These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
venetistrader norie
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2261 - 2017-06-15 13:17:44 UTC
Ok guys. I did look at all the charts all the comments… and I don’t understand one thing. I’m now in 0.0 for 1-2 mounts now. I did train to a carrier…. I do havens. …
OK. The part I don’t get is where do the guys get the anomalies???
When I’m ratting in my carrier I can make good ticks just if I’m alone ratting the havens. If there is 3 or 4 players making the havens we wait a lot till one site is free.
So, to get such ticks, as the chart tells us, you must be alone in a system and have all the sites to yourself.
Where was this chart of super making so much ISK done??? Does a super-rich player have its own system with sites all to himself??
This chart is 100% made in such way that it supports the facts that CCP is trying to make us see.

So CCP please make a chart of the system where I’m ratting and show it to me. I did ask my corp m8 and no one did never see such tick’s ass you say we can do.
I would propose a different approach from you side. Just tell us you are nerfing it and that this is just the start because you want the players to buy plex and not make it in-game. In the end, you want us to buy plex that’s the only logical answer to the nerfs.
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2262 - 2017-06-15 14:09:58 UTC
venetistrader norie wrote:

I would propose a different approach from you side. Just tell us you are nerfing it and that this is just the start because you want the players to buy plex and not make it in-game. In the end, you want us to buy plex that’s the only logical answer to the nerfs.


Another one who don't understand how PLEX work...
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
#2263 - 2017-06-15 14:11:05 UTC
First of all there's a sov upgrade, which your system should have, that spawns several more Havens than normal and makes them respawn very quickly. That alone can easily support a super and 2-3 carriers doing sites, as long as you don't have other people in subcaps occupying anomalies for half an hour. Second, I'm not sure if it's the case for normal carriers, but supers make more money in Forsaken Hubs and Sanctums than Havens, so that takes a little of the pressure off.
Spurty
#2264 - 2017-06-15 14:21:12 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Commander Spurty wrote:
Why haven't you used your data to decide:

"We are placing a cap on CONCORD bounties per Region! If you wish to go over X ISK, you need to invade your neighbors"

Faster the super pilots deplete the ISK bucket for their region, the faster they have to uproot and move.

That path leadeth to thine themepark
Mechanically you have two options.
An arbitrary total ratting limit. Which means everyone who isn't a super gets nerfed too.
Or an arbitrary per pilot limit. Which forces multi-characters on the same account (to keep costs down) to bypass it, & makes no sense in a sandbox.
Neither are viable solutions.



I would love to have watched you jumping to these conclusions. Mad as a box of frogs matey.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Sonny WEL3
Sapper Corporation
Anarchy.
#2265 - 2017-06-16 01:17:18 UTC
Maybe I'm the confused one here!

CCP you say Super/Carrier ratting is an ISK faucet that's creating an economic problem. However, I believe you're creating the problems. So many massive changes to the game which affect different parts of the game's economy. Then you over correct the problem before the economy has time to rebalance with the recent changes. Examples:

Well let's take a look at something right quick, just in one of the latest releases you made. You made the Roq king miner again. So players dusted off that old dust bucket to do a little mining, which turned out to be very lucrative. So more and more players invested in this ship and related SP, which created a small sink but still a sink. Then as we all know, they started going pop because they become high valued targets. This created content thus balancing out the Roq's mining faucet with the economy. Then BAM you nerf the whole thing making the Roq nothing more than a dust collector again. LAWL

During or around the same time frame as the Roq is king release, you introduced the Carrier/Fighter changes. With this change came again a lucrative way of making the almighty ISKIES. AGAIN creating another small sink, as players cashed in, investing in the ships and related SP. Again you nerf it.

Note to CCP: "with greater risk comes greater reward" isn't that what you wanted! Now that you've implemented this concept with the lasted releases. The players have finally come to see it the same way and taken you up on you're challenge, only for you to nerf it as well! GG

I'm truly invested with this game, as far as rl time and money and this has kept me playing but now how long will it last.

