Not sure I agree. The measurable fact is that there is significantly more destruction in null than in wormholes and I think thatās relevant.
While there may be different explanations to why that destruction level is different (population levels vs mechanics)ā¦ that fact is established that it is different. And it is a fact that suggests that making null more like wormhole space might lead to a decrease in destruction.
Yes, it doesnāt PROVE it. But it does suggest it. Simply because that people who would want to play in space that acts like WH spaceā¦ are probably already playing in wormholes. This is basically applying the broken window fallacy in a different mannerā¦ toward the population level itself rather than the destruction amounts produced.
But without hard numbersā¦ what can I use besides personal experience? The fact remains that I run into non-blue players much less often in WH than I do in null. I THINK Iām pretty safe in assuming thatās normal. Iām not really wanting that to become how null works. And making nullās mechanics more like WHās seems to be a step in that directionā¦ especially when critical thinking seems to suggest thatās how the changes would play out.
I havenāt really seen a convincing argument as to why the various methods of removing null would lead to more combatā¦ because all seem to ignore the intel that locals would have (by virtue of being localā¦ or by having the intel structures already in place). That ālocal intelā gets offset by the free intel from local chat. Itās not there BECAUSE of the free intel from local chat. At least thatās how I view it working.
A point I want to emphasizeā¦ there is actually no way the bolded fact is true. While there may be less destruction in null per person than in wormhole spaceā¦ there is definitely not less destruction.
There is measurably more destruction in NS. The argument can be made that itās due to the number of pilotsā¦ but given the transitory nature of EVE (on any given play session Iām often present in Low, Null, High and wormhole space at some point), I have no idea how youād even go about counting populations for each. You could only take a snapshot at a given point. The argument can also be made that itās due to mechanics (which in turn could also could drive populations in each space).
But the higher destruction in null is not an argumentā¦ itās factual.
It is one idea, the OA. It will have fitting choices meaning you can control what kind of intel you get. If you want to hunt down a cloaked ship, chances are youāll have to give up something, maybe alot of other information.
The basic idea is you lose local, and you get to recoup that information via the OA and its various fitting options. It has not been fully fleshed out, but players will not be left in a vacuum.
Yes. But you need to engage more in multi-step thinking vs. single-step thinking. Yes, if these interaction are all discrete and have no connection over time, then interaction may very well go down. Especially depending on how vulnerable the OA is. If the OA is like other structures and even continues to operate until destroyed then it would likely lead to less interaction. However if the OA is disabled after the initial hack, and destroyed after the second hack or something like that, then it could very well increase interaction. Turtle up and you could end up being completely blind. Yes, you can wait and hope they go away and you can entosis the OAās back into operationā¦but if you turtle up as a matter of routine my guess is soon youāll be facing a full on invasionā¦which is more interaction.
Really? You are āstumpedā. If I know that after 30 minutes youāll be auto logged off, all I have to do is stay docked for 30 minutes. Iāll turn my full attention to Netflix for that time. Then you log off and there you go, I undock and we get precisely zero interaction. If I see you coming several jumps out, same thing, I dock until you move on or are logged off. I have zero incentive to undock until things are in my favor. In fact, I have incentive to remain docked. There is nothing you can do with meaningful short term consequences. You could start hacking sov structures, but that is not going to amount to a short term problem for me.
As for the size of the OA there are these ships called blockade runners. They are fast, agile, and fit a covert ops cloak. Back when Goons were using stealth bombers to hit structures and move around quickly, Iād bring my main in a bomber and my alt in a fuel/ammo truck. Iād get credit for 2 pilots on those ops and the truck just sits at a safe until somebody needs ammo or the BLOPs needs fuel.
You are comparing an you think is an apple to what you think is a rutabaga and proclaiming the apple better. You are making a nonsensical comparison because for all you know you are comparing a carrot to a cup of coffee.
Or consider it this way:
How much non-ISK wealth do players have in WS on average relative to NS? What if the NS player has 5x the non-ISK wealth? And Iām talking everything like POS, POS mods, crap in your hangars, citadels, etc. Is destroying 3x stuff in NS more or less meaningful than destroying stuff in WS? Iād argue no it is less meaningful, the WS average player has suffered more of a loss.
