These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Eric Lemmonte
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1421 - 2017-06-11 03:00:47 UTC
I don't see where the carrier nerfs are going to help. You have all these afk ratters and influx of players yet you kill income from the people who've spent all this time to get into a capital. Couldn't you just create another isk sink somewhere? Maybe even increase the cost of plex since you love to have your "sale" all the time it would be easy to mask that change.

Hell... here's a wild idea. You guys hate multiple accounts right? Limit there to two active accounts on a given machine. I bet that will stop a lot of afk ratting.

Another idea... Remove mining drones entirely from Rorqs. Make them actually have to boost a fleet like they were always intended to.

Change the bounty value on Haven and Sanctum rats.

Changes like this make me really reconsider why I play this game. I've always been "on the fence" of playing at all. Please don't give me a reason to leave. I only rat enough to play the game in my carrier and I only ever rat for 1-2 hours. At best that means I earn roughly 300 mISK before taxes and loot. Ratting and mining is way too boring for me to go longer than that.

I'd really like to see the money graph with total accounts overlayed.
Rauski Koraka
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1422 - 2017-06-11 03:06:18 UTC
RIP the last few months of my training queue.... What a waste of time. First Rorquals.. now this.
idontknowy
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1423 - 2017-06-11 03:11:56 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
C0ATL wrote:


Where exactly do the graphs show >carriers< responsible for the ISK influx? While bounty is the highest index on the income graph, it needs to be stated that it has always been so. The extra influx is coming from Alpha clones being drafted into nullsec alliances and thought to AFK rat in drone cruisers. CCP claims to make a stand against passive isk income while doing little to nothing in terms of punishing bot users and solving AFK cruiser ratting. Funny how on the same release as carrier nerfs, the Vexor and Ishtar models are getting a re-work :))) ...

The fact that the dramatic spike in Bounties from about 40 Trillion isk to today's 70 Trillion isk can be traced back to the patch that buffed carriers. Given that Vexors & Ishtars have been around in their current form for significantly longer, and if it were profitable to the tune of 30 trillion isk to put more alts doing it, people would have done it with subbed alts, it's a reasonable assumption to guess that Alpha's in Vexors are not responsible for the sudden jump and that it is instead carriers.
Furthermore Quant is almost certainly capable of pulling more detailed metrics from the system like 'what ship was someone in when they got paid/killed a rat' and probably does know what he's talking about when he says that the spike is carriers.
Especially when the player accessible data supports that statement.

I.E. Stop trying to blame someone else and accept that it is carriers causing the massive spike.




CCP Quant is an amateur statistician using outlier numbers.
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1424 - 2017-06-11 03:15:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Jang Taredi
idontknowy wrote:
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
C0ATL wrote:


Where exactly do the graphs show >carriers< responsible for the ISK influx? While bounty is the highest index on the income graph, it needs to be stated that it has always been so. The extra influx is coming from Alpha clones being drafted into nullsec alliances and thought to AFK rat in drone cruisers. CCP claims to make a stand against passive isk income while doing little to nothing in terms of punishing bot users and solving AFK cruiser ratting. Funny how on the same release as carrier nerfs, the Vexor and Ishtar models are getting a re-work :))) ...

The fact that the dramatic spike in Bounties from about 40 Trillion isk to today's 70 Trillion isk can be traced back to the patch that buffed carriers. Given that Vexors & Ishtars have been around in their current form for significantly longer, and if it were profitable to the tune of 30 trillion isk to put more alts doing it, people would have done it with subbed alts, it's a reasonable assumption to guess that Alpha's in Vexors are not responsible for the sudden jump and that it is instead carriers.
Furthermore Quant is almost certainly capable of pulling more detailed metrics from the system like 'what ship was someone in when they got paid/killed a rat' and probably does know what he's talking about when he says that the spike is carriers.
Especially when the player accessible data supports that statement.

I.E. Stop trying to blame someone else and accept that it is carriers causing the massive spike.




CCP Quant is an amateur statistician using outlier numbers.


