|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 15 post(s) |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5240
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 15:58:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm concerned about the balance here, specifically the interaction of multiple siphons, them costing nothing, and them being 20m3. Given their cost is a rounding error and even a covops can hold 6 or so, every time you siphon a tower there's going to be two siphons.
There's also no actual cost to doing this. You lose nothing if your siphon is noticed and blown up instantly. They pay for themselves incredibly quickly and even just the waste 'pays' for itself overnight.
I think the cost should be bumped up some so that a successful siphoning is profitable, but unsuccessful siphoning has at least a moderate downside. Chaining siphons also seems unbalanced. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5240
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:00:00 -
[2] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:Aryth wrote:Why has alchemy been exempted when you could have solved this by changing the units of output for alchemy? The biggest market for using these is going to be lowsec reaction chains which have huge usage of alchemy. Was it simply because someone could not figure out how to change 1 to 200? No, the version that is coming out in Rubicon is intended to be a very basic version. Thus, we didn't want it to have too wide application. We'll probably add a couple of new versions in the point release, one of which *could* go for alchemy. There's an easier fix. Make alchemy produce 200 units instead of one, and require refining in batches of 200 just like ore. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5240
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:01:00 -
[3] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:CCP Tuxford wrote:Two step wrote:Sounds pretty neat. One issue: Using the API, people can tell when stuff is missing from silos. Has this been thought about? Yes we did. We do track how much is siphoned from what and where it would end up and the API then reports those numbers. It's a bit evil abusing the API in this way but I think it's for the good of the feature. So basically the siphon is pointless. It will take all of 5 minutes for someone to make some 'alert' type program using the API that will notify players a siphon has been deployed on their POS. Get an alert? Log in an alt already at the POS who normally would stront the tower if under attack and just man a gun to blow it up. Or just zip over in new travel fit interceptor and do it. Do you guys ever sit back and think you have far too much free intel being given out to the players or what??? LESS AUTOMATION! MORE PLAYER INTERACTION! i suggest you do more reading and less outraged posting |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5246
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:24:00 -
[4] - Quote
What level of "monitoring your pos" are you envisioning players should need to perform? Let's assume that you check it once every eight hours (which is rather reasonable: you check it when you wake up, when you go to bed, and also once during the day).
That's already a fairly irritating level of checking your pos. That means that in those eight hours, 20% of your output will be destroyed irrevocably. And if the player is paying attention (because they can pick when they start the siphoning) they get about 80% of your pos output for eight hours, for 20m isk.
This feature is poorly thought out. It's poorly balanced. It's another one of CCP's hamfisted nerfs of 0.0 that should go hand in hand with buffs of 0.0 that are pushed off until "SOON(TM)". It doesn't reward people who use their space: it merely penalizes them a little bit less. It doesn't actually place the people siphoning at risk physically or economically: the siphons make it hilariously easy to break even.
It's a neat feature. It would work well if it was balanced properly, and if there were buffs for people who DO live in their space. But it's sort of half-assed and fits into the general CCP philosophy of "nerf 0.0 now, buff SOON(TM)" and then get distracted and naturally never get to the buff.
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5247
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:27:00 -
[5] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote: Or... you could actually occupy the space you decide to deploy assets in with other players from your corp, alliance, coalition?
Well, for starters, you've thought this feature through and read how it works so poorly you were outraged at a post telling you exactly what you wanted to hear.
But the point is this doesn't reward "occupying" your space. It requires manually checking your pos every few hours. If there's 20 people ratting in that system nonstop it's not actually stopping someone from siphoning. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5247
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:I find it very entertaining that players who periodically flood Jita with Tornadoes are complaining about a cheap griefing mechanic.
You make this cost as much as a tornado, problem solved. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5247
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:33:00 -
[7] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote: i don't want to argue about the feature because i don't know pos well, but please remember that if the pos owner sees the siphon before the robber logs in, they can take their goo back again from the siphon, so the theft isn't irrevocable
other than that i don't have experience enough to comment vOv
The waste is irrevocable. With two siphons, you lose 20% of your total output every hour permanently. Only the remaining 80% is up for grabs. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5247
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:35:00 -
[8] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote: With so many thousands of people, don't you have people flying through the space in which you have POS'es?
Oh... right...
Yes. We do. Those thousands of people are never on grid with a mining pos because they have no reason to be. That's my point. Those thousands of people, using our space, do not actually provide any meaningful advantage over an alt left logged out in the tower. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5249
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:37:00 -
[9] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Thank you for the clairification. Now I can lean back and enjoy POS owner tears as they now have to do more than stop by once a week to spend 3 minutes interacting with their ISK printing press. The issue here is that there are only two real forms of alliance income: moons, and renters. Renters have lead to a terribly boring 0.0 where every few months we relentlessly sodomize N3, who then retreats back to their bad space that's all rented out. All this does is make renters even more necessary, which makes it even more necessary to own all the bad regions to rent them out instead of those serving as alliance incubators. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5251
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:46:00 -
[10] - Quote
Zloco Crendraven wrote: Just lol...
