|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
0
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 04:09:46 -
[1] - Quote
and CCP_falcon said feedback should be posted back at forums as its easier for dev to respond hiding their asses like medieval fat overlords when the peasants are revolting and screaming "dont let them in guards!" |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 04:20:19 -
[2] - Quote
on the hindsight, carriers are most people's end game content because its the most versatile cap available and of cos being a jack-of-all-trades cap its capabilities after the first nerf is was still reasonable but this nerf almost pushes carriers down one tier, carrier into T2 sub-caps and super-carriers into normal cap class unless this is your intent somewhere down your roadmap.
and if it is your intention please do make appropriate changes esp in mineral cost to put them around the cost of a fitted marauder to justify the use of carriers.
and basically what you are also telling us is that "capital ships were never intended to be use as an isk making tool if so HAW guns on dreads needs to be look at too i believe it is possible to rat drifters? with HAW guns" dont just nerf fighters cause "its making too much money" |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 06:10:21 -
[3] - Quote
Now imagine all those carriers training say 15 alts he can basically take over 1/2 or all the anoms in a system and afk rat.. hot dropper tackles one of his afktars.. 14 other afk tars warp to him whats the trade out of that fight? Basically if he cant fight back that drop he can just warp out his non tackled afktars loss is still lower than a tackled carrier. But still nakes a ton of profit from that afk session balanced? Yea! Cos ccp eins the wallet war! And whos the one who loses? The players |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 06:26:58 -
[4] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Nevyn Auscent wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:Now imagine all those carriers training say 15 alts he can basically take over 1/2 or all the anoms in a system and afk rat.. hot dropper tackles one of his afktars.. 14 other afktars warp to him whats the trade out of that fight? Basically if he cant fight back that drop he can just warp out his non tackled afktars loss is still lower than a tackled carrier. But still makes a ton of profit from that afk session balanced? Yea! Cos ccp wins the wallet war! And whos the one who loses? The players And you know, almost none of them will do it, because it's a lot of work, and if they were going to do it they would have been doing it three years ago already. So yeah, not worried about a sudden spike in Ishtars or anything like that actually happening. Not only that, but with his one carrier he was likely able to PLEX his account. With 16 accounts he'll have to actually open his wallet to fund those 16 accounts. Yes, I will base my argument against this change on players having infinite wealth!
which is the base of my point this whole nerf-ing is only benefitting CCP does it really benefit the economy? i doubt so its the same as how some miners run like 10 accounts is it hard work? it might be cause its a little more complicated than afktars who warp in orbit and drop drones but ccp think its alright since they plex that 10 accounts right? but if you make that same amount in a single account.. no bro.. its not good for us we need more people plex-ing or subbing accounts
another question is that the report doesnt show the root cause of this increase in bounty payouts is it entirely due carrier ratters? or is there an influx of alphas running vexors? or maybe people starting to upgrade vnis into afktar or rattlesnakes? by just pointing that X player made an isk tick of xxx amount doesnt justify how carrier ratting is the root cause of the spike. if ccp wants to justify that carriers are the root cause they should just release the entire report on the bounty payout divided into ships class which ships take how much percentage of the pie to shut everyone up |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 06:43:01 -
[5] - Quote
teckos i think you misunderstood my point these top 1% wont sub with their RL money in any case they can as easily plex 15 accounts. what i am saying is this: if i sub my account but makes 200m/h eg. from ratting its not ok cos i can basically stop subbing and just run plex or basically 1 plex/mth so basically they potentially lost 1 sub account cause he can fund it entirely out from ratting ticks
compared to if i need to plex 15 accounts to make the same amount ccp makes 15x the money compared to that 1 account that runs 1 plex
these plex of cos comes from some other players who buy plex with RL cash to fund whatever they need or as start-up money so if there is a demand for more plex to sub accounts to multi-box ccp wins and people who have near infinite pocket would too |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
4
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 07:10:16 -
[6] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:teckos i think you misunderstood my point these top 1% wont sub with their RL money in any case they can as easily plex 15 accounts. what i am saying is this: if i sub my account but makes 200m/h eg. from ratting its not ok cos i can basically stop subbing and just run plex or basically 1 plex/mth so basically they potentially lost 1 sub account cause he can fund it entirely out from ratting ticks
compared to if i need to plex 15 accounts to make the same amount ccp makes 15x the money compared to that 1 account that runs 1 plex
these plex of cos comes from some other players who buy plex with RL cash to fund whatever they need or as start-up money so if there is a demand for more plex to sub accounts to multi-box ccp wins and people who have near infinite pocket would too Still not going to happen all that much if at all. A player in a carrier or a super may be able to PLEX their account and have some left over after ratting for a number of hours. But ratting in an ishtar or VNI is going to take more time. This type or argument ignores a basic economic concept known as opportunity cost. Devoting more time to ratting is not costless. Devoting more time to ratting with 15 accounts is going to come with even higher costs. The problem here is that there is way, way, way too much ISK entering the economy. It absolutely has to stop. This maybe a boneheaded way to do it, but the problem is real and it has to be addressed, and no matter how one does address the problem the days of making alot of ISK with a carrier or super are done. And that is a good thing. Edit: Anyone who mines, uses the minerals to build a JF and then self-destructs it...they are doing it horribly, horribly wrong. They are losing ISK On that venture. Yes, they maybe adding ISK to the in game economy, but the number of people doing this is minuscule or zero.
