CCP on Declarations of War Podcast

I am not asking for changes to NPC null, I am asking CCP to consider the differences of NPC Null vs Sov Null, when making any changes to CItadels or the new Dynamic Resource system.

Some players can’t stand endlessly running missions :wink: Miners wanna mine, ratters wanna rat, explorers wanna roam for the next hack can full of loot - etc. Conditions for mining and ratting can’t be improved in NPC null, limiting the number of players who might live there to do those other things.

Miners find belts in NPC null sec and Ore anomalies are there as well (remember how CCP introduced ore anoms to every single system in K-space) … Well, except for Curse because CCP removed belts in Curse and Great Wildlands. I wonder what Rattati has to say about this since they have not been returned, leaving all that space out of the “ore have been doubled everywhere” craze. And you have tons of moons, too. And mining missions for when you are sick of standard ores and just want to mine something else entirely.

Ratters can rat and get a crap load of loot. More loot in fact than from anoms because so many more people can run missions and you get interesting loot, too, from a variety of factions instead of just one.

As said before, NPC null sec is superior to Sov Null sec in these regards. :wink:

REDNES

I disagree that NPC null is superior; iHubs in Sov Null enable ENORMOUS ore anoms, and can buff ratting with endless respawning of those higher-level anoms.

I have heard rumors that some people in deep Sov Null run ratting anoms in (super)carriers! So many sites can appear in an iHub boosted system, that high-end ratters rig them with hyperspatials so they can get to the next site faster, while grumbling about their isk/hr. This kind of talk and expense for a “ratting ship” is unfathomable to my small provincial NPC Null brain.

Small & medium anoms were put in every NS system to sort of replace the removed belts containing ores which were moved to HS and LS. But belts with Arkanor & Mercoxit still exist in the lowest TrueSec systems, where they were found before.

These high tier anoms have long respawn times and only allow some 4-5 people to really use them effectively. Missions have no respawn timer and give potentially more money than any Sanctum. And they do that consistently. Not to mention that only a handful of anoms are actually worth running and they depend entirely on the sec level of the system. While CCP introduced Havens and Sanctums to low sec level systems years ago, they only get 1 or 2, not 10 each like in -1.0 systems. Most NPC null sec has a sec level or 0.0 to maybe -0.2. Ihubs there would only spawn utter trash like Hidden Rally Points or Hidden Dens and not the Havens that you crave. There would also be a few unmodified Rally Points but they also have a long respawn timer.

The rumors are right. But you know what? Only 1 (ONE) super can rat in these systems because it is so fast and the anoms take time to respawn. You can have 50 people run missions in systems like G-0 or H-ADOC or OSY or HM-UVD or G-ME2K and so on, and they have the same kind of income. Consistently.

These tiny anoms cannot replace a system with multiple belts and they can for sure not compensate the loss of all these normal belts when other regions still have them.
It is true that Ihubs spawn Collossals and Enormous ore anoms, but the Ihubs come with a ton of downsides as a price. None of the rewards are a worthy compensation for these downsides.

REDNES

3 Likes

About 1 hr in there’s talk about a recent event site, think it was a Null Sec Hacking site, that had a mine field in it which required players to manually navigate their ship through it in order to get to the loot can. The discussion made it seem like this was something new.

The Level 3 Guristas Epic Arc has a mission that’s similar with a mine field around an acceleration gate. The player has to manually navigate through the mine field in order to access the gate which leads to the final room for the mission objective.

It was a very cool mission, definitely different and fun to complete. Out of all the missions in that Epic Arc, that mission is the main thing I remember. Whether in event, exploration or mission sites, it would be cool to have more like that.

1 Like

We are currently working on better logging due to Quasar, https://forums.eveonline.com/t/introducing-quasar/, allowing much more granularity for analytical events.

Same goes with our ship data warehouse.

I think there is a lot potential in both using some of that data inside the client (popular fittings) and as well having fun with digging into the data for players.

1 Like

Happy to hear this, and thanks once again for the reply.

Good luck with the Quasar platform, the (invisible to us players) slow migration of services, etc. Reading between the lines, it sounds like the platform gives new services built on it access to async logging capabilities that wouldn’t have been possible with Python’s GIL and the traditional Tranquility server. Naturally, the development of a framework for structured logs processing follows suit. :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

They could try reading my open forum post that has been on page 1/2 everyday since 2019. That might just give them some insights.

1 Like

Maybe somebody with good Catalyst skills should gank these Abyss runners to provide some risk…

1 Like

It’s the right feature, for the wrong version of the game.