Sincerely
Getting feed up and bored

Analius Glover
Volatile Restability
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#2266 - 2017-06-16 09:31:25 UTC
Just for you know CCP - further nerfing cariers and supers and making them less effective on anomalies will make people to drop them as a source of income. Ths will remove a content for smalgangs and hotdroppers because very little amount of people risks such expensive ships for PvP. So if you wanna make a change make a new anomalies which still will make players to undock their shiny ships otherwise the lack of content cancer will continue spreading across New Eden. Same with the rorqs - you made a good decision bringing them to the ore sites but now you doing all to make them replaced by multiboxing mining barges and exhumers. Stop penalizing normal players and support afk multiboxers
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2267 - 2017-06-16 11:11:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Mark Marconi
Honestly the solution is actually rather simple.

Have the anomalies detect capitals or super and then have a massive drop of high damage, low bounty NPCs onto the Carrier or super. So they have to flee or go BOOM!!

After the loss of a couple these ships, they will no longer be used and the problem of them in anomalies is solved.

No need to alter their PvP capabilities at all.

The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.

After all we are not just players, we are customers.

Time for the CSM to be disbanded.

April rabbit
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2268 - 2017-06-16 12:33:35 UTC  |  Edited by: April rabbit
Mark Marconi wrote:
Honestly the solution is actually rather simple.

Have the anomalies detect capitals or super and then have a massive drop of high damage, low bounty NPCs onto the Carrier or super. So they have to flee or go BOOM!!

This will make carriers an supers sit in docks. Not sure if this is what you want. Lol

Like others pointed it will hurt droppers and hunters the most. Because you know - killing afktar is not as fun as killing carrier.....

So yes, you WILL nerf PvPers too.
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2269 - 2017-06-16 14:16:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Mark Marconi
April rabbit wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:
Honestly the solution is actually rather simple.

Have the anomalies detect capitals or super and then have a massive drop of high damage, low bounty NPCs onto the Carrier or super. So they have to flee or go BOOM!!

This will make carriers an supers sit in docks. Not sure if this is what you want. Lol

Like others pointed it will hurt droppers and hunters the most. Because you know - killing afktar is not as fun as killing carrier.....

So yes, you WILL nerf PvPers too.

The fact that Sov is a joke is the main reason Carriers and Supers are sitting around and personally I would prefer a few players, losing some kills over the destruction of the economy.

Edit: Also Carriers and Supers are the problem, so you can't have them running anomalies for free because then they still wont do it. So you either destroy the economy or stop them running anomalies, you can't have it both ways.

The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.

After all we are not just players, we are customers.

Time for the CSM to be disbanded.

Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2270 - 2017-06-16 14:27:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Valdr Auduin
Oh! Why not make persistent pirate fleets gain aggro on any capital that rats anything from their faction, the more expensive the rat, the more aggro the cap-pilot gains on all their capitals, this aggro is only reduced when the pilot is killed while in a capital. These persistent pirate fleets use the new special AI system to custom fit for tackling and podding their target and will track the systems the pilot gets killboards or killboarded in. The bigger the "aggro bounty" a pilot's capitals have, the bigger the headhunter fleet is; if they have enough aggro from more than one pirate faction (i.e. each faction's aggro goes past a certain threshold, individually) then you'll see pirate alliance fleets hunting these highly active capital ratters. And yeah, I suppose they'd draw aggro from CONCORD if they jump in through a gate or attack anything, including their mark.

CCP can adjust the aggro and response threshold weights, I'd assume the CONCORD mechanics already have code like this, to suit their current taste on how much ratting capitals should or shouldn't do.


ED: Could also make it so anomalies don't spawn, they're built up over time, but that would mean there wouldn't be as many which would severely dampen income opportunities. I was thinking the same thing could be implemented with belts, requiring NPC miners in empire space to perform moon mining to create all new belts once the feature is implemented, but again, that would all but eliminate typical income and mineral opportunities for everyone but the highly active players willing to hunt these things down. However, it would definitely clamp down the economy- might stall it out though.
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2271 - 2017-06-16 19:47:36 UTC
Valdr Auduin wrote:

ED: Could also make it so anomalies don't spawn, they're built up over time, but that would mean there wouldn't be as many which would severely dampen income opportunities. I was thinking the same thing could be implemented with belts, requiring NPC miners in empire space to perform moon mining to create all new belts once the feature is implemented, but again, that would all but eliminate typical income and mineral opportunities for everyone but the highly active players willing to hunt these things down. However, it would definitely clamp down the economy- might stall it out though.


