Highsec problems.
The only ones that matter.
Lowsec was great sites respawned instantly and even that i havent done them all day long i still got about 20 boosters to sell + some for myself. only fear were combat probes
1 Like
Enjoyed that event.
Would have been nice to get a few more accelerators, but apart from that it was fun.
Probably could have thrown more sleepers at us (larger/more waves), we can take it.
Keep at it.
Overall, the event was very good.
Positive points:
- Good challange
- Good rewards (blue loot)
- Interesting mechanics
Negative points:
- Booster drops could have been a bit better (I found 3 after doing about 30 sites)
- Eosian Safeguard took a LOT of time to kill.
- There was not much conflict as people didn’t bother to go suspect over the loot.
Maybe if the drop would be concentrated in one of the sleepers (maybe the safeguard?) people would be willing to fight for the loot.
1 Like
… and just to note, the event is not over, the accelerators will continue to function for another three weeks.
1 Like
As an aside, did anyone get the station wreck to spawn anything when bumped? I know that the vault would tend to drop near it, but after 35+ sites, I never was able to get it to drop anything by bumping it.
nah, just there for pretties…
I did over 200 sites. I can tell because I have 202 Relics. I got 5 accelerators and almost 3 bill in salvage/blue loot and boosters.
Considering my late start and the fact that I was out of town for a week I didn’t do too badly. I’m kicking myself because I just missed the cutoff to earn the last 30 points for the 120pt tier.
Still between the two accelerators, the blue loot, and the boosters I walked away with 300-350m isk. If I had to guess I’d have to say I’ve done 20-40 high-sec sites in a quiet-ish cluster. Between the ship I was using and my skills it would take me about 45min/site.
In retrospect I should have left the salvage behind especially after the patch. In one site the scrap was worth about 5x the rest of the salvage.
The Safeguards and to a lesser extent the Sentinels were “not fun” I’d leave the Safeguard for last and pretty much afk for the ten minutes it would take to chew through its armor. With my cap pretty much being perma-dry I wasn’t going anywhere anyway.
I’ll reiterate a common critic here: Neuts+Web+Scram severely limit the ships that can be used. Pretty much passive tank and cap-less weapons. Other than kill order and a little bit of drone management at the start there was shockingly little thought required.
I used an active tank cyclone. Can withstand 2x safeguards neut pressure pretty good if you fit for cap regen.
Idk, I actually had Valkyrie Accels almost every site while I was in low-sec - I think the drop rates for accels were intentionally very low in HS.
And yeah, the Safeguards were a HUGE pain to deal with.
That was my experience as well.
Was it intentionall?
but let’s make an announcement next time, I don’t had drops in hisec why should bother with more dangerous lowsec?
I don’t know. Maybe to see if there is any difference?
There is feeling that CCP giving too many details about anything is really bad because players forget how to explore and learn. For my taste they better do not announce anything and maker people just discover new sites and new event.
2 Likes
There is obvious progression from hisec to nullsec in what pve content drops. There is no so obvious in terms what is the most dangerous part from pve player side, because low sec is the most dangerous place in EvE for pve. So if I know from the beginning they were changing the drop rates in lowsec favour I may reconsider doing those sites in hisec becauce there were waste of time from my perspective.
My curiosity was telling me the inquisitor was waiting for me in lowsec. But I didn’t listen. I heard rumors of his supposed spawning too. So after 100ish sites in hisec, and no inquisitor, I decided to go lowsec. And there the inquisitor was. Waiting for me. Man was that a tough spawn. 10/10 cant wait to fly my exodrake again.
TL:DR You cant always read everything and expect to get all of the info. What fun would that be.
So, here’s a few responses and some insight into what we’ve learned this time.
I agree. Procedural generation is controlled randomness. This is not controlled. This is just random. More about this in the next response…
Yes, but we shouldn’t have to run those sites.
We have spoken to different teams about this and there are a few things going on.
-
On going and we’ll see the results of this in about 8 months: Revamp the Site creation tools. They are woefully old school, and although they are functional, that doesn’t mean they are good. This is taking several teams to do, because it’s not something that can be taken on by the events team alone. A “new” visual editor and the backend are getting married. It’s a beautiful ceremony and should have been done a while ago. Unfortunately, these results aren’t very visible. It’s just a tool we use to make things quicker.