Let's be honest. The only way you're getting 260m ticks, is if you get a dread spawn and an escalation. That, or you're multiboxing revenants (and probably using macros). Most people get between 60-100mil, and that's with a supercarrier.
Pr0Vaporizer
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#1425 - 2017-06-11 03:20:17 UTC
If the issue is super ratting why are you nerfing light lighters more?
Hamasaki Cross
Perkone
Caldari State
#1426 - 2017-06-11 03:20:31 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
[img]http://web.ccpgamescdn.com/newssystem/media/71813/1/GermanFlag33.png[/img]  [img]http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/devblog/FLAG_-_RUSSIAN-33.png[/img]


This trend is unsustainable. Having such a large ISK faucet is bad for the economy, and this ISK faucet is concentrated to a relatively small number of players.



I quit eve after one of the dozen nerfs in the last few months after playing since Beta. Someone linked this nerf to discord, which caused me to chuckle and chime in.

For you people complaining about nerfs, it's really quite simple.

"Isk faucets" need to go away so you buy more plex since this game hasn't had a new player base in many years. (free to play influx is laughable, as any game on such a transition is well known to be on it's last legs) As such, it's not going to be unusual in the coming months to continue to see many more nerfs for players who have invested billions of isk and years of time into SP and ships, in order to reduce the total number of available isk/SP. Since injectors implementation, these nerfs cause a direct loss of SP as people rip now obsolete skills (now Carriers, before, rorquals, before mining barges/hulks when rorquals were rebalanced, leadership skills, etc) at a great loss. As new injectors give far less SP than the SP ripped, this is net profit for CCP who needs an increased revenue stream.

I rip 500k SP and get 150k back in return or whatever the calculation works out to be. 350k SP removed from the game so I need to buy 3 additional injectors to make back my lost SP.


I'm going to run on the assumption that this moronic CCP trend will continue and continue to train useless skills as they suddenly become the only viable option for gameplay (such as salvaging) in the future. And since I FOOLISHLY (really, shame on me) subbed for the remainder of the year, near the end of said sub, I'll login and take a peak around at the new 'enhanced' CCP velator with mining lasers only gameplay style. "for the economy" of course since suddenly CCP really cares about the "player driven economy" which is actually now "ccp nerf driven".


All this said, I find CCP's strategy highly curious for a game that attracts zero new customers. (new accounts are redundant as people increase scale on existing accounts in the world's most multibox able game). Screw remaining cash cow customers who have given years of solid support in preference for.... I dunno what... bankruptcy?

To CCP devs/marketing team, at this point, have you guys just given up on this game? -- This is an honest question (not trolling, bruh) and I wonder what the honest answer is (or if such a thing were realistic to expect)


And finally, somewhat comically, I find it hilarious that fozzy didn't send out this nerf advice. I guess he/she/other finally got tired of being crapped on by the general population for announcing many dozens of other bad business moves.
idontknowy
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1427 - 2017-06-11 03:25:32 UTC
Pr0Vaporizer wrote:
If the issue is super ratting why are you nerfing light lighters more?



Now there's a good question....
Crash 888
TRINTEX
#1428 - 2017-06-11 03:37:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Crash 888
Hamasaki Cross wrote:
All this said, I find CCP's strategy highly curious for a game that attracts zero new customers. (new accounts are redundant as people increase scale on existing accounts in the world's most multibox able game). Screw remaining cash cow customers who have given years of solid support in preference for.... I dunno what... bankruptcy?
.


CCP isn't going bankrupt, quite the opposite, they had record year in 2016. 30million USD capital they raised for VR was all paid back and then some, and that only from selling only 1 (rather unremarkable) VR pew pew game. Guess where their future is. Lol
C0ATL
Renegade Stars
Stellae Renascitur
#1429 - 2017-06-11 03:46:51 UTC
Chevy Caputtos wrote:
C0ATL wrote:
[quote=Gimme Sake][quote=Wolf theQuarrelsome][quote=Gimme Sake]
Actually.... what if CCP is unsatisfied with people ratting in carriers -- since they are making enough ISK to live by with just 1 account, because carrier multiboxing cant be done? What if their true intention with this whole nerf is to get people who used carriers to move into Ishtars and PLEX 1-2 more accounts in order to get to the same level of income as they had on their carrier? Afterall, more PLEX is more cash from the cash cow, right?


