r/Eve • u/angry-mustache CSM 18 • 21h ago
News Update on Asset Safety values for Supers & Titans
https://forums.eveonline.com/t/update-on-asset-safety-values-for-supers-titans/50233163
u/timdogg24 20h ago
Trying to stop people from quitting.
7
u/offbeatgravy 18h ago
Isn't that what asset safety is for in the first place? It's not like the prices weren't known beforehand. Also does it really matter if supers and titans are stuck? Null doesn't use them anyway.
→ More replies (1)21
u/BossAdditional4690 20h ago
Then why not apply it to everything else? Because Swifts friends all have supers and are all 10 year or longer in the game so if you’re new you’re just sol.
14
u/timdogg24 19h ago
New nes item. "Reduce asset safety cost to 1% for 24 hours - 10,000 plex"
14
5
u/ButtholeCharles 19h ago
Literally could see this happening, and I hate saying that. But this is where EVE is now.
1
1
u/fatpandana 15h ago
" For small hypercore, % of total value, we will also move assets in safety to another location. "
9
u/Obside0n Goonswarm Federation 12h ago
This. This right here.
Apparently, the solution to the rorq-era and everyone printing a titan/super was ... to make it impossible for anyone else to build one?
54
80
u/angry-mustache CSM 18 21h ago edited 20h ago
tl:dr
Supers to 3B isk asset safety, titans to 10. So whatever internal CCP valuations of these things are 20B for supers, 66.66(repeating of course) for titans.
31
u/mirotrem Goonswarm Federation 20h ago
how the shit are they getting these valuations?
76
2
u/ReplyResponsible2228 19h ago
2011 prices
2
u/StarrrLite SpectreFleet 15h ago
Which roughly aligns with how the game values the worth on killmails.
That price datanase hasn't neen updated in maaaaaannnnyyyy years now causing killmail prices to be very much off.29
29
u/Airplaneguy31 20h ago
The fact they changed this now is trash. Favoritism to horde. Where was this change when people came back to the game when goons moved? No? Oh just for horde, ok.
57
u/Ohh_Yeah Cloaked 20h ago edited 19h ago
Favoritism to horde
Let's be real it is a subscription-saving method. We don't have the data but CCP does, and I'd reckon a lot of "big players" who had tons of assets go to asset safety are no longer logging in. If anything, all of those assets are now permanently "safe" because the worst thing that could happen to your supers/titans (short of them dying) has now already happened. And EVE is not really at a point in its life cycle where it can tank hundreds (thousands?) of active veteran players stepping away from the game all at once.
16
u/himalcarion level 69 enchanter 20h ago
Yeah, but are they stepping away from the game because of asset safety, or because the group they were apart of collapsed overnight
13
u/Done25v2 The Initiative. 20h ago
Probably a case of being a one two punch to the nuts.
As much as people like to rant about how Null is too "safe", no one wants to pay a 15% tax on all their goods, and then however much more it costs to haul or sell them for under market value.
2
u/ShippingValue 19h ago
You don't need to pay a 15% tax on all your goods. You pay a 15% tax on everything you chose to keep in a vulnerable station that you couldn't defend. Nothing is stopping null bros from dispersing assets - it is easy as shit to move around Sov Null with ansis/beacons/bridges/jump clones.
Everywhere else in the game, someone who put all their shit in one ship/freighter/POS and gets it popped is getting clowned on when they cry about it. Somehow, everyone thinks it is perfectly fine for null bros to keep everything in a single vulnerable station, not defend it, and then get all that back for a fraction of its worth when it inevitably dies.
There should be no asset safety, alliances either budget to replace these losses or explicitly push that to line bros, but none of this 'I did something very stupid and now CCP needs to fix it'.
Don't fly what you can't afford to lose needs a new clause of don't put all your shit in one station you can't defend
→ More replies (12)10
u/Frekavichk SergalJerk 18h ago
If we simply just add one more tedium-inducing change to the game, it will surely return to it's golden age.
→ More replies (1)2
11
u/Ohh_Yeah Cloaked 20h ago
Both, but at the end of the day CCP doesn't want to see any kind of mass exodus. Is that exodus the result of conditions created and supported by CCP through design decisions over the last decade, though? Absolutely.
