These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

CSM Campaigns

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

lock and delete thread

First post First post First post
Author
Corey Lean
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2015-01-31 20:37:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Corey Lean
Marlona Sky wrote:
It is no secret that keeping the game stagnant is highly profitable for some groups and players. They believe the only important thing is the size of their epeen and would rather see the game wither and die than give up some of that wealth and power. So the idea that me, someone who is well known for doing extensive research, no matter how mundane fills them with fear. Someone who is willing to sacrifice the vast majority of their wealth to join in with thousand of other players in celebrating the ten year anniversary of EVE, has them shaking in their boots.

So they send the usual trolls my way. Orders to turn an anthill into a mountain. Attempt to discredit me and do everything in their power to keep me from getting on the CSM. They know that if I do, it will mean another person who will put the fun of other players above themselves. Someone who wants to see the end of these cancerous coalitions and the return of individual players having real control of their story instead of a couple power hungry sadists

Can you elaborate on this a bit? I seem to recall a statement not long ago that was ratified by literally every major 0.0 alliance leader expressing dissatisfaction with the state of 0.0 and the need for change.

Post phoebe- every major power bloc has shrank its holdings and the size of its afk rental empire except your own alliance, which has doubled down on its holdings and collected even more rental property to become the largest afk isk generation operation in the history of EVE.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#62 - 2015-02-01 00:05:13 UTC
Corey Lean wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
It is no secret that keeping the game stagnant is highly profitable for some groups and players. They believe the only important thing is the size of their epeen and would rather see the game wither and die than give up some of that wealth and power. So the idea that me, someone who is well known for doing extensive research, no matter how mundane fills them with fear. Someone who is willing to sacrifice the vast majority of their wealth to join in with thousand of other players in celebrating the ten year anniversary of EVE, has them shaking in their boots.

So they send the usual trolls my way. Orders to turn an anthill into a mountain. Attempt to discredit me and do everything in their power to keep me from getting on the CSM. They know that if I do, it will mean another person who will put the fun of other players above themselves. Someone who wants to see the end of these cancerous coalitions and the return of individual players having real control of their story instead of a couple power hungry sadists

Can you elaborate on this a bit? I seem to recall a statement not long ago that was ratified by literally every major 0.0 alliance leader expressing dissatisfaction with the state of 0.0 and the need for change.

Post phoebe- every major power bloc has shrank its holdings and the size of its afk rental empire except your own alliance, which has doubled down on its holdings and collected even more rental property to become the largest afk isk generation operation in the history of EVE.

It is not AFK ISK generation when people have to form up and defend that rental space. Perhaps our rental program is vastly superior to the rest. I'm not a huge fan or swaths of rental empires. You would see these start to shrink if some things like structure notifications went away. It is really easy to know your losing rental space when the very moment it is attacked you are notified of it no matter where you are in the game.
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#63 - 2015-02-01 00:14:16 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
More has happened since the Phoebe changes were announced than in the 9 months before them.

Only as a result of people adjusting to the changes. Since that initial shuffle to consolidate sovereignty things have been generally quiet. I went from having around one capital fleet a day to one to two every two weeks.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#64 - 2015-02-01 00:29:41 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
More has happened since the Phoebe changes were announced than in the 9 months before them.

Only as a result of people adjusting to the changes. Since that initial shuffle to consolidate sovereignty things have been generally quiet. I went from having around one capital fleet a day to one to two every two weeks.

Drop caps on targets closer?
Dagoth Fett
Whole Squid
#65 - 2015-02-01 01:43:08 UTC
Also a wonderful dancer. Lol
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#66 - 2015-02-01 01:58:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Il Feytid
Dagoth Fett wrote:
Also a wonderful dancer. Lol

You said that would stay between us. X
Xenophilius Lovegood
League of Non-Aligned Worlds
#67 - 2015-02-01 02:42:22 UTC
What is your position regarding LNAW, EVE's most illustrious corporation?
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#68 - 2015-02-01 03:26:16 UTC
Xenophilius Lovegood wrote:
What is your position regarding LNAW, EVE's most illustrious corporation?

I think Cas Mania should try harder in matching the rest of you when it comes to the family picture.Blink
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#69 - 2015-02-01 20:45:51 UTC
What about big vs small "organizations" thing

Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible.

