Jita Park Speakers Corner

I'm pretty sure we agreed on Local as an intel tool being a mechanic that we needed any way. Perhaps using it as a chat channel is not the neatest way to do it, but the principle is sound and it's information that you should know.

When I hear people raging against local, I think they want nobody to know who's in space with them, or they want the whole thing to be muted and boring. I agree with neither. I would be OK with splitting them into two different tools, but again, I'd probably put them in the same place myself, because they naturally go together. (Who are you talking to? The people on this list, who are in the same corner of space as you right now.)

IDK. I think it's fine and I don't understand all the rage, and nobody seems particularly keen on explaining it.

Pretty much, he's the guy. I will probably update my **** later, but right now I need to see a man about a ship.

Couple of broad questions for you Alekseyev:

What are your thoughts on Incursions, particularly in High Sec?

What are your thoughts on Player interactions with NPCs, such as making player standings more meaningful, relating to docking rights, Potentially siding with Pirate factions etc?

Any opinions in regard to Malcanis' High Sec Manifesto?





My quick explanation would be this, Local chat intel kills sneaky gameplay. With no stealth/cloaking mechanics whatsoever in Darkfall it was still possible to sneak around with no one knowing, whether it be to sneak away or hide from threats, or ambush those you're hunting. In EVE I can be in a ship that makes me invisible, but because of Local Chat it results in everyone in the system with a working monitor and at least one functional eye instant knowledge of my presence. If people want to chat that's fine, but there's no need for the instant Intel function, players should have to work for intel, Overview, DScan, and Probes already offer a lot of intel tools.

I liked Incursions when they initially came out but as time went on and the capricious minds of the EVE player base got used to them some problems have been exposed. I see three major problems:

1. The different levels of Incursion sites do not progress well in terms of ISK/time, with Vanguards being vastly more profitable than their tier would suggest.
2. Players have managed to plot the sites out so effectively that there is perceived little risk, so the proliferation of Blingmobile-only fleets has distorted both the ISK/time and the inten for Incursions to be accessible to a broad array of players and bring them together
3, Players are farming the Incursions, having long pushed the Incursion back and spawned the "boss" there has been a brokered agreement not to kill it until the last possible moment to maximize the amount of time to grind Vanguards.

Players have finally stepped up and organized counters to 2 and 3 which have both prompted CCP to make mechanic changes to prevent them doing so (2) and finally admitting there's a problem (3). I'd like to see a balance of the ISK reward tiers so that the more difficult sites are not out rewarded by the easy ones, I'd like a little more unpredictability + ECM/Neuting in the spawns to keep people on their toes, and I would like to see some adjustment to the Incursion spawn/despawn mechanic to prevent players from intentionally prolonging the Sansha Invasion CONCORD is paying them to stop.

On NPC standings: I like the idea of having them matter more in NPC 0.0 space very much, provided there's tools to bring it up as well as down so players can choose their relationship. It brings some much needed immersion and some interesting gameplay options to the table. I'm cautious of making that too widespread though, since standings are easy to lose and more of a grind to gain. Preventing highsec docking because i dont have a sufficiently high standing with a certain corp, for instance, I'm not too keen on unless that came with a revision of standings in general.

I think Malcanis broke down the highsec population well. I'd also add in the "alt" factor ie 0.0 and lowsec players that maintain highsec characters to access the safe ISK making or other advantages of highsec even though they dont "live" there. While I agree wardecs need a major revamp, I differ on his other two solutions. I think the security rating/penalty system (and aggression system in general) should be made LESS complicated not more, and while i don't disagree high risk/high reward CANT live in highsec I staunchly oppose moving lowsec content into empire (it's bare enough as is) and I'd oppose the suggestion that the rewards be as high or higher than lowsec/0.0 which have more risk just by being there in addition to whatever you're trying to get done NPCing wise.



Nicely said.

I can't support you because of this.

You don't seem to "get" that incursions are better than missioning and are replacing it due to the group or community aspect. This reactionary attitude in my opinion is unneeded on the CSM.

Vanguards need some fixing. Force complete is one. Nuking the rest is not the answer. They get "Farmed" due to the time it takes for new ones to spawn and travel time if you intend to fly anything other than a quick logi.

Incursions are FINALLY the real counter to nullsec CTAs and of course because of that the calls for nukes are coming more than ever. Therefore the only changes needed or small adjustments to vanguards and buffs to Assault and HQ payments.

If you are willing to reevaluate your position on this I would be glad to read it.