Why do you want to nerf all ratters when carriers and supers are the problem? Why am I supposed to see less anomalies in my Oracle when it's carrier and supers which are too much of a gravy train?
Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2272 - 2017-06-16 19:51:30 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Valdr Auduin wrote:

ED: Could also make it so anomalies don't spawn, they're built up over time, but that would mean there wouldn't be as many which would severely dampen income opportunities. I was thinking the same thing could be implemented with belts, requiring NPC miners in empire space to perform moon mining to create all new belts once the feature is implemented, but again, that would all but eliminate typical income and mineral opportunities for everyone but the highly active players willing to hunt these things down. However, it would definitely clamp down the economy- might stall it out though.


Why do you want to nerf all ratters when carriers and supers are the problem? Why am I supposed to see less anomalies in my Oracle when it's carrier and supers which are too much of a gravy train?

I'm a simulationist at heart, it's not a serious theoretical mechanic like the upper half of the post, I just dislike "spawns" of any sort- I'd be much happier if NPC had to mine and manufacture all their ships just like players.
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2273 - 2017-06-16 19:59:10 UTC
Valdr Auduin wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Valdr Auduin wrote:

ED: Could also make it so anomalies don't spawn, they're built up over time, but that would mean there wouldn't be as many which would severely dampen income opportunities. I was thinking the same thing could be implemented with belts, requiring NPC miners in empire space to perform moon mining to create all new belts once the feature is implemented, but again, that would all but eliminate typical income and mineral opportunities for everyone but the highly active players willing to hunt these things down. However, it would definitely clamp down the economy- might stall it out though.


Why do you want to nerf all ratters when carriers and supers are the problem? Why am I supposed to see less anomalies in my Oracle when it's carrier and supers which are too much of a gravy train?

I'm a simulationist at heart, it's not a serious theoretical mechanic like the upper half of the post, I just dislike "spawns" of any sort- I'd be much happier if NPC had to mine and manufacture all their ships just like players.


Functionality > realism/quality of simulation

The top part of your post is also bad since all it does is make people completely stop using carriers and supers.
Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2274 - 2017-06-16 20:10:34 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Functionality > realism/quality of simulation

The top part of your post is also bad since all it does is make people completely stop using carriers and supers.

The validity of that statement relies on your assumption of what is and is not functional, or rather what function is most desirable. Since this is, I've been told, a highly detailed economics simulator (in space, for fun and imaginary profit), one would be led to assume that the quality of the simulation is actually fairly important. And it doesn't stop people using carriers and supers, it just means using them leaves an escalating paper trail, I'm more thinking about the kind of content having pirates following a high-end player's caps around would entail than the functionality of your bland ratting mechanics.
Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2275 - 2017-06-16 20:21:55 UTC
Valdr Auduin wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Functionality > realism/quality of simulation

The top part of your post is also bad since all it does is make people completely stop using carriers and supers.

The validity of that statement relies on your assumption of what is and is not functional, or rather what function is most desirable. Since this is, I've been told, a highly detailed economics simulator (in space, for fun and imaginary profit), one would be led to assume that the quality of the simulation is actually fairly important. And it doesn't stop people using carriers and supers, it just means using them leaves an escalating paper trail, I'm more thinking about the kind of content having pirates following a high-end player's caps around would entail than the functionality of your bland ratting mechanics.


If it's ever escalating like you were proposing, it means your ship will die at some point and you won't have a counter beside not participating. You know what happen to feature that grantee your ship will go boom with not associated counter? Player stop participating. If you don't believe me on that, check how active the Drifters incursion were and you will understand how interesting a mechanic you can't avoid is.
Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2276 - 2017-06-16 20:25:40 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Valdr Auduin wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Functionality > realism/quality of simulation

The top part of your post is also bad since all it does is make people completely stop using carriers and supers.

The validity of that statement relies on your assumption of what is and is not functional, or rather what function is most desirable. Since this is, I've been told, a highly detailed economics simulator (in space, for fun and imaginary profit), one would be led to assume that the quality of the simulation is actually fairly important. And it doesn't stop people using carriers and supers, it just means using them leaves an escalating paper trail, I'm more thinking about the kind of content having pirates following a high-end player's caps around would entail than the functionality of your bland ratting mechanics.


