Jump Gates. Don't Blame CCP. Blame yourselves

So new jump gates not quite what in was expecting through the few years of hype about them. I was hoping we could create a gate to any system or at least increase the jump range because really all we are changing is how the look and that they are attached to a citadel.

But the big change is zero fatigue. Now given all the changes about fatigue and capital proliferation and the ability to get across the universe to stop that craziness CCP have almost gone to the extreme by making it even more easier.

So i think I understand why because CCP wants to generate more content by allowing people to find fights everywhere possible.

Why.

Because you the players BLUE everyone around you and there is nothing to shoot. The game has gone so far into carebearing and less about PvP like it was 10 years ago.

Now CCP creates a plaster so you can find targets and content because you created this problem yourselves.

Simply put we need to restrict the blue donut. Sure have NIPS and NAPs but go neutral, shoot each other in the face and have fun for god sake.

Now I’m going to say… CCP please reconsider capitals not getting fatigue this is absolutely crazy idea.

However the idea of sub caps and roaming gangs not getting it I think is a very good idea and will allow people to run around and find fights.

It’s up to you large sov alliances to start generating content and reduce the blue list…

3 Likes

… but go neutral, shoot each other in the face and have fun for god sake.

So basically your saying play WH style…

1 Like

I’m not sure he’s saying that “per se”. He’s saying that alliances should shoot each other more freely whilst holding onto their sovereignty and limited standings. This as opposed to having large numbers of regions with good standings towards each other. We’re not suggesting alliances don’t try to knock down each others structures now and then :P.

1 Like

This absolutely

Look at it the other way. Zero fatigue jump bridges should make it easy to travel to the edge of your empire and still use a titan bridge to drop on some hostiles.

As far as assigning blame goes: CCP still dictates the changes in EVE, so they deserve all blame/praise for whatever happens. If a player finds that EVE is no longer an enjoyable game, the blame for not switching to something more enjoyable rests solidly on that player.

1 Like

Well CCP adds mechanics to do stuff like standings but it’s the players that manipulate and abuse those mechanics to their needs. There more on this occasion it’s the players that needed to remove standings not CCP.
The standings mechanic is needed for things like structure access.

I firmly believe it’s the players that can make the game better and it would be quite easy to do.

Remove standings
Insert NIP and NAP clause (like who wouldn’t sign up for that)
I mean jeez they could even say don’t shoot anyone in havens or rorqs if they wanted.

Go roaming shoot stuff. You know like we used to do. We formed a 50 man roaming fight then the others would too. Why just to Have some fun and make explosions.

It’s not problem with the gate idea as I said would be interesting for sub caps. But being able to jump capitals aorund easier than before is crazy and it’s taken us backwards. It shouldn’t happen

The blue donut is a problem, but it’s a problem because it’s a solution to the current game mechanics.
You break it up by changing the rules of the game making such a solution obsolete, and that requires brave and bold moves from ccp to radically change the meta in terms of not just fleet compositions and ship types and daily reward quests, but in how resources are distributed and gathered, bounties, how sov is taken and held etc etc

I’ve not seen that argument in a while but find it well thought out, perhaps players should vote with their ‘wallets’ (playing time) rather than staying and protesting, the message would get across clearer and CCP would pay more attention.

I think youre thinking too deeply. The players set the mechanics. For example ccp implemented the standings mechanics. But it’s entirely up to players on how they use that mechanic and who sets standings to what.

I mean if alliances still wanted to preserve structure access because unfortunately player and structure standings are based on same mechanically they all can and some do adopt a NPSI policy for just players in space. Not purple shoot it. Meaning even blues are up for being shot but the docking and structure access and non aggression/invasion Is preserved

I think this isn’t a hard problem to solve at all. In fact it’s easy without actually breaking any impact on sov. Just think outside the box… basically the alliance sov leaders need to sit down and agree a NPSI policy for pilots in space that’s it. They don’t even need to change any ACL for citadels or do any resets to current blues

1 Like

So what you’re saying is alliance leaders need to unilaterally decide to stop playing to the most efficient method in the game, especially the null powers.

That is wishful thinking at best, at worst it’s hopeless optimism. CCP are in charge of the mechanics, and have consistently shown through releasing changes without much or even any consultation with the CSM that player opinions can often matter very little as to what those mechanics will be. It is their game, their IP and players are playing as they see fit within those parametersz.

No amount of “let’s hug it out and decide to make the game better together!” Is going to change the fact that it’s on CCP to take the bold steps of changing the dynamics of the various areas of the game to revitalise interest, at the risk of alienating those who enjoy the status quo.

1 Like

It’s a sandbox where the players decide remember… the whole ethos of eve is that it’s player driven.

I agree in some part CCP are responsible but in some occasions they stick a plaster over it to try solve a problem.

I’m.not talking about everything in game but I’m talking the if alliance leaders changed mind sets then perhaps ccp wouldn’t of added jump gates with zero fatigue to fix a problem of not finding targets because everyone is blue around you…

But if we go by your point and it’s a valid one then if we the players won’t change then don’t complain when ccp changes it for you. That’s the point I’m getting at

And let’s not forget the people.your asking to hug it out with are actually already hugging it out… ie being blue

Let’s take an example

  1. GOTG coalition all live in the north so it’s pretty all blue.
  2. Can still keep blue standings for things such as structures access for everyone
  3. Adopt coaliton wide NPSI policy so people have fun shoot each other whilst in space. Have banter no harm done, dock up go to bed happy you’ve done not than krab today
  4. when coalition needs to shoot other coalition join fleets, purple up, shoot said enemy in face. Log off had fun.
  5. rinse and repeat

Generates content, improves PvP tactics and learning, everyone has fun. Not much to ask really is it

I am just a humble capsuleer. I have only some PLEX, few billions in ships and modules and SKINs, and account PLEXed to 2023.

