Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Let me see if I can summarize thing so far....

Lucas Kell:
--Any change to local will absolutely destroy null sec. It will become a complete wasteland with nobody in it anywhere at anytime.
--AFK cloaking is bad and it should be nerfed even if it creates an imbalance in the current status quo.

Various sources
--ISK is apparently not an issue; eliminating AFK cloakers who can apparently shut down systems for hours even days on end and completely shut off the flow of isk will not substantially change this.[1]

[1]Daichi has linked a thread showing this is really not the case that even a small change in the rate of ISK flowing into the EVE economy is of intense interest to CCP. Daichi if you could link that thread again I'd be grateful.

Mags', Nikk, Me, Daichi, et. al. (sorry if I you are in the et. al, feel free to post to get your tiny sliver of e-fame):
--That local is an integral part of AFK cloaking. No local, no AFK cloaking. We might all disagree on how to deal with AFK cloaking, but in terms of how AFK cloaking we all agree local is an part of the process that is fundamental, as in removing local in some fashion would make AFK cloaking impossible.

Nikk, Me, Daichi, et. al (again if you are in the et. al. group sorry, feel free to post...in fact please do):
--Local should no longer be a source of intel.
--Implement a new intel mechanic.
--The new mechanic should ensure that null sec PvE is viable.
--The new mechanic should, idealy, make AFK cloaking a non-issue.

[1] I think this is a significant issue. If removal of AFK cloaking results in a surge of ISK into the EVE economy it will result in a response by CCP to keep inflation in check and actually nerf null PvE.

Wrong. Any change that will be significant enough to be worthwhile (ie, not replacing it with an identical but module based system) will destroy null, and AFK cloaking being removed wouldn;t create an imbalance, it would be the removal of a redundant feature no longer required with the sov rebalance.

AFK cloaking doesn't shut down operations, it moves them. So no, no more ISK will be generated following the removal of AFK cloaking. In addition, please note the aforementioned sov rebalance which will also reduce null set income.

I've agreed that removing local would fix the issue, but at too high a cost. In exactly the same way, the complete removal of cloaking would also remove AFK cloaking, again at too high a cost.

For a replacement mechanics to ensure null PvE is viable, null PvE players would still require a warning the moment a neut enters local, since their only realistic chance of survival is evasion. So what would be the point in replacing local with a system that does what local currently does? Null PvE is already being nerfed with the sov rebalance, so no further nerfs would be needed.

The belief that removal of AFK cloaking will result in a sudden surge in the isk faucet of nulsec pve is utterly absurd. The vast majority of PvE space is not AFK camped on a regular basis. AFK cloaking or the lack thereof does not change the overall value of space unless it is done long enough to force a degradation of the military index. Even then, once the camping ends, it can be quickly repaired.

An AFK cloaker denying the use of space only reduces the normal isk input of one system of the thousands available and in use. Furthermore, those PvErs typically have an option to simply go to another system and resuming their isk-generation activities. Or they can simply ignore the possibly afk player. Risk vs reward says it is less risky to go someplace else for the same reward.

As has been pointed out, even small changes in the isk flow is of interest to CCP. You look at the posts on AFK cloaking and they are rife about how it shuts down the best systems for long periods of time. So...people can't have their cake and eat it too. Either AFK cloaking is no big deal (in which case it does not need a nerf) or it is (i.e. it does impact the isk flow) and it shouldn't be nerfed (by itself).

And yes, one AFK cloaking pilot can impose a steep reduction on income from a system...out of thousands of systems. But we aren't talking about just 1 AFK cloaking pilot in the game.

And I just went back to the (rather old) quarterly economic reports and for 2010 they show that at that time on a monthly basis the amount of isk flowing into the game via bounty prizes is 20-25 trillion and that it is the single largest faucet for isk in the game. Taking that report as a basis for doing some simple math to give some context...

