Jita Park Speakers Corner

Based on everything I've read in your platform, I think we'd agree on much more than we disagree on. At the least, I'm sure bridges could be built, but this is campaign season so let's do this!



Well, I guess one way to explain my opinion on this is, seeing as how I sat right next to CCP Greyscale when FW was being implemented (he did most of the work on it), I think I've got a fair handle on where FW was supposed to end up versus what it's languished as over the years. It's really one of the great tragedies of EVE what a step-child FW has been. That being said, you've singled out two statements so let's look at them.

The first is a pretty general answer / opinion and I made it because of the way that game mechanics tend to evolve. My answer was made because I believe it reflected what is most likely to take place and how I believe we'll get the most bang for our buck so to speak. It's highly doubtful that you are going to see CCP invest significant resources into improving two completely different, parallel territory systems. They are going to look for ways to use their resources most efficiently so it only makes sense that as they finally start to iterate on FW that those guys will also be involved in peer review of any null-sec sov changes and vice-versa.

As for the second statement you quoted, I can't really see how or why you wouldn't want improved NPC interactions in FW. I mean, do you want the way you deal with the NPC Empires to remain exactly as they are now? Don't you want those opportunities and processes to evolve and improve? v0v

To be fair, CCP and by extension the CSM should care about what players do, rather than try and push on them what to do according to CCP or the CSM.

FW should be fixed to do what FW people wants it to do. CCP already had a chance to do it their way and it ended FUBAR.

You and I are in total agreement. I've made several post in my Q&A thread on this very issue.



Yes, and I've been pretty vocal about how I'm not really a fan of that. I don't see either system evolving completely independent of the other and have no desire to see any mechanic in eve be a 'guinea pig' for another.



Something like this is just as likely as anything else. CCP is going to look at all of the various systems and figure out what would work best where, then find a way to have them all work together seamlessly. At least that's ~the dream~.



That's completely fair to say and, as I said to Hans, I think he and I would agree on much more than we disagreed on. Different perspectives are needed, that's why there's not just a one man CSM.

Selene
First let me say thank you for posting in this thread in a constructive way. I voted for you and I think you can be a real asset to ccp and the players.

Two points on what you say here:

1) If you know about faction war by sitting next to greyscale etc, where it was supposed to be etc. and think its a tragey that it wasn't worked on then why did you never seem to push for it in your term? Why didn't you engage the fw community more? Your failure to do this and your suggestion that it should be turned into a testbed for null sec send a message that you don't think the failure to work on fw was a "tragedy" at all. In fact it suggests you think it was a minor problem.

2) This may actually answer the first question for you. But what faction war was intended to be in 2008 may no longer be relevant to what it should be now. For example it seems the original plans for fw had npcs/rats playing a considerable role. But now Eve has many new ways for people to play the game if they want to shoot rats. They now have sleepers and incursions etc. So the niche of players who want more ways to shoot red xs seem to have gotten some love. But the players who want more small scale pvp have not had their needs addressed.

So when you say this:


It seems if people want to interact with npcs more they can already do it allot of different ways in eve. Most fw players are now looking for small scale pvp not pve.





I think your talking about using fw as a test bed. Where I disagree with your thinking here is you seem to assume that there is a single perfect mechanic that ccp should strive for. But there isn't. Different players want different things in this game.

Some want politics and think eve politics are great. Others think they are lame. Some think spying is great others think spying in eve is lame. There is no right or wrong answer here any more than its right to say people should like baseball more than football. If we change the rules of baseball to be a testbed for new football rules how do you think baseball fans will feel? (Actually thinking about that it might be pretty fun but I hope you still get my point.)

Now you say they need to conserve resources. Well I tend to disagree. If they want to grow this game they need to develop the game for several different playerbases. Null sec is for the more hard core players who can deal with a high maintance computer game. Low sec and fw should be for a more casual player who loves the single shard nature of eve and loves the consequences that come with pvp but can't commit the real life time. I really think abandoning the second group to conserve resources to chase after the first group is bass ackwards. The second group will probably yield a much larger number of players.

But there is another reason that resource efficiency argument is unpersuasive. FW is almost there! It’s really very close to being awesome. It won’t take allot of resources. I never met anyone who has really been able to pvp using the plex mechanics who doesn’t see its great potential. Yeah there are issues but people who have tried it can see how it can be awesome. It’s just not generating *enough* of the pvp we love. It needs iterations not abandonment in favor of something that might work in null sec.

Spending time on fw is not the same as spending time on WIS that really has no gameplay. FW has great gameplay if they get it working. It is a Maserati that currently doesn’t run because it needs some gas and a few new sparkplugs. After that ccp should give it oil changes every 30k miles. But don’t replace it with some sort of Caterpillar tractor that you think the null sec players might want.

Thank you again for the great questions Iam, I'll tackle them one at a time here. First, regarding module deactivation in large high sec fleet engagements, I agree that it doesn't makes much sense for a fleet to have its cap chain dismantled every time it engages a new target, if it is already under aggression or involved in a legitimate war dec situation.

