EVE General Discussion

It's not an attitude. It's my personal anecdotal evidence. Going from Tribute to Venal to Tenal to Cobalt Edge and back again for a couple ticks worth of ratting bounties and overseer effects is not what i call "making money". Sure, when you get a several hundred mil deadspace drop + battleship blueprint+effects that sounds awesome. But that is far from the norm. It does not average out to that when you account for time spent properly - especially when talking about a rattlesnake blueprint. Based on my track record of running escalations (0 probing or initial travel time involved) I gave up after a few months.

I might play around with checking belts between anoms. I expect my ticks to drop to around 15.

So, any and every sandbox.

Yeah, unlike you, I for one am not ready to just throw out the core principles of the game just yet.

This is the same kind of thinking that led to Dominion in the 1st place (sidenote here, does NO ONE ever read the links to the past DEV Blogs I put up showing how all this stuff has bee talked about before? No wonder history keeps repeating itsell like an episode of Battlestar Galactica on SyFy...)

I underlined the word that is the problem. As CCP tend to think, many players also think they can 'FORCE' people to do something in a sandbox MMO. Those efforts have failed time and time and time and time again and yet, like bad economic theory in real life, people cling to the failed ideology because they lack the will and creativity to understand anything else.

Every 5-6 years in this game their are 2 things: A 'scapegoat concept' (the thing blamed above all other reasons for the 'current situation', this time around it's "power projection") and a 'Savior Concept' (the simple thing that if CCP just implements it it, will solve all the problems, this despite the fact that EVE Online is a super complex and interconnected system used by unpredictable human being and thus totally immune to ANY simple fix...)

The Savior concept this time is of course 'occupancy SOV', which like all such things will.not.work. the way people think it will. It wo't work for the exact same reasons as the anomaly nerf didn't work: People have options.

Nothing is going to change unless you completely nerf high sec pve (missions, exploration and incursions), low sec pve (lvl 5 missions and FW pve) and wormhole high end pve (c5-c6 type stuff) OR amp up null sec pve rewards to the insane level they'd have to be to compete with 250 mil an hour low sec mission blitzing with a cheap ship, or worse, the 4-600 mil an hour FW missioning in freaking cheap ships that is STILL going on even today (and i know, because I have an alt each in the Minmatar and Gallente militias). Buit if you do that, you explode the EVe economy like was done with the 500 mil an hour ratting titans, EVEN if you switch from isk spewing anomalies to LP spewing missions.

The above is just one of the reason occupancy Sov won't work. Another is scale, people who make things (ie, the people the PVPrs in this case don't understand) don't want to REPLACE pvp loses, they want to generate profits, and in this game you do that by exporting. You'd have to turn null sec into an EXPORTER of finished goods like Jita is right now to get the kinds of people occupancy SOV would need to work to live in null sec. ie you'd have to turn the game on it's ear economically and that makes no sense because to create that you need stability which would lead to MORE BLUEING as it became more profitable to cooperate than fight (again).


TL:DR
We (the EVE Community) has been through all of this before. When people get tired of the Sov System of the day, they lose sight of what's really going on and just want the "bad" to stop. So they advocate to CCP reasonable sounding but ultimately flawed fixes, CCP comes up with their own backwards thinking fixes to implement instead, and the cycle repeats itself over and over ag

You're talking an opportunity cost which is something that is considered when talking about economic costs but it not something you consider when talking about accounting costs. He wanted to know how to get a ship without spending all that isk. He was talking about an accounting cost.

I would suggest that there is a problem with the mechanics of the game itself if all nullsec decided to blue up and not go to war with each other. What is the incentive for any group to go take over space right now on the other side of the galaxy? Why should any group commit hundreds of billions or trillions of isk worth of assets to a war for a very limited reward?

Aside from grudges, r64 moons and rental space, there are no real reasons to go on a full blown war. Grinding sov is comparable to having ebola, and moons rarely change hands because both sides can bring huge super fleets.

In order for an actual change to take place, the mechanics of nullsec would have to change to provide value for actually going to war. There are so many options available that just haven't been implemented. Instead of trying to actually improve nullsec, Greyscale just continually nerfs it- the anomaly change in 2011 was a nerf to "encourage coalitions to fight", the jump drive changes are a nerf to reduce coalition size, etc.

Greyscale has made it clear that his intent is to nerf nullsec, which is why these changes that CCP has spent resources on have not led to any noticeable increase in subscription numbers, and likely why a lot of the Good Devs have jumped ship to RIOT. At a recent eve meet, I spoke with a former CCP developer who shall remain unnamed and they shared the same mentality.

For instance- instead of these nerfs over the past several years, why not change nullsec sov to function more like Faction Warfare? The higher the level of sov, the more sites spawn in your space. Enemies get some sort of ISK or LP from coming and attacking your sites, and the costs increase or level of sov decreases when you fail to defend sites. These mechanics are already in the game in some form, and could just as easily be applied to nullsec as any other change that would be made, other than simple nerfs.

I realize that it's not just 100% Greyscale making these decisions and that we are generally harsh on criticizing him. But seriously, how many years of the same type of changes (nerfs) are going to be made, how many CCP developers are going to leave, and how many subscriptions are they going to lose, before they collectively 'get' it and start making some changes that are beneficial to the nullsec game.

Even things such as the industry changes- a generally accepted change - still doesn't work for nullsec because of the awful imbalance of mineral supply in null. A simple rebalance in the null ore anomalies would make localized nullsec industry possible, but apparently that is too much of a change for the nullsec team to deal with at CCP.


edit: fixed typo

You get out of here with these observatory, logical, historical and fact-based posts. This is General Discussion and your kind are not wanted here.

At least throw in a hurf here and a blurf there and pepper with insults so nobody notices the useful content.

Many if us, myself included, have been suggesting a facwar-like system for years. Problem was, suggesting that very thing got threads trolled to sh*t by many members of your own distinguished alliance (amongst others), to the point where it was impossible to have that discussion. Don't believe me? Search these forums for sov related discussions circa 2-3 years. Never had I seen so many goons defend timers so ardently.

A further problem was that many of the recent proposals for sov changes were oddly self serving. Take for example the musings on TMC of "apex forces" and sov rebalnce. Ever so eager to nerf capital and supercapital travel, there was not a mention of jump bridges or sub capital projection in general. Apparently, rapidly moving thousands of caps across the map is a problem, but doing the same for subcaps is A-OK. And, when fatigue was announced to effect subcaps going through bridges, there was quite a bit of outcry from your corner as well.

My point isn't so much Grrrr Goons (the proposed changes by PL were also self-serving), but that having a discussion on sov has been mostly impossible for the past 3 years, so it really isn't a wonder that CCP is basically doing their own thing.

Who said anything about nerfing high sec? Who said anything about making people go to null?

The gist here is that because null space is a desert and not worth fighting for, changing 'jump range' and how sov works won't result in more fighting or smaller coaltions. it will result in more of the same, over and over again. Whatever the answer is, it has to take all of EVE into account. The Anom nerf failed because people could just go make isk elsewhere. high sec doesn't need to be nerfed and high sec people don't need to go anywhere, but CCP needs to change it's thinking on what it wants from null and use past experience to guide whatever changes they make.

Didn't you say this...



Unless you are just stating that nothing will change unless you nerf high sec but you aren't suggesting that we try to change and advocate status quo.

But if you advocate status quo isn't that just stagnation?

No, it just means there are people willing to pay billions of isk per month for the privilege of living there. Personally, I think CCP sees this one simple fact and thinks you're all full of self serving sh*t every time you ask them to buff isk-making in null.