Ohhhh...My first 10 urns are capped. Need more for these Goons tears.
I believe this post, and the Marlona posts, make my point quite well. There's no solid arguments about why these are well-balanced being presented. The sole argument being presented is the same one we always see when a goon is correctly pointing out something that's unbalanced: some nitwit saying, well, the above. You saw it with blap titans, for example. |
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5251
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 16:47:00 -
[11] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote: It's called SCANNING, an activity that regular members often partake in. It involves flying through systems looking for some good signatures to run.
The thing that probably upsets you goons is that you don't really do that kind of stuff in the space where the moons are, which seems to indicate this change is rather a good one.
See, this is the caliber of person that supports this: the kind that thinks that scanning for sigs or anoms is the same kind of scanning that would turn up a siphon. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5258
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 17:32:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP Tuxford wrote:Sparkus Volundar wrote:CCP Tuxford wrote:Two step wrote:Sounds pretty neat. One issue: Using the API, people can tell when stuff is missing from silos. Has this been thought about? Yes we did. We do track how much is siphoned from what and where it would end up and the API then reports those numbers. It's a bit evil abusing the API in this way but I think it's for the good of the feature. Sorry for probably unneeded question about potential bug: This reporting will account for the 20% loss? Just asking because "what is syphoned" sounds potentially different to what was mined/made. Thanks, Sparks Yes it will account for the lossed items as well. The idea is that you wouldn't notice that you were being siphoned from the API. When the siphon is dead does our api go back to being useful, or is there going to be ghost minerals in there forever? |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5258
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 17:33:00 -
[13] - Quote
CCP Legion wrote:Once this is out we will be keeping an eye on how players use it, both via feedback here and metrics that we gather. We can then rebalance it accordingly to make sure it is not completely unbalanced or if it is used as a pure griefing tool for example. There are a lot of values which we can tweak relatively easily as required.
You don't need metrics to know how this will be used. It's 10m. It's 20m3. And "we'll balance this SOON(TM)" is not really a great response given that soon never comes. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5260
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 17:43:00 -
[14] - Quote
June Ting wrote:Weaselior wrote:When the siphon is dead does our api go back to being useful, or is there going to be ghost minerals in there forever? How about just removing the record of what moon minerals are in the POS silos entirely from the API to avoid this problem? It's far less complicated and forces people to actually pay attention to their POSes instead of running 100+ of them and having an API tool ping them to tell them what to fuel/plat next. That's a stupid idea that creates more busywork for no reason whatsoever. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5260
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 17:44:00 -
[15] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote:IrJosy wrote:If goons siphon all of your moon income. How do you pay for your alliance? With renters! well yes it seems this will shift the paragim from passive income to active... which i like... more targets is a good thing... like 2006 all over again before jump frighters. renters are way more passive than moons |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5261
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:05:00 -
[16] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote: how many poses do you have 100's? you are litterally going to spend every day doing this?
you will burn out pretty darn fast... why not do what goons are going to do and shift the defence to local renters?
seems much more managable...
still not any sort of pvp, it's "notice structure, pop structure" |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5262
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:09:00 -
[17] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote: granted that sov needs to be reworked much like they did with FW...
this is our basic point. this would be a neat feature with a sov rework. but they're not going to actually do that. they're going to push it off until SOON(tm) along with the use for sov4 and sov5, all of the iterations on ihubs that would supposedly come, the last t3 subsystem, the 'farms and fields', the pos revamp, and anything else that might actually improve 0.0 |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5262
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:11:00 -
[18] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote: if you have renters in each contilation they will spend the majority of said time you know doing what null bears do and that is rat.
more people = more targets = more regular pvp...
though our definition of pvp is different does pvp to you means only giant sov blob grinds?
a game where the highest form of combat is ganking a renter every so often is a boring, stagnated game
don't get me wrong the loss of low-level ganking has been a problem but renting is a ****** way to solve it because it makes actual high-level combat die off |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5266
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:29:00 -
[19] - Quote
Benjamin Hamburg wrote: Since when GSF care for one man corp operation? Is that has anything to do with the fact half of nullsec is currently owned by CFC? Coincidence.
It does. We're basically out of people to kill, and 0.0 is getting fairly stagnant and boring. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5266
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:30:00 -
[20] - Quote
Gekkoh wrote: Oh, now that's interesting.
