To contradict, I’ve seen many games where players like where they are at and don’t want change because “change is bad”. from past experiences, changes hurting them, or games crashing because of so. There are numerous reasons people hate change. But to rant about how asking or suggesting change is “dumb”, well that just shows narrow minded people can be.
To to negate the arguing about how people hate change lets do this:
Pros to Changing Capitals to have increased Jump Range and Remove HAW fits
- More Cap vs Cap fights
- Giant alliances would reign supreme against other caps
- Smaller Alliances/corps may stand more ground and create more fights.
- Sub Caps may stand more of a chance in fights
- Capitals will potentially no longer reign supreme against sub caps.
- Prices of Capitals COULD potentially increase due to them not being used as much. Meaning you could make more isk.
- More content for sub caps without fear of dread bombs, this doesn’t stop carriers.
Cons to changing to increased jump Range and Remove HAW fits
- Caps potentially can’t be used to welp sub cap fleets (this is what carriers are for.)
- More alliances/corps would have capitals dropped on.
- Alliances/corps will have to be more cautious with caps and may have to play more defense.
- Not as much escalation in fights, may cause mundane fights.
- Caps may end up costing more due to them NOT being used more.
- Capital Powerhouse alliances/corps may not get as much content with caps.
When it comes down to it REALLY, thinking about it. Dreadnoughts are the issue. Carriers being used for sub-caps, well that’s how it was intended initially. But to use dreads against subcaps. Really? Is this what everyone wants?
What’s wrong with having carriers d o the job they were intended to do? Leaving dreads to fend against other caps?
Granted every scenario is different and we can “what if” all day. But, when it comes down to it. Everyone should keep an open mind. I mean after all, we all play the same game. Why shouldn’t we all collaborate and put ideas together to make changes to a game we all love (I think)?
Instead of stiff arming every suggestion of change and pick sides, what was it. “children” or “vets”, “left leaning” or “right leaning”. Why don’t we discuss what could be changed for the better.
My Ideas may be great or they could be the worst ideas in the world. But what matters is that ideas are still coming out. Sway others and myself to think of other outcomes to make the game more fun. Not keep it stagnate for the next 5-10 years.
“MORE SKINS, LESS CHANGE!!” Doesn’t make me happy. I like seeing communities get involved with what they spend most of their day playing, trying to suggest the best and the worst of the game. The “for the children” argument doesn’t exist in this post. This is something that someone stated because it was a question in a lot of questions to get what other’s opinions.
To make valid arguments, you can’t sit on one side of a fence and only complain about your side. Put yourself of both sides. What balances it all? What makes both sides mad? What could change to create a semi-fair playing field? What are both sides strength and weaknesses?
The “children” argument only shows 2 things that are different, both of which has to happen to make this correct. The difference between children and vets, Numbers and Skill.
But that’s my opinion. So who cares 