These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

why does it seem like CCP is castrating high sec content creators

First post
Author
Ashterothi
Malevelon Roe Industries
Convocation of Empyreans
#81 - 2016-04-30 23:40:01 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
I think you are rather confused, you are mistaking adjusting bad mechanics and balancing the game for blocking what you define as content.

I think it is you that is confused, but that is situation normal.

Beginning from Retribution (Dec 2012) when destroyers were rebalanced, if you go through each change made to the game that either benefits ganking (assigning +1 for easier ganking) or makes it harder (assigning -1 for more difficult), then you can actually see the evidence yourself objectively whether things have been balanced or not,

So starting with a +1 for the destroyer rebalance in Retribution and coming to the latest change, even allowing for some differences in opinion, over the last 3 1/2 years, the balance is around the -4 to -8 mark.

That's not balance. That's nerf.


Let me start off by saying I have never ganked anyone in highsec, nor have I ever been successfully ganked in highsec (the highsec freighter kill on my record was suspect flag for some damn reason, didn't ask). I know nothing about the actual experience of this gameplay.

However, I do know game design and so I suggest an alternate idea.

Instead of balancing ganking vs not ganking as a 0 sum game in which "balance" is a net 0, instead look at it as a balance between the playstyle of the gankers and the playstyle of the hauler. Make ganking too easy, and hauling becomes more problematic, people do it less, prices go up, less targets for the gankers, more concentration of danger of each hauler, so on and so on, until new equilibrium is met. Make ganking harder and fewer people will go through the effort until the problem is sufficiently solved as to reduce the complexity of the new process. Haulers become "safer" and hauling becomes more common, higher numbers mean fewer percent of the total are being ganked, more risks are taken.

In this universe it actually seems to be that the best way to handle this issue is to every so often, solve the puzzle for the gankers. You don't have to incentivise ganking, the system incentivises itself, so people work to solve the new puzzle and find new methods and eventually the danger level rises until it is time to shake it up once again.

So maybe that is why you see these things. Every time the ratio of killers vs haulers raises above a certain point, they remove an exploit or otherwise terrible broken mechanic to make the wheel continue to turn.

Just a thought
Chopper Rollins
hahahlolspycorp
Brave Collective
#82 - 2016-05-01 01:55:44 UTC
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
[quote=Dracvlad]...
So starting with a +1 for the destroyer rebalance in Retribution and coming to the latest change, even allowing for some differences in opinion, over the last 3 1/2 years, the balance is around the -4 to -8 mark.

That's not balance. That's nerf.



It's still very easy to kill nerds in Empire. I think CCP are doing a great job of treading the fine line between sandbox being allowed to stay sandbox but constantly sitting in Empire being profitable.
There's no rails forcing hisec gankers out of Empire or away from what they do, sandbox is still sandbox. You gotta admit though, there's been times when moving through bottlenecks and hubs in hisec is so dangerous it stifles play.
I applaud our CCP space overlords in their efforts, i don't know what i would do faced with the same propensity for so many players to become hisec barnacles forever, pvp or not.



Goggles. Making me look good. Making you look good.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#83 - 2016-05-01 09:55:04 UTC
Chopper Rollins wrote:



It's still very easy to kill nerds in Empire. I think CCP are doing a great job of treading the fine line between sandbox being allowed to stay sandbox but constantly sitting in Empire being profitable.
There's no rails forcing hisec gankers out of Empire or away from what they do, sandbox is still sandbox. You gotta admit though, there's been times when moving through bottlenecks and hubs in hisec is so dangerous it stifles play.
I applaud our CCP space overlords in their efforts, i don't know what i would do faced with the same propensity for so many players to become hisec barnacles forever, pvp or not.





People keep on saying things like this yet there is absolutely zero evidence to back it up. The number of freighters getting ganked is staggeringly tiny and there is already highly effective counters to bumping.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#84 - 2016-05-01 11:24:08 UTC
Chopper Rollins wrote:
Shae Tadaruwa wrote:
[quote=Dracvlad]...
So starting with a +1 for the destroyer rebalance in Retribution and coming to the latest change, even allowing for some differences in opinion, over the last 3 1/2 years, the balance is around the -4 to -8 mark.

That's not balance. That's nerf.



It's still very easy to kill nerds in Empire. I think CCP are doing a great job of treading the fine line between sandbox being allowed to stay sandbox but constantly sitting in Empire being profitable.
There's no rails forcing hisec gankers out of Empire or away from what they do, sandbox is still sandbox. You gotta admit though, there's been times when moving through bottlenecks and hubs in hisec is so dangerous it stifles play.
I applaud our CCP space overlords in their efforts, i don't know what i would do faced with the same propensity for so many players to become hisec barnacles forever, pvp or not.



Great post, so spot on.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#85 - 2016-05-01 11:31:04 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Chopper Rollins wrote:



It's still very easy to kill nerds in Empire. I think CCP are doing a great job of treading the fine line between sandbox being allowed to stay sandbox but constantly sitting in Empire being profitable.
There's no rails forcing hisec gankers out of Empire or away from what they do, sandbox is still sandbox. You gotta admit though, there's been times when moving through bottlenecks and hubs in hisec is so dangerous it stifles play.
I applaud our CCP space overlords in their efforts, i don't know what i would do faced with the same propensity for so many players to become hisec barnacles forever, pvp or not.





