Resource Redistribution Update

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Nevyn_Auscent

Yeah, as I thought, you are resorting to BS dictionary references used out of context.

No, I’m asking you to provide your definition. If you want to use a non-standard definition in this context then that is a discussion that can be had, but I’m not going to argue with a completely undefined term.

And you are also dismissing any effort you don’t think counts.

I’m dismissing any effort that is token at best. Running a level 4 mission with a proper farming ship consists of nothing more than warping in, sorting the overview by distance, and pressing F1 until everything is dead. The biggest investment of effort is not getting so caught up in whatever you’re doing in the other window that you forget you’re playing EVE.

See the bit you didn’t bother to highlight about skill

You’re right, because of that word in the middle: “or”. A skill requirement is one way of producing difficulty, effort is another. Nowhere did I say that skill doesn’t count.

lets also go with meaningful complexity as a relevant part of difficulty. And perhaps also include meaningful decision making DURING the action as part of difficulty.

Ok, sure, let’s go with that for the sake of argument.

The vast majority of EVE’s PvE contains no meaningful decisions. Everything is scripted in advance, the scripts are all easily available public knowledge, and the tolerances are generous enough that even an accidental deviation from the script doesn’t really matter. Short of absurd things like “but what if I turn off all of my tank and go AFK” the worst that can possibly happen is that you obtain a slightly lower ISK/hour rate by not using perfect target priority. Deciding which of the 10 helpless punching bag NPC battleships to kill first is a decision in name only.

Ganking smart players does include meaningful complexity and decision making. You have to identify a target, make a risk vs. reward calculation on whether the small-at-best profit is worth the opportunity cost, conceal your attack from your target’s scout until it is too late, etc.

And want to see prep time reduced but action difficulty added.

That’s a nice theory, but when you consider only the action of “open fire, wait for CONCORD” then it’s not going to happen. There is no conceivable game mechanic that can make a 50v1 gank have the difficulty you’re looking for, overwhelming numbers will always win and the only relevant difficulty can be in the ability to arrange your 50 attackers and get them to an appropriate target.

[Nevyn_Auscent]

@Merin_Ryskin

The vast majority of EVE’s PvE contains no meaningful decisions

Why are you bothering to bring this up when I’m not calling the vast majority of EVE’s PvE difficult? Why are you constantly trying to throw strawmen around

@Merin_Ryskin

There is no conceivable game mechanic that can make a 50v1 gank have the difficulty you’re looking for,

But there are conceivable game mechanics that make 50v1 ganks extremely wasteful and rare. And are game mechanics that make them impractical as well. And I mean game mechanics that don’t remove ganking from the game here.

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Nevyn_Auscent

Why are you bothering to bring this up when I’m not calling the vast majority of EVE’s PvE difficult?

Because the context of the discussion you joined was the claim that PvE is more difficult than ganking.

But there are conceivable game mechanics that make 50v1 ganks extremely wasteful and rare. And are game mechanics that make them impractical as well. And I mean game mechanics that don’t remove ganking from the game here.

Wasteful and rare, sure, but you’ve already said that reducing the profit of ganking doesn’t count. And every single attempt I’ve seen at making 50v1 ganks “impractical” has had catastrophic consequences everywhere else.

[Nevyn_Auscent]

@Merin_Ryskin

Because the context of the discussion you joined was the claim that PvE is more difficult than ganking.

It was very clearly not a claim I was making though, I think EVE rats are dumber than bricks, the fact we regard it as amazing they can now remote rep 15 years into the game says something about their smarts.

@Merin_Ryskin

And every single attempt I’ve seen at making 50v1 ganks “impractical” has had catastrophic consequences everywhere else.

looks at thread topic, looks at this topic I think we are enough miles off topic here to not go further into this but we’ve gone into at least some of this in previous threads anyway. Short version is I can think of several methods that wouldn’t be catastrophic, but all would be a significant change and require people to adapt to the new metas around them. And CCP at this stage probably aren’t interested in too many dramatic changes around things. As even this resource update isn’t really a dramatic change.

[Siegfried_Tahl]

@Merin_Ryskin

Except no, it isn’t. It has to be done once before each kill. You know, because all the ships you bought are destroyed by CONCORD, you have to scout a new target, etc.

You multibuy and multifit ships and store them locally. Reshipping or logging in another alt takes what, 30 seconds? Otherwise its self imposed difficulty.

@Merin_Ryskin

Except none of that involves any meaningful chance of failure or loss or even investing significant effort. 99% of your meaningful effort in PvE is invested one time and is never repeated for the rest of your EVE career. You will never lose your farming ship(s) or suffer any other setback besides the ammo you spend.