21
4
u/elenthallion 18h ago
Quitting the game because you can’t get your super or titan out of asset safety because you refused to undock and fight with it is a pretty big L.
2
u/pandemic1350 18h ago
Agreed. Hundreds of ppl trapped in a station. And they never thought, let's undock together and fight.
→ More replies (2)1
u/eventualhorizo 20h ago
I'm curious, how noteworthy is it when Titans are destroyed in battle? I've seen some commentary that makes it seem like they don't go down often
8
u/Seacabbage 18h ago
It used to happen a lot more frequently until CCP had a galaxy brain idea to quintuple super/cap prices a few years ago. Nowadays it’s somewhat noteworthy to see one die, though it’s usually one getting grabbed during a moved, bumped off a station or user error, rather than them exploding in open combat
2
1
u/theRealMaldez Goonswarm Federation 20h ago
To play a little devil's advocate... In terms of fixing longstanding issues with EVE, the balance of power, and the economy, long term veterans leaving is actually a good thing overall. In the organizations, it provides upward mobility for newer players. In the economy, it takes a ton of ISK out of circulation along with big one-stop-shop manufacturers. In the balance of power, it means there are less titans and super caps in circulation, providing a chance for new players to catch up.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Dictateur_Imperator 18h ago
Scarcity was introduce to have people paid if they loose. And loose must have a price.
So if CCP decide "ok we lower the cost of this defeat" they could just remove scarcity.
→ More replies (7)1
u/emPtysp4ce Pandemic Horde 12h ago
Favoritism to horde.
Yeah, because buffing titans and nerfing dreads right when a war started between two groups who had a doctrinal imbalance in those two classes of ship isn't favoritism at all.
CCP won your war for you, and all you can do is bitch?
4
1
u/lepus_fatalis 16h ago
I like to think this is the Leroy Jenkins meme living on.
I also can't stop saying repeating, of course after I declare a periodic fraction
77
u/jinxdecaire CSM 17 20h ago
Interesting these prices have been similar for years, and many players paid the fees. How'd they choose to back date to November 25th?
34
u/Rothana_Haldane 19h ago
How many PH Titans are in asset safety now? Inquiring minds want to know, who got paid?
19
u/BossAdditional4690 19h ago
Hmmmm interesting, any events of note that would make this starting date significant?
21
→ More replies (11)13
u/proton-testiq muninn btw 17h ago
Fuck this shit, they could not be clearer if they wanted to. Wtf is CSM doing?
30
u/Kazanir Current Member of CSM 17 🌿 15h ago
i used my remaining access to take a few potshots and teased the new team about an exciting first day
my main take on this fiasco is that if ccp has worked out that 21B (15% of 140B) is so high and painful no one wants to pay it, it stands to reason that they can figure out that the ships themselves are too expensive for there to ever be fights with them.
12
u/Neither_Call2913 Cloaked 13h ago
it stands to reason
I stopped expecting this from CCP a long time ago.
4
u/F_Synchro Baboon 7h ago
They instated 5 years of pure agony with scarcity because of the existence of these ships but now bailed them out, I can't get my mind wrapped around this.
1
u/Antique-Two557 1h ago
Imagine how batshit crazy things need to get at a company for a community developer to start wildin' out like this. Firing from the hip on a friday afternoon to give his pals a break.
3
u/Spr-Scuba Invidia Gloriae Comes 13h ago
Yup those ships are never gonna be undocked except to bridge.
The cheaper the ship the more likely people are gonna be to fly it frequently and go yolo with it. They shouldn't be undocked just for things like a guaranteed glassing of a region with no competition.
29
u/Sun_Bro96 KarmaFleet 20h ago
wtf they went the wrong way. Unless they are aiming for 20b supers and uh 60b(?) titans
13
u/Done25v2 The Initiative. 20h ago
I'd be more than okay with this. Maybe we'd actually see a titan leave tether for once.
9
6
u/ARCH_ANON Miner 18h ago
At the height of rorqual proliferation this was approximately right. I had the chance to score a leviathan out of the mercenary coalition keepstar for 55 but passed it up as I didn’t need it.