People keep on saying things like this yet there is absolutely zero evidence to back it up. The number of freighters getting ganked is staggeringly tiny and there is already highly effective counters to bumping.

And the number of people dead to violent crimes with guns is less than that of cars.

We still make a big deal of it.

Its whenever somebody has their "life bubble" pierced that they then overly focus on it.
If somebody else gets shot, why it could happen to me as well! (Nevermind the majority are criminals shooting each other over territory and money What?)

So to do these people think they could be ganked, never mind that its something like what, 10 toons total on a really good night of them just coming constantly per gank group?

Really, the bigger issue is people flying what they can't afford to lose, case in point, somebody ran the new upwell stuff in a shuttle on day 0 and I saw them pop.

You've been telling them a long time what to do, but the end result is that they don't care and would rather face the music than change.
Radical Posture
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#86 - 2016-05-01 12:22:40 UTC
Gankers are nothing more than Miners who jump on Gank alts when you start mining their system.
W33b3l
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#87 - 2016-05-01 18:40:48 UTC
The reason CCP is looking at highsec a little more is because nothing induces rage anywhere close to being ganked in highsec. If anyone else blows up anywhere else, they either had a warning message pop up on their screen or the pew pew was consensual. Rage = rage quit sometimes wich = lost sub, wich = less income for CCP.

I have personally known people to unsub after dieing to an expensive highsec gank. Its actually common. I don't speak for CCP but I would think it's safe to assume these changes to highsec are mainly for monetary reasons.
Rin Vocaloid2
DUST University
#88 - 2016-05-01 20:12:06 UTC
W33b3l wrote:
The reason CCP is looking at highsec a little more is because nothing induces rage anywhere close to being ganked in highsec. If anyone else blows up anywhere else, they either had a warning message pop up on their screen or the pew pew was consensual. Rage = rage quit sometimes wich = lost sub, wich = less income for CCP.

I have personally known people to unsub after dieing to an expensive highsec gank. Its actually common. I don't speak for CCP but I would think it's safe to assume these changes to highsec are mainly for monetary reasons.


Even then, gankers adapt. They will always find a way around any change that seems to hinder them.
W33b3l
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#89 - 2016-05-01 20:18:40 UTC
Rin Vocaloid2 wrote:
W33b3l wrote:
The reason CCP is looking at highsec a little more is because nothing induces rage anywhere close to being ganked in highsec. If anyone else blows up anywhere else, they either had a warning message pop up on their screen or the pew pew was consensual. Rage = rage quit sometimes wich = lost sub, wich = less income for CCP.

I have personally known people to unsub after dieing to an expensive highsec gank. Its actually common. I don't speak for CCP but I would think it's safe to assume these changes to highsec are mainly for monetary reasons.


Even then, gankers adapt. They will always find a way around any change that seems to hinder them.


Short of a forced fire safety of green in highsec completely removing all non wartarget aggression.

I don't see that happening anytime soon if ever though. I wonder what would happen lol.
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#90 - 2016-05-01 20:46:36 UTC
If you can't gank in 3 mins, your just bumping for the lols. Get on with it or bugger off. Some people where caught up for a very long time via bumping. Mostly because they don't understand the true power of just logging off. (1 min if locked 30sec if not assuming no other timers).

Dragging out ganks is tedious and not good. Either do it or don't. But don't take all day about it.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.

ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#91 - 2016-05-01 21:09:40 UTC
I have removed a few personal attacks and off-topic replies.

Quote:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

27. Off-topic posting is prohibited.

Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued to the off-topic poster.

ISD Decoy

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#92 - 2016-05-01 21:58:07 UTC
Fiddly Pop wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Please stop claiming its "content creation" when someone just plays the game. That isn't "creating content". In fact in over 11 years now in Eve I have seen very little "content" created by players. I've seen sandbox styles of play gain favor, but I'm waiting to see more actual content created. For example, lets have more "sports league" type ideas. How about a corp dedicated to hosting live player events. Real trade embargoes, That happens sometimes, but not nearly as much as it could.

Ganking is NOT creating content.



I beg to differ. ganking creates action. ganking is also easy to avoid as most are flashy red. if you are engaged in the game you will almost never ganked. sure if you are new in an area and don't know who to watch out for it could happen but most people stay to area they know.

Just because sometimes the person was AFK and doesn't notice the content until an hour later doesn't mean it wasn't content. It just means they missed the content.


Ganking is not content, it is standard game play in the sandbox. Nothing is "created". I'm not saying don't gank, just don't claim you created anything when you did, all you did was play Eve as intended.
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#93 - 2016-05-01 22:55:30 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Ganking is not content, it is standard game play in the sandbox. Nothing is "created". I'm not saying don't gank, just don't claim you created anything when you did, all you did was play Eve as intended.

This is demonstrably false. There is an entire anti-ganking community whose gameplay is entirely dependent on the existence of ganking.

