CSM Campaigns

Firstly, the only evidence I have as to the state of WH space is annecdotal, from my own visits there, from information from corp thieves that prey on wormholers, and the like. Everyone I've spoken to indicates that C1 to C3 holes are quieter than they used to be without having had any major mechanical changes. C4s are quieter although they have also seen mechanical changes that make them harder to defend. C5/C6 cap esc fleet whelps tend to be big enough news to get an article on EVE sites, and these articles are becoming less common.

I'm confident that this annecdotal evidence is sufficient to say that WH space is presently in a decline that is neither at, nor near crisis proportions, and C6 holes are somewhat insulated.


For players that use game theoretical methods to balance risk and reward to optimize returns, immunity to AWOX predation is another factor pulling them toward highsec mission and/or incursion grinding at the expense of wormhole PVE. It's not clear if this is *the* tipping point, or if the actual tipping point will be another future change to highsec safety, but the single most viable way to kill marauders in highsec just disappeared from the game.

I don't claim that large numbers will move out of wormholes on day 1, or that everyone will abandon wormholes over time. But the prevailing wisdom among PVE players will shift over time in favor of running multiple accounts grinding incursions or missions in high, rather than running a smaller number of accounts running wormhole PVE.

Reduce the number of prey and you will reduce the viabiltiy of predators - just look at the mess non-FW lowsec is in if you want to see what happens to space when, for a long period of time, it offers little to incentivise prey.

Some people will, of course, ignore any changes to the prevailing wisdom and will act in a game theoretically incorrect way due to their personal preference, just as some people continue to grind missions in Dodixie 9-20 rather than the 'optimal' approach of doing missions for the Sisters. These people might be enough to sustain an ecosystem in wormholes. Time will tell.




As for incursion runners in single-player or NPC corps - I consider this a serious issue that needs fixing, and have proposals that would rebalance incursions payouts to make fielding a single corporation fleet (and possibly defending it from hostiles) viable.

Thats some really bold statements to make on annecdotal evidence. All the people i have spoken to seem to say the opposite that c1 to c4 are doing really well. I wonder who's right ;) you can find alot of the info in the wormhole winter summit minutes.

by not having any major changes, you mean things like a huge increase in pay outs for c1 to c4, the fact relic and data sites from k space have been added.

You do also realise that finding specific c6 wh's are also by far the easiest wormholes to find? I'd hardly call them insulated.



First its not awoxing, you mean corp on corp and if people want immunity they can do it right now just by being in a npc corp. If this was as much of a issue as you say people would have been leaving w space ages ago to run incursions in npc corps. so your arguement really falls down here.

This is arguable. It's only interesting to you because of conflict. Some players are quite happy without it. There are all types in this game and everyone should get a say, not just your guys. There are numerous reasons not to play on the test server - no social interaction potential resets, more downtime. People pay to play this sandbox game in whatever way they see fit, and that's what they do. CCP support that. You supporting only conflict driven content makes you no better than someone supporting only non-conflict combat. If you can't understand that there should be a balance between the two, there's no talking to you.

If I buy Call of Duty, and then go on their forums and complain that other people are allowed to shoot me, I would probably be banned for trolling, and rightfully so.

EVE Online is no less a PvP game. Whether you partake of that or not, you should still recognize and accept it.



If your say consists of "what other people like about the game should be deleted!", then no you really shouldn't.

See the Call of Duty example above. You don't get to have a say when it comprises complete opposition to the spirit of the game. If you hate it that much, why are you playing it in the first place?




Read the FAQ. It says, in no uncertain terms "EVE Online is a PvP game". If you can't understand that, then you can't be redeemed as a player.

I don't get where these people claiming that CCP are changing AWOXing to protect newbies.

I do not advocate this, but if you wanted to make a change to PVP to protect newbies, you would prevent lowsec gatecamping. THAT is where newbies lose ships to mistakes all the time, particularly in lowsec systems that sell skillbooks.

Removing AWOXing is nothing but a change to protect career highsec players and to reward recklessness. Competently led corporations were seldom infiltrated, and if a disloyal member got in, they seldom did damage with blue on blue highsec attacks - the disloyal member might land tackle, but other loyal members would arrive on grid before anyone was killed.

It's not to "protect" newbies in that way. It's not to stop newbies being shot. It's to encourage people to recruit newbies by removing one of the major risks with recruiting newbies. If a newbie can't be a corp attacker (I use this term as Awoxing covers other activities still allowed), it means there's no problem in giving a newbie a chance in a corp.

Career highsec players already have protection. They can be in NPC corps or in corps of just their alts which protect them as much as this change does. A lot of people are simply blowing this change way out of proportion so they can make their objections sound more grand.

EVE's biggest strength is the depth of player interaction. That is undeniable.

Changes don't have to generate conflict. But changes that take away from conflict by definition take away player interaction.

That is not a good thing.





Except that I am not advocating that missions be deleted. I don't want their playstyle to go away entirely.

They do want the elimination of mine, that has been made clear many, many times over the years. There's a good indicator of that going on right now in fact, with awoxing being deleted.

Don't try to pretend like there is any moral equivalency between the two sides, because there is not.





And if I go there, and hatefully demand that my "playstyle" involves walking around in that game being immune to bullets, people will laugh at me.

That's exactly what we have here. When you have someone demanding something entirely contrary to the reality of the game.

Why that is even being entertained, I cannot imagine.

And if you haven't figured it out yet, I am not talking about "PvE", which although I truly despise it, has a place in this game. I am talking about the kind of people who insist that they should be immune to the actions of other people. The people who want to pretend like an MMO is a single player game.

The last thing this game needs is more safety. It has too much already, that's why everything is so inflated compared to a few years ago.

That's the whole point.

There is no merit to ideas that reduce player interaction. None. They should be dismissed out of hand.

Well - Kaarous in what category would the jump fatigue changes fall?

more interaction because of less risk involved to get hotdropped, thereby promoting more small/medscale fights?
less interaction because of slower movement there reducing the number of players at battles?

you can't put every change into a category like increases or decreases interaction - it doesn't work that way

Then they shouldn't be improved in that way. There are plenty of ways to improve this game's PvE without crippling player interaction.

Personally, I think they were on the right track with Burner rats, and that more missions should involve elite enemies instead of blowing away wave after wave of zerging rats.

You're trying to claim that the only way PvE can be improved is at my expense, and that just exposes it for what it really is.

It's not about improving your gameplay, and it never was. It's about hurting mine. And that's why people like Sabriz need to be elected. Because CCP needs to hear my voice, and the voice of people who care about PvP and the sandbox all over EVE.