If it's ever escalating like you were proposing, it means your ship will die at some point and you won't have a counter beside not participating. You know what happen to feature that grantee your ship will go boom with not associated counter? Player stop participating. If you don't believe me on that, check how active the Drifters incursion were and you will understand how interesting a mechanic you can't avoid is.

Your ship will always die at some point, that's the advice everyone keeps giving me, give somebody enough incentive and they will break your stuff for whatever reason- is this a goon rhetoric or does everyone get sensitive when you talk about giving NPCs goals that might include chasing you down and giving you a taste of the medicine you regularly dish out?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#2277 - 2017-06-16 21:31:37 UTC
Your ship will die to PvP at some time or a dumb mistake at some time.
However if you keep running the same site the ship will not die to unbeatable NPC's (assuming you could do it the first time). And frankly, given the data from drifters that were beatable but had a death cannon that was 99% sure to kill at least one ship, Frostys is right. People don't like PvE where they HAVE to die at some stage. It's not a fun experience knowing that sooner or later an unavoidable death will happen.

It doesn't mean you couldn't create a better modelled PvE system, but it means it can't continue to magically escalate vs a particular person, and additionally a better modelled PvE system would kill highsec since all the PvE would be consumed before the rats ever 'spread' that far. But regardless, it's a totally different topic to the fighter nerf.
Valdr Auduin
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2278 - 2017-06-16 21:56:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Valdr Auduin
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Your ship will die to PvP at some time or a dumb mistake at some time.
However if you keep running the same site the ship will not die to unbeatable NPC's (assuming you could do it the first time). And frankly, given the data from drifters that were beatable but had a death cannon that was 99% sure to kill at least one ship, Frostys is right. People don't like PvE where they HAVE to die at some stage. It's not a fun experience knowing that sooner or later an unavoidable death will happen.

It doesn't mean you couldn't create a better modelled PvE system, but it means it can't continue to magically escalate vs a particular person, and additionally a better modelled PvE system would kill highsec since all the PvE would be consumed before the rats ever 'spread' that far. But regardless, it's a totally different topic to the fighter nerf.

Except that's inherently wrong and pig-headed for an analysis of what I proposed. First, aggro only increases when the player cap-rats; second, each pirates faction tracks separately; third, the fleet is a game-asset, not a spawner, and must physically find the player based on the killboards their capitals leave and then travel to them AND THEN engage them; fourth, the only drawback is you don't get a bounty (or not as big a bounty and you still get loot) and may or may not accrue further faction aggro; fifth and finally, this isn't some "aha, a capital, sick 'em, boys" aggro, it's more like an UnSecurity Rating combined with a faction standing tracker. By the time you 1) amass enough aggro on your caps and 2) are actually tracked down, tackled, and killed it's more than likely you'll have paid your ship's worth off several times over unless CCP weights things like a jerk (which wouldn't be a surprise given the last week or so).

And your major gripe that breaks the idea is that if a cap-ratter keeps cap-ratting like they're a pigeon in a Skinner Box eventually all unholy hell of a pirate coalition fleet will gank them once, maybe twice. OOO~OO~OOH, yes, I'll go sit in the 'bad idea corner' now.

Quote:
But regardless, it's a totally different topic to the fighter nerf

Same topic, I just generalised a potential solution to all capitals.
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
#2279 - 2017-06-17 00:37:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Valdr Auduin wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Functionality > realism/quality of simulation

The top part of your post is also bad since all it does is make people completely stop using carriers and supers.

The validity of that statement relies on your assumption of what is and is not functional, or rather what function is most desirable. Since this is, I've been told, a highly detailed economics simulator (in space, for fun and imaginary profit), one would be led to assume that the quality of the simulation is actually fairly important. And it doesn't stop people using carriers and supers, it just means using them leaves an escalating paper trail, I'm more thinking about the kind of content having pirates following a high-end player's caps around would entail than the functionality of your bland ratting mechanics.


If it's ever escalating like you were proposing, it means your ship will die at some point and you won't have a counter beside not participating. You know what happen to feature that grantee your ship will go boom with not associated counter? Player stop participating. If you don't believe me on that, check how active the Drifters incursion were and you will understand how interesting a mechanic you can't avoid is.

