Dev Post – Fighter Changes reduced

2017-06-12

Unless you have been living under a rock this weekend you will know that, as of Friday, once again Eve is dying. In conjunction with the already much-lamented change to mining anomalies, CCP did a surprise nerf to Fighters.

And suddenly the sky was falling.

To add further insult to the injury, CCP Quant took to Reddit to tell those who were decrying the change, that they were actually the ones to blame for the change.  In so doing CCP Quant made the situation many times worse.

The bitter words really started flying then. Before too long Facebook, Reddit, and Twitter started to show a hint of the scope of people’s anger and screen captures of cancelled subscriptions began to float through people’s feeds.

Earlier today, CCP Falcon, in his capacity as the community manager, released an updated statement relating to the changes.

The original dev post was updated by CCP Phantom to show the new changes. He then went on to show off some graph porn to support CCP Quant’s original assertion that the problems lie with the very extremely rich in super caps ruining the economy by printing ISK. A closer look at the data, however, shows a number of significant flaws. Not the least of which is that it only covers 5 days in June. It also is notable for only looking a narrow cross section of Null sec operations. No mention of Hisec mission running or incursions appears which would be important data points if the focus is really on stemming the tide of ISK into the entire economy.

Money Supply

Ultimately most people can agree that there is more ISK coming into the system than CCP has ways to pull back out again. Smarter minds than mine will work the problem over in the coming days with a number of ideas on what the changes actually mean in terms of isk per hour and the price of plex.

A better way to examine the problem might be to pick a nominal ISK/HR that an average super carrier can produce. Then using that as a baseline, determine how many of a given hull is required to then match that performance at a given activity. For example, it may take 6 VNI’s to get the same total isk per hour. Once you know that function, determine the cost to skill inject to the required levels (so one char to the super vs 6 to the VNI) and you can determine in moments how many hours it takes, at that fixed ISK/HR, to start becoming profitable. Should you choose to take it one step further and subtract monthly plex maintenance and you can see where the real problem lies.

Let your voice be heard! Submit your own article to Imperium News here!

Would you like to join the Imperium News staff? Find out how!

Comments

  • Rhivre

    Thanks Froggy.

    There are a few things I felt were missed out in the devpost, firstly, using “All characters who got bounties” is a confusing metric, as it includes alphas doing the tutorial, miners in highsec who kill the odd belt spawn, and PvP fleets who kill rats on gates. The total isk earned by these characters is not much in terms of total isk, but the numbers of characters gaining bounty payouts this way is large.

    Also, the 62T to 69T increase in bounty payouts in one month is something that needs some explaining I think. Is it because a load of new super pilots started ratting? Is it because a load of players who had not ratted before suddenly started doing so? The rorqual changes are not in yet, so it would not be those guys switching over. The player numbers do not seem to have increased particularly during this time period, so what caused the increase?

    June 12, 2017 at 8:49 PM
    • CK Rhivre

      For that matter, how about showing the income per capita. It could be more players, or more players ratting rather than pvp. Or, not cherry picking the data after Quants bungle. How about introduce something that we want to spend that isk on rather than devaluing the things we’ve already bought? Maybe increase mineral requirements for capitals and slow down the mineral prices and increase isk sinks at the same time? SO many decisions not as ham-handed, shady, and poorly explained were possible.

      June 12, 2017 at 9:49 PM
  • To establish an ISK timeline you also need to factor in the total buy-in cost of owning a super, mixed with the risk of using said super and in to replace said super. So rule of thumb is around 48bn ISK to achieve a baseline ROI.

    Now factor in you make approx 140m ISK average per tick. Now you’ll need to rat for approx 114hrs to get your base buy-in costs out of the way, from there its down to actual ISK making. Realising however someone isn’t likely to do the full 114hrs straight and spread over time given the absolute sheer boredom of Haven/Hub grinding.

    Its not an absolute gravy train and the buy-in hurts like hell, so ease up a bit on the gap analysis until you factor in all variables fairly.

    June 12, 2017 at 10:26 PM
  • Players that have played longer and risk more make more ISK. Sov wars have almost ground to a halt due to FozzieSov mechanics. Are they surprised that stability creates farming efficiency?

    June 13, 2017 at 12:26 AM
    • Apparently. Impressive, isn’t it? Remove all incentives to engage in strategic conflict, actively hinder people’s ability to do so at all (even purely as entertainment), and stock the game with an overabundance of minerals and cash. Then complain when the players either farm all day or quit out of boredom.

      v0v

      CCP have been at a loss for ideas since Stoffer and friends left the party.

      June 14, 2017 at 5:09 AM
  • Erick Asmock

    There are a number of good comments below. No self respecting data scientist or economist would limit a sample to 5 days unless they were intentionally cherry picking data points.

    The other explanation for an uptick is a new methodology that realizes income not picked up before. Short of that there is no rational reason for the uptick other than stability increases the ability of players to make isk. Stability fosters economic development. This is demonstrable in real world ways and I will spare you the examples here.

    June 13, 2017 at 2:32 AM
    • Rhivre Erick Asmock

      I was also thinking last night that it seems very much like a knee-jerk, to what could be an anomaly.
      They took a 5d period, and said that 10.6T was earned. If that is representative of the month (which is what they are trying to say), over a 30d period, 63.6T would be the income from bounties.
      63.6T is above Aprils, but 6T below May bounties. The handy thing now is, when the value comes in at around that number, they will be able to say “Look, our changes made the difference”.
      I would have waited to see if the spike was a one off, or a continual issue. Basing nerfing (or buffing) on one month spikes is not necessarily a good idea.

      June 13, 2017 at 5:22 AM
      • Erick Asmock Rhivre

        I have to look at it more but the long term trend provided shows a consistent increase with like spikes and some dips.

        The issues is CCP’s lack of transparency in how they gather the data. We know there have been huge swaths of unsubs during the timeline. We also know EVE is not really gaining players at a fast clip. Given that are they accounting for “inactive” accounts that may have considerable isk locked up.

        The challenge with determining active status is they redefined what an active player is in terms of alpha. Is that a player in the spike? Or does a lot of this go away if you discount players who have not logged in for 90 days or more?

        I would argue this is not a new issue if the money supply graph is accurate. It would be years old so a knee jerk reaction isn’t required.

        I would also challenge the mineral price indexes. Seems they need to view that from a regional perspective more than a universe perspective.

        June 13, 2017 at 10:45 AM
  • Erick Asmock

    Let’s remember CCP Quant is arguing Quantity Theory here expressing the rise or fall in isk supply will create inflation or deflation respectively. Without factoring in velocity of isk which is well below 1.0 (more like .7).

    Even using QT isk entering the market has to be used to affect inflation. With such a low velocity we know players are stockpiling isk or that most of the isk in the graph is on inactive characters.

    With players stockpiling it means they are saving for a rainy day. Perhaps building war chests to ready for massive war which would be delayed by reducing the ability to do this.

    It has been rumored (in EVE forums) the North who is ratting at per capita rate 1.8 that of Delve is doing this very thing.

    June 13, 2017 at 2:50 AM
  • Alot

    I’ve never understood how game company employees keep doing this to themselves. Any dev that sticks his head out in social media after a frustrating change will act as a lightning rod for all the abstract, unfocused rage of the entire community.

    It doesn’t matter if your opinions are good, bad, insightful or necessary. You are showing your rear and asking for a whipping. If you going to upset the community, inform them in advanced so their indignation can be spread over a few weeks. Failing that, hand all community interactions of to some soulless PR expert, oozing vague supportive cliches, who’s attitude has been botoxed into a permanent smile -.-

    June 14, 2017 at 9:09 AM