4/10 is an easy site, it only takes 5 minutes to clear, every time, with only 15-20% chance of success, i.e valuable loot. 80% of the time it’s unfruitful time “investment”, a sink. And sometimes it takes hours to find one. There is no chance of failure you say? Failing to profit is PVEers fail, not necessarily losing a ship.

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Nevyn_Auscent

It was very clearly not a claim I was making though, I think EVE rats are dumber than bricks, the fact we regard it as amazing they can now remote rep 15 years into the game says something about their smarts.

Ok. I will accept that clarification, but you did jump directly into the conversation where that was the context.

(And yes, it is tragic that EVE is wasting all of its potential with the current AI and PvE.)

[Merin_Ryskin]

@Siegfried_Tahl

You multibuy and multifit ships and store them locally. Reshipping or logging in another alt takes what, 30 seconds? Otherwise its self imposed difficulty.

Ok? And your point is? You’re still doing preparation for each kill, whether you do 10 kills worth of advance preparation at once or 100 kills worth or whatever arbitrary amount you want to name. The amount of preparation scales with the number of kills, PvE preparation doesn’t. Once you’ve bought a farming ship farming 10 missions or 100 missions or 1000 missions requires no additional preparation beyond buying ammo.

Failing to profit is PVEers fail, not necessarily losing a ship.

But how exactly do you fail to profit in PvE without being an idiot? You know the average ISK per hour over time for each activity, and if you do it long enough the RNG averages out to that rate. If you’re voluntarily doing a PvE activity where you don’t profit then you’re just bad at EVE.

[Siegfried_Tahl]

@Merin_Ryskin

Because the context of the discussion you joined was the claim that PvE is more difficult than ganking.

Not more difficult, but as easy.

[Siegfried_Tahl]

@Merin_Ryskin

Ok? And your point is? You’re still doing preparation for each kill,

One still has to clear every mission and/or site, its pve preparation for overseer kill. Just like gankers reshipping and scouting for next target.

But youll never admit that its basicly the same F1 activity in both cases.

Killing a pvp target is meaningful for you. It isnt for me. Killing npcs is meaningful enough for me, but not for you. Hunters and warriors.

But you keep stubbornly insist everyone not playing the way you do are worthless farmers and are playing it wrong.

Keep patting yourself on the back how hard you try and prepare every gank, that is just the same sequence of menial tasks and pushing F1. But because youre so brave and bold it suddenly becomes meaningful.

[Black_Pedro]

@Siegfried_Tahl

But you keep stubbornly insist everyone not playing the way you do are worthless farmers and are playing it wrong.

To get this back on topic, I think the meta question is more like should the game cater to farmers so they can farm in isolation, with minimal interactions with the other players?

Obviously collected resources from the environment and NPCs is an important part of the game, but the question seems to always come back to is how much risk/interaction/cooperation/competition should be inherent in those activites?

I agree with Merin that turning Eve into a solo grinding game with no real choices or points of competition with other players isn’t a good idea. And to be fair, through intention or neglect, CCP has moved the game down that road a fair bit in recent years. They have expressed their intention to change that now, so we get devblogs like this.

Will that cost some players that only want to be able to do everything and only interact with other players on their terms? Maybe, but I really don’t think it will be that large of an adjustment. There will still be plenty of space for people who want to optimize their shooting of hapless NPCs or collect resources in relative safety alone. There is room for almost everyone in Eve and there still will be.

But that doesn’t mean these farmers are some sort of protected class that should be exempted from the core idea of the game. For the game to have meaning there has to be struggle, competition and scarcity, and just because you pay your $15 a month doesn’t mean you get to be the winner of Eve if you just press F1 enough times.

It’s become too easy to accumulate things in safety and do everything yourself. Time for a slight rebalance, and to turn the dial away from “everyone is a winner!” to “you need to struggle for resources and power” for the long-term health of the game.

Personally, I don’t think it is especially onerous to ask industrialists to have to trade more with each other directly or via the market (or go further afield to source the raw materials). CCP could screw this up and make getting resources too difficult, but you probably should wait to see what the final state is before you decide you don’t like it.

[Siegfried_Tahl]

@Black_Pedro

To get this back on topic, I think the meta question is more like should the game cater to farmers so they can farm in isolation, with minimal interactions with the other players?

Define farming. Define isolation. Define winning EVE for 15$.

The only isolation so far I know of are abyssal pockets. Abyssal traces are still scannable and farmers are open for ganker blapping interaction.

