EVE Forums

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2003-07-21 14:39
  • First Forum Visit: 2013-08-28 22:43
  • Number of Posts: 239
  • Bounty: 0 ISK
  • Likes Received: 0

Panther X

Security Status 3.0
  • High Flyers Member since
  • Northern Coalition. Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    SurrenderMonkey wrote:
    Brigadine Ferathine wrote:
    Vaktul wrote:
    This makes no sense. So you're sweeping the biggest ISK making game-breaking exploit and guilty parties under the rug while at the same time punishing people that are actually out their grinding for their ISK instead? You people are the equivalent of corrupt politicians with how you represent us and you're equally as out-of-touch.

    Yup Yup yup


    Nope nope nope.

    This is patently ridiculous.

    First of all, the two situations are not remotely comparable, nor are they at all related.

    Ghost training absolutely should be punished in some way (I'd start with an outright deletion of all earned ISK and take it from there), but that has nothing to do with this.

    You're not being punished. It's simply necessary, for the health of the game, to reduce the inflow of ISK from carrier ratting. vOv



    Then just make havens and sanctums gated deadspace. Carriers can't go in. Problem solved. If that's what the problem is? Carriers are still pvp machines, fighters still do capital level damage.

    There are better ways of fixing issues than the nerfhammer.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    evan mclean wrote:
    Sterling Blades wrote:
    My issue with this nerf isn't from the carrier viewpoint side, but the structure utility side, as this is a blanket FIGHTER nerf, and not a direct carrier nerf. A hard chunk of citadel defensive DPS is getting stripped with this, making structure defense a mite more difficult. Its more an annoyance to me than anything else, as it still quantifies a strong force multiplier when utilized right even after the fighter nerfs hit on tuesday, but considering fighters are one of the few viable anti-subcap defenses in citadel reportoires right now(Point Defense and bomb launchers not withstanding), it seems a bit ill-thought since fighter changes don't just affect carriers anymore.


    sounds like a carebear problem and carebears + ccp = lame ass game


    ehhhm, no there's no PVE content on a structure. I don't take over my fortizar's weapons to kill belt rats.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jenn aSide wrote:
    xOmGx wrote:
    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]

    Hi Space Friends,
    Coming with our release on Tuesday, we’re significantly reducing the damage output of Fighters.

    Why:
    We are making this change because Carriers & Supercarriers are too strong in PvE, specifically anomaly ratting in Nullsec. As you may have seen in the May Monthly Economy Report, there is a significant upward trend in the Money Supply. This is primarily due to NPC Bounties.

    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.

    We also think that Carriers and Supercarriers are a bit too effective in PvP now. This change will significantly change the PvP balance, but we’re confident that Carriers and Supercarriers will remain powerful options for PvP.

    What:
    • Light Fighters (Space Superiority): No Change
    • Light Fighters (Attack): 20% reduction to Basic Attack and Heavy Rocket Salvo damage.
    • Support Fighters: No Change
    • Heavy Fighters (Heavy Attack): 10% reduction to Basic Attack and Torpedo Salvo damage.
    • Heavy Fighters (Long Range Attack): 30% reduction to Basic Attack damage.
    • Heavy Fighters (Shadow): No Change
    • NPCs are 15% more likely to shoot at fighters than they are currently.


    We will continue to observe the economy after these changes and will make adjustments as necessary to keep it healthy for all our players.



    CCP you are ******* faggots pls die


    This is helpful lol


    In b4 banhammer for being mean to CCP

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.

    No it was the sound of thousands of Goons unsubbing.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Why don't you make a change to the banking system as well? Let players choose which CCP/NPC corp sponsored bank their isk wallet is held at and regulate the banking system. Allow for a modest interest rate, but also allow for market fluctuations, "corporate scandals" (Hello Lore Department I'm looking at you) and rising/falling stock indexes be a revenue sink for players, corporations and alliances.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    rhiload Feron-drake wrote:
    im afraid your overestimating carriers/supers. they will not be strong as you think as they are now, its better to just increase the HP of the rats in havens and or decrease bounties. as you've seen in recent large scale fights, carriers dont win fights, dreads do, and this will be even more the case as dread dominance will prevail over any cap.


