EVE General Discussion

So thanks for confirming, absolutely, that the problem here is you want to run around solo and have no trouble stealing from them.

Oh, sure, you're trying to dress it up as some top level "unintentional" design elements, but Eve is all about things being used in unintended ways. It's only a problem if there's a balance issue, which there isn't.

First example that comes to mind: Hilmar gave a presentation at fanfest about his early experiences with Eve. He talks about can mining and how it surprised him. See, jet cans were only put in the game because items can't just sit in space within Eve's database, they need to be inside something. They were never intended for mining into, as a consequence to this, his intended progression of mining in eve went out the window, because the players were using completely unrelated tools/the environment to rapidly speed up how quick they could obtain minerals by working in teams using jetcans.

Another example: the design intent of carriers never really considered using them in a spider-tanking formation, leaving them open to be both defensive and offensive. The triage module specifically disables a carriers combat ability when it chooses to be in 'logistics mode.'

Another example: many ships intended to be armour brawlers are used as kiting shield setups in small gang, because the meta favours mobility more than ever.

Another example: Incursions weren't designed to be farmable for days, they were meant to be fought off in a short timeframe. Players choose to keep them around for as long as possible to min/max their income.

Should CCP force incursions to follow their design aims, eliminating 80% of their income? Should CCP force carriers to choose a role? Should CCP re-name jetcans to "OMG no ore in these what are you guys doing"? Should CCP disallow shield extenders on a Brutix?

CCP are making a sandbox game. Their goal is to give people sand and see what they do with it. For as much as possible, they don't then run around going "no no no I wanted you to build a castle what is this a windmill god you players are the worst".
No, and neither should they.

To setup an ESS in an anom takes several minutes of buggering around every day, and can be undone by a single person in much less time. To work around it as a defensive measure, requires only a very small amount of ingenuity/creative thinking.

I think basically the tl;dr of this thread, is that you have failed the only test an Eve player needs to pass: the ability to adapt.

I really don't see what you could possibly be lobbying for here aside from trying to make it easier to steal from them and thicken your own wallet.

What you are proposing is that the unquenchable interceptors be allowed to steal from them with no risk.

I see the use of the anomalies AS a defensive measure that should put the advantage with the defenders. A defenders job is to find the best way possible to defend. The placing of the ESS in an anomaly is an excellent way to utilize a part of the game as a defensive measure.

OP about now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hlUx60oVEAI

Am I not allowed to play solo? As far as I know CCP made this game a sandbox for all types of play, not just the one you represent.

I see the discussion that already lead to the dumbing down of the ESS from its original design presented by SonyClover as a fair amount of measures in favor of the defenders, in exchange for the benefit they get from it, and I will continue to claim that the anomaly "exploit", in fact, has changed the initial design concept: A defense force made of players scrambling to protect their extra income
The key point with the ESS was to force player driven action, even if it is only to scramble a ship to fend off a poorly equiped raider.

The thing you seem not willing to admit is that the advantages in that medium ground described by Fozzie is already in favor of the defense, without the NPCs anomalies added in the mix:

1/ alliance intel usualy allows fair warning of incoming threats. intel is also usally able to size up the threat and the ships types, even before the raiders start their warp to the ESS.
2/ Home turf advantage means ships than can be scrambled can be adapted to the existing intel. It also means that mobilizing bodies for reinforcements is easier, and jump bridges networks widen the range of bringing more bodies to defend.
3/ Sharing requires 30 seconds, where taking requires 3 minutes. With an alt posted at the ESS, sharing can be done even before the first raiders jump into system if they started from too far away.
4/ ... which leads to the fact that the ESS may be empty, the raiders still have to commit to check it out and deal with the bubble.
5/ sharing does not generates token, as it is immediately payed out, while taking require looting the wreck and escaping alive with this cargo, and all the way back to safe space.
6/ obviously the bubble and warp scramble effect and being stuck in place for 3mn to complete the looting.
7/ and I would put the fact that LP points are paid regardless of what happens to the ISK in the ESS as an extra benefit for the defenders

I would be curious to hear your version of the advantages of the raiders and see how they really compare to the defenders' advantages above. They must be overwhelmingly superior to justify this extra layer of NPCs protection you are defending so much.

You are misrepresenting whati I am lobbying for for the sake of your own lobbying and justifications to keep a comfortable status quo.

One of the reasons I am mentioning a module to access ESS is that it can then be set with fitting requirements that prevents interceptors to access the ESS. I said it before in that thread, I would not be against preventing frigate size ships to access an ESS. My goal is simply to make ESS defense a player driven action.

I have yet to see from the goons that are so active in defending the current status quo a list of the overwhelming advantages raiders have that would justify this extra layer of NPCs protection, that was more an oversight of CCP than anything else (much like the WH watch thingy that got addressed...)