Everything else is pretty open for competition and interaction. You got plenty of competition in combat exploration. Mission and incursion runners compete to sell their LP, and are scannable in mission pockets. Null ratting though is a different beast.

I’m not opposing the idea of some new PVE, with more meaningful interaction and choices. But I also think it would be adding more stick for same amount of carrot. Remember FOBs?

[Qia_Kare]

Ultimately, all I think will change is that some industrialists will have to buy some materials from the market. The value of items on the market is roughly proportional to the shortness of the stick one has to deal with to get it. More market activity sinks more isk out of the economy, meaning people have less of it, but the buying power of a single isk goes up. If materials are scarce, people will use smaller ships.

People will adapt to whatever conditions prevail. The conditions will just shape what that adaptation looks like.

[Mr_X5]

@Gaius_Mileghere

Way to cherrypick. We’re talking about localised mineral resources. Therefore, my answer is completely valid. If the only source for a particular mineral is Highsec, then Highsec is absolutely relevant.

Did you check the facts before answering? According to Aug MER, all TOP5 regions based on Total Mining Value are in HS. The total market value charts enforce this, as 75% of the market are products which require minerals.

@Gaius_Mileghere

You said that, not me.

I’m really fine with this. CCP makes a new space for WH in K-space in agreed location with the WH owners, moves all the assets from WH there and makes all the K-space NS. I would love to see that.

@Gaius_Mileghere

I haven’t seen the video, give me a link and the timestamp where it was said and colour me surprised.

You can find it by yourself either on some posts earlier, either on Twitch.

@Gaius_Mileghere

Again, I think you’re mixing things up where it doesn’t need to be. We’re talking about locally sourced minerals, not haulage/trade.

Wrong! We are speaking about the base mineral for ships. If it’s going to be available only in HS, almost the whole production of Trit is going to be bought by NS Blocks. Based on Production and Demand, the prices are going to raise (because Trit is available only in HS) until the rich entities are going to be able to afford them. It is a free market, so there is no regulated price. This could lead for example for a T1 cruiser to cost 70M, because of the increase in Trit and Mexallon prices. After this change, the Kernite will produce less than 25% of the existing value of Mexallon. There is also a decrease in Isogen reprocessing from available HS ores between 10% to 18%, but this shouldn’t affect as much.

@Gaius_Mileghere

Again, if people didn’t want features, situations or whatever else is going on, they’d go do something else.

Again, go watch the video. They explicit say that they didn’t discuss this with the CSM, even they had a meeting with them in the same day.

Go watch the video and comment after that.

[Black_Pedro]

@Siegfried_Tahl

Define farming. Define isolation. Define winning EVE for 15$.

I think these terms are quite clear.

There are players who want progression without competition for their $15. They want no risk of losing progress or feeling that they lost to someone else. There are other players that are here to compete and interact.

To be fair, this isn’t binary and there is a continuum between these, but the archetype of “farmer trash” Merin likes to rail against isn’t a hard concept at all. And while it is an archetype and the reality of each player’s motivations is more nuanced, he is not wrong at the core. The “farmer trash” add very little to the shared universe as they seek to avoid interactions and maximize resource generation.

And he is also right, they won’t be missed very much if they do leave. At least not now. Eve’s economy is sick with overproduction and established, min/maxed activities are being farmed and spewing out resources at unsustainable rates. Some “farmer trash” leaving because the size of the carrots are being toned down (or moved around) isn’t a problem for the game.

But really, I think most of the teeth-gnashing in this thread is unwarranted, or at least premature. This game will always have farmers and things to farm. A month or two after these changes we will reach a new normal, and players will adjust, or leave and be replaced by new players for who this is the only state they ever knew. As long as the new state is functional, the game will be fine.

[Lily_Inkura]

@Black_Pedro

I think the meta question is more like should the game cater to farmers so they can farm in isolation, with minimal interactions with the other players?

No.

And I only say that, as a solo “trash” farmer, due to respect for EvE’s initial design as a sandbox, (all but) no-holds barred game.

@Black_Pedro

Will (proposed changes) cost some players that only want to be able to do everything and only interact with other players on their terms?

Yes. I am not in a position to quantify that, as an absolute. But I can qualify it, absolutely, in terms of additional warp jumps, time, effort, risk.

@Black_Pedro

But that doesn’t mean these farmers are some sort of protected class that should be exempted from the core idea of the game.

Sigh. If only we were. But then again, would we be playing this game in the first place if we were?? I suggest that contrariness/ perversity are two strong characteristics not far from the surface in most PVE/ carebear/ farmer/ solo players.