    Sorry to disagree Rhiload, but the answer to the economy's problem of accumulated and generated wealth is not stopping the revenue stream, it should be managing it. By clawing back the amount of risk free wealth, player generated wealth through bounties and insurance payments, you will have a more balanced and fair to everyone system.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP, if you are concerned with the money in the game, take the money away, don't mess with the revenue stream. Sheesh cut off our heads to cure a hangnail.

    Tax our income appropriately to our income levels, that's one way to keep balance.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center





    No it would be FOTM if it had NEVER been a viable source before, like the Rorqual situation. Carriers and Supers have ALWAYS been a viable source of income, but the game changed to make the level of investment much easier to handle; skill injectors, low ship prices, etc.
    If no one had ever done it before and now all the cool kids do it, that's FOTM. Like a one hit wonder band. THAT is FOTM.
    Lowering the investment level to get into a profit making device is just opening a PROVEN income stream to more people.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Panther X wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Count Basie Thellere wrote:
    Not impressed. Every time I spend ages training to get into a ship with good specs CCP nerfs them. Makes me wonder why I waste my time with this game.



    Smart people learn that following the Flavor of the month is bad.

    While everyone around me was ratting with Carriers or afking with ishtar's, I stuck to my MJD Rattlesnake. I told my bros "they are going to nerf those you know".

    Find something you like that works but isn't the FotM. Those things always get the axe. Happens in PVP too, which is why I never got to fond of the Orthrus, because they are going to nerf those things lol.


    Carriers were never FOTM. I've been ratting in carriers for years. Subcaps just take too long to move on. Maybe I have too short an attention span, I don't know, but carrier ratting has been around a lot longer than the last expansion you know.

    Flavour of the Month, indeed.


    Don't be ignorant. You know (or should know) that not as many people were carrier/super ratting before the fighter changes. People across EVE were more likely to use AFKtars with multiple characters.

    Have you looked at CCPs economic report? Would you like for me to post the one before the fighter changes and the one right after the fighter changes that show a spike in null sec bounties? Would you like to see the zkill stats for the same period that shows more carriers dying with npcs on the KM after the fighter changes (meaning more carriers in anoms)?

    Yes carriers and supers became the FOTM for ratting, the proof is available in the places I mentioned if you don't believe this.


    Don't be insulting because you are behind the meta. I have known about carrier ratting and super ratting for years. and have made billions on it. More people have been doing it lately, yes, but that doesn't make it Flavour of the Month. Rorquals, now that is a different story.

    There's no need to be rude because you are stuck in your own little world and are afraid to try something else. I was carrier and super ratting long before carriers and fighters were changed and will continue to do so. Who knows? I may start ratting in my titan again and getting even more dank ticks.

    Don't think you can look down your nose at anyone because you think your way is best though.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Geanos wrote:
    The simplest solution would be to put a tax on bounties for carriers, supers or any other ship class you fancy. Bounties are calculated at 15 minutes, right? So if you add a formula for carrier/super ratting like this - total bounties per tick (tbt) = tbt - (tbt * 20) / 100 - the server extra load would be negligible. Having the ability to put a bounty tax on certain classes of ships would also help you in the future.

    I think this is way better than straight up nerfing. And with a tax on bounties you won't have touch the PVP capabilities of ships "because of ISK".


    You're right, server load would be negligible, as they do it right now in hisec anyway. The autotax on NPC corps...that goes to CCP does it not? I make my own corp and set corp tax at %5, that comes automatically with each tick. Add a CONCORD tax to bounties, and a year end income tax payable by personal, corporate and alliance income taxes.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Count Basie Thellere wrote:
    Not impressed. Every time I spend ages training to get into a ship with good specs CCP nerfs them. Makes me wonder why I waste my time with this game.



    Smart people learn that following the Flavor of the month is bad.

    While everyone around me was ratting with Carriers or afking with ishtar's, I stuck to my MJD Rattlesnake. I told my bros "they are going to nerf those you know".

    Find something you like that works but isn't the FotM. Those things always get the axe. Happens in PVP too, which is why I never got to fond of the Orthrus, because they are going to nerf those things lol.


    Carriers were never FOTM. I've been ratting in carriers for years. Subcaps just take too long to move on. Maybe I have too short an attention span, I don't know, but carrier ratting has been around a lot longer than the last expansion you know.

    Flavour of the Month, indeed.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Lhord GankBang wrote:
    What if I told you, you can nerf the insane ticks by simply not allowing carriers to warp to the anoms? Idea
    Not making them entirely useless and just large drone boats that have slightly better DPS than an Ishtar.