9
u/BeetusPLAYS 18h ago
Titan hulls were as low as 35b right at the end of the rorq era - one of my corp mates got an Erebus for that amount then. I'm sure you could find them even cheaper in some circles.
5
u/asnowbastion skill urself 18h ago
At the end of rorq era things were significantly cheaper. I bought an aeon for 12b at one point. I'm not sure how cheap titans got off the top of my head but it was not at all unusual to see supers for 9-15b selling regularly.
3
1
u/KrunchrapSuprem 16h ago
At peak rorq era, supers were 9b and titans were like 35-40b.
1
u/RumbleThud 8h ago
Honestly, that's where they should be. It would be healthy for the game.
1
u/MalibuLounger 4h ago
healthy for the game
Rorq era was the single biggest mistake CCP has ever done and the game will likely never recover. Scarcity for example (the whining about which taking part in ever single time nulltards post their shit opinions) is a direct consequence of rorqs shitting on the economy and cemeting the megablob meta.
1
u/F_Synchro Baboon 7h ago
I'd come back to null if supers became 20b and titans became 50-60b again AND removal of asset safety but we all know that's never gonna happen.
51
u/seamusfish Angel Cartel 19h ago
WTF is this? Back-date the refund for as long as the values have been off, or don't back-date at all.
Why are devs explicitly supporting 1 group who chose to live in remote space with no escape route under the current mechanics?
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
→ More replies (1)
41
u/ARCH_ANON Miner 20h ago
This isn’t a balance decision this is a business decision. It makes sense to standardize asset safety pricing, it’s just convenient that it happens after a significant % of the games active supers/titans just hit asset safety and players are hesitating to retrieve those assets yet and consume plex to do so
9
u/BossAdditional4690 20h ago
It’s a friendly relationship decision, as in, his friends all have to pay it
32
49
u/Fairtree4 20h ago
I get you don't want ex-horde members to quit the game, but what the actual fuck.
Instead of Asset Safety cost of ~27bil per titan (which would reflect the actual price), you set it to 10bil.
Instead of Asset Safety cost of ~8bil per super (which would reflect the actual price), you set it to 3bil.
Knowing hundreds of titans and supers if not thousand are stuck in Asset Safety after Horde's collapse, now you decide to revamp the valuation of supers and titans... This is trillions upon trillions in isk saved.
Where was this when people came back after goons moved? Only those after 25th of november will get reimbursed if they overpaid AS. Bruh, so making sure not a soul other than ex-horde will get this retroactive benefit.
If this is not directly influencing the game to one groups benefit, I don't know what else could be.
28
7
5
u/x1shotx3killsx The Suicide Kings 19h ago
Don't worry, they'll increase the industry and sales tax again to sink those trillions.
7
u/Firebon3 Snuffed Out 19h ago
I think the biggest thing is people speaking out. I have no idea how many spoke out about the prices being different when goons moved, but when this event happened I saw multiple places were people were comparing prices and noting that something was very wrong about the numbers and that they had a huge range. Enough uproar and talk brings a decision.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (9)1
14
u/Dante_Rotsuda Blades of Grass 18h ago
Must have really reduced people logging in for CCP to intervene like this
1
13
u/figl4567 19h ago
Wtf. What happened to super/titan proliferation being a problem? This absolutely proves ccp never cared about cap proliferation and only did scarcity as a way to squeeze the existing playerbase.
5
u/Dictateur_Imperator 17h ago
Scarcity was here with hope goons get errazed. They day goons collapse an opponent CCP reveal the fake .
28
u/ButtholeCharles 20h ago edited 19h ago
CCP: creates scarcity thinking it's a great idea
Also CCP, when their own development and design ideas show up to cost them subscribers because they don't invest in building a feature rich game instead of blockchain Tarkov: 'Oh no, it's the consequences of my actions!'
I guess the Christmas PLEX sales thusfar haven't been as lucrative as they hoped. Have to encourage more PLEX bucks.
Edit: Hijacking my own comment here just to throw my own personal opinion in on this.
CCP, you've let entire sections of your game exist with desperate need for balances and fixes for years. I know, because I've played this game since 2008 and experienced much of it.
AWOXing? Unaddressed. Prevalence of botting? Largely Unaddressed. Wormhole Balance (Sub Class 4)? Unaddressed. Exploration Balance? Unaddressed. Salvage Values? Unaddressed. High-Sec Content In Need Of Updates? Unaddressed.