It seems that you're hinting at unannounced CCP plans to change null so that we end up with smaller, more concentrated entities, while incentivizing more players to come to null?
That would be a good thing.
A very good thing.
If that's so, I wish they'd expand on those plans :-)
CCP has had "plans" for this for the better part of a decade. It's follow-through they need. |
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5267
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:38:00 -
[21] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Good news everyone, CCP has just implemented one such feature!
While I'm not sure why I would expect the person who thought anom and sig scanning uncovered things like this siphon would grasp gameplay mechanic issues, this will not lead to more small entities in 0.0. Because we'll squash them and then rent their space back to them. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5267
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:45:00 -
[22] - Quote
Maximus Andendare wrote: But that leads me to another question: why should any of us believe that you're delivering honest feedback? You've publicly expressed that you're members of the Economic Warfare Goon committee, so since that's your purpose anyway, where do you think your credibility comes from? Authoritarian speaking? Threats?
Our credibility comes from our long unbroken streak of being right, every time. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5272
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 18:55:00 -
[23] - Quote
MeBiatch wrote: correct me if i am wrong but most 0.0 poses are not death stars and the majority dont even have guns on them for pos mining...
correct, because one of the many, many things that need fixing is that pos guns are garbage and have needed rebalancing for years |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5276
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 19:08:00 -
[24] - Quote
Rakshasa Taisab wrote: Yes, I know it would be difficult for someone like you to understand how people who do sig scanning would be able to detect siphoning structures.
A sig scanner is scanning only for sigs. They do not randomly also scan the system to see what structures are in it and then scan down all of those. Once again, you have fundamental defects in your understanding of how the game works that makes it so your opinion is not worth the time it takes to dismiss it. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5276
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 19:09:00 -
[25] - Quote
Gardaz wrote:Weaselior wrote:Our credibility comes from our long unbroken streak of being right, every time. Can't be that long then since mynnnas prediction about moon goo prices for the rebalance turned out false. Mynnna's prediction was right, and we're starting to see the stockpiles break and the price to revert to where it 'should' be. I assume you haven't checked Dyspro prices anytime recently. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5276
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 19:12:00 -
[26] - Quote
sssssssssssssssssssssh shuuuuuuuuuut uuuuuuuuuuuup |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5277
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 19:17:00 -
[27] - Quote
Tonraks wrote:I must say i think this implementation and the idea of a goo sucking pos module, is a pretty bad feature.
It promotes afk play, and make pos-work even more bothersome and boring than it already is.
It's almost like you devs want pos's to a feature that slowly but surely gets to be a less and less used feature.
that way you can justify not fixing them because only a small portion of the community uses them! |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5278
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 19:29:00 -
[28] - Quote
Uppsy Daisy wrote:Yes, of course you are. Like the time CCP messed up Factional Warfare and you realised that the new rules could be exploited to make huge amounts of money. You called CCP out straight away and told them it was not good for the game didn't you? Oh no. You didn't. You exploited it for trillions of ISK.. How is that "promoting things that are good for EVE, even at our detriment."? we told them, on these very forums, it was going to end hilariously badly
ccp didn't listen
aryth proceeded to demonstrate it ending hilariously badly |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5284
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 20:59:00 -
[29] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote: IF you siphon every valuable moon in a region, AND it goes unnoticed...maybe you got ahead? somehow?
i'd say "you'll see how" but you probably won't, you'll just assume the prices were supposed to do that |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5292
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 21:17:00 -
[30] - Quote
I mean I think I've made my point: we're arguing with people who don't have the faintest grasp of any of the underlying systems like dr "less moongoo harvested means prices drop" economics, so I'm going to repeat myself once and then stop responding to people who can barely manage to string together two sentences, most of which is misspelled.
The system itself could be neat when siphon costs aren't a rounding error, but the system is poorly balanced as it is because there's no cost to losing a siphon. In addition, being able to chain two siphons to nuke the entire output is not well balanced and that should be looked at. Lastly, alchemy being immune throws things off. Presumably this is because it produces one unit an hour. That should be changed to producing 200 units an hour, and requiring 200 to refine. They can even be .005m3 so that nothing changes size-wise.
Those three things should be looked at and corrected before (not after) they are introduced. Especially the cost, as you say you'll fix it later if it's unbalanced - but you won't, because you won't want to run the risk of people speculatively hording beforehand. |
|
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5292
|
Posted - 2013.10.17 21:40:00 -
[31] - Quote
Pinky Hops wrote:Krios Ahzek wrote:There are maybe a few hundred R64 moons we don't own.
Let's say there a a thousand of them.
That's still only 20 bil to put two siphons on each. I could bankroll that and I'm basically a newbie. Jewbal-level 1%ers can buy enough siphons to do this hundreds of times. So can our socialist alliance.