    Yep, I spoke to that very idea earlier.

    I ask the dreaded coding/programming question...."How hard could it be?"

    Can someone hand me an umbrella for the shitstorm about to hit me?

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Abagah Khan wrote:



    Quote:
    If you go one step further and assess what the actual big picture problem is...there is no counter to the faucet. You need a sink to drain it. There is nothing wrong with having wealth, when there is something to spend it on. Right now there is no sink, no overflow tank, no sump pump nor levy to stop the flood. Reducing slightly ( and we are talking slightly) the amount of isk incoming, will still not resolve the issue of too much personal wealth.

    Personal, Corproate and Alliance Income tax, asset repossession, removal of insurance payouts, would all be a big step in resolving the personal wealth. Bans of tax evaders, wallet negative adjusting, and forensic accounting could all be used to slow down and control the massive unflux of risk free and risk adverse income streams.


    this is something ive noticed myself lately. Outside of skins, there is nothing to sink isk into. So i put it in another ship.. or in this case the market, making even more isk that i have nothing to spend it on..


    That's right. I have amassed a huge collection of ships in different parts of the galaxy, and still maintained my wealth portfolio. It is just too much of a PITA to move stuff around and reship to Jita and resell. Even still, with the small isk sink of alliance doctrines on deployment, I'm able to grow my wallet. Why? Because CCP allows it. The minuscule amount of tax I pay on transactions, the minuscule price I pay for shipping and travelling costs is almost a profit. Ridiculous or not, not up to me to decide. But when I get paid out by CCP for losing a ship, and get my alliance funded SRP, I make money when I lose ships in the long run. If one can account for EBITDA in a game where there is no real income tax.

    I'm not really sure that CCP knows what they are doing when it comes to money. But any retail regional manager or branch manager could tell you this. You don't need an economist to figure this out for you. If alliances corporations and individuals had to do their income tax at the end of the year, it wouldn't be fun, but it sure would make the playing field more level

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jenn aSide wrote:
    JC Mieyli wrote:


    so in short all this does is make isk scarcer and more valuable
    it makes plex more scarcer and more valuable
    it makes isk harder to obtain
    and encourages plex sales from players who struggle to farm isk


    All of these are good things.

    When I started ratting and getting 20 mil isk ticks in 2011 I was like WOW, 20 mil. 20 mill per tick back then meant I was RICH lol.

    CCP buffed somethings and over time it took more and more and more ratting just to get the same amount of "purchasing power" I had in 2011. Now i got a Rattlesnake that can do 40 mil ticks and the feeling is like "meh"

    It won't happen overnight, CCP screwed up when they opened up these big isk and mineral faucets and let them run for so long, be eventually things will settle and PVe activities in null will fell like they are worth it again as you don't have to grind near as much.

    As I said, people are just too short sighted to see that this ends up being a good thing, especially for us who rat.


    You are still taking too small of a picture to make a valid argument. What about the people in Jita making bank scamming idiots? Why should they continue to rack up huge wallets with ZERO risk? Why should a small percentage alone be forced to surrender their income streams? There needs to be bigger sweeping changes in the game to keep it viable. CCP arbitrarily going after small groups of specific income streams doesn't solve anything. We will always find a way to min/max each meta they come up with, except for a game wide mechanic that affects EVERYONE regardless of income method. The wealth hoarders will have to pay more of course, but that's the cost of doing business.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Jenn aSide wrote:
    Sassura wrote:
    Jenn aSide wrote:
    I said this on reddit but I'll say it here too. I know it won't stop the freak out because people can be pretty dumb when it comes to money, but here it is anyways.

    People are too short sighted to understand that these nerfs (this one to carriers/supers and the one about escalations) end up helping people by making deadspace loot and pirate BS BPCs way more valuable across the board.
    It shifts the income making from anom grinding to doing 10/10s (sure you have to grind for them, but the fewer times you get them will eventually be made up by price after the current stockpiles are depleted).
    This is a good thing.



    People who don't agree with you may not be dumb. They may simply feel that a substantial nerf to fighters is not the best way to go about making the changes that this game needs.


    I know that CCP has been heavy handed in the past. BUT it's easy to look at the MERs, see when carriers got buffed, see the explosion of null sec bounty generation, and understand that fighters were the cause of that.