If CCP had improved the game properly and having a more dynamic and active gameplay, sure! nuke the local chat into oblivion for good.

But when they came with stupid observatories (stealth) and NPCs to change solar systems I gave up.

I admire the people still believing. Keep going!

but you can have an alt outside, that ganks the ganker first and pulls concord to you.

This is probably the most disturbing answer you can get from CCP.
You actually show that you have no metrics or ideas what you wanted to achive by “Scarcity”.
It was just “feelings” that you are using to decide the situation.
If you think something is bad and needs change you better back it up to show that the situation did improve. If you are only changing things randomly without having any metric to actually check the changes, then there is basically no way to decide if the changes worked in the first place.
If you are doing decisions by feelings and assumptions then I can tell you this.
“Assumption is the mother of all f***ups”

4 Likes

Starts off:

Ends with:

How about you get off you high horse and fix the game?

6 Likes

Not really, data oriented helps avoiding our wrong subjective view.

Problem is, the scientist also has his subjectivity analysing data, that’s a new challenge in the area.

Nonetheless it’s a great step taking decisions based on data, problem is when the game stops being a game and start being just A/B testing. Also enough data is necessary.

I also not saying CCP is doing it right, since Hilmar declared “triglavians kill people and they came back”, I acquired a sense they don’t know how to interpret it. It’s just a sense (see the trick here?).

Careful what you ask for, the last 2 years of nothing but nerfs is how he thinks the game should be “fixed”

“It’s going to be all sticks and no carrots” - @CCP_Rattati

5 Likes

The thing is that I still remember this post and the graph:

It did indicate that CCP actually has a measurement they are trying to follow.
After all this graph was probably only the opinion of some CCP devs. No actual metrics, just opinions. They should never show a graph if they are only talking about personal opinions.

CCP could have just told us what they actually were trying to do with “Scarcity” and what they are trying to achive. They just never cared to explain and used random words like “reducing stockpiles”.

And I am just a gamer, not someone who should figure this all out. It is their job and they get payed for it.
But for me one of the biggest and most obvious problems is this:
https://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/blueprint/?typeid=20187
I do not understand how this is healthy and good in any way. And the market is like this for quite a while. They never addressed this in any way. After changing a working market. And I never understood or heard an explanation from CCP why they did this.

2 Likes

Fair, now that you brought some argument, I totally agree.

Not explaining is not being held accountable for you actions / decisions.

My point is, don’t be against data oriented decisions just because EVE.

CCP took and is taking long overdue steps to correct issues they created with Rorquals and skill injectors. They had a meta going on where every miner in Nullsec felt entitled to have their Rorqual and mine to their hearts content.

Reducing stockpiles is pretty straight forward. Lots of minerals and materials were stashed during this period where it seemed resource gathering went unchecked.

This is the confusing part to me though… everyone complaining about capital proliferation, super umbrellas, how it no longer really meant anything to own or lose a capital, and that entire meta. CCP finally sees the light and moves to correct it and now everyone is all up in arms.

CCP stated from the beginning of this correction that it would be painful. One can assume that they had metrics they were monitoring and had/have a target number for specific things. They have also stated that the resource gathering people were accustomed to prior to their intervention wouldn’t be returning. Rorquals and Orcas should 100% be mining support ships.

4 Likes

it’s not about dumb mining changes and not about “painful” changes. But about zero information, discussion and clear goal with proper metrics. Not “We have plan but can’t tell what is it because it won’t work”, “trust us”.

If CCP would provide clear goals and plans. Most of vets would just clench their teeth and carry on while helping CCP fixing the game. Instead they decided to use any possible way to simply upset everyone and so far. Making game even more broken.

3 Likes

I dunno, I think CCP is doing the right thing by not divulging information to the playerbase. We’re notoriously terrible when it comes to being critical of their logic and decision making. Granted, I agree that CCP hardly does anything right but they aren’t obligated to share their metrics nor are they obligated to run their ideas by you. No matter what they say or do, they’re going to have a group of neckbeards playing arm-chair developer.

They ought to have a goal and a vision for what they want Eve Online to look like and I dont doubt that they are working towards it. I for one am happy if things are more expensive. That means that losses are more meaningful, or ought to be.

To add, they did seem pretty clear that scarcity was over right? We’re in the age of prosperity and the issue is that everyone thought that prosperity would be returning to the old. This is what normal and prosperous should look like. Sure it’s not perfect and there’s tweaking and adjusting that needs to happen, and hopefully they do that.

4 Likes