-
Not started but results of this should be in about a year: We will be adding functionality to the Site creation tools. An example: currently sites can only give players feedback if something happens. We want to be able to tell you if something didn’t happen too. In Warzone Extraction, I wanted to be able to say “You search the wreck but find nothing.” but can’t because we don’t have the correct triggers and events. If I get my way, we’ll be adding a few… hundred.
-
Not started but probably taking place around the same time as #2 on the list: Adding functionality to the Site distribution system. There are some limits already in place so that we can avoid having too many sites appear in one system, but that one dial actually controls a few things. We need to decouple those controls so that they are completely separate. Basically the system works great if there are a bunch of sites on the list to be distributed, but starts to act like a child and throw sites into the far corners when you only give it one site.
-
Hand out the Site creation tool to everyone at CCP and see how they feel about it. Not only do I want to see what crazy stuff people come up with, but also we want them to tell us all the problems they are having with the system. That way we can improve it. Depending on how good we can make it, I would like to hand it out with the EVE client so anyone can use it. Granted you wouldn’t actually be able to play the sites, but you could at least submit it back to us so we can
steal your ideassee the cool stuff you make.
So kind of you to offer.
I might have misunderstood, but originally I thought I was told that the Site Completion trigger would stop the spawning of rats. It’s not a bug, it’s just a misunderstanding of the actual functionality. Which doesn’t change the design for this site, but definitely makes me want to change a few things for the future.
I was wrong.
The NES was asking for accelerators. +20s for the store, +10s for the event. OR +12 for the store, +10/20s for the event. We’re in talks about how to balance all this, if we even want to or if we can keep accelerators as event-exclusive. Other than “we’re talking about it” I have nothing to report at this time. No decision has been made.
No, it was not supposed to spawn in High Sec at all. After looking at the metrics on this, I think that was a poor decision on my part and want to test out something in the Crimson Harvest. I’m going to have the “special” NPC spawn some of the time in High Sec and see how it goes. Obviously it will be a low chance in High, Null or WH, but a much higher chance in Low Sec. I was considering a medium chance in Null and WH, but the additional variable might mess up the test.
It should clear up after a little while or another login/logout. However if it does not, please contact support. They can fix it.
We became aware of this issue shortly after the event. It apparently has been a known issue for a while but we’ve got a fix in for it now. The bad news is that because of how many systems it might break, the fix requires super extensive testing. We’re not sure if the fix will be in for the release later this month, but we are pushing hard to get it there because we don’t want to go live with more accelerators if this bug is still out there. Unfortunately, I don’t know how long this will take.
This is a very interesting point that we’ve been debating recently. Spreading the loot out means that people have to check everything which should take longer. The longer you are out there, the more risk, especially in Low Sec. So making people take longer to get the payouts in Low Sec should help drive conflict there, but doesn’t drive conflict in High Sec.
Coming up with ideal strategies is fine, especially because these are sites that are only available for a limited time. And this is the evolution from forcing completion in a specific ship class. Now we’re not limiting you to specific ship class or fit types, but rather you can choose how you want to do this. Like @Kaivarian_Coste who did this in an interceptor. It’s up to you how you tackle the situation. It’s up to us to come up with interesting puzzles. This one might not have been particularly interesting to you, but did require a little bit of work to find the ideal fit.
I like you guys.
But to answer @Jeremiah_Saken, I think you also have a good point. It would help you make a good decision if you have some information about what to expect. And we don’t do a good job of presenting that information. I don’t have a good answer for this at this time, other than acknowledging that it is a problem.
A last side note, I don’t really want to reward progression as much as I want to reward risk. If I can find a way to determine risk, I will reward the higher risk gameplay. At the moment High Sec and Null Sec have similar riskiness in comparison with Low Sec. Yes, High and Null are very different but when compared to Low, they don’t seem that different from each other. Therefore, Low Sec is the place to put the best rewards.
The test here was to see if showing that the best rewards were in the highest risk areas would motivate someone to move around. The answer is no. Most people would rather just deal with the lower risk and lower reward instead of finding the better rewards elsewhere. Part of this could be that we don’t message where the higher rewards are located good enough or that there isn’t really an obvious progression through riskier areas for higher rewards.
Anyway… we could really get into some interesting discussions about this but it’s a topic for another day. I’m sure we all have opinions on this. It just means we may have to find other conflict drivers. These are the types of things we really want to test with events.
10 Likes
That is more words than i can read at this time. But i wanna thank you for the updates and recent event. All things considered i think it was a success. Great Job. Cant wait to see whats in store for us next.
Edit: OMG i got a 420 post! This day couldn’t get any better.