This is chump change. It costs even less if we aim at only one type of moon mineral at once. except there are hidden costs: 1) lost ships 2) you're being 100% naive, but this is excusable, since you are self-admittedly a newbie. nobody is just going to let you walk over to the other half of the universe and perma-siphon their moons. See 1) 3) whatever time you are spending doing this could be spent doing nearly anything else, most of which is probably more profitable and more impactful on the economy than trying to shut off 20% of a moon 40 jumps away, even if you succeed...See 2) basically: good luck to you...rofl could you do the math on how your hidden costs add up to 980b
wait you said trillions
1980b |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5329
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 12:58:00 -
[32] - Quote
CCP SoniClover wrote:Hey guys, thanks for all the good feedback. Couple of things we're contemplating:
a) reduce waste factor from 20% to 10%
b) have a character limit on how many siphons you can deploy (i.e. have in space at the same time). This would probably be in the 5 to 10 range.
Let me know what you think. Those don't actually address any of the balance issues that were raised with these and I have no idea why those two are the response to feedback. The biggest issue is cost. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5330
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 13:38:00 -
[33] - Quote
Lallante wrote: So what? If they do that they deserve the rewards.
The original Eve goons (that cared about lulz and tears) would have embraced this idea with open arms. The current, greedy bloated carebear fallacy that calls itself goonswarm being opposed to it just shows how completely ideologically bankrupt they've become.
oh no my internet spaceship guild is ideologically bankrupt
IDEOLOGICALLY BANKRUPT
we might lose the mandate of heaven :ohdear: |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5333
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 15:08:00 -
[34] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Oh, I suspect as much as well, but I'd like to hear their reasoning. Because if that's the goal, there are far better ways of doing it than making the data export system not export data properly. to be fair the only difference is now the api is broken intentionally |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5338
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 16:22:00 -
[35] - Quote
edit: oops |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5339
|
Posted - 2013.10.18 16:26:00 -
[36] - Quote
xttz wrote:If this is intended to drive conflict and have more players interacting, then people need to be fighting over siphons. As they stand they're nothing but a griefing tool that people can profit from if they can be bothered to. Players can be encouraged to interact like so:
- Remove waste as it currently works, a single siphon pulls 50% of material from a silo each tick. Up to 2 siphons can be anchored per 'end of chain' module on grid. They will automatically leech from the one that is physically nearest to them.
- When a siphon is destroyed, the full contents within are dropped back into the silo it originally came from.
- A siphon is emptied by a ship by clicking an 'empty' option while within 5km. This ejects any materials inside into a jetcan, but deducts a certain amount of waste first (much like POCOs). A nearly-empty siphon will have zero waste, a full siphon has 90% waste.
- The API reports the total contents of a silo plus any siphons leeching from it, meaning that it's only possible to detect loss if material is removed from the siphon.
The net effect of which is: 1) Siphon owners who are very proactive about their theft can steal the entire output of a tower, but are more likely to be discovered. 2) Siphon owners get diminishing returns by waiting, encouraging them to empty more often. This brings more opportunities to interdict them, and therefore more chances for PVP. If they wait too long, the starbase owner gets everything back without penalty. 3) Siphons cannot be spammed merciessly, resulting in situations where small reaction corps have to clear 50+ structures from their towers at a time.
This is a really good idea, I like it. |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5459
|
Posted - 2013.11.11 18:44:00 -
[37] - Quote
Verdis deMosays wrote: Assuming you trust the opinion of the goonswarm, who have consistently shown themselves as an exploitive economic coalition. Honestly, if they are raising hell about how OP and unfair this is its a good sign to me that the existence of this item really worries them. The 74 pages of goon tears are pretty much proof of that. Assuming that CCP doesn't cave to the cries of the goons who control the majority of the moons worth anything I think the siphon will be a nice piratical way to break their hold on the T2 market. And before any goons or alts thereof start debating me on that, I'll just remind people of Hulkageddon and that time of GoonFun.
we tell the unvarnished truth because you won't believe us and it makes it even more hilarious when we're completely right for exactly the reasons we said we'd be right while you're spluttering in outrage about how dare the goonies abuse siphons
"I can hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
Weaselior
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5478
|
Posted - 2013.11.14 16:41:00 -
[38] - Quote
Angus McRothimay wrote: Yes really ..... Unless the original statement was sarcasm and you really think it will be "better" for the big corps -- in which case you should try to understand that sarcasm is harder to convey in written communication than verbally.
you're right, there was no possible way to puzzle out that was sarcasm
shame on you xttz for being sarcastic in print without saying you were being sarcastic "I can hire one-half of the working class to kill the other half." |
|
|
|