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Seraph IX Basarab
Outer Path
Seraphim Division
#70 - 2015-02-01 21:04:15 UTC
+1 for leaks and the tears it created.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#71 - 2015-02-01 21:04:26 UTC
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
What about big vs small "organizations" thing

Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible.


they already are. Running a coalition the size of the CFC or N3 is a gigantic amount of work, and there's a hell of a lot of organisational friction.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#72 - 2015-02-01 21:55:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Il Feytid
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
What about big vs small "organizations" thing

Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible.

What I am not a fan of is that in order for the small organization to have any meaningful participation in null requires not just the blessing of the larger ones, but having someone on staff who has an IT background. Right now it is either join or die with no room in the middle for a variety of options.

I'm not implying a large organizations have it easy, but the bar for entry into null should not require becoming part of a coalition or waiting until you have thousands of players to forcefully take a single system away from the large organization.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#73 - 2015-02-01 22:17:50 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
What about big vs small "organizations" thing

Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible.

What I am not a fan of is that in order for the small organization to have any meaningful participation in null requires not just the blessing of the larger ones, but having someone on staff who has an IT background. Right now it is either join or die with no room in the middle for a variety of options.

I'm not implying a large organizations have it easy, but the bar for entry into null should not require becoming part of a coalition or waiting until you have thousands of players to forcefully take a single system away from the large organization.


What do you think the qualifying size ought to be?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#74 - 2015-02-01 22:29:56 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
What about big vs small "organizations" thing

Should big ones be made "somehow" less mobile, bureaucratic beacause there share size. even if such thing is possible.

What I am not a fan of is that in order for the small organization to have any meaningful participation in null requires not just the blessing of the larger ones, but having someone on staff who has an IT background. Right now it is either join or die with no room in the middle for a variety of options.

I'm not implying a large organizations have it easy, but the bar for entry into null should not require becoming part of a coalition or waiting until you have thousands of players to forcefully take a single system away from the large organization.


What do you think the qualifying size ought to be?

1 (the active small group) should qualify more than 0 (the inactive large group).
HarlyQ
harlyq syrokos investment station
#75 - 2015-02-02 02:04:41 UTC
-20 not voting for loose lips.
captain foivos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#76 - 2015-02-02 02:41:30 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
1 (the active small group) should qualify more than 0 (the inactive large group).


Would you qualify Goonswarm Federation as a large active or inactive group?
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#77 - 2015-02-02 02:56:29 UTC
captain foivos wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
1 (the active small group) should qualify more than 0 (the inactive large group).


Would you qualify Goonswarm Federation as a large active or inactive group?

If I had to pick one; considering their size in membership, I would lean on inactive. This of course fluctuates depending on the time of year and what is happening in game.
Xenophilius Lovegood
League of Non-Aligned Worlds
#78 - 2015-02-02 03:23:43 UTC
LNAW endorses Marlona Sky; victory is assured.
Angry Mustache
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#79 - 2015-02-02 08:10:16 UTC
Hello Marlona

What do you think should the balance be between ease of living/QOL and the ability for organizations to leverage the same mechanics on the strategic level.

For example, Jump drives/bridges allow players to move quickly between points. This can be used by individual players to bring their nullsec good to highsec for sale, for courier groups to make deliveries, and of course, for massive Supercapital fleets to smash many different targets across many regions (or used to).

Using that for an example, Jump fatigue both limited power projection and made it slower/more expensive to live in sov null. It's generally agreed that this is a good change, and the "collateral damage" to residents was well worth it. Is there a balance point where changes to mechanics use in sov-wars would impact "day-to-day" life too much to be worthwhile.

On a related note, how big should the "home-field advantage" be for defenders of sov, on a grand scale? on a tactical fleet fight scale? on a roaming scale?

An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#80 - 2015-02-02 08:57:57 UTC
Angry Mustache wrote:
What do you think should the balance be between ease of living/QOL and the ability for organizations to leverage the same mechanics on the strategic level.

For example, Jump drives/bridges allow players to move quickly between points. This can be used by individual players to bring their nullsec good to highsec for sale, for courier groups to make deliveries, and of course, for massive Supercapital fleets to smash many different targets across many regions (or used to).