Or to put it differently, we have 2 countries. Country A has 10 million people each with $1 so the wealth of A is $10 million. B on the other hand has 100 people each with $1,000. Which country is richer? In absolute terms A is. However, everyone in A is living a very, very, very mean and harsh life. A horrible awful life (the international extreme poverty line is $2/day). So perhaps B is the richer countryā¦?
Absolutes are of some interest, but when making comparisons you want to do so in relative terms.
You said that WHās might have higher destruction than null. Thatās simply not true.
Relative comparisons are importantā¦ but the more I consider this case the less important they are for two reasons.
Few people (outside of HS) are a resident of only one type of space.
There is no reasonable way to calculate a set population of any type of space.
I log inā¦ and Iām in Low sec. I travel around and eventually take a wormhole. I surf between various sites and end up taking a hole back to high sec. I then clone jump back to my null sec home, leave the station and rat for a while.
I could be killed at any of those security statusesā¦ but where do I count in terms of determining the population for each security? I think the only way you could conceivably manage a count is to find out how many are in each security space every second and average the results over the day.
Thatās simply not the same as with nations taking a census every 10 years or so. Yes, people travel someā¦ but the actual amount of time the average person spends in other nations is pretty miniscule compared to EVE.
To go into your examplesā¦ if the people losing money in wormholes are ātouristsāā¦ it is no different for them than losing that isk in their home space. And there is a LOT of tourism in wormhole space. More important (in my opinion) is how much total action is happeningā¦ not where the person who gets killed is from.
As for nationsā¦ that doesnāt apply as there is too much tourism. Iām not even sure where I āliveā at this point in eve. I have places I stage out of in 3 different parts of null, two different low-sec areas and two high sec areas. The only thing I can be sure of is I am NOT a resident of wormhole spaceā¦ yet Iāve been killed and podded there.
So your focus on per-capita statistics for various areas of space simply isnāt reasonable. We know there is more destruction in null than wormhole space. We do NOT know the reason for this (as we have no good statistics on population). But we know that more stuff is destroyed in Null. I think it would end up being WAY more than my 20-minute window analysisā¦ given the fact that when you look at big kills (10b plus) few are in wormholes. Two out of the last 100 at the moment. Heck, in the time between those two big losses in whās totalling 24b (one on 8/19, one of 8/21), goonswarm alone lost 130b in big losses, Test lost 95b and CO2 lost 90b. And none of those were structuresā¦ they were all ships. One of the wormhole losses was a Fortizar.
Per-capita statistics are meaningless unless you have up to the second population counts or the population is not mobile. Neither applies to EVE.
Iām sorry, but that is nonsense. Yes populations fluctuate, but we could in theory get a relatively clear picture if we had access to all that data. We donāt, so we canāt. Further, we can only make statements which are largely meaningless like, in absolute terms NS has more destruction than WS. But we know there are probably more people in NS, people in NS can have things people in WS canāt have. Does this skew/alter the implication of which place is more destructiveā¦maybe.
Having lived in null as well as WHs (and I mean thatās where most of my stuff was, not just daytripping), I can say the main difference between 0.0 and WHs is this:
Letās say the corp is out PvE-ing in 0.0. Someone comes along and attacks, is scouting next door, is baiting, etc. A decent chunk of people in null simply dock up, log out, or avoid the fight. Not everyone by a long shot, but a decent chunk of people. In short, itās very easy to play casually in null. Even in the most hardcore null corps you can get away with doing very little PvP.
In WHs, thereās really no such thing as casual play. If someone is next door, or if someone out scouting finds a target, itās all hands on deck, everyone drops everything and comes to help. The rule Iām used to in WHs is if you arenāt in fleet and on comms, you get neuted out and left to drift by corpmates first as a warning, shot and podded second time as a second warning. There is no third chance.
In both 0.0 and WHs you control space and work to defend what you own. Nearly everyone living in WH space does that, a lot of people in null donāt. A lot in null are happy to let other people defend the space for them. While thatās fine, it doesnāt promote fighting.
WH space is also the only space where Iāve regularly seen people purposely downship to have a more even fight, just so a fight actually happens (knowing if they donāt downship, the other side wonāt undock to fight in the firstplace). A lack of local chat doesnāt account for all of this, obviously, but taking the training wheels off and not relying on local chat and free intel creates a kind of culture that promotes fights and good natured conflict. Back to the topic, AFK cloaking also becomes a non issue as another result of not having local. If everyone in your corp is paying attention when PvE-ing, traveling, etc. you donāt really have to worry about schrodingerās cloaker.