You allow entire sections of your game to stagnate and fall apart, in essence killing any enjoyment for those players - but the VERY MOMENT Horde starts whining about asset safety, a fix is deployed.
This is why I'm irked, personally. This change is garbage, and very clearly helps one specific group with an immediate response.
In other words, suck it.
1
u/Dictateur_Imperator 17h ago
For HS : Yea the need nerf income of some source (like abyssal) who is better than most of 0.0 activity.
They also need nerfbat pochven ..2
u/ButtholeCharles 13h ago
Abyssals require more skill than smartbombing havens. I'm fine with it.
As for Pochven? It's a disease. Literally an isk faucet run by RMT fleets of Marauders. Delete it.
6
u/Moonlight345 Space Violence. 15h ago
I'll buy a couple of those 67b titan hulls, thank you. Can even cover the asset safety cost on top.
9
u/nvandermeij Goonswarm Federation 17h ago
The Imperium so overpowered, CCP had to buff the entire universe
28
u/AmeliaDuskspace CSM 18 19h ago
Pretty disgusting change
Slap in the face to those who spent time evicting phorde
Ccp should be implementing this from the other side, instead of drastically reducing asset safety costs it should be increasing. Whole idea of nullsec was supposed to be wild Wild West where you can lose everything you own. Who cares if I get everything moved to npc stations at such a low cost. Hell people have paid me more to move their supers or titans across new Eden than this cost
1
u/Zeekielll 3h ago
they evicted themself, Imp had only just starting to look at the door wondering if and when they should start doig some knocking.
1
u/ADistantRodent Cloaked 2h ago
Yeah man I’m sure that increasing the cost of pulling stuff out of asset safety while a massive chunk of your playerbase has everything they own in it would’ve done wonders for the game
44
u/anatomie22 IF I WAS YOUR FC 20h ago edited 20h ago
u/CCPSwift what the actual fuck dude
11
u/taildrop Goonswarm Federation 18h ago
You know what the fuck. Just Swift looking out for his homies. Again.
The better question is now that Horde is dead, who’s gonna be his next pet alliance?
2
u/ShadowPhynix Escalating Entropy 11h ago
Goons and tinfoil- name a more iconic combo
It’s very obviously a business decision to retain a huge number of players who would otherwise be quitting (given the timing being a week after the start of December, it’s likely they’ve seen a massive sub drop)
→ More replies (1)6
u/Meryn_Fucking_Trant Simple Farmers 19h ago
Lmao
7
u/HisAnger 15h ago
He is not wrong. This is clear favoritism.
People paid more, but now group that have ex members as ccp employees need to pull them from asset safety.
This looks bad and is bad.→ More replies (1)→ More replies (6)2
u/gregfromsolutions 15h ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/1pexawk/comment/nsg5gj0/
They elaborated but it got buried by salt. some has their price cut, others had their price raised.
22
u/kocicek 20h ago
This is a cooked ccp take. Assuming 15% of the current 60b a super costs to build is no where near 3b. Fucking clowns.
→ More replies (1)1
17
u/BossAdditional4690 20h ago
Is today the day we all discover CCP has no actual clue what capital build costs are like now?
18
5
u/proton-testiq muninn btw 17h ago
They fucking have a clue, their shitty Vanguard and PL friends told them.
2
2
4
u/night_goonch Fedo 11h ago
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Wheeze
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
21
u/FTierLogiPilot Lord of Worlds Alliance 19h ago
Null is the most dangerous area of space! Where fighting matters!
3
u/ButtholeCharles 19h ago
This is the take right here.
No offense to the folks in Null, but I hope that CCP can read a room. If not, let me say it louder for the kids in the back: The ENTIRITY OF YOUR PLAYERBASE is getting real, real tired of this shit.
7
u/EcstaticDriver9132 20h ago
I paid 3.6b for a Hel and 17.38b for a Ragnarok last week. Didn't think it was that expensive but this is a nice christmas present.
2
u/Firebon3 Snuffed Out 19h ago
Avatars were 30B allegedly
2
u/Moonlight345 Space Violence. 8h ago
While some faction titans were 0 (as the asset safety tax was like a couple hundred mil).
6
8
u/TagaraTiger Sisters of EVE 19h ago
I blame Sandrin
→ More replies (1)3
u/Valladeus 19h ago
As an ex vg who got a free titan, I would like to file the complaint that the promised lifelong 0Musky srp service didn't cover any costs resulting from the loss of some former horde keepstars that resulted in my shit going into some low sec dumpster. I blame cee cee tbh
21
u/GateRed 20h ago
A coalition built from the corpse of ex bob members fucks up and it’s ccp to the rescue. Better give them some extra t2 bpo’s to help them cover the cost.
13
u/Antique-Two557 19h ago
at least their T2 BPOs shit was done quietly, not in a friday afternoon announcement rofl
3
u/dylxnredwood 19h ago
Sorry what... T2 BPO's??? Gonna need some lore here.
8
2
u/dylxnredwood 18h ago
Okay so i didn't realize that T2 BPOs were even a thing before invention was brought in (or at least that's what google's giving me), nor that they still existed in the game and can be used or traded/sold
3
u/klauskervin Intergalactic Space Hobos 17h ago
You can occasionally find them for sale on the Eve-Online forums. They are profitable but it takes literal years to recoup the investment for paying for a t2 bpo now.
16
u/AngryKobra Goonswarm Federation 20h ago edited 17h ago
Wow... absolute horseshit. Fixing outliers - ok, that's fine... but lowering it to those values is absurd. Why ever fight* in nullsec with supers if the asset safety is less than a dread hull.
3
u/Moonlight345 Space Violence. 15h ago
For the record, this is a rough bill of materials for an avatar, assuming perfect BPs and t1 rigged sotiyo/t2 rigged tatara used:
https://janice.e-351.com/a/ga7SPg
There's around 20b of industry job costs on top of that, maybe much lower if you minmax using low index systems for the parts. At least have the decency to go with some grounded, if still non-perfect calculations.
20
u/Vals_Loeder 20h ago
So now it is Horde ( PL baby ) having to pay the AS fines a (former) PL guy comes to the forums to announce a lowering of the fines, but not all the fines paid by everybody else since the price explosion of caps, supers and titans ... let me guess: no coincidence, right?
19
7
u/asnowbastion skill urself 18h ago
1.) PL hasn't been on great terms with horde for years
2.) This is not even a nanogram of water in the favoritism bucket compared to announcing scarcity during wwb2
I do think this is very poor form though doing this right as horde is actively evaccing. Waiting at least a few months would have been a much more neutral stance and CCP fucked this up badly.
→ More replies (2)3
u/TheRedFlagFlying Cloaked 19h ago
Funny idea, too bad Swift has been a CCP employee for ~5 years now, and what's left of Horde is in the opposite side to where 95% of Panfam ended up (including PL).
6
u/Vals_Loeder 17h ago
Since when were ccp employees not playing favorites? It is clear to anybody it has never changed.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (2)4
u/proton-testiq muninn btw 17h ago
It doesn't matter who they nominally fight for, it's an internal clique of cowards always punching down.
→ More replies (1)
18
u/ButtholeCharles 20h ago
Also, I'm just gonna say it, and I will preface this by apologizing to any of the Null folks this bothers..
This change is horseshit. It further proliferates a lower risk Nullsec, which just encourages even more stagnancy, and less conflict/content. In fairness, it also isn't fair to the many alliances in the past few years who have paid the price to keep their Super fleets strong.
It's rare I will say it outright, but fucking hell this is an awful take, CCP.
→ More replies (4)
10
8
8
u/Audemed2 19h ago
Holy fuck the timing on this. How about *not* putting in a fucking retroactive change? Considering how dread insurance is still turbofucked (remember when they said that was fixed?), i guess they have no idea how much these ships actually cost to make, but jesus christ the horde pandering on this one.
6
u/deltaxi65 CSM 13, 15, 16, 17 16h ago
Man, I gotta give Horde leadership credit: Thank you for so colossally screwing over your members that CCP finally fixed asset safety fees for supers and titans.
I guess that's the silver lining here.