Ganking directly creates the content for anti-ganking gameplay.

You can claim whatever you want about the value of that content, but claiming that ganking doesn't create content is a straight up lie. But hey carebears lying to push their agenda isn't exactly a new thing.
Pookoko
Sigma Sagittarii Inc.
#94 - 2016-05-02 00:09:20 UTC
It's very simple. Anything that's in space is potential 'content'. When you see a potential 'target' in space, whether it's high-sec or low sec or null sec, you start to think about ways to destroy/loot that stuff. As long as it's not impossible to do it, people will find ways to achieve the kill. This is the part that gets creative, and eve players have always found ways to kill something new under new mechanics. From can flipping of the old days to organised ganks with brute force, as long as something is in space, we will find ways to destroy it.

So from that point of view, any mechanic that gets more ships/structures in space is a good thing IMO. The reason why high-sec is attractive for 'content' seekers is that there are so many ships flying in space there. In low/null too many people dock/cloak up as soon as something shows up in local. People don't even wait to see what ship the neutral is flying and evaluate whether to fight or flee. But in high sec, people have this false sense of security. People think they are (relatively) safe and continue to haul/fly with billions of isk in loot & modules fitted.

If there is any mechanics change (be it bumping or whatever else in future), anything that gives people the feeling that high-sec is 'safer' works in gankers' favour ultimately. Yes you may need more effort to organise a successful gank, but the opposite extreme is that ganks are so easy & common people start docking up & not actually flying in space, in which case you get no 'content'.
NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#95 - 2016-05-02 01:02:29 UTC
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
If you can't gank in 3 mins, your just bumping for the lols. Get on with it or bugger off. Some people where caught up for a very long time via bumping. Mostly because they don't understand the true power of just logging off. (1 min if locked 30sec if not assuming no other timers).

Dragging out ganks is tedious and not good. Either do it or don't. But don't take all day about it.

This has been remedied by pegging you with a rookie ship.
Then you have a 15 minute log off timer, and it can be refreshed at any time.

The three minute always goes through has another part, the server has to check each tick if a ship can warp.
This is the same as serving up a 504 error.
Its sending back a bit of data to say just get it over with, in this case the warp instead of an error.

Functionally for ganking, this doesn't change as much if you keep everyone nearby or go for alphastrikes.
The bigger issue here is if you can't tank the surprise moment or have multiple targets during a cooldown.
But then, this is now a better enforcement in a nominal sense, since it puts through that ganks have a window at each gate to occur.

So once more, fast reacting blobs do better, but then again ganking with tornadoes is always more fun.
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#96 - 2016-05-02 01:17:58 UTC
Didn't read all three previous pages, I'll admit. I had to jump to here, which is "Gawt, that OP pretend miner post was way too obvious." Come on, man.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#97 - 2016-05-02 01:46:46 UTC
Because the gankers in high sec are not "content creators". That phrase was invented as a smoke screen to hide their true intentions: Griefing. Before they came up with this white wash, gankers would say they did it for "The precious tears". They finally figured out that was politically incorrect, and put up the current smoke screen.

They are in fact content destroyers. The freighters they destroy can no longer haul, preventing them from creating content. The removal of the ship itself is a direct removal of content. The cargo lost to the loot fairy is a removal of content. The interaction between buyers and sellers that would have occurred if that cargo had been put on the market is also a loss of content, along with whatever content would have been created had that cargo been available to be used by other players.

Ships destroyed. Market activity gone. Useful items gone. Ganking does not create content. It destroys content.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

NEONOVUS
Mindstar Technology
Goonswarm Federation
#98 - 2016-05-02 02:26:00 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
Because the gankers in high sec are not "content creators". That phrase was invented as a smoke screen to hide their true intentions: Griefing. Before they came up with this white wash, gankers would say they did it for "The precious tears". They finally figured out that was politically incorrect, and put up the current smoke screen.

They are in fact content destroyers. The freighters they destroy can no longer haul, preventing them from creating content. The removal of the ship itself is a direct removal of content. The cargo lost to the loot fairy is a removal of content. The interaction between buyers and sellers that would have occurred if that cargo had been put on the market is also a loss of content, along with whatever content would have been created had that cargo been available to be used by other players.

Ships destroyed. Market activity gone. Useful items gone. Ganking does not create content. It destroys content.

Yeah, which then means somebody buys my stuff.

Broken windows fallacy in EVE doesn't apply since we have rat drops and infinite ammo damage.

Without destruction, very few things need to be bought, and frankly, if you check market activity, you find a single freighter on a large number of items can tip a market on its head.
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#99 - 2016-05-02 04:17:05 UTC
Perhaps CCP plans on toning down highsec rewards and replacing a lot of highsec space with lowsec? Like less or equal than .7 would do the trick.

There obviously have to be rookie systems in game and in those areas of space, the mechanics have to be newbie-friendly. Not seeing the "nerf content creators to death" part tho. What content are we talking about?
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#100 - 2016-05-02 04:58:47 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
Perhaps CCP plans on toning down highsec rewards and replacing a lot of highsec space with lowsec? Like less or equal than .7 would do the trick.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha.