DBS and ESS changes suggestion

Current DBS, ESS, and the iterations we’ve been through

So far, we onto v4 of the DBS and ESS in which CCP is still attempting to tweak changes until they’re happy.

We’ve seen a consistent increase in the upper limit of “contested” systems, not counting the genocide of cyclones in this. At the same time we’ve seen some tweaks to ESS in regards to the time until payout, cloaking changes, and we still have no full understanding of the interactions you have when warping to the ESS acceleration gate.

In regards to this: CCP doesn’t seem to want to stick with this system, but they seem to be missing a few key ingredients and as such they adjust tweaking the numbers to compensate for these issues.

Problems with the current DBS

So there’s a few problems with the current DBS, as the ESS is considered to be a kind of unique and odd situation in the game, but people seem to generally be enjoying it so far.

Problems with DBS, and some minor ESS issues:

  • Forces a fully even spread of ratters, removing chances of fleet fights as it’s just a single person with their alts
  • High DBS modified systems are still not attractive to ratters as 50% of the income goes straight into ESS which takes a whole other approach to defend
  • Low DBS systems are not more attractive for pirates / ESS raiders, as there’s simply less in the ESS
  • None of the info is available on the map, only through a bugged version of the agency. CCPlease add this to ESI and the map

Suggested changes

DBS applies instant bounty payout vs amount that goes into the ESS

The following formulas would be used to keep it fair and square, yes these are taken over by an idea posted by somebody else before here.

  • DBS Range: 30% minimum, 200% maximum
  • Your payout = 70% - (100% - DBS%)/2
  • Amount to the bank = 30% + MAX(0, (100-DBS)/2)

Example with a few numbers:

  • 30% DBS = 35% of the value goes to the ratter (every 20 minutes), 65% value goes into ESS, total 100%
  • 60% DBS = 50% goes to the ratter, 50% goes into ESS, total 100%
  • 100% DBS = 70% goes to the ratter, 30% goes to ESS, total 100%
  • 120% DBS = 110% goes to the ratter, 30% goes to ESS, total 110%
  • 200% DBS = 150% goes to the ratter, 30% goes to ESS, total 150%

DBS value modification

To prevent people from gaming the system and modifying the stuff by blowing up a bunch of unrelated cyclones, simply do the following:

DBS modification (per 24h) = (Value of all destroyed items - insurance payout) / (Value ratted), maximum numbers capped at +25% or -10%

(Optionally) Region Bounty System

Introducing… Region Bounty System, DBS affects how much you as a ratter gets paid out vs how much goes into the bank. However to prevent from huge stale region where nothing except krabbing ever happens, and the occasional ESS raid: all rats’ value is affected by RBS.

RBS modification happens similarly as DBS, but much slower, and with moving averages. Numbers are a bit hard to come with, but should be somewhere around 50% <–> 150%, with a month of good war setting them up to 150% until the value of that war has been krabbed away.

Just think about the value of Delve :O.

Other changes

Increase the payout from ESS to bonds from 70% currently to 80%, reducing the amount of ISK that goes into thin air.

Secondly disable cargo deposits to stations to which you have no docking rights.

Issues which are addressed

With the current system, as a system loses its value in DBS it also becomes less attractive to pirates. Which leads to less fights, which in turn leads to an even lower DBS.

If we instead look to change it so that DBS just changes the amount into the bank + an added bonus for ratters if they chose to rat in a very active system, then systems with lots of ratting activity will attract pirates on the hunt for that bank.

Similarly, instead of rotating systems in a region like rotating crop, the whole region would now be affected by an RDS, making whole regions slowly less attractive over time as their value declines.

To the point that holding a single 100% region is more valuable compared to holding 2x 50% regions (as your forces are twice as spread out). Hopefully this introduces some bigger alliances fighting over new regions.

To that effect, every time an alliance moves, it’ll create a conflict, which will increase the region’s value in that time.

I multibox ESS and the two biggest problems I see are:
ESS pays the PvPer far too little for it to be worth it isk wise
AND the PvEer doesn’t have enough at stake to care to defend it.

It’s too often that I steal an ESS with 20 reds in local because its quite simply not worth the risk to defend it. Most ESSs currently do not even pay for a fit t1 cruiser (the cheapest ship allowed in the sites). It doesn’t make sense to bring a fleet to steal (or defend) less than the cost of replacing 1 ship in that fleet.

ESS needs to pay more AND take a bigger percentage of ratters income if any sort of fleet engagement is going to come of the system. If you just make it pay more but do not take more from the ratters it’s still going to end in me and my 2 alts stealing your ■■■■, which you may defend, but you’re still not going to get fleet fights.

My Idea:
Have the ESS take the first 50mil ratted in a system (ratters get 0isk in bounties until the 50mil is paid into the ESS) after which it takes the regular percentage. If the ESS is stolen then the ratters have to pay the 50mil again, if the ESS is collected by the defenders (minus 50mil) then the original 50mil that was paid in stays.

Question for Clarity:
I’m still in the dark about how the defenders interact with the ESS besides defending it. How does the defender collect the ESS? Do they just go into the site and start the timer like everyone else or do they have a separate interface?


When the timer expires it just pays out your share. If you steal it you take all of it.

I think the amount of ESS payouts is now set to a good rate though, imho 2h was too low for attackers to take a cut out of it.

Perfect then my idea would work well.

The amount of isk ESS pays out isn’t even close to what it needs to be. That’s the reason for the 50mil part of my idea in my previous post.

50mil is around the cost of a t2 fit t1 cruiser (the cheapest ship allowed in the site).

