I’ve been here the whole time mate I’ve seen everything and I will laugh no matter what happens.
There is better entertainment than this, and less time consuming.
I would actually be more interested in seeing them phase Concord out of high sec, and adding in ways for players to police things themselves. But while they may do some crazy things I don’t see them doing that particular one.
1 Like
I think the problem with players policing them selves is the amount of time “form-up requires”
fast tight nit groups can do it in 5-10 min but most take 30 min-an hour I remember finding a whole mining fleet once and thought ■■■■ it let me call it in and see what happens, took people 1 hour 30min to form it was agonizing.
Still tied up on a lot of work and holiday stuff so haven’t had much time to get back here and elucidate. So I dug up a few links with other takes on the PvE/PvP/Economy situation. Enjoy!
That last “Lifestyle” link, I like what he does with the PvP overview in the first half. Not at all a fan of the “salvaging ships” idea in the second half, but at least it’s some creative thinking on what could be done to broadly increase PvP interest. It just has too many downside in my opinion.
1 Like
Player policing would actually require different mechanics than sudden response, although there is a possible way to work “emergency response” in. For instance, a help beacon that allows members of a protection alliance you’re contracted with to warp directly to you.
However removal of Concord would be more along the lines of making pirate/ganker/aggressor flags long lasting or permanent, then bounty hunters could hunt the criminals and get rewarded for it in various ways. Would take some careful balancing between rewards and losses so it doesn’t just become a big farming circle, but would lead to way more interesting PvP than the current gank/loot/get Concorded environment.
1 Like
Could make it more like the real world, if you commit a series of frags you are more than likely going to get away with it on the spot but then be in a world of pain afterwards when you have everyone chasing you in any type of civilized area.
So maybe remove concord but then have some serious sec status drops and heavy penalties for having low sec status like slower align time so more time for hunting parties to catch criminals or something.
but then again I think this is how it was before and Moo went and terrorized everyone to such a degree that they made concord ? I can’t remember that far back.
This feel-good narrative you people built for yourselves has absolutely no bearing on reality. Crimewatch had no practical negative effects on PvPers who wanted “easy targets,” and in fact made such activities considerably easier, because suspect-baiting is a much more versatile means of accomplishing this goal than the theft system it replaced.
Crimewatch was a cop-out attempt by CCP to reduce the overall amount of PvP in high-sec, which they accomplished not by restructuring “consequences” or any part of the risk/reward relationship inherent to any engagement in isolation, but by simply making wars more expensive, and implementing a half-assed “ally” system to try to counteract war declarations without removing them outright. That’s it. That’s literally all they did. And all that happened as a result was that all of these small groups of hunters merged together into extremely powerful high-sec PvP cartels in order to save on war fees, and eliminate the need to fight each other for prey. This led to the industrialization of the high-sec wardec process, resulting in a system in which war-eligible high-sec residents are farmed like livestock.
I would question the sanity of anyone who thinks that this was a positive outcome. But I guess when carebears hear the word “Crimewatch,” they’re instinctively driven to react with praise and approval, probably because of the name itself, and nothing else. “Crime is bad and we hate it, so surely something like ‘Crimewatch’ is a boon for us!” No, Crimewatch isn’t good for you; it turned you into a commodity.
There you go. Now you’re finally starting to get it. The only thing you have left to do is realize that PvPers are players like all others, and aren’t these tiny-hearted, griefy-scummy-mommy-basement-virgin-dummies or whateverthehells that you keep telling yourself they are just because they choose to farm other players, and not NPCs or asteroids.
The sooner you drop that superiority complex, the sooner you can realize that CCP is disenfranchising you by either taking away the needed tools, or never implementing them in the first place, to deal with player aggression, because this is exactly where they want you. You’re halfway there with your follow-up ideas about replacing CONCORD with proper player policing (for perspective, I proposed a system of distress beacons and deputized player cops/bounty-hunters a decade ago, and I fall into the category of players you clearly despise!)
2 Likes
As I noted, risk seekers tend to have issue with self-destructive behavior.
Setting aside the prejudicial language here, this does kind of underscore my issue with using risk averse as a slur. Many of the people tossing that term around were those doing things in HS and using the game mechanics to their favor to limit their risk and taking advantage of other players who out of ignorance of the game mechanics took on too much risk. And after learning the lesson the hard way and not falling for these kinds of tactics they were called risk averse…the irony.
That being said, knowing game mechanics and taking advantage of them is completely legitimate. Looking for a profit while doing something PvP related…that’s fine too. I see things like ganking as showing some players who were ignorant of certain aspects of the game how those aspects of the game work.
I am always bemused when a player posts on the forums, “I don’t like that form of game play. It is bad. And those who engage in it are bad people too.” Seriously…it’s a sandbox. do what you want and have fun, but beware that you may be someone else’s idea of fun and take the necessary precautions.
How is it egregious? I look at the ISK supply and it looks pretty much the same in terms of trend slope. If anything blackout was a unit root event in terms of ISK making. If you look at the time series for the money supply with blackout the money supply started contracting sharply and when black was over it started growing again at about the same rate as prior to blackout meaning the money supply growth was knocked permanently to a new and lower trend line that is parallel to the old trend line. That is, it does not look like the money supply process is not trend stationary - the shock of black out knocked it off the previous trend to a new and lower trend and absent another shock (in the opposite direction) will likely not return to the prior trend line.
Why are you fine with this. People trading stuff should not be seen as an inherently bad thing. And reducing liquidity in markets tends to increase volatility which people generally do not like.
Perhaps you should re-read your prior paragraph as that pertains to wealth building.
This rarely works outs like people think it will. The people they think they are controlling, manipulating and so forth also have agency and can react back against those kinds of things.