Using that for an example, Jump fatigue both limited power projection and made it slower/more expensive to live in sov null. It's generally agreed that this is a good change, and the "collateral damage" to residents was well worth it. Is there a balance point where changes to mechanics use in sov-wars would impact "day-to-day" life too much to be worthwhile.

This is a really good question. At the current state of null industry in regards to gathering resources within null, it is dire. The good news is CCP recognizes that. Right now, null depends on Jita. As much as it would like to walk away, it can't. That is why industry related ships, like haulers, freighters and such have a nice -90% bonus to Jump Fatigue. It means they can still perform the necessary trips to and from Jita to supply their efforts in null.

Once CCP is able to revamp industry side of gathering local resources to a level that makes sense, then such a bonus can be removed as it is no longer needed. I know moon goo is one of those things that is shipped to high sec and sold as an export, but I feel like that needs to be expanded upon. Even parts of low sec and maybe even high sec could have some things worthy fighting for and controlling. Such things could then be shipped into null. At the same time, it should be possible to find such items in other parts of the game, but no where near the occurrence in its native region.

There is near infinite possibilities that can be done to make null space very desirable while at the same time, not making it 100% self-sufficient. Trade is very important and creates opportunity's for conflict.

As far as taking something too far, the answer of course is yes. This goes for everything in the game. You have to find that balance. For any new mechanic or revamped one, having several options as 'slider' where CCP can easily make small adjustments here and there that is capable of evolving with the meta and player population. Jump Fatigue has several sliders that can be adjusted. As I have said before, as long as we get a sov system that is occupancy based, one that is not dependent on grinding structures and immediately notifying AFK empires their system is under attack; the Jump Fatigue will feel a lot better.

Right now everyone flocks to basically one major war front because anyone outside of a major coalition trying to take anything sends out a structure notification. Instantly. The defending coalition has an insane amount of time to mount a defense and repel the non-bloc force that is trying to take just one system. If having sov meant an alliance actually had to utilize the system at some capacity outside of stabbing a tower on a R64 - then we would see blocs and alliances begin to spread out across their territory. If they didn't, then their territory would shrink due to it being nibbled away at by groups at the borders.

And very important is it should not just be profitable to be active in these systems, but should be enjoyable to do so. Players do whatever it takes to have fun. Even if it means taking gates for 7 hours with capital ships to deploy to where the content is. The strain on their Jump Fatigue is soul crushing. But if the fun was only a handful of jumps away, you would not be stressing the Jump Fatigue left and right. There simply is no reason to cross regions at a time in a couple minutes to find what you are looking for when it is simply next door.

Then, we finally have a dozen or so different brush fire wars in null. Conflict spread across many, many server clusters... which of course means far less TiDi. Of course this does not bode well for those who like to sit on a throne having 40,000 players at their beck and call. After all - why would anyone follow someone who is in no position to aid them from the other side of the map? More leaders, more blood in null, more conflict, more pew pew.
Angry Mustache wrote:
On a related note, how big should the "home-field advantage" be for defenders of sov, on a grand scale? on a tactical fleet fight scale? on a roaming scale?

Jump Fatigue offers a huge home field advantage. While the invaders are having to slowly trudge their capital ships across systems to get to your front door, your capitals are already there. Some people complain that their capitals and supers were nerfed with Jump Fatigue, but they are looking at the glass half empty. As a defender using such toys, you can use them with the confidence that you will not be hot dropped by everyone and their brother from all four corners of the map in a couple minutes. This home field advantage scales up the larger the entity that inhabits the space obviously. Of course the more people you pack into one part of your territory, the more open you leave the rest for another group to start another front where you don't have your heavy hitters. You will need to balance your forces out between ensuring a successful defense of a system and maintaining control of the rest.

But capitals already on home defense under Jump Fatigue should not be the only thing out there that falls under "home field advantage." It could be something wild like deciding how you want a grid to function in regards to effects similar to unknown space. Perhaps the ability to lay mines because your alliance has sov? Again, near endless possibilities. But it should never be so over the top that opting to "blue ball" is the best option and you hope the invaders give up.