I think the fact CCP employees cited RMT as a reason for the change is evidence enough. They don't want the "1% of the 1%" of players to be making ~$3 in ISK an hour, instead of buying PLEX. Even though said players are risking a lot, and have to train and afford those ships in the first place.



By all means...eliminate RMT, but do so in a way that does not affect game balance to such a degree. Furthermore, do it in a way that actually punishes people who abuse RMT...not mid-level carrier pilots who rat for pvp ships or PLEXing their accounts.

Do you honestly think that the top 1% of EvE are ratting to begin with? They are making ISK in trade hubs, flooding the market with faction battleships or skimming the top of alliance wallets, given their position as powerblock leaders.

If RMT is CCPs hidden main reason then, even from that perspective, this nerf is very badly thought out -- 95% or more of the players this nerf punishes have nothing to do with RMT. I've been carrier ratting for over 2 years and I personally didnt even have knowledge of RMT mechanics until informing myself about it due to this very scandal.

I am not unreasonable to expect a game developer to not have their own interest in perspective, alongside their playerbase... but if they had only just asked the community for ideas, I'm sure a lot more better options would have come up to fix RMTing, rather than this...

There was a time when CCP resolved issues in such a way. I respected them greatly for this and and remember how I would use this as a hook when trying to get my gaming friends interested in EvE. Sadly, we are a far way from those times and it only seems to be getting worse.
Bobaa Fett
Wraithguard.
The Wraithguard.
#1430 - 2017-06-11 03:47:40 UTC
So. This wont correct this isk faucet. You have also potentially created a worse loop. Example. As carriers were the appex pve ship in null...it also created a hunting pool for people like me... Spending billions to effectively hunt these. The extractors....the skills... The plex purchased in the likes of carriers...was.. Immense. Now, less carriers fielded means less carriers will die. Less carriers die, less plex purchased for their replacement. Less carriers in the hunting pool, less people like me spending billions on hunting them. And no one is going to extractor buff their account for carriers that deal similar dps to rattlesnakes dualboxed. ....And you just sent everyone back to incursions. Lets be honest CCP. The player base you have now is all you're going to get. Stop beta testing half assed rebalncing with them.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#1431 - 2017-06-11 03:48:45 UTC
Hamasaki Cross wrote:

To CCP devs/marketing team, at this point, have you guys just given up on this game? -- This is an honest question (not trolling, bruh) and I wonder what the honest answer is (or if such a thing were realistic to expect).

You know what happens when Devs give up on a game, they give up on balance changes.
A balance change that risks offending some of their old players is actually a sign of a game with a future, because it means the Devs care about the games ecosystem.
Now yes they can still get it wrong, but this change means they see the game being around for 5+ years, otherwise it doesn't matter if the economy death spirals because of this.
Jang Taredi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1432 - 2017-06-11 03:52:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Jang Taredi
It's also worth mentioning that this is going to adversely affect anyone that owns a (super)carrier, as their vessels will drop in value. To already see once 20 billion ISK ships already being sold for 15 billion is just plain pathetic. It's almost downright theft.
Funny as hell
The Warp Core Stabilizers
Goonswarm Federation
#1433 - 2017-06-11 03:54:45 UTC
Unsubbing 4 accounts, screw these changes and the continuous nerfs to null sec. Peace.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1434 - 2017-06-11 04:29:44 UTC
I'm surprised by the reason for the changes. It sounds like they were based on income generated. Was this the case? It's very unusual.

Nerfs happen, just like buffs, and what surprises me about this change is the apparent reason for the change. A change isn't something you can call objectively good or bad, and what matters more is the motivation or intent. Boiled down to its simplest terms, it is perceived as simply wanting players to farm less gold.

It shouldn't be difficult to understand why that would maybe upset people. There are several better reasons for this type of thing.