@Black_Pedro

It’s become too easy to accumulate things in safety and do everything yourself. Time for a slight rebalance

“The”(?) problem here might be in the definition of slight. And also especially the too slow roll out.

Quantum cores have upset a lot of people. At least on these forums. Had that change happened when LS minerals could still be got from HS moons, I for one would have shrugged it off. But, coming after the nerf of moons, I decided to pull down a refinery instead, both because of the subsequent low mineral value and because the previous Fortress changes did not make mothballing the structure in-place to be viable.

CCP were then just too slow in rolling out the distribution changes. Given that moons will now effectively be the only source of pyerite and mexallon in HS, I have just put the same refinery back up. Albeit on a different moon and certainly before cores become mandatory.

@Black_Pedro

you probably should wait to see what the final state is before you decide you don’t like it

I already know I don’t like it. Whether I can turn a(n improved) profit out of it, remains to be seen.

[Mr_X5]

@Qia_Kare

Ultimately, all I think will change is that some industrialists will have to buy some materials from the market. The value of items on the market is roughly proportional to the shortness of the stick one has to deal with to get it. More market activity sinks more isk out of the economy, meaning people have less of it, but the buying power of a single isk goes up. If materials are scarce, people will use smaller ships.

People will adapt to whatever conditions prevail. The conditions will just shape what that adaptation looks like.

You are right and wrong in the same time. It is correct that will sink more ISK from the existing pockets. The problem here is that the rich entities, mostly the NS blocks, will afford to sink the ISK. The little guy will not be able to do the same. This will not affect too much the rich people on the Short and Mid term and might affect them on the long run. Definitely will affect the little guy as all the products are going to be more expensive, not only the ships, but also the consumables.
How will a mission runner for example use a smaller ship than the one required?

[Siegfried_Tahl]

@Black_Pedro

And while it is an archetype and the reality of each player’s motivations is more nuanced, he is not wrong at the core. The “farmer trash” add very little to the shared universe as they seek to avoid interactions and maximize resource generation.

Oh, I would agree with you, some PVE farmers are trash. But Merin brushes all of PVE as menial farming and all PVEer as trash.

On resource redistribution I dont have a formed opinion as I’m not an indy or a miner, I just dont think that scarcity or deficit is a healthy state or a way to reach it. Abundance with more resource sinks and more choice is much healthier and better.

It’s been years of production being x3 of destruction according to MERs. I have 20 ships in hangars, several bases/stashes across the universe. It’s my convenience. Would they rather me having 1 ship left or something?

[Mr_X5]

@Siegfried_Tahl

On resource redistribution I dont have a formed opinion as I’m not an indy or a miner, I just dont think that scarcity or deficit is a healthy state or a way to reach it. Abundance with more resource sinks and more choice is much healthier and better.

Agreed.
They are trying to correct the capital ship imbalance in a wrong way, by affecting also everything else in the economy. Yes, you will have 2-3 ships in some time with this update.
What they should have done is re-design the capital industry and add new materials for them with exclusivity to HS/LS/NS/WH, which are not stockpiled at the moment. Actually this would potentially lower the prices of all subcapital ships, because the existing stockpiles will lose their value.

[Lily_Inkura]

@Siegfried_Tahl

I just dont think that scarcity or deficit is a healthy state. Abundance with more resource sinks and more choice is much healthier and better.

Yes, but does abundance make such a good story-line? (Said with my contrarian hat on.)

@Siegfried_Tahl

It’s been years of production being x3 of destruction according to MERs. I have 20 ships in hangars, several bases/stashes across the universe. It’s my convenience. Would they rather me having 1 ship left or something?

Well, you can only fly one ship at a time. How many spares do you need?

I’m being facetious, but I think we are all furiously arguing here on the need for balance. Yet none of us knows how or what “number” to put on that, between abundance and poverty of resources.

EDIT: I think we are furiously agreeing on need for balance … but can’t agree on where to place it, etc.

[Mr_X5]

@Lily_Inkura

Well, you can only fly one ship at a time. How many spares do you need?

Wrong… I need a ship ratting. I need a ship for mining. I need different ships for mission running. I need a different ship for salvaging. I need a different ship for exploration. I need a different ships for PvP dps. I need a different ship for Logi. I need a different ship for EWar. I need a different ship for hauling.
Tell me the ship which can do all this…

@Lily_Inkura

EDIT: I think we are furiously agreeing on need for balance … but can’t agree on where to place it, etc.

I also agree the need of balance with regards to the capital industry. This is the wrong way to do it, affecting every other industry component. As I said, CCP should redesign the capital industry with new minerals, so that the change doesn’t have an effect on the other parts of industry.