issue now is that nerfing fighter aint really gonna solve the inflation issue and its punishing people who invested time and money getting into them to be told their skills are proly not gonna be much use. or they can some stupid debuff or something in all anoms to reduce fighter's effectiveness against all npc entities so they at least retain their overall effectiveness in pvp
the only fix to the situation is basically like what they did with pirate BPC decrease drop rates across the entire board ores bounty drop rates, all module drop rates and raise scarcity of everything so every ship blow up in space reduces its availability until the inflation can be curbed when everyone has exhausted almost all their nigh infinite isk |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
5
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 07:59:17 -
[7] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Yuri Sarain wrote:I see the sense of the changes due to ISK creating reasons, but I see a big problem when it comes to pvp. Thanks to low sensor strength the fighters are extremely easy to jam and due to larger signature radius also easy to kill. This makes carrier pretty much useless in pvp, as u can take them out with, for example, a singe griffin.
Conclusion: yes there needs to be less money created in pve with them, but nerfing them even more is a real problem in pvp. Pretty much my view.
my point too honestly i am not a carrier pilot but it was my dream to be one i can forego carrier ratting to at least be able to use it in fleet action.
which is why i was suggesting why not just put a god damm phenom in all anoms to debuff fighters so that it can keep its usefulness in pvp |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
7
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 09:16:33 -
[8] - Quote
ccp_falcon was on ytd in reddit
[GÇô]CCP_FalconCCP Games 212 points 1 day ago This is actually a fantastic breakdown of how you see the situation. Thanks for sharing it. I'll point the relevant people in the direction of this post - really nicely put together dude :)
they are avoiding the fighter threads no one wants to give us a proper explanation after the powder keg exploded in quant's face :x |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 09:40:12 -
[9] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:M3tamorph wrote:Is CCP really ignoring all this posts and will not give a flying "panda" about the players and their opinions?
It's obvious that this will be worst change CCP already forced their paying customers... are we still going forward with this tomorrow??? No, they are just ignoring the bears bitching about having their golden goose castrated. Too must isk flowing into the economy has been a problem for a while now and the single biggest cause is carriers/supers out in null. Revamping the way anoms work to stop this is a big task and will take too much time so they went with the easier option and nuked the problem ships. This is not the worst change they have done, not even close. If you want your firepower back then start pushing for anoms to be revamped so they cannot flood the market with isk.
issue is they didnt nuke all the problem ships they only nuked the elitist problem ships which are also the end game some players are work towards. if they really wanted to control the isk income just nerf the ticks and that would be way easier than nerfing fighters.
and if they truly want to shut everyone up on this issue they should just issue a detailed report on bounty payout based on ship class by simply saying 140m tick must be super ratting and using it as a basis that all carrier and super carriers are making the same is not justifiable |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 09:45:53 -
[10] - Quote
they can even do something like "due to the massive strain in operating Capital ships after constant use will suffer a stacking penalty occurring every x hours lasting for x hrs" to limit cap ratting while kinda like jump fatigue
the stacking penalties can affect fighter gun tracking etc..
and carriers are not the only problem dreads in WH i believe have the potential to me billions in an hour how would that be justifiable? |
|
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 09:50:57 -
[11] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:baltec1 wrote:M3tamorph wrote:Is CCP really ignoring all this posts and will not give a flying "panda" about the players and their opinions?
