hard to take what you said seriously with all the horrible misspelled words..
4 Likes
And that has been the problem, I still find it ironic that the “Siege Green” change was sold as an “Anti-Structure Spam” change for highsec. But it completely wrecked any and all groups and players who were using Astrahaus anywhere other than in highsec.
Its not a good idea, and it harms the build up and progression for smaller player groups.
IE the Sledgehammer Approach to a bug, instead of using a scalpel to solve the problem.
Its a pretty common issue on and off.
Well its the same thing with Custom Offices.
Before the XL Station Changes. I was hoping that CCP [now Fenris] would realize they could reintegrate a good chunk of the game. By requiring the usage of station liceneses. So then it would drive LP store and economics for the lower tier players.
If you were in highsec you had higher costs with the licenses…you move to lowsec lower license costs…then if you go wormhole/null no need for licenses.
But you are correct fuel is a very “unevenly applied” option across the game. Fuel becomes a very key option in the game and helps hold the game in check. But also would help put some pressure on some smaller mining changes and modifications to already outstanding ships and mechanics to allow tapping into ice resources in wider areas of the game.
Its been weird to see “convenience mechanics” that benefit a few…but then completely hamstrings the rest of the gaming community in some really painful ways.
2 Likes
I said it for years: CCP/FC needs to stop making the game more convenient for large groups. Effort and inconvenience is a natural limiter for endless growth, ensuring constant fresh competition from the bottom up. Which keeps the game spicy and interesting.
Longterm health of every game is ensured by ‘grassroot growth’, new players coming in, being able to build up something new, based on their own ideas. And then challenging the establishment. Catering the existing powers is recipe for failure.
3 Likes
After taking a jaunt through Frontier, I feel Nullsec in EVE Online is too small for what it is, and too understood. Where as in Frontier you have to think about positioning in the universe, distances, and linking those systems.
Personally Nullsec does need a change somewhere or some sort of change to allow the small groups to grow. Or even, what if a group decides to strike out on its own into unknown unlinked space. [Much like Frontier?] And have to build everything from the ground up?
I do not think Fenris is ready to pull some sort of hybrid EVE Online/Frontier combination. Where a massive increase in systems and interlinks both in K-space and Wormhole/Pochven/Zarzakh happens. Nor is the architecture ready for such a combination. I know some of the established blocs in known “mapped” nullsec would be furious, or be trying to race out into this new zone to get new territory…but having to create their own infrastructure and networks to interlink with the old areas of space with the new areas. Others would be concerned as their old territories no longer can be easily defended. Because this new zone would allow people to attack from uncharted directions. So you would have some groups pulling a “Great Wall of China” mentality.
But yes, the problem is a major headache. Because if we change the mapped nullsec mechanics, it only is a temporary penalty/fix. Its going to be need a major shake up to split the nullsec attention, or attract the current blocs into sectors that are deeper and harder to control and work, leaving the “mapped nullsec” for smaller groups.
But you understand the problems we are dealing with. Its ironic, empire building in EVE Online is very simplistic to what is potentially possible, but you know EVE things.
1 Like
I understand why you want this, you’re a solo/small gang lover, which is fine and fair.
But maybe FC wrote an MMO with the emphasis on the Ms. Seems to me their vision is massive space battles between thousands of participants, no matter the TiDi, and thus to achieve it they need to make the game more convenient for large groups.
No you don’t.
My views on general game design issues are entirely decoupled from my personally preferred gameplay style. That is called professionality.
2 Likes
@CCP_Swift I have a question regarding the infrastructure that was already put in place for the current ANSI’s.
Many alliances have already different structures around the current ANSI’s and with these changes some of the ANSI’s will be removed or change so it will be fair also to get a pass on unanchoring the structures without losing the rigs on the structures.
Some entities will need to restructure their industrial parks, defence positions without losing to trillions in rigs due too these changes.
so zkill has a new stats thing..
18 million solo kills
less than 2 million where the gangs are over 50…
EvE is not the kind of game you think it is.
So, “ganking” is about 0.75% of the killmails… seems like a very HUUUUUUGE problem for the game. Someone quickly make a threat about how it kills EVE!