Ships and mechanics often see nerfs after their introduction. I suspect it is to generate interest in accumulating the SP initially and then pulling things back. It's a well-known pattern in EVE. This could explain the fighter changes somewhat, where you want players to skill into the new capital drone skills and want to put another carrot in front of them.

Balance changes are also commonly based on the ship types used, compared to one another. It's not the best method even though it's common in game balance and game design in general. That type of reasoning would mean buffing less used ships to make them more viable for PVE. Perhaps. Even in this scenario, it could explain fighter damage reduction with the goal of avoiding power creep while seeking a balance in usage statistics.

I've always wanted to see changes based on far less tangible reasons, like fleet comp synergy that wouldn't show up in stats. With this goal it would be understandable to say Supers as solo PVE boats does not align with your vision of cooperative gameplay. You could go on to say Supers should be used for PVP and make changes to distance them from PVE only. Just between us, don't tell anyone, but I would agree with this assessment the most, that a solo Super in an anomaly is distorted gameplay that was last common perhaps five years ago.

Everyone knows the saying about stats, right? That there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Use stats and base decisions on them, but "you're farming too much gold" is very self-centered and is a company-facing decision. The only failure on the player base's behalf is maybe allowing the farming to happen, but even then you'd be wishing we attack each other more. In this case that's something you (the game developer) wants.

I also suggest being more careful about the reasons given for changes, at least publicly. Do what you want but make sure someone massages the publicity with explanations based on player need. Do what you need to do but tell the players what they need to hear.
Bonaventured
Gladius Veritatis
Goonswarm Federation
#1435 - 2017-06-11 04:38:43 UTC
It looks like a nerf on income generated by carriers and supers very poorly studied and implemented. Sometimes is good to look at the solution proposed by players and why not, use that object situated above your shoulders. It help most of the times, if used properly.
Dengdeng Xiao
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1436 - 2017-06-11 04:46:58 UTC
Why you doing that? Can't believe it. stupid change. You can nerf the supers,why nerf the carrier,why the light fighter? 20%reduction? Still can't believe, well, It's time to leave EVE.
STUPID.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1437 - 2017-06-11 04:51:20 UTC
It even makes sense if you dislike players making so much ISK period. I can understand why. ISK inflation by players who have excess ISK after funding their Omega accounts. Makes PLEX more expensive and less appealing for players who have to work harder at it. In that case you could still say "We think the damage application of fighters is fine, but after reviewing their performance since the capital drone changes and especially the last year of their use, we think their damage output is too high."

Totally plausible explanation, and then find statistics to support that claim. You get the same exact changes you want for your own reasons, and nobody is left feeling like PVP is suffering from a faucet leak.
VeronicaKell
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#1438 - 2017-06-11 04:58:46 UTC
Buff NPCs then. I have been training fighters for the last 4 months. Why the hell are you ruining a PVP ship to make your bottom line better? Do your jobs as creative game innovators and not EA Game flunkies... oh wait.
Bruce Destro
Backwater Resources and Distribution
The Banana Republic.
#1439 - 2017-06-11 05:14:09 UTC
VeronicaKell wrote:
Buff NPCs then. I have been training fighters for the last 4 months. Why the hell are you ruining a PVP ship to make your bottom line better? Do your jobs as creative game innovators and not EA Game flunkies... oh wait.



carriers will still have the largest ratting income. 20% reduction in dps can be considered roughly 20% reduction in bounties. 150m an hour to 125? that is still far greater than you can get in a fully skilled faction battleship.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#1440 - 2017-06-11 05:19:13 UTC
VeronicaKell wrote:
Buff NPCs then. I have been training fighters for the last 4 months. Why the hell are you ruining a PVP ship to make your bottom line better? Do your jobs as creative game innovators and not EA Game flunkies... oh wait.

Because that will nerf EVERYONE. And the problem is only a small subset of that. So CCP are actually doing their jobs exactly as they should and not punishing the non carrier pilots for carriers being out of balance.
It's like all that isk in your wallets has removed your ability to read.