Did CCP secretly nerf Emerging Conduit as of today?

I see a lot of people going on about bots but the nerf is not about bots. I knew the ECs would eventually be nerfed because they were quite simply too good for hisec . Bots or no bots. A couple of hours a day and you could plex your account, buy skill injectors etc. It was easy isk and I never really came close to losing a ship. Still, it is a huge letdown. Without the TSDs the loot is garbage. I don’t know. RIP emerging conduits.

3 Likes

Well now you can get a maximum of 5 TSD per hour so there is still reason there.

Sigh… Back to wormhole ratting.

Yes, I think that is the thing. CCP would rather you go into a wormhole to make your isk where cloakies will be earnestly waiting for you. The emergency conduits were a just a teaser for carebears. You want to make isk get a cheap ship and go get blown up and podded now and then. Or join a corp and fight to own a chunk of space to support your carebear activities.

You can’t do 5 an hour. One can make max. 4 now with almost no loot. More than half people here do not know what they are writing about. But yet they put some shiat figures out of blue.

1 Like

Hai AIdeeeeen

The design intent behind these sites when they were originally introduced was to provide a taste of Invasion content to those that aren’t necessarily able to take part in Invasions proper, namely aimed at newer players, the hope being that they would team up and tackle the content together.
This meant creating a piece of content that was widely available and easy to access, hence the 1 min respawn and HS-wide distribution.
These goals were satisfied but I will be the first to admit that I did not anticipate the subsequent snowballing of botting and min-maxing that started to happen over December and January.
The numbers that we started to see in that period became cause for great concern and a decision was made to space out their respawn timer more and tweak the survey database drop rate.
I understand that people have issue with this but given how the consumption of this content evolved past the initial goal satisfaction, they were a huge problem.

12 Likes

Why dont you fix it since it’s obvious that you know about it? Fix the multiple Alpha log-ins while you’re at it.

Well it is not about adjusting itself but the way it was done. You guys could adress it differently than plainly hammering it down. You could diminish number of SS or just adjust respawning timer instead you killed it. Really said.

1 Like

Sounds like CCP have forgotten The Malcanis Law, namely

“Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of ‘new players’, that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players."

Perhaps put that back on your project whiteboards.

2 Likes

The amount of people getting angry over this clearly shows that it had to be nerfed. There should be plenty of activities to do, not just one single thing that you now have to do all the time because the payout is so much better and doing something else is a waste of time.

Actually any PvE income over 100m/hr in HS should either be a team effort or tied to a certain amount of risk or unpredictability.

3 Likes

Incidentally I hope you ban-hammered a lot of these.

Unfortunately, any form of clearly laid out, reasonable & rational explanations are lost in most of the threads here it seems. I totally get the point and the unforeseen outcomes thus the need for the conduits to be adjusted in this way but…
The problem is, reasonable and rational doesn’t really allow for the flamers to get properly riled up and going again cos they have no real counter to it. Maybe if you had instead posted something like “I nerfed your isk cos I am an Evil Dev and I hate all players” they would have been happier but I don’t think they ever are.

In fairness I don’t think they actually ‘care’ that this happened as it isn’t that big of a deal. Just wait until the next ingame adjustment and they will move on to that :smiley:

It just does not matter. They create more alpha bots.

Definitely the right thing to do given the nature of the site and some of the claims made regarding income.

Indeed.

A statement like that should have been added into the patch notes!

I am a high sec only player and CCP is nerfing High Sec into the ground. I have lived in low sec and null sec, I don’t care for the players or the politics of either. It really is a shame that the only place that get HUGE nerfs is High Sec.

1 Like

And when a nerf happens and people don’t get angry? Do the changes get reverted? Nope.

Clear you guys work on coms

1 Like

You misunderstand.

You getting angry isn’t going to change anything. The change was made for the longterm health of the game. If you want to lobby to change the game back, then make an argument for why it’d make a better game.

‘nerfd ma ticks! I’m gonna unsub!’ isn’t going to help anyone.

I’m not the one unsubbing, but there are plenty of people who are. But my opinion is that alt accounts shouldn’t even be a thing.

Thank you. A good answer, and pretty much as expected.

Even though I personally didn’t take more than a glance at them, I think EC’s were a success in that they did essentially exactly what CCP designed them to, were interesting in themselves, and pushed players to explore something new.

As we mentioned above, they would have been improved by being set up in such a way that did not produce such cookie-cutter content, the same every time. That, plus decent rewards, is what led to the swarm of farming.

In future it wouldn’t hurt for CCP to implement a design stage that says “Okay, let’s say this turns out to do what we’ve outlined here. Now let’s imagine 10,000 players and bots attacking this scene with their minds set on ‘maximum exploitation’. What’s likely to happen?” With a focus on:

  • player interactions
  • risk / reward / farming
  • botting / multi-boxing
  • bugs / crashes / negative outcomes
  • player satisfaction or outrage

I think a stage like that probably would have improved outcomes for about 50% of the problems I’ve seen occur over the past 8 years.

2 Likes

You misunderstand.

He said that the argument, that “The amount of people getting angry over this clearly shows that it had to be nerfed.” is stupid, because it implies that any change is good, whether people are angry at it or not.

1 Like