On the subject of ECM, I can only speak as to how it affects the scale of warfare I most frequently engage in: subcapital warfare ranging from 1-30 pilots on each side. In my experience, ECM hasn't been a major breaking factor, in that the fragility of ECM boats and the "primary" factor have been enough of a deterrent so that they aren't out of control. I am sensitive though to changes regarding ECM that might be breaking game play elsewhere, and would certainly consider options that make ECM more fair for everyone that plays the game. I know many are frustrated with ECM drone power, that would be something worthy of discussion.

I should clarify that I have no qualms with PvP occuring in high sec space, disdain isn't an appropriate word to describe how I feel. EvE does involve war that touches every pilot, and that includes those that live in high sec. However, with two other regions primarily offering mechanics that allow for more PvP with less legal interference, I feel that pilots seeking abundant PvP should be seeking it in low and null sec, not in high sec. I envision the ideal role for High sec PvP focus on security, meaning retribution for criminal activity through transferrable kill rights and paid bounties, and dispute resolution between corps and alliances that live and work in the region. Low sec should be enhanced to house the bulk of PvP that exists for profit (piracy) or sport (Faction Warfare).

Regarding orca swapping, I am firmly of the belief that assisting a flashy pilot in high security space through an orca swap should render the orca the same flashy status, plain and simple. Orcas should NOT be Brutix delivery services, they should not be a means to assist bait tactics, and they should vulnerable if the pilot they are allowing to swap ships is vulnerable. If a pilot commits to assisting a PvP player in any practical fashion, he is part of the PvP action and should be treated the same as the one engaged in PvP.

When I suggested using monetary means to stave off war, conceptually what I support is that players that seek passive activities such as mining, industry, and trade, should have more tools at their disposal to use financial means to combat aggressive war decs. Yes, simply allowing a defensive corp to pay more to increase the cost to the declaring corp is a solution that favors wealthy corps, and would be insufficient on its own to defend smaller corps. I did not intend to suggest it as the sole solution to high sec war decs.

We have seen CCP develope and abandon feature after feature like a child with too many toys. I don't care what CCP is most likely to do nor do I care for crystal ball gazing on what they are likely to do. The CCP track record is abominable when it comes down to deciding where CCP allocates their resources. A blind person throwing darts at a gaggle of CCP developers screaming idears would have had a better chance of getting it right. I am willing to bet all my Aurum on that.

Without people on the CSM willing to set the bar high, how can we ever expect CCP to deliver anything close to a playable product?

Simply stating it is unlikely they will take the efford scares me comming from somebody on all three sides of the fence. What also freaks me out is that current CSM members seem to think everything can be "solved" by some grand new and untested as well as undeveloped blanket solution. Painting everything in space with the same brush will simply make for a bland and washed out whole instead of distinctly different regions of space.

I want diversity, not some supramacist's dream on how everyone should adhere to their version of the ultimate endgame. If I wanted to fly the goose step in a mandatory fit I will fly somewhere where that would be required of me.

^^This. Mother of all Gods, THIS!!!

(I'd "like" this post 1000 times if I could. As well: Hans Jagerblitzen for...CSM7 Chairman? Hey, why not? Seriously, why freakin' not?)

E: Because what keeps me in EVE, what got me addicted to EVE once upon a time ago, is that diversity in the sandbox, and the sheer depth of the universe that it breeds. I want to find, explore and play my endgame, Mittens, that's just the way it is, and you're just going to have to deal with that...I find Mittens' and that ilk's endgame, frankly, repellent.

I support Jagerblitzen for CSM. It's about time we had some real representation out there.

You have my guns in your sights and my vote Hans.

Give them whats for.

Hans, I couldn't agree more m8. But, once again, I'm just not getting where this sense of ~persecution~ is coming from. I agree with your approach - I don't want to see CCP just slap some random **** together without talking to the players either, but I don't get the sense that's going to happen this year. I know historically that it's not always been the case but I think, (metaphor incoming!) after a long night that there's some light on the horizon and you'll find that you have many more allies than enemies on the current CSM and at CCP.



I want to see WAR, Hans. Full out, NPC faction approved, sponsored and rewarded WAR. I touched on this in an answer above and what you describe seems along the same line. I want your standings to mean something, I want to see the militia ranks transcend into something more meaningful (and be harder / more rewarding to achieve). I'd like to see faithful service in the line of fire rewarded.

Let me ask you a question, and there's a bit of RP to it - I read and actually enjoyed Tony Gonzalez's book, 'The Empyrean Age'. The idea of immortal pod pilots doing the bidding of the Empires (or any other major NPC faction) was pretty damn cool. When you sign on to a militia, what type of experience would you prefer to have? Does achieving rank and having a solid military structure mean anything to you or do you prefer the, "******* point me at them!" violence where you just GET PAID with no other hassles? Do you not care at all for dealing with the factions and just want to be a legalized pirate in the eyes of the Caldari State, etc...?

What if each of the four major empires, or someone like the Serpentis / Angel Cartel offered something a bit different in terms of how they dealt with their pod pilot fighters? What if the NPC interactions (agents, militia missions, whatever) led directly to increased PVP violence? I want to see players free to do as they choose, but I'd also like to see some actual choices / consequences inserted into the mix.

Anyway, I'm just a visitor in your thread and like talking about this stuff.