I regret nothing! :sunglasses:

1 Like

You mean yourself of course.

Now… have they said anything about how much LO is needed?

In theory, it’s easy to make it prohibitively expensive to move a capital fleet around. Imagine, for example, it took 1 LO per 100,000 KG of mass. A completely unfit Thanatos (travel fit lets say, nothing that adds mass) would then cost 12,000 LO.

That’s not isk-expensive at all… each jump would cost like 1.5 million isk.

BUT

That’s 4800m3 of LO. For a single unfitted carrier. An unfitted Avatar would be twice that much, at 9600m3 of LO.

A small-ish battlegroup of suicide caps, lets say 15 carriers, must now bring 72km3 of fuel with them for every jump. I’m not sure what the range is, but it’s not at all unreasonable to expect your average highway to be at least 3 jumps. We’re up to a whopping 216km3 of LO.

It’s not isk expensive, but it’s going to be a serious pain in the ass to bring a jump freighter full of LO for even just a small-ish capital group.

Then consider that the only time it’s really going to be a noteworthy problem is when they’re bringing hundreds of capitals. 100 carriers, for example, you’re bringing a Freighter full of LO for every single jump.

Then consider a super fleet… a hundred supers with their hundred faxes. Just… ouch.

Where’s that fuel going to come from? It’s going to have to be mined… 100% promise that the price will go up astronomically and it’ll become more cost effective to mine it than to ship it from Jita.

Its stupid altogether.

Promotes more cap proliferation, promotes more areas for botting. Extends cap umbrella capabilities further thus taking away roam space and further limiting small groups while further empowering large groups.

If you really want more stuff to shoot for large entities then condense sov space and jump ranges further. Pack them all into much tighter territory while making it easier for smaller entities to traverse. More bubble immune ships, more cyno limitations for caps, etc. Otherwise its just hypocrisy and often times trolling under whatever guise.

Give me the ability to hack the gates so I can either use them or lock them for a few minutes at a time.

All the nonsense and drivel I see everywhere on the forums is just boring.

I have no dog in the fight. None. I don’t belong to goons, I’m not a member of the blue donut, etc. Having said that…

  1. If nullsec cartels would rather be blue to each other rather than red, so be it. It’s their choice.

  2. If you want jump fatigue for capships, then make jump fatigue for all other ships too. Quit discriminating against caps.

The changes are a simple reflection of CCP accepting the blue donut syndrome and being smarter about it than players for monetisation and overhaul of game concept purposes.

It’s a funny thing about humans, they like to build, they like to blow stuff up, but the more they build the greater the interest becomes to limit blowing stuff up. It’s why we have a history of conflict management, proxy conflict projection and so forth all throughout our history. A conflict effectively escalating to the point of harming what people build regardless of interests all over and across parties involved is, as strange as this may sound, a historic aberration on the actual pattern.

With CCP changing EVE from the old emergent behaviour model towards something more in line with modern time mmo concepts and expanding monetisation pathways the blue donut syndrome long seemed to be something to tackle as a problem, whereas in fact it was equally possible to introduce further stimuli to get players and their organisations to increase investments and commitments while expanding depth of connections and diversity of risk potential. Now the crux of the jump gate structures isn’t the lack of jump fatigue, that’s the distraction element. The crux is something known as lane projection, more potential of pathways towards conflict.

Humans, in spite of appearances, are at odds with this on a level of both social and behavioural psychology. As much as we want to blow up, we don’t like it us being blow up. So we prefer to consolidate interests, we invest in backroom deals, we arrange proxy conflicts, we stimulate consolidation of similar or same organisation throughout thereby increasing the likelyhood of conflict management and the decrease of strategic escalation that would harm monolithic blocks that share perspectives on power and dependancies.

This translates into space sucking for smaller groups, increased impetus to optimisation of organisational processes, deeper investments in the equivalents of military-industrial complexes which know each other and recognise both shared and opposed interests. It becomes a classic game of control through influence rather than raw power, where niches are allocated, where proxy conflicts are provided, where local vulnerabilities are required to keep people sharp, and where remote options are provided for entertainment purposes.

It’s deeply conservative behaviour which CCP is gradually stimulating. Which pays. Because it’s all about getting players to keep par on parity, the show of political theater and the distraction of limited conflicts in spite of a variety and higher pace - with both organisations and members increasingly being pushed/seduced/required to invest in shortcuts to maintain parity.

Plex, injectors, multiple accounts. In short, EVE Online isn’t about the warm bodies, but about the accounts, and CCP pretty much banks on what people have been bitching about for years while simultaneously doing what they bitch about increasingly.

CCP has the last laugh really. And every discussion and debate serves as distraction and incentive in its irrelevance on potentially influencing the actual change :stuck_out_tongue:

High five Hilmar. Well done. Seems Virt and Hrafnkell were right after all. Makes me wonder when CCP’s product level people will figure it out :slight_smile:

Why comment on something you clearly don’t understand