Complex systems move in ways that are very hard to predict. Especially if those complex systems also have emergent behavior. I will say that those players who are already “rich” either in ISK, resources or both will likely fare far better than those who aren’t. Players in groups that have a strong internal structure will likely do better than those that do not.
This is probably true. Wars are extremely expensive and are, if anything a sunk cost (i.e. once you incur those costs they are gone forever, unlike say other in game assets. If you buy a ship you can sell the ship and recover some of the costs or even make a profit). Or take a stroll down memory lane when OTEC basically ironed out rules surrounding technetium moons in the north and fights over those became pretty damn rare.
Gee, iono man.
So? I don’t see a problem. Most of the ISK is created in NS…why is that a problem? Or more accurately, in looking at the money supply time series, why is it a problem now and not say in 2018? 2017 or say 2012?
lmao, and with this, i know you’re not worth my time trying to explain any of this to.
Wish you a good one, kid.
If you cannot articulate your point then you have no point.
2 Likes
It comes down to 93.4% of the game’s NPC faucet ISK (not sure if this includes wormhole/abyssal NPC bounty items) being generated by less than 25% of the game’s player base, in a degree of safety that’s objectively higher than any other area of space.
4 Likes
They switched to incursions and abyssals right now. CCP can tweak risk/reward easier there, and dont have to count on players to do so, as they were unreliable.
Maybe what CCP thought is a bit better idea. Also because of bots and rmt, would be a bit harder to hide then, bit harder to use? I dont know.
I wish CCP would say why things happen
Again…so? You describe some facts and inject an opinion but you do not explain why it is a problem.
Are you saying its not?
I mean, Im not putting a slant on it just cos I hate the rich, but is it actually financially ok for the majority to be excluded in the resource generation to that degree?
This is coming from my programmer-perspective:
Looking at Hilmar’s collective words regarding EVE autonomously reacting to the players’ actions …
… and taking into account the latest devblog …
… I actually have relatively a good idea of what’s coming.
First they “lowered the economy” (for lack of a better term) to get a base line. They’ve been monitoring activity and comparing it with previous values to see what works and what doesn’t. Then they’ve spent the year figuring out algorithms which self-balance according to the activities in the game.
So when a group begins mining ore in a specific system every day, less ore will respawn every day, to encourage them to move somewhere else, where more ore will respawn instead. Such self balancing algorithms don’t even require an AI, but I guess there’s benefits using machine learning for this, as it likely can cover a lot more variables than if the whole thing had to be coded by hand.
From the devblog I gather that they want lowsec to be a far more important part of the game. They’ve already started doing this and they’re likely going to push even more into this direction. I remember CCP Dragon … Dragoon? … from years ago saying that lowsec is actually the most dangerous known space. I forgot what he said about jspace. Lowsec is also the redheaded stepchild of EVE and has been so for over a decade, always under-utilized and basically ignored.
So to me it looks like they’re going to put everything on self-balance with as little interference as possibly needed, but they’re going to include all the different spaces into this. I take this from the mentioning of the increased demand for wormhole resources. I’m really curious how they’re going to implement this.
I believe it is a good direction, because it removes a lot of static from the game. Everyone has to move, settling actually is going to make the game harder and cooperation between people will increase due to the inherent dangers of lowsec and wormhole space.
This is irrelevant, because the population changes according to the environment.
The current crop of players would have been extremely ill suited for the EVE ONLINE of the pre-CrimeWatch 2.0 era and they will likely be rather ill suited for the post-BlackOut era. They’ve had their years, but that’s apparently over. One type of people leaves, another type of people comes and stays. That’s how it’s always have been. It’s pretty clear that CCP isn’t particularly interested in customers who provide nothing to the game beyond being targets and accumulating wealth. The changes of the entire year speak for themselves in this regard.
Scarcity does breed War …
… but not with this kind of population.
Important to note is that the changes CCP implemented in the post-CW2 era were changing the population really, really slowly. They’ve spent years pleasing farmers while trying not to displease the PvPers too much. Years. On the other hand, the post-BlackOut era gave us a huge amount of changes in relatively short order, with pretty much every change trying to undo what they’ve did over the years in the pre-BlackOut era.
There’s no room to argue that any of the changes in this year were done to displease carebears, but apparently occasionally CCP listens to complaints, which likely happens when they realize they’ve been overdoing it. That’s, from what I’ve gathered, how they operate. They go far, look at what people actually do and then adjust accordingly, until the reaction is within some boundary they deem acceptable.
2 Likes
I am not sure it is a problem. There has not been much inflation in the game which suggests that the amount of ISK entering the game is probably a reasonable amount. And ISK, like any currency, is not all that helpful in and of itself. It has little intrinsic value, which is typically the case with money. Where it is useful is as a facilitator or exchange. If NS is ISK rich…it doesn’t seem to just sit there, but it finds its way into the wider economy including HS. So, I am not sure it is a problem at all.
Perhaps it is like the RL trade deficits. People always say they are a problem, but very rarely articulate a reason why. In fact, there is often tremendous levels of ignorance around things like the trade deficit. My personal theory is deficit generally has a negative connotation and so people just conclude a trade deficit must be bad because the word deficit is bad. I have thought about it quite a bit and frankly I can’t see a problem there. I haven’t thought about ISK creation in EVE nearly as long, but it seems to me that people look at “big numbers” and simply conclude - there must be a problem there. Maybe there is, but nobody has articulated any actual problem so far in this thread so far. Maybe someone will and great…or everyone will simply point to “big numbers” and say, “You can’t see a problem, then you are an idiot!”
And ISK generation is not resource generation. Money is not, in and of itself, a handy resource. Money is typically something with little intrinsic value or has much use value. Gold and silver are two common forms of commodity money. But other than looking pretty it doesn’t have much other practical use. Where money is really awesome is when it helps the process of exchange.