EVE General Discussion

CCP Medium Rare Angus

I think the logical fallacy is assuming that 0.0 is the endgame of EvE for everyone. For many that may be true, it may even be the designed intent, but for some players it will never be the case. We can agree that EvE is a pvp sandbox and that all activities in game are in fact pvp, but they are not motivated by the same whims. People play EvE to both create sandcastles and destroy the sandcastles of others. And as they represent a cross-section of RL human beings, those players will by nature be both introverted and extroverted with their enjoyment being relative to their psyche. If we are going to assume that the endgame for an introvert is a 3000 man corp in 0.0 where destruction rules the day, then the argument is already lost.

It seems to me that CCP tweaks gameplay elements to hyper-saturate the construct with player interactions but somewhere along the way decided that this alone wasn't enough to drive player-generated content. High-sec ganking became a necessary catalyst and I'd agree it probably stirs the mix well. But one can't rest there. There can and should be other catalysts since the celebration of ganking in general artificially promotes that activity. There are other ways to reduce aversion. Envisioning EvE as one giant cylinder of reactant in a centrifuge, swirling players to its fringes would be great if all players were psychologically similar, but they aren't. A better analogy would be a smaller cylinder within a larger cylinder both being agitated independently. It goes without saying that the same catalyst will not work in both cylinders as you're dealing with different reactants/conditions.

So destroying high-sec for the benefit of null or vice versa will both ultimately fail. There are two cogs in this machine and they are both necessary. All CCP can do is keep centrifuging high-sec to the best of its ability and moving as many players out toward low/null as possible so that majorities do not coalesce in opposition to its own predetermined vision for EvE. But that doesn't mean that high-sec should be made barren and desolate. They're still running a buisness and as we've seen subscription numbers (or unsubs) ultimately prevail over their vision at some level. As they represent significant numbers, you've still got to accomodate this introvert/averse population. Risk-averse money pays bills too and we similarly depend on their participation. It's always going to be a high-wire balancing act. Which is why I was thrilled to see that balance is now going to be an ongoing forever topic in game as it should be.

And while I of course cannot discuss the specifics of forum moderation (without violating rules) I would agree with most of the OPs characterizations. We were told the CCLs were going to exist because 9,000,000 words a month are written and its too much to keep up with. Our new CCLs are supposed to condense this info into nuggets for devs to digest quickly. Their judgement in this would be immensely influential. But we'll never know what they say or do. There is zero transparency. And so far, all we are privvy to are the hammers. The new CCLs lock and edit so many topics that it would be difficult to disagree with an assessment of them as a censorship group from the player pov. They censor quite a bit. Did one guy yesterday get his thread closed because of the topic (goons) or was it because he has poor mastery of the English language? It was admittedly written poorly. Who knows? That I can't answer the question makes the criticism valid. And what purpose does this censorship really serve? Look at GD. There are dev/gm comments in almost every topic. In fact, I'm pretty sure yesterday someone wrote on GD, how do I speak with Jon Lander, and 3 hours later, Jon Lander said hello. Wow. 9,000,000 words wouldn't appear to be as much of an impediment as advertised. I'm all for personal attacks being edited out and non-EvE topics being locked, but this lack of content/rumor rule, as it's the same people over and over and as no one is qualified to determine whether a rumor is true, really pushes the presuppositions to the limits of credibility. Hate the avatar above you is compelling content? Really? I think I'm a pretty fair-minded individual. I'll even admit my own liberal views on speech are a factor in my opinion and I accept that the CCLs are only doing their jobs as defined by CCP. But as it is accurate, no one should bristle at the use of the word "censorship" in this context. If this post gets deleted, it'll show that it isn't just the specifics of moderation, but any discussion whatsoever of CCLs isn't permitted, and especially in a general brainstorming hub like GD, that should really worry all of us.

Yonis Kador

DIS not taste liek bacon!

E:

Fixed linky-fail.

You're quite right, I feel I ought to adress this. I have liberally smeared my posts with labells and monickers that are not always representative of reality. Goonswarm as a whole is not responsible for trying to force a high-sec nerf, nor is there a cabal of whiny carebears, there are only people with loose affiliations and similair viewpoints, but I felt that these labels were by and large representative of what the community percieves the dissedent groups at war with each other to be.

I've got to disagree CF.

Sheep are herded. Devs have an obligation to prod the playerbase into desired situations by incentivizing those activities they wish to promote. I agree with most else you've written, but not getting "involved in managing or altering the dynamics of the eve playerbase," would leave us with a captain-less ship. For all intents and purposes, adrift. While it would be a fascinating human experiment, that's not good management imo. Every alteration made to this game could potentially spawn a directly related change in playerbase demographics. Of course someone has to monitor that and make adjustments. Balance is always going to be an issue in EvE. Just as an example: If you make high-sec too safe (by a number of possible alterations, ehp increases, gank penalty hammers, etc) and usher in this huge influx of risk-averse players, then those increased numbers could threaten the pvp sandbox concept entirely. And as I believe risk-aversion is detrimental to the quantity and quality of pgc, and thusly the quality of EvE as a game, (even though its perfectly OK to be averse) its still in all of our best interests, devs included, to minimize aversion as wholly as is practical. People don't have to be necessarily "pushed into low-sec," but there should be major incentiviztions to group play dynamics. As it so happens, ship destruction drives the economy and the risks of life in low and null lend themselves handily to working in groups. Baby birds don't always jump out of their nests. Sometimes a loving push is indeed required.

YK

You say that now, next thing you know there's a zombie apocalypse that begs to differ.




Brains and all that.