No?
Once they leave, they won’t come back. They’ll have found something else to do with their time. They will have developed new habits, and stick with them.
9 Likes
My god that is a nail it completely post if ever I have seen one, total awe and respect for that one. So spot on.
At the moment there are many small groups (and even corps of major bloc’s) fighting over trash space and having fun, why are CCP ruining that? Makes no sense at all.
4 Likes
No, what I said was that what is good for the bigger group is good for significantly more players. That’s the point. You want to maximize utility for the most players. That tends to mean that you focus on where those players are, and a majority of characters in the game are in big groups, across all areas of space.
Yeah, I’m the one making these decisions for CCP. Right.
As for the resentment, I find that people in this game have a very hard time being civil to people who disagree with them, and they immediately like to assume that those who do not play the game the way they do have no ability to understand what it’s like to play the game the way they do, which is a pretty big (and usually wrong) assumption.
And if they respond to you with what the problem is, that changes nothing, since this is how they are planning to address it. I’ve explained why I’ve pushed for these changes. Obviously what I suggested was persuasive since they’re making them. So hey - if you don’t want to wait for CCP, you can read what I said the problems were and stop waiting.
Everybody benefited from the implementation of citadels - I mean, that’s literally why these small groups are complaining. They like and use these structures and generate content from them. If they didn’t want these structures, they’d still be using POSes or living our of NPC stations. This argument makes zero sense.
I don’t think they need to be resolved together - we can do this and then go fix the war dec switcheroo nonsense.
They can fight other small groups all they want. Do you honestly think no small groups will fight each other if this change goes through? Again, what did they do before medium structures?
None. But why should they have advantages that the big groups don’t have?
Again, you seem to think this is going to push people out of the game. I don’t think it will. Folks will adapt, because that’s what we do in the game.
I think it is a bad idea when we start making any kind of balancing decisions in the game based on what “individuals” will do. This is an MMO. You start not doing things because they will have a negative impact on somebody, and that literally means you can change nothing in the game. Every change will screw somebody over. Doesn’t matter what it is.
Right, because Atrum is going to love SRPing 5 bil jackdaws. That is the reason why you don’t do it, not because individual players can’t afford them. It’s that it’s not financially feasible for the large groups to require expensive ships because they are going to be the ones paying to replace them when folks lose them, which is inevitable. And no large group exists without SRP. It’s one of the primary benefits to being in a big group.
I appreciate what you’re saying here and you trying to fight for the little guy, but you don’t need to pretend that the reason we do things is some kind of altruistic “let’s let everybody play, coach!” kind of thing. It’s because it makes the most sense, gets the most people in fleet, and numbers are important in this game.
I think the problem starts with the CSM elections, you seem to have to be a member of a large nullsec block in order to get enough votes of your own block. Reading CSM member Brisc’s comments just makes me sad (he’s probably a well known player with great statue but he should perhaps restart playing Eve from scratch).
I guess it’s hard for these CSM members to understand small (in my case hi-sec) corporations that own a M structure. As such owner (corp of 25 of which 1-2 are active) it’s pretty impossible to counter a wardec with 3 spidertanking basilisks and a 10-5 HACs fielded.
I really can live with my M structure being demolished (it generated enough mony) IF I would at be able to take at least a few attackers down with it as a structure gunner (and doing so would make the fight more interesting for them).
Unfortunatly there is no way you can do any serious) damage at all. Mounting fireworks does about the same amount of damage. I had two wardecs recently both surrendered (which depletes corp wallets) and was asked for a test fight (and be able to use the M structre agains them). The first corp just quit after 10-15min because they got bored.
Big block CSM members on the other hand see stuctures otherwise: they have to clear them in large numbers (spam) that takes a few days each.
So my advise is to give M structures the power of at least a Fortisar so they can put up a decent fight.
2 Likes
You mean when they fought over POS?
They fought over POS. Are you saying that they should go back to fighting over POS? Because ‘let’s base our playstyle around a thing CCP still insists they’re getting rid of’ seems counterproductive, man. 
How does this give them any advantage the big groups don’t have? Once again: anything they can do, we can do, better.
I think we’re already seeing it do that. You’ve got people here telling you that this will cost their groups members. When those people stop logging in, do you expect they’ll report back weekly to say ‘still gone’? Or will we just stop hearing from them?
You’ll notice I didn’t say ‘while inflicing no burden’. I said the least onerous. My phrasing regarding individuals was to draw the contrast between the burden we can share out among a thousand people, and 50% of that total burden hitting a group of a hundred people. .1%X per person vs .5%X per person.
Dude, we’d approach it the same way we approach the NAPOCs now. We give the bling-fit NAPOCs… normal APOC SRP. We’d give these normal Jackdaw SRP. Notice that I didn’t say anything about us SRPing at that price. That was kinda the point: the burden would be on the individual, not the group.
You’re right. I don’t need to pretend It’s why I do things. Because it is why I do things.
12 Likes
Just like y’all adapted to the blackout, instead of leaving? Amirite?
10 Likes
You can’t be serious about that statement…
Why should smaller groups have some advantages over large ones? Because that has been the case for all times of human history and it is what makes assymetric conflict interesting.