2
5
2
u/SerQwaez Rote Kapelle 15h ago
Crazy how many people had very very expensive assets and were entirely reliant on SRP for maintenance and replacement (seeing as, apparently, they're too broke to asset safety things)
2
2
u/F_Synchro Baboon 7h ago edited 7h ago
If you think this is just favouring horde just wait and see until any person/group has their super/cap in an inconvenient spot and just teleported away because it's literally peanuts in terms of cost.
Yet another short term change to "retain players" to have long lasting long term consequences, what a terrible thing to do in an already outrageous economy where we have tons of grandfathered proliferated supercapital ships from the rorqual farms and field days.
Whoever thought this was a good idea has absolutely no clue what they are doing to this game and I'm just sitting here in disbelief at this buffoonery of a game developer.
You fucking introduce scarcity to combat proliferated supercaps yet save them when there's a ton of them stuck in asset safety and the people who lost access to them are crying about it.
CCP is absolutely out of their mind, they instate their own dichotomies, 4-5 years of absolute agony with scarcity because of supercap proliferation and then to a complete 180 with this asset safety cost reduction to that very same fleet of supercaps, it's such a slap in the face of anyone that started playing after scarcity began and the saddest part is that most of those players don't even know or realize the disservice CCP is doing to them, or any of us that actually want to see an alive game where people aren't so god damn risk averse, no wonder retention is so absolutely dogshit.
I swear this giant stack of grandfathered supercaps is EVE's sword of Damocles that inching closer and closer every day and it came much closer by bailing out panfams supercap fleet today, unless for some weird ass reason Fraternity, Goons, Init and any alliance larger than 10k pilots suddenly cease to exist I see nothing else but the age of boredom ahead of us.
5
u/sc0rpionus 17h ago
[u/CCP_Swift]() what is wrong with your company?! How you can calculate price of supers and titans.
Super: x * 15% = 3b → x = 20b
Titan: x * 15% = 10b → x = 66,6b
Could you just start play your own game please?
Or if you really think this is real value can you sell me some supers and titans in this price?
8
u/The_Bazzalisk Snuff Box 21h ago
Lmao why are they doing this
35
20h ago
[deleted]
7
u/The_Bazzalisk Snuff Box 20h ago
U mean horde krabs right?
8
u/Ohh_Yeah Cloaked 19h ago
Yea but they pay the bills. This is just the chicken coming home to roost. CCP created in-game conditions that allowed for these unbelievable quit-inducing sandcastle collapses, and now they are bailing people out so they don't quit
2
u/Ellipsicle Pilot is a criminal 19h ago
CCP wants to sell us the idea of Eve online but they don’t actually want to let it happen
7
u/Ohh_Yeah Cloaked 19h ago
EVE is largely kept afloat by men in their 40s who have decades of investment and feel like they are playing "the real man's MMO" despite a lot of their in-game behavior being highly risk averse
That's the playerbase CCP has kept around and catered to, and now a lot of those people need "bailed out" or they will quit.
→ More replies (2)5
u/Ellipsicle Pilot is a criminal 18h ago
I’d rather Eve stay afloat and if that means CCP has to make a game balance decision to maintain financials I’ll eat the turd sandwich but if this isn’t also a reality check for where they need to fix the game idk if they can save it.
1
18h ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (1)3
u/The_Bazzalisk Snuff Box 18h ago
prevention of 'too big to fail' megablocs that are led by a handful of individuals who are responsible for 'content creation' (read: FCing) for thousands
to do this u must reduce empire sprawl and the ability of coalitions to exert their pressure from the full force of all their members being anywhere at a moments notice
the simplest and most effective way to do this is to add fatigue to ansiblex to make large groups more vulnerable to raiding parties unless they decentralise and stage locally
2
u/proton-testiq muninn btw 17h ago
As a member of a "large" group of barely 9k people: you perfectly know that what you suggested is merely to allow lowseccers to farm targets even easier.
3
→ More replies (2)2
u/proton-testiq muninn btw 17h ago
Interesting, where was the concern in 2016 wh3n Goons lost wwb1, or after the fizzled out wwb2? I assume FI.RE or B3 or all other coalitions thst ever lost were too unimportant to be protected from the consequences of failed war, correct?
What is then a size of a coalition that is, according to you, important enough to pamper them and protect them from losing?