It's obvious that this will be worst change CCP already forced their paying customers... are we still going forward with this tomorrow??? No, they are just ignoring the bears bitching about having their golden goose castrated. Too must isk flowing into the economy has been a problem for a while now and the single biggest cause is carriers/supers out in null. Revamping the way anoms work to stop this is a big task and will take too much time so they went with the easier option and nuked the problem ships. This is not the worst change they have done, not even close. If you want your firepower back then start pushing for anoms to be revamped so they cannot flood the market with isk. issue is they didnt nuke all the problem ships they only nuked the elitist problem ships which are also the end game some players are work towards. if they really wanted to control the isk income just nerf the ticks and that would be way easier than nerfing fighters. and if they truly want to shut everyone up on this issue they should just issue a detailed report on bounty payout based on ship class by simply saying 140m tick must be super ratting and using it as a basis that all carrier and super carriers are making the same is not justifiable Nonsense. Look at the data FFS. ISK growth was pretty much flat for quite some time.
please attribute that to carrier ratting
like i mentioned unless ccp throw the statistics to indicate that carriers are the true cost to the spike that the only way to shut everyone up but shutting isk income and killing a ship pvp-wise along the way is just not justifiable |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:05:03 -
[12] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:
please attribute that to carrier ratting
like i mentioned unless ccp throw the statistics to indicate that carriers are the true cost to the spike that the only way to shut everyone up but shutting isk income and killing a ship pvp-wise along the way is just not justifiable
Again, for most of 2016 ISK growth was flat...when VNI an Ishtars were around. Plenty of people could use them. Yet ISK growth was nearly flat. If drone boats in general were the problem...why was ISK growth so flat?
have you considered that some might graduated into multibox SB ratting? and also political climate potentially encouraging/allowing more people to rat in relative safety in bigger ships?
similarly it was quoted that some alliances are encouraging full on rat mode in prep of the coming winter wars when moon mining is out can it be the cause of a sudden spike? moon mining was introduced in march the same time the spike started |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:15:02 -
[13] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:lolzz Quekz wrote:
please attribute that to carrier ratting
like i mentioned unless ccp throw the statistics to indicate that carriers are the true cost to the spike that the only way to shut everyone up but shutting isk income and killing a ship pvp-wise along the way is just not justifiable
Again, for most of 2016 ISK growth was flat...when VNI an Ishtars were around. Plenty of people could use them. Yet ISK growth was nearly flat. If drone boats in general were the problem...why was ISK growth so flat? have you considered that some might graduated into multibox SB ratting? and also political climate potentially encouraging/allowing more people to rat in relative safety in bigger ships? similarly it was quoted that some alliances are encouraging full on rat mode in prep of the coming winter wars when moon mining is out can it be the cause of a sudden spike? moon mining was introduced in march the same time the spike started Not to this extent. If anything the argument: "Go rate like crazy we'll be having lots of wars" kinda fits with the narrative "carriers and supers are the problem." People went straight to the optimal ship for ISK printing. As I pointed out a few pages back. The average monthly ISK growth was about 7 trillion ISK. Now last month it was 53 trillion. That is a 757% increase. 757%. Because people are in full ratting mode? Yeah...not buying explanation. Considering that kind of increase has NEVER been seen before.
never seen before doesnt mean it cannot be the case esp given the accessibility of carrier and things like rattlesnakes coming down to around 400m hull(before the recent pirate nerf) compared to the last couple of years and all the blue donuts around as of late is potentially an open door to allow lower sp toons bigger toys to play with.
i am relatively new to eve so i want want to argue too much on the case as my knowledge is limited i am just putting out observable facts and providing idea to improve the mechanics to still keep carriers alive cause carrier were my end goal even if i cant rat in it i wanna fly it out and do some good |
lolzz Quekz
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
8
|
Posted - 2017.06.12 10:31:01 -
[14] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:I know most people here are averse to looking at the data...but you can find it here. The money supply grew rapidly last month. We saw some pretty wild swings recently with Alpha clones lining up with a surge in the money supply. A big drop when citadels were released (everyone and their Uncle Bob buying up blueprints). There is no similar explanation with the recent rise in the money supply.
which was my point eve was relatively at war for quite a long while with the blue donut officially forming around feb? march? somewhere along that line have you considered that this insane increase have been potentially attributed to the now safe space to rat and naturally enticing people to rat more to "save up for rainy days" there have been no full scale invasion for the 3 months or so..
and of cause i cant proof anything until the next major war breaks out and only then can we see if the blue donut might actually be the contributing factor to the sudden spike look at it this way.. even during war-times isk was still flowing in.. what would happen once peace comes?
alright i am going to stop now i am just saying you cannot attribute everything to just carrer and SC ratting |
|
|
|