In Q4 of 2010 the money supply in game was 445 trillion isk. The money supply increased by 11%. If isk from bounties increased by 0.5% it would mean an additional 3% increase in the money supply (assuming no change in the sinks). If we assume that about half that increase in the money supply associated with an increase in bounties leaves the game it is still another 1.5% increase in the money supply. So, we'd expect inflation to increase unless the flow of commodities also increases to offset the additional isk entering the game. Of course, these numbers are rather dated and getting updated information would help. And I'm not even sure CCP has much information on how much of an effect AFK cloaking has.

Still, the issue of isk sources and inflation cannot simply be dismissed with hand waving, IMO. There is a risk that simply removing AFK cloaking could elicit a nerf to null ratting.

You still seem to forget that this wouldn't be being removed on it's own though. Sov is being revamped and with that null income is being heavily nerfed, very soon. So the removal of AFK cloaking is simply a very minor balancing factor in that. Quite honestly I think the ISK flow change would be close enough to zero to be insignificant, but the reason for the change would still be sound - to ensure players have to actively play the game.

First off, the impact of sov changes on ratting is not as clear as the impact on things like reaction farms and the like. One can rat in a system without sov. Second you are conflating "null income" with isk sources. The two are not the same. After all, what is a big chunk of null income? Moon goo. But moon goo is not a source of isk in the economy. So null income might go down as some of those income sources shift to say low sec or even high sec, but the question of isk sources...not so clear cut Lucas.

Edit:

When I mentioned null income going down that if the income generating process moves from null to somewhere else, then it is no longer "null income".

Also, it is possible that ratting continues as a major source of isk, and if AFK cloaking is removed, and if commodities from null decline (e.g. minerals, PI, etc.) and there is a small uptick in ratting income, then we could have an increase in inflation as both the quantity of commodities and the money supply increase.

It is not being nerfed or boosted.
An avenue for resolution is being offered, that demands more from both sides.

How many AFK cloaked players do you expect, after they are no longer seen in local, as well as can be proactively found and removed?



Well, gate camps are rather common at borders, and any active alliance can be expected to have scouts watching pipelines, etc.
Do you expect players in opposing alliances to politely remain away, if your alliance has no active picket defenses?


No, my post above specified:


Ships with no cloak equipped would not receive any benefit, and would appear in local as normal.

Of course there's nerfing and boosting. How can you possibly claim that the removal of local wouldn't be a nerf to PvE and a boost to PvP?

Not at all, but I don't expect every gate to need to be guarded actively 24/7 in order for ratters to exist at all in null.

I missed that bit, apologies. It still wouldn't stop you tackling with a cloaker and bringing in a fleet to follow up. To be quite honest, even a ceptor with an inactive (but online) cloak fitted would be able to tackle most PvE ships without a problem.

Effectively though the whole ides is still "give cloakers a massive buff".

Actually I am not claiming that.
I am not removing local, I am just changing it on one detail, as described below.
Can I claim my suggested change won't have that effect? Easy yes answer.


Of course not.
Only the strategic gate camps need to exist while ratters are active, to have any sense of safety.

Why would every gate need a guard, so long as the choke points were covered?


Your fears are safely allayed.

That ceptor with a cloak is still suffering a 75% movement penalty, assuming they have the T2 version.
That fleet can be safely flagged as a known element, with all ratters who were properly attentive to intel channels pre-warned.

So your problem is cyno's? which, with many other things, are up in the air for discussion as part of the null changes. You never answered me when i asked if null rewards are buffed, would that make removing local good.

CCP's goal was to fix a boring and stagnant system and enable small gangs to be a credible threat to coalitions that lazily defended their stuff. Changing cloaks, changing sov warfare, changing local and the jump nerfs will make it harder for large groups to hold vast areas of space. It has more people talking about getting a piece of null than before, and will bring more interesting gameplay like small gang roaming.

The kinds of players most likely to leave are null bears and cap blobbers. I dont see that as a problem, i infact see that as a good thing.



Link

With what soni-clover suggests it would be prudent to believe that we'd get inflation if cloaks were changed alone. And likewise prudent to believe we'd get deflation if things were made too risky.

Null rewards are getting looked at. Ore is getting an over haul and CCP often boast about their new rat-making software. I dont think it so unlikely that they wont touch null rewards.



'Null as we know it...'

But thats kinda the point.