2 Likes
I don’t think EvE is all about large TiDi fests, and it would seem the stats from Zkill agree.
I do think FC’s vision for EvE is massive space battles still. Which maybe doesn’t align with what typically occurs in EvE but I don’t think they care.
2 Likes
Perhaps the large null alliances have been holding fenris hostage?
I dunno, feels like eve has to go in the direction the vocal few from null dont want it to go because they’re playing farmville.. but nothing ever really satisfies them; not truly.
Krabs gonna krab.. just make highsec missions worth it again and let them go back there.
1 Like
Is this using recent data…or all time?
Or month to month.
If its month to month…that will be interesting to cross reference.
If its all time…I would think that would be off by a mile or so.
Another issue is Zkill is “Survivor Bias” people can post/depost information.
So the ganking might be less visible if the gankers are deliberately not wanting to be traced.
Gankers cannot prevent the victim from posting the killmail.
However I personally would prefer a system of ‘crimewatch’ where CONCORD releases all information about all crime related kills automatically. Means victims and destroyed ganking ships.
This would allow the payers to get a precise picture of crime in different HS regions and even establish some better law enforcing roleplay.
And it would even be somewhat realistic, in most civilized countries crime statistics reports are published by the law enforcing agencies.
1 Like
Personally I like the changes other then the fact that these Ansiplex’s can now only be used by the alliance that places them. That’s just ludacris as it only helps these massive alliance’s that own so many systems in Null Sec and punishes the little guys. Squashing the smaller Alliance and forcing them to now join the Bigger Alliances. Pretty much making so if you are a smaller alliance don’t even bother trying to own anything in Null Sec as the bigger bullies will now just take one of the alliances in their coalitions and having them take over a region of null sec. Then do the same with the next region with a different alliance in their coalition and so forth.
I think they should still allow an alliance to choose who can use the Ansiplex but just make it harder for larger fleets to travel through these gates with the capacitor penalties they will be implementing. We already waste 50% or more of our damn time in the game just jumping through systems and now they want to make it even longer for day to day travel. Just another screw the little guys approach in my opinion and help feeding these bigger Alliances. If they keep this crap up then it’s only going to be the massive alliances left. Why are they so hell bent on killing EvE?
2 Likes
I also think there needs to be a more effective way…to make the killright/bounty system work…so people can’t alt claim it…or the scam killright system…where people create killrights via self-ganking…to get money off of people who are frustrated and wanting to revenge attack.
Although that might be adjusted to the python upgrades, its going to have to be something that is going to be adjusted so people can roleplay as enforcers/bounty hunters of the ganking community/gate campers etc. But done in such a way…that allows bounty hunters to surprise the gankers. And keeps things from being alt abused. Keeping natural/normal PVP in action.
But I also think a Crime Watch information tracking of ganking and other attacks…could give hunters and bounty hunters/enforcers ways to hunt or focus on areas of interest. Gankers look for low crime areas…for high value targets. bounty hunters and enforcers look for high crime areas…using locators for further zeroing in on their targets. A better ecosystem
The hunt and counter-hunt around super aircraft carriers are the sole solution to boosting engagement
Observatory Flashpoints in Pocvhen have been
CCP can’t type properly and can’t typo properly either. It’s Poochven.
Baffled and somewhat miffed that you continued to restrict Ansi’s to Alliance only despite the many arguments that this change will cause a level of damage that won’ bring players back. Its almost like you don’t play or understand the game you design. You want conflict yet impose jump fatigued, and now locking up Ansi’s to the alliance that anchored them. There were better ways to improve Ansi’s if you thought they were really the mechanism that allowed force projection. I’ll let you into a little secret - Titans and Keepstars are the really mechanism for force projection - along with jump clones and staging systems. You’ve literally just made the game into a full time job if you live in null sec. brainless.
Oh and if you want conflict, you just reduced the number of flash points conflict usually occurs! Oh and while you’re at it Jump fatigued AKA Space Aids was the worst thing you ever did to “slow force projection”. no thought again!