    This one time, CCP is nerfing the actual cause of the problem.


    If you go one step further and assess what the actual big picture problem is...there is no counter to the faucet. You need a sink to drain it. There is nothing wrong with having wealth, when there is something to spend it on. Right now there is no sink, no overflow tank, no sump pump nor levy to stop the flood. Reducing slightly ( and we are talking slightly) the amount of isk incoming, will still not resolve the issue of too much personal wealth.

    Personal, Corproate and Alliance Income tax, asset repossession, removal of insurance payouts, would all be a big step in resolving the personal wealth. Bans of tax evaders, wallet negative adjusting, and forensic accounting could all be used to slow down and control the massive unflux of risk free and risk adverse income streams.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    another way to reduce the Isk ingame is to get rid of insurance. No payout on ship death, plus a premium paid to CONCORD for cleaning up your "accident scene" in a percentage of your wallet by ship class. Frig and dessie? Oh lets say 1/2 % wallet. Capitals, lets arbitrarily say 5% of your WALLET. Tax the 1%'ers.

    Implement a yearly income tax system that cannot be avoided. You do not pay your yearly income tax? Your wallet is seized. Your assets are seized. All tied to your api, so the "Forensic Accountants at CONCORD" will follow the money. Think you can evade the tax man? IP ban.

    Do something to the isk scammers and market PVPers that have zero risk, sitting in Jita all day, manipulating markets, making uncounted billions with zero risk.

    Give the working man a break.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Henry Plantgenet wrote:
    so....4 days before next patch you're ninja-ing these changes?
    Where was the CSM in all of this....


    Selling their carriers and rorquals, liquidating ore stocks and ripping out SP in their worker drone alts.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Total Newbie wrote:
    Simple solutions for your simple minds CCP.

    Rather than kill entire classes of ships in your effort to throw out the baby with the bath water, why don't you:

    1. Have rats apply even more massive damage to fighters/bombers.

    2. put a gate on anoms/sites that capital class ships can't enter

    3. spend more time finding your terrible code and fixing it.


    I mentioned 2 earlier and IMO it's probably the easiest and most "balanced" way to fix this "problem". If you implement #2 then #1 is moot anyway. If you want to implement #2 you will probably have to do #3 anyway, so we ALL win.

    Please CCP, listen to us here. Some people CANNOT afford to play this game in a paid subscription/RL money way. If you keep removing viable options for us to play by working for it, then you are going to see a reduction in the Omega clone subscriptions. I'm not saying "I quit" but I will be looking at the number of Omega subs I have. I'm not a high volume player like some people are, and I am not the richest guy in the game, but in my tenure here, I have been able to make good business decisions, and save enough to not HAVE to pay for my subs. But I would rather save that isk for a rainy day, or invest in side projects, than blow it all on however many subs I would need.

    At the end of the day (gawd I hate that line) your heavy handed band aid solutions are not garnering you any good will here. Please step back for a moment and re-evaluate your course of action here. Eve isn't here because of you, CCP. It is here because we love this game, and we love the community we have built around it (despite Gons best efforts to the contrary--JK) and it is here because we continue to open our wallets every month, 6 months, 12 months etc and continue to pay your salaries, buy new equipment and bring tourism to Iceland every year. CCP doesn't pay for Fanfest. WE DO.

    CCP you would do well to remember that.

  • [June] Fighter Damage Reduction in EVE Technology and Research Center

    CCP;

    If you wanted to keep carriers as PVP ships, why not make all combat sites static deadspace? That way capitals are not allowed into them. There are many spawnable combat sites that are deadspace locked anyway, why not make them all? You still need to unlock the higher amount of anomolies in the higher security class systems with the sov upgrades, but making them static deadspace and put them on a respawn timer.

    (Mostly) everyone is happy. Carriers are still powerful pvp machines, but with their inherent weakness to ECM, the "problem" of nullsec isk faucet is turned off, and you haven't nerfed a ship into oblivion.

    It's still crappy for everyone, but everyone still has something, and a little bit of dignity.

  • [June] Nullsec Asteroid Cluster and Excavator Drone changes in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Soko99 wrote:
    I think the most disturbing part about this change.. is that it's 30 pages in. and not a single DEV response.



    That's because it's going to happen, despite the furor and bluster of the community at large.

Forum Signature

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...