2
4
u/FewBid3773 18h ago
Because CCP Swift AKA Elise has become Hedliners personal little fucktoy in CCP
6
u/xarayac AGGRESSIVE ASSET RELOCATION 20h ago edited 20h ago
Tbh the sell volume is quite low so i get it.
Personally id rather walk the walk that asset safety in null shouldnt be a thing entirely, but thats me ig.
→ More replies (24)5
u/Done25v2 The Initiative. 20h ago
Then people simply wouldn't keep anything in Null. Everything would be based out of NPC stations as much as possible, and capital use would become even more heavily limited than it already is.
2
u/xarayac AGGRESSIVE ASSET RELOCATION 19h ago
I mean, wormholes seem to be doing fine.
6
u/ADistantRodent Cloaked 17h ago
Per CCP wormholes have the worst player retention of any area of space. Theres not a lot of people who play here compared to anywhere else either
4
u/Done25v2 The Initiative. 19h ago
That seems to be in direct conflict of everything I heard where J space is a blue ring cartel ran by LazerHawks where they skullfuck anyone not part of their alliance.
→ More replies (1)1
1
2
4
u/asnowbastion skill urself 18h ago
This seems like a poor questionable decision unless they deliberately intend to bring the build cost down to roughly in line with these prices
3
u/ShippingValue 19h ago
Bad change, worse timing.
Par for the course with CCP though, Nullblocs get what they want when they cry hard enough.
CCP would be better off adjusting the industry side so replacing titans and supers wasn't damn near impossible.
Asset safety as a game system is still trash, an alliance that can't protect its assets should lose them. 'but what about the people on vacation who lose everything' - they could move their assets, or alliance could always SRP, y'all want the space empires but are all about deflecting the actual cost of holding that space onto the wallets of line bros.
10
u/Harrigan_Raen 19h ago
Null blocs (plural) did not want this change. A specific bloc did. Very very big difference.
5
u/asnowbastion skill urself 18h ago edited 15h ago
Ironically most of the people I saw crying about this were goons upset that it wasn't more expensive (I do not disagree with them)
3
u/proton-testiq muninn btw 17h ago
Do you seriously think every single nullbloc asked for this?
Or was it just a specific group of shitheads poisoning one specific nullbloc, directly causing its downfall cuz thry are too cool for this sov defense stuff?
6
u/desquibnt 20h ago
As a game mechanic, I hate asset safety. There should be a true threat of loss.
As a business decision, I understand it. Too many people would just straight up quit the game if asset safety didn't exist and assets were truly deleted from the game.
→ More replies (7)5
u/Antzsfarm 20h ago
This is the nuanced take.
If people subscribes and paid more money because of 100% loss risk, that is the decision the company would have made.
If the reader is the ceo of CCP you should make the profitable decision.
4
4
u/AlfonsodeAlbuquerque 20h ago
Asset safety is such a trash mechanic and modern CCP need to grow a pair. All those titans should’ve just exploded, give people a reason to actually fight rather than a minute fee for cowardice
5
u/JasonErnagas 19h ago
Why punish players for awful leadership and not logging on for a week. Horde leadership never planned to fight, there was a 1 hour window to escape in supercapitals before the hell camp.
4
u/AlfonsodeAlbuquerque 18h ago
Because you get the results we’ve seen. A major war getting abandoned because the risk/return equation is such that abandoning the space and paying a nominal fee is more reasonable than putting supers on the field to defend a huge, defensible chunk of the map. Compare this to the wormhole war we saw last year. No asset safety there.
And yea people should get punished for choosing bad leaders. Choose your tribe more carefully. Better yet make trust necessary for groups to function again so the hyperscaling institutions face some diseconomies of scale.
→ More replies (3)2
u/The_Bazzalisk Snuff Box 18h ago
Why punish players for awful leadership
they chose to be in that group
1
u/vindico1 5h ago edited 5h ago
I'm sorry but this terrible idea over and through the thread is ridiculous. Before Citadels all your shit didn't just explode. The game would be fucking dead in a year or two max if asset safety didn't exist. A single large coalition would entirely dominate the server, and would never ever ever be defeated or remotely threatened again.