It’s very rare for an ESS to go over 50mil currently and even when it does the system is usually so stacked with defenders that you’d have to be crazy to try to take it, even with a fleet on your side. AND EVEN THEN the highest I see them get to usually is 100 or 200mil. Which pays for 2-4 t2 fit t1 cruisers… that’s not much of a fleet.

TLDR; ESS still doesn’t pay enough to be worth assaulting with a fleet nor does it take enough to be worth defending in most cases.

1 Like

The whole premise of these things is not just wrong, it goes against the spirit of EVE (in that it’s a complicated scheme trying to make people do something rather than just letting things evolve more naturally). Both of these things, separately and when taken together are CCPs efforts to lower isk injection into the economy while at the same exact time “give player reasons to fight”.

They have succeeded only in shifting people to running other safer and more lucrative content (people running the hell out of T4 to T6 abyss stuff in high sec, and burner missions , and FW farm alts and Wormholes with the entrances crit ect) while killing some of the best “off the cuff” content the game had like catching Supers or fleets of smartbombing Battleships in anoms.

CCP is doing what you are doing OP, trying to think of ideas to salvage this mess. What they should be doing is taking the whole ESS/DBS thing as a lesson. The lesson being the (A) you can’t make people fight each other over isk and (B) complicated schemes don’t work when players can just go to a different part of the game and do the same thing, just better.

1 Like

Too low - ratters wouldn’t care. Too high - they’d just stop ratting.

And start PvPing or go to High Sec and be replaced by players more willing to defend their space. Null Sec should not be a place to PvE with impunity, which is what is currently happening.

My suggested changes would address that, if they want to PvE without impunity, just steal their money.

In regards to your “50 million” suggestion, any flat amount is always going to be bad for the small guy who’s on his own trying to make a buck.

My changes are not addressed at making people do things they inherently don’t want to do.

It’s trying to make the changes attractive to both sides, if defense never shows up, their region will slowly de-valuate, and pirates can steal the cookie ever time they so please.
On the other hand, if you actively defend your space, you are not needing to have 20 diplo incidents over who gets to krab into a system as the lowest any given system will ever go in total payout (personal + bank) is 100%.

So if you choose to krab in a system with many other people, be ready to defend your money as it’ll attract pirates.
If you choose to krab in a hot warzone in a system where very few other people krab, you’ll be rewarded by instant (and higher than normal) payouts.

Combining these two you get incentives for many people without causing frictions between your own alliance / corp as to who gets to krab in which system. Furthermore, the whole scheme becomes more attractive for pirates as they can target people who don’t want to fight back and keep running away with their money.

In that sense I do think that the current payout from ESS to bonds should be increased from 70% to way 80%, but in the same breath disable “deposit cargo” to structures you don’t have docking access.

Your changes would do nothing to encourage anymore PvP and still allows ratters the luxury of not having to defend their space or PvP at all. This IS the problem with null-sec that ESS is trying to address. Null sec SHOULD NOT be a place where you JUST PvE and are able to completely avoid any real multiplayer content.

Did you even read the suggestions? If ratters don’t defend the space, the majority of their krabbed ISK goes into the ESS, which again, if they don’t defend gets stolen.

Over and over, thus leading to pirates becoming rich and krabbers literally krabbing for the sake of pirates.

If you don’t understand the formula, just say so instead of trying to come up with some BS excuses.

I did read your entire suggestion, and while I do like the part you mentioned, I do not think it is enough and here’s why.

The inherent problem with Null-Sec in its current iteration is that it’s actually safer than pretty much any other area of the game (save dead HS systems). This means CCPs hands are tied, they can’t increase rewards in Null-Sec because the risks are not high enough. Furthermore, this overly safe Null-Sec has lead to a HUGE botting problem. The root of ALL of these issues is overly safe ratting in Null Sec.

I honestly do not care how much you have to pay ratters in Null-Sec to make it financially worth it, I’m sure CCP could figure it out pretty easily. The MAIN PROBLEM they’ve been avoiding though is the risk factor. Botting and AFK ratting in Null Sec should. not. be. profitable. period.

Attentive Ratting by PvP interested players who WILL defend their space is the ONLY kind of ratting that should be incentivized. Trying to leave space for any other, lazier types of ratters just leads to Null Sec income nerfs, larger gaps between new and old players, very little Null Sec PvP/risk, and a massive botting problem (at this point I’m skeptical of CCPs advertised stance on botting).

Null Sec ratting should serve 1 role and 1 role only. To fund PvP. Not to accumulate in some bears’ wallet. Not to pimp out a capital ship that you never plan to take to battle. And CERTAINLY not to RMT and sell to some Whale.

How are players supposed to save up for supers? LIke i don’t understand your position on null sec players making isk. We need to accumulate wealth in order to buy our first super.

Why do you think you need a super?..

man im not one to insult but you’re an idiot. Sure why have a cruiser? we could all just play in noob ships.

1 Like

What do you plan to do with that super? I ask because I’ve played the game for 10 years and never once have I needed a super for anything…

Ok well im in Test. and there’s this thing called WWB 2. maybe you haven’t heard of it because you probably have no experience doing anything but complaining that people have it to easy. Well were about to have this big battle to decide who wins. Part of that will be decided by Super pilots. I’d like to have one for that day.

Glad you feel that players don’t deserve things in the game tho, that’s a great way to think about the game.

I’m not saying you dont. That’s actually the best reason to have a super so I commend you for realizing it’s not a trophy.

I’m merely saying that you should be subject to more PvP intervention when ratting to encourage more varied and consistent engagement options.

Afterall, if you’re saving to whelp a super in PvP then I dont imagine you’re opposed to more PvP opportunities… are you?

No i have no problem with increased pvp oppertunities. I just don’t want more nerfs to null ratting income amount.