I know that that's how it works. The problem here is that EVE is often more a simulation than a game; sneaky gameplay is perfectly possible, it just requires an awful lot of patience.

If you're willing to wait for a couple days, you too can get kills like this. It comes down to the question of whether you think that it's good for the game to be able to immediately see everyone in local, and I think it is. In hisec, everything is so crowded that d-scan isn't going to help you one bit; in nullsec, perhaps it's different, but it acts as a crucial tool for those who hold sov or really any kind of superiority in an area. Without it a lot of things would change, as it is crucial to so many gameplay styles.

As it is, the immediate local-listing in k-space forms a major cornerstone of the way the game works today, and unless you can actually come up with a really good reason why it's bad for the game, I would be against changing it just to see what happens on principle.

Hans your a likable guy, but your platform is overtly hostile to High Sec PvP, and although never called for directly the consequence of many of your positions is consensual PvP only, outside of seriously bad luck or mistakes made by a pilot. Here's some quotes by you from your platform and CSM thread.

On for profit PvP and High Sec PvP



Here we see your position that such PvP should occur in Low, not High Sec. This might be ok were it matched with a real rebalance of risk vs reward, but there's little emphasis on that in your platform. You did say the following which is encouraging:



But where in your platform does it talk about pushing Incursions and other lucrative PvE out of High Sec?? In any case we move on to see what you say about non-consensual PvP Low Sec:




So ultimately you want Low Sec PvE to be safe from PvP as well. I haven't seen anything about removing Local Chat Intel from Null on your campaign either, so the same can be said for Null Sec as well. Hans the fact of the matter is you represent players that want PvE and PvP separated, where you PvP for "sport" duels and e-honor safely funded by PvE that is free from PvP.

Now ask yourself why would Mercs, Pirates, and most High Sec PvPers want to be represented by someone who holds your views on EVE?

Alekseyev's platform is in the interests of Mercs, Pirates, and High Sec PvPers, your's Hans is not!

Also real quick about Incursions: I never said nuke them; they're actually much much more enjoyable than most other NPCing and I like the teamwork aspect. They just need three tweaks to make them a bit less exploitable: better reward/difficulty scaling, less predictability, and incentive/mechanics so players try to complete the Incursion event as fast as possible not as slowly as possible.

BUT ON TO THE MEAT!


Mmm wish they'd booked me for that one instead of this coming Fri. This weekend I was on Fly Reckless but we covered some of the same ground. Also, Fly Reckless is endorsing me now. Oh well, I'll have my shot at Kelduum at the upcoming Lost in EVE debates this Sunday. Are you coming Hans?

I think Hans' heart is in the right place, but as Christopher Walken would say "You're talkin to [the devs] all wrong. Wrong tone." Regardless of what anyone thinks (on both sides of the issue), a massive nerf to highsec income is almost certainly not going to be on the table for this CSM (if it ever is). We (PVPers of all stripes, people who interact with empire but care about lowsec and 0.0 development) are going to get a lot further engaging CCP about how we can create unique content for lowsec that appeals to players aspirations/sense of adventure as well as their wallets rather than whining that things highsec has should be in lowsec instead. The "move level 4s/labs/refining/etc/etc/etc" to lowsec mantra has been chanted repeatedly at CCP, both in general and at CSM summits past, but they're simply not interested in doing it; it's time for a new approach.

Other than that, I'd just like to say I think this:



aka moving from bribing players to call off wars (with all the interactions and trust involved) vs. giving that money to CONCORD so it's automated isn't consistent with this:



I do so hope we get to debate..

While I respect you and your organization , I have a problem with your proposal for fixing the neutral RR "problem".

Primarily that it breaks legitimate RR everywhere else.

What everyone always seems to forget is that the only advantage neutral RR really grants is the surprise factor which is only useful once, beyond that you just have the issue of not being able to engage them until after they interfere.

The main complaint I see always boils down to the fact that neutral RR can instantly dock or gate jump ignoring the fact that the mechanic works exactly the same way for in non-neutral RR.

Putting an aggression timer on RR (which is not an aggressive act) basically makes RR a suicide role because you'd never be able to successfully disengage from any operation that takes place on a station or a gate. and warping off isn't always an option since we have these little things down here called bubbles.

I understand that the mechanic can be frustrating to deal with in High sec but your proposed change would affect more than high sec and frankly neutral RR isn't a problem where I live.

Some good posting going on in Kelduum Revaan's thread, check out my blog post about it