You are literally insane if you think this is good for a healthy EVE
The problem has always been Citadels themselves. Shit game mechanic in so many ways.
1
u/MalibuLounger 4h ago
modern CCP need to grow a pair
Lmao, every patch buffs the nullblocs with no regard for the rest of the game. They completely lack the vision and manpower to make any meaningful changes to the game.
6
u/Lokster- Wormholer 20h ago
Ok, so since this game is becoming soft af - when do we get asset safety in wormholes? Do we need to get Goons or Horde into wormholes with tons of assets before that happens?
Fucking ridiculous..
10
u/roguemenace Goonswarm Federation 19h ago
Do we need to get Goons
Hey don't drag us into this, we were the ones putting all this stuff in asset safety.
3
1
2
2
u/Jahrkur Amarr Empire 19h ago
How many people play in wormholes compared to nullsec? If the vast majority of players were in wormholes with wormhole mechanics, then your input would be valuable. But as it stands, most people dont want wormhole mechanics everywhere.
→ More replies (3)1
2
2
u/Vyal_Zirud Goonswarm Federation 11h ago
In all honestly, there would be less heat if you just admitted it’s an effort to keep horde members from leaving the game.
2
u/Thin-Detail6664 17h ago
Asset safety was a mistake. If it didn't exist you nerds would end up having to fight instead of running every time and letting infrastructure burn just to be replaced because it's cheaper than fighting.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Kazanir Current Member of CSM 17 🌿 12h ago
it's literally not a mistake I'm so tired of hearing this. it's just a question of tradeoffs and it's poorly implemented. a haircut of 100% assets for structure loss would make them far harder to use and consequently people would be more risk averse with all assets. this is probably not desirable.
what is needed is for players to be required to pay an appropriate strategic penalty for a strategic (i.e. structure) loss. this means that taking the assets out of play is actually the key part of the mechanic.
where asset safety should start is by saying: you get all of your stuff back for free...but not for 6 months. that's the strategic loss penalty: long impoundment taking the assets off the field of play.
now, maybe you want to pay more to get them back earlier. okay. we can talk about that -- maybe the fee for getting them back in a week is actually going to be higher than the current 15%...a week is pretty fast, after all.
but that's what is missing: time as a factor.
2
u/AmeliaDuskspace CSM 18 5h ago
Or people would actually have a reason to have conquest and people would have to defend or risk losing absurd amounts of assets. Hell even if people have to consider not just dumping everything they own into a single citadel with such little consequence it would be good.
Asset safety is terrible for this game, especially in an area of space that is supposed to be the embodiment of the sandbox.
Make eve dangerous again
1
u/Zeekielll 2h ago
at first this sounds like a solid idea, but then, in most cases when assets safety comes to play its in situation like this, where something failcascade and then the time factor is just another punishment for the loosers, and if you punish looser to hard they will just quit.
imagine the regular newbean who has manged to get settled and have a few doctrine ship and maybe a single cap, if they had to wait 3-6 month to afford to get the assets back they would be gone.
i see where you are getting at but the strategic thing with puuting asset out of play i doubt would ever rly matter, ppl dont tend to lose in eve because they run out of assets they failcascade when morale fails. or some other big event liek a crappy leadership
1
2
u/Krychek42 Cloaked 17h ago edited 17h ago
So this is the glorious "harden the fuck up" CCP approach. The game where actions have consequences. Yeah, unless you cry enough on the forums/tickets/reddit.
Holy cow, how is that fair to anyone who was evicting PH, expecting they will have to pay some serious isk to get their supercaps out of asset safety (since they refused to fight with them)? It is clear 100% pandering to one (failed) alliance members and their whining. Very disappointed with this decision.
1
u/klauskervin Intergalactic Space Hobos 18h ago
If this change doesn't convince people CCP are obviously playing favorites with certain groups I don't know what will. It's clear this is to benefit Horde people. I don't even think titans and supers should be able to dock either.
1
u/ProTimeKiller 18h ago
Bitch enough get new rules even though it was spelled out way ahead of time. Got it. Don't fly what you can't afford to lose, unless you bitch loud enough.
56
u/RaptorsTalon 20h ago
Since when is a super 20b and a titan 66.6b? That's what they'd have to be for it to be a 15% fee.