After years of this topic being a thing i finally came to a conclusion.
itās a difference in mindsets.
thereās emotional thinkers incapable of rationalky realizing that their fear comes from themselves, not the afk cloaker. to them, they are without flaw, and the afk cloaker is the source of the issue.
rational discussions and logical arguments are a waste of time.
thereās no way of reaching into the minds of those who can not see into their own minds.
removing local will solve the problem differently than most would expect
it would make all those, who only selfishly care about farming, quit the game, because of the fear that someone might be there.
throughout all places in the game farmers cause a significant drop in quality of life for everyone else.
this āproblemā, which isnāt one, can not and will not ever be solved, unless those who are afraid of themselves will finally quit the game. good riddance, i say. A faster way of solving the problem would be banning all those who refuse to play the game as intended. suddenly everything would be alright.
These residents that will leave over losing local wouldnāt fight anyway, making your argument moot. They simply do not have any business being in nullsec in the first place and nobody will miss them.
Linusā¦ those residents can be caught and forced to fight.
Iām not wanting to fight when Iām out in a mining shipā¦ but Iāve been caught mining several times. I imagine itās the same for others in PVE and mining situations. Some of the hunters are very fast at getting to ore anomalies and belts quickly so those who arenāt fully paying attention get caught.
I think hunters will miss those targets if they leave.
Secondā¦ those who get to blow them up now will miss them.
People donāt hunt through null-sec to kill the local defense fleets. The defense fleets are mostly larger than what the hunters have. Hunters generally try to escape those fleets. The hunters come to blow up a bunch of mining ships and PvE players before the defense fleet kills them.
Although to be fairā¦ most of the time after doing that and getting the target webbed and scrammedā¦ a large amount of other ships come in. But if you tell me that doesnāt happen in WHās too Iāll call you a liar. Thatās just EVE.
FW is one place where it often isnāt a trapā¦ because of the size restrictions at sites. Grantedā¦ itās forced there, but Iāve seen many a larger ship come outside my site and then leave to come back with a smaller ship to get a fight.
If Iām in a skiff and a solo frigate comes in and locks me upā¦ Iāll give it a shot. Iāve got a tank and T2 mediumsā¦ Iāll see what happens. If he cynos help in for a skiffā¦ oh well. If a larger ship comes inā¦ Iām going to run. Because IāM IN A MINING SHIP. Iām running because Iām going to lose if I fight.
Same goes in FW if Iām in a T1 cruiser and a VNI or Gila starts warping in. Or if 8 ships arrive. Iām leaving because theyāre likely to win.
Same goes if Iām in a Cov Ops and an Astero warps in. They have drones and possibly guns. I haveā¦ a relic analyzer. Theyāre going to win.
Same goes if Iām in a pure ratting fit ship and a PvP ship comes in. Iām not fit to win that fight.
Nowā¦ will I go back out in a bait ship later to try to get rid of them (if I have blues nearby who will come to my aid)? Yes. but Iām not going to engage in a fight where I donāt feel like I have a chance of successā¦ unless you trap me. Not sure what you expect.
Youāre running when you know itās useless, but you also try. Youāll try to fight, or bait. farmers, literally only farm and cry when someone doesnāt let them. they expect the world to change forthem, because in their minds the world is at fault. THAT is the sole reason for 99.9% of all whine-/complaint threads about whatever.
The world has to change for me, because i can not possibly be at fault. a dangerous mindset; iām still researching it.
I may not beā¦ but in game I bet I look like one to you.
My annoyance with AFK cloakers is less about them being in system to prevent me from doing PvE. Itās that they arenāt there for me to bait.
If theyāre present and see my bait porpoise/skiff toons and drop on meā¦ then great. Iāve got interaction. But I get annoyed if I sit there mining (which Iām not all that huge a fan of to be honest) for an hour in a bait setup and get nothing not because they sniffed out the trapā¦ but rather because they arenāt at their computer to see my nice juicy bait.
Itās why I favor the AFK timer solution. That way I can at least know my interaction attempts are with an actual playerā¦ not an empty seat.
makes sense, that youāre annoyed. otoh, if he doesnāt bite, you can mine in perfect safety anyway, right? itād mean heās gone, or heās not operating in your timezone? it makes me happy to know that there arenāt just wimps out there.