At all times small forces used hit&run, hide&seek and force multipliers like - you guess it - OUTPOSTS & FORTS & CASTLES if the opponent approached with larger force that you couldn’t beat in open combat. It was always a LOT more expensive for the Kings to pursuit and corner and hunt down the rebels than it was for them to hide and sting. Often to a point where the big armies tired, reconsidered and gave up, giving the smaller ones breathing space and time to regroup.
That is why structures and hideouts were built in the first place, because with a force of x armed defenders you could hold off 10x or even 50x attackers for quite a while or at least make it very costly to storm the keep. EvE structures can nothing of that. They are just big pinatas for the big guys to loot.
Fortified and Armed Structures of any kind have been used that way for all over history, they always gave an enourmeous defenders advantage, especially for the inferiour group and made razing them very inconvenient or expensive for the attackers. And POSes fulfilled that role pretty good. Upwell Structures DON’T. And you want to make them even weaker and wonder why people don’t agree that this would be “better for the game”. So sad.
And yes, people will adapt. They will use less stations. Or they will go join some big blocks for protection, paying “rent” to the same kind of people that threaten to kill them if they don’t. Just to survive. What a sad game. Or, wich is the case for some part for sure: they adapt by leaving the game instead of accepting one kick in the nuts after another from this totally biased game design.
7 Likes
Most alliances/coalitions who actively live in nullsec can replace their structure, I am sure of this.
Bud light is a beer.
Correct I do not live in nullsec.
Can be either or it can be all. If you are constantly getting smacked down and losing structures in a region, constellation or system then it is probably time to stop deploying structures and move.
No where did I say that. I said if you continuously lose your structures. Meaning, if you defend it once and lose, then defend it twice and lose then it is probably time to reconsider your position. Whether that be finding stronger friends, or by moving.
How can that be? He says he supports and advocates for aLL pLaYsTylEs!
Debatable.
4 Likes
This is not quite fair. Rarely do invaders in our region “stick around” so to say. They move through, shoot things, and leave. Weeks, months, years later, someone else comes by and tries the same thing. Sometimes we win; sometimes we lose. But as you say, we do have the isk to replace them once in awhile.
1 Like
This. Losing your structure as a small corp has little to nothing to do with its location, it’s just random if you are scouted by someone looking for a small guy to stomp and an pretty much helpless structure to raze for easy loot.
Also the idea of just “moving” is barely a solution for any small corp. Where exactly shall they go?
Nullsec: The landlords approach and just kick you out. “Thou haveth to pay us rent for existing and obey our orders, else you be beaten and kicked your teeth in for this is ALL OUR SPACE!” (even if we are too lazy and incompetent to prevent ninja-anchoring!!!).
Lowsec: The next midsize pirate gang reports back to HQ: “Yehaaa, yammi yammi lootbox found. Just lets BURN IT. BURN IT ALL. BURN IT BECAUSE WE LOVE FIRE!”
Highsec: The wardeccers scout add line #96 to his excelsheet of corps to wardec for the lulz and structures to raze for the core in the next weeks.
So where shall they go exactly? Lowclass-WH was the only space left, people took the most ugly holes, with bad PI-options, annoying effects, lousy connections just to be left alone by the griefers because even they don’t want to spend a week in a lousy hole. And now CCP comes and even kick them again with totally unnessessary changes.
4 Likes
Once in a while is not an invasion or eviction. Occasional destruction of structures makes it easier to replace losses. Continuous loss because you can’t defend your structures yet you continue to drop more structures is where our debate is on.
Ah, the old bigotry back again. Doesn’t know the CSM, doesn’t know who I am, but has zero concerns assuming my views, experience and that of the rest of the CSM.
I didn’t go anywhere. I liked blackout. I was having fun.
But people left. So many people left that CCP reversed the blackout.
That’s the thing, Brisc. It’s not about if you’ll leave. It’s not about if I’ll leave. It’s not about if Arrendis or Plato or anyone else in this thread will leave.
It’s about if the game will be diminished for losing variety. And unlike you claim, people will not always adapt, as we saw in the blackout.
1 Like
Most now, shifting away from that certain statement.
Nullsec blocs invade lowsec a lot less then they invade nullsec regions, you do understand that?
It really depends on the willingness of big blocs to steam roller through in terms of losing the large structures, the mediums will be easy now.
Let me assure you currently in the existing system in terms of 3 timers we are defending quite nicely, it is when this hits that we will likely have issues.
Seems to me that you are advocating for people to move out once this goes live when people start losing their structures when previously they were defending them.
Blackout was always going to be temporary. And the players didn’t leave. they just stopped logging in. And in big enough numbers that it cratered the economy for a month, and you can see exactly where it happened on all the MERs.
The game isn’t going to be diminished because you also have one fewer timer to defend your structures. I think it’s going to be bettered. You disagree. That’s fine - we will see what happens. And if you are right and I am wrong, and suddenly every small group in EVE dies, I will concede you were right and I was wrong, and I will advocate changes to fix what was broken. Just like I have many, many times before.
1 Like
I thought it was you who objected to putting words into people’s mouths.
But as you say, when that happens, the conversation is over.
Cheers, see you in Reykjavik.
3 Likes
Yeah that is quite obvious. Look at how well Frat has done against Snuffed. Losing most fights even when they had 2:1 numerical advantages.
Again, big blocs and even medium sized blocs are able to for the most part replace their core infrastructure. Losing a structure whether it is a medium, large or XL even, does not really hurt blocs.