I don’t suppose you have a link to her suggestions?
Edit: And can someone explain to me what lead to small/medium gangs being replaced by blobs? I know it happened, I just don’t know the how of it.
Summary. Supers become other people ship carriers. but no personal offence. I.e. they kinda become the new jump bridge.
Titans become temporary citadels with deployment restrictions.
At this point we are back to Dreads and Carriers at least as the largest primary combat vessels, and sub cap fleets become far more effective since sub caps can contest vs dreads and Carriers.
Blobs basically people just grouped up to avoid even fights and over time the groups grew larger and larger.
1 Like
I agree about the overview setup. They should really make that simpler, good point. As for the other things, I think the way to go would be as already mentioned in-game help/documentation browser.
I mean most games have that.
Yeah I mean that percentage has hardly anything to do with the game play. We can only guess, but people being sensitive to games that look pay2win comes to mind.
2 Likes
Good call!
Invaluable call! 
Thanks!!
I actually really like the sound of ‘the 4th way’. @Arrendis I’m no good at marketing but this idea needs to be sold hard to CCP, imho. 
And I think the article particularly nailed the low sec (possibly FW too) view point of things, at least in my small/medium gang mindset, where we’ve gone from Low Sec to WHs to avoid ‘the blob’:
“The important thing is getting a fight. It’s a fairly instant-gratification thing. Even when there are structure timers involved, as often as not, the timers are made in order to get a fight.”
Because getting a fight is what we find FUN! Prior to the moon mining changes holding ‘valuable’ low sec moons was a great way of getting a fight, it provided the opportunity to ‘test our metal’ against (most often) larger groups, but not overwhelmingly so (again, most of the time). In the instances where there were going to be overwhelming forces, we could team up (strategic alliances as it were) with other low sec entities (who would other wise be hostile, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, after all). And fun would ensue!
I have experienced null sec, both sov & NPC, with the sov experience being the most recent (just after Fozzie Sov was introduced)… we entosised all teh things! Held our own space for a (short) time, but I didn’t find it as engaging as a good ol’ fashioned fight.
Regards,
Cypr3ss.
Human nature. The easiest and most effective way to make sure you can beat up some other guy is ‘bring two friends’. So everyone brought friends. And then they kept bringing friends, because the other guy brought friends. And soon, what had been small groups turned into bigger groups, and eventually, they formed groups so big, they could be reasonably called ‘blobs’.
And then one of those groups had a smaller group in it that made EVE, and the cycle repeated inside the game, because that’s what people do.
They’ve seen it. It’ll never happen. CCP doesn’t want to do things that are difficult. Nearly every change they’ve made for as least the last decade, go ahead and look at the language used. ‘Twist some knobs’ ‘tweak some numbers’. When they do bigger changes, they get good advice (‘the Rorquals will be horribly overpowered like this’ -The CSM) and willfully ignore it (‘We know this is overpowered, but we can just dial it back’ -Fozzie).
They don’t want to do things that are hard. When they get things pointed out that hurt their goals (like the lack of cut-out on high-sec wardecs for ‘Same War, Same Fleet, No Criminal Tag’) their response is that it would be too hard to do, so they’re not going to try.
It sounds a lot like they’re attempting to not hurt ‘devs’ feelings…
CCP Management: “they coded this really awesome thing, think we should implement it?”
CCP Dev: “look how awesome it is!!!”
Everyone else: ‘but it won’t work’
CCP Dev: “but look how awesome it is!”
Me: 
Such a shame.
Regards,
Cypr3ss.
Oh no. It’s the devs saying that. Management? FFS, when Hilmar went on TiS that first time with Falcon and Goodfella, he flat out said that the last 5 years of development have caused all the problems we have now.
Hurt their feelings? The CEO threw them all under the bus, publicly. While declaring that he wanted them to be churning out new changes every week.
2 Likes
All after he presumably signed off on it in the pursuit of profit. As CEO he’s where the buck stops, unfortunately for the rest of CCP excrement only flows downhill.
Hypocrisy knows no bounds.
No, not necessarily. That’s what an Executive Producer’s for: to actually helm the development of the game. The CEO’s job is to tend to the business side of things. It would be rather like demanding that the CEO of BMW be personally involved with the design of the cupholders in every model of auto they make.
The bigger issue isn’t ‘Hilmar signed off on it then trashed it’, it’s ‘Hilmar can’t decide if he wants his job, or Mannbjorn’s’.
That’s fair, my ignorance of larger corporate structures is showing; I work in an area where the person at the top of the food chain is often one of the folks getting their hands dirty.
Although if his job is to tend to the business side of things perhaps he should be more aware of what direction the development of the game is taking and intervene before he decides to throw his employees under the bus.
…You know, my personal belief has been that CCP is so busy dealing with their legacy code issue that they just don’t have the time and/or manpower to deal with much else, which is why their updates are so slow and barebones, but reading this makes me wonder if it’s an Icelandic/Scandinavian cultural thing? Because I think I’ve experienced something like that before. Personal anecdote ahead, but I promise it has relevance:
When I was younger my family would occasionally go visit relatives in the San Juan Islands, and sometime’s we’d take a boat out to Orcas Island where there was this cozy little diner called Cafe Olga, which was owned by an old Scandinavian couple.
They were wonderful people, and let me tell you, the food was amazing. Everyone in my family loved coming there, and our only issue with the place was how slow their service was. The owners did things at their own pace, and it wasn’t unheard of for a meal to arrive nearly an hour after we ordered it. Like I said earlier, the food was really good, so we didn’t complain about it.
I wonder if CCP is the same way, taking things at their own pace? 
Or maybe I’m just being racist. 
1 Like
This is the new ganker currently camping Aufay. He/they use 25 catalysts, and that allows them to kill freighters easily and cheaply.
They are camped there near enough all the time. They even killed a panther.
Most of the freighters they kill are only worth 2 bill in total.
Why does CCP allow players such as this to chase people out of the game? They’ve allowed it for years and look where we are.
These choke systems should be 0.7 or greater, not 0.5. And autopilot should warp to zero. Then it’s no more easy ride for gankers, still possible but got to work harder.
What makes you think that AFK haulers need an easier ride against people actually at the keyboard playing.
1 Like
CCP fully supports high sec ganking. They even added npc frigates to help gank in highsec. All those terrible venture pilots and afk’ers at the sun are ruining the game. This game is not for them! HTFU! PCU is up!
It was also allowed when EVE was rapidly gaining players. Your assumption that this is the cause of people quitting are wrong.
1 Like
I think it is fair to say that uncontrolled rampant ganking will chase people out of the game.
This is not saying that we currently have this state (also not saying we don’t). Just a comment that at a certain level it will start to do so.
As gankers have gotten more organised, computers have gotten more powerful and 3rd party tools to organise logistics have gotten better, the gankers have slowly gained the advantage even with the same in game mechanics.
Because none of those things actually help the guy flying a slow ship from A to B. The guy flying the slow ship has the choice of “Haul less cargo but do 5 times the work, or log off and don’t bother going through if gankers are there”.
The Ganker has the choices of adding another account very easily as computers can handle that no problems.
This is not something that provides a scalable advantage to the hauler. Yes 1 web account can work, but you then are doing 10 times the work, & doesn’t scale.
The end result of these basic mechanics are that time is naturally tipping the balance in the gankers favour, and CCP do need to take actions to pull it back in the haulers favour every so often.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.