago is not really relevant.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2220 - 2017-06-14 00:25:25 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:

Interesting.

So maybe if they had max ratting/ded sites per space region or constellation in a given day, the equivalent of belts being mined out? This would limit the isk flow rather than nerf ships. Is that what you meant?

m


The problem is this impacts everyone, and in fact hits the non supers/carriers harder than the supers, since the faster you do sites as a result the more of the proportion you get. It might slow down the total isk supply, but at the cost of hammering everyone else into the ground, and forcing a single alliance to sprawl all over Nullsec again.

Maybe if we had sites that could be done co-operatively using the new large grid where shooting/hacking this tower over here impacts that structure 1000km away over there and everyone on grid (who isn't cloaked) shares the payouts along the way, but even then supers could split their squadrons to some extent, though the range would place them at greater risk of losing fighters to PvP.