You mean the Drifter incursions that were slaughtering hundreds of Thrashers each day while printing 3-5 billion ISK per site? I ran those for 3 days and made 22 bil.
Akktu Stakki
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#2280 - 2017-06-17 07:16:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Akktu Stakki
Instead of putting restrictions on capsuleers what CCP should do is provide more content. The capsuleers active in Supercarrier ratting are at the top of the(ir) game, and have worked hard for years (literally!) to get to where they are. In that perspective it shouuld be obvious CCP should deliver something of better, shall we say, quality... than a simple nerf and slap in the face.

So here's my idea about adding content:
So what if we had anomalies tailor made for capital ships. Think 'noobship acceleration gate' but the complete opposite... get it? Ok I'll elaborate. So... we have these annoying capsuleers who are filthy spacerich and they get the silly idea to spend their excessive isk on these stupendously huge spaceships. So what's so good about them? Oh, absolutely nothing! You'll just make yourself the biggest target in the system. Literally hundreds of people will scan down whatever number of Wormhole connections necessary to get to you and provide you the finest content isk can buy. That's how nice the EvE capsuleer community is, every ship comes with a lifetime content guarantee, end of lifetime that is.

Oh, but that was not the content we were intending to talk about here. Let's get back on topic. So, tailor made anomalies for Capital Ships? How do we approach that?

Here's my idea:
Introduce a new category of anomalies that only spawn in nullsec. Let's trust CCP and their trusec magic on this one if you will. Ok maybe not, whatever. Either way, these anomalies would be scannable through the use of special probes, PROBES not robes, leave your special robes in the closet for this one... alternatively a specialized scanning skill using combat PROBES. Once scanned down, the anomaly will reveal itself to be something similar but not identical to a wormhole. It's somethings strangely, different. So, only a Recon class T2 Cruiser is capable of getting close to this anomaly, and then only when cloaked.

Enter the site:
Inside, the Recon ship will be able to observe and assess the activities by the strong NPC (name your faction) presence. Capital ship-size entities? Yes totally, or at least a decent probability to encounter one, or more, in a site like this. This site is the motherload, the fully developed hive mentioned in the drone 10/10s description clearly stating that this is not a "fully developed hive".

Now here's the trick
In this type of site, a cyno beacon can be activated and, if capital ships are at the entrance to the anomaly (within rangeof it) they can jump into the site. This site could run something like a 10/10 with possible escalations, different routes etc but would be strictly limited to Capital size ships. Possibly a single Capital ship could solo it, but imho rather not. Teamwork should be encouraged is my idea. The fun starts when you get a escalation and a cyno beacon appears on your ship sensors that you do not know where it leads to. This new site would be connected to a different entry point, in a completely different system. So capsuleers from other groups could find the entry point to the site you are in, and drop by to help bring you the very content you so desire! Imagine that! So what can possibly go wrong?

So, for however long the escalation chain goes, along the whole chain of sites any one of the entry points can become a exit point with the help of a Recon class T2 Cruiser lighting a Cyno field next to it. So that all capsuleer groups participating can exit at their convenience. Beware though, for exiting this type of anomaly will cause disturbingly high jump fatigue, or at the very least a polarization timer significant enough to prevent ships from entering/exiting engagements at will.

Pros
- Content content & more content! Did I mention content? Content for everyone! Surprise parties!!! YOU are the special guest for this party and we want to bring it to you!
- CCP can modulate rewards without tampering with the PvP capabilities of already established ships and modules. It also opens up ways to introduce new items and of course, to achieve the so-desired (by CCP most notably) Capital ship attrition rates.

Ok, so what are the cons?
CCP actually has to pull something off rather than pull out (the nerf bat...) this often takes time. Ehhh, yeah... This is also risk vs reward though (are you kidding me?!?) but may well be worth it!!! Like with the Moon Mining Arrays, so patience is advised. So the technicals has to be worked out, but having Capital class anoms off the local nodes may give the room needed to solve those issues.

So... yeah this is not my main char. I'm a returning player of 2003-2008ish vintage, and by my alts CCP shall know me. I've been flying Motherships aka Supercarriers since they were introduced to the game. Life happened, I had kids and then life happened again and I'm back. So there you go, CCP are just too awesome like that and deserve cred for it. Hey, my ship(s) were still here when I came around to log back on, so there's that.

Anyway, here's for hoping this catches on and you find my idea worth pondering.

Cheers!

No I did not post this sober, hey it's fri.. it was friday! I swear!