Jita Park Speakers Corner

People who dwell in Empire space as opposed to Nullsec simply have different expectations out of the game. I know the FW crowd in lowsec the best, and I can safely say that 90% of FW players are in FW because they are not interested in the Nullsec politics, alarm-clock CTAs and waiting around for hours for fleets to form up and slug it out. I'm not saying that is a bad style of play; many people enjoy the Nullsec gameplay and culture. But FW pilots do not enjoy those same things; we like to log in and find a fight quickly and nearby with no :drama: and politics.

CCP and CSM6 had mentioned using FW as a "test-bed" for Nullsec mechanics (particularly, Sov mechanics) and Faction War players are vehemently opposed to this. Mechanics that might work for Nullsec won't work for Lowsec just as mechanics that might work for Lowsec won't work for Nullsec; they are entirely different populations.

Yes, iterating and improving on Lowsec and Highsec will improve the game. A healthy sandbox helps all areas of the game, Nullsec included; and the opposite is true: improving Nullsec will also benefit Lowsec and Highsec.

As for the "assumption" that CSM6 has a strong interest in Nullsec iterations, to cite one example, The Mittani has frequently stated that using FW as a "test-bed" for Nullsec Sov Mechanics is a "good idea".

Read the whole PDF and I have to say I like it. +1

Even though I am a certified carebear, and avoid pvp (being a non-focus trained 2 month old player), that does not mean I will always will be. Low sec living intrigues me. Faction warfare not so much, and nullsec politics, drama and RL demands definitely not. I see the bounty, kill-rights and wardec systems as being broken, to one degree or another.

Bounties, ineffective. A bounty of any significant size will be claimed by the target's alt or friends. A bounty that is too low will not garner any interest vs the risk posed. I don't know if bounty proportional to the value of the target will do the trick.

Kill-rights, futile. I'd bet vast majority of pilots with kill rights are incapable of exercising them themselves due to their specialization and skills not lending to 1vs1 PvP. I know mine do. Being able to re-assign kill rights and hire mercs to do the job might do the trick.

War-decs, outright griefing. In theory, they work. In practice, they are dirt cheap to (ab)use, and very expensive to fight. We'll never know how many players left the game entirely due to having their corps griefed by bored multi-year vets, unable to leave the station and play the game.

I'm not a game designer, and no one pays me the big bucks to solve these issues. I just play the game. So the more attention is given to these areas, the higher the chance something will be done to improve them. It sounds like Hans is the man.

OH ****!! I KNEW I forgot to put fuel in it last night! .......Ok this will be a short post while I get online and assess the damage....





Push, no. Accept if already complete? Yes, but only if they cost less than real top hats.

What this next CSM needs is members from all areas of gameplay. With the amount of effort you have put in leading up to here I believe you would make an excellent candidate.

I just hope the High-Sec votes are not too watered down and spread out.. but from this high-sec player who tends to get lost in wormholes, you just got a couple more.

Good Luck

I feel that you match up with what I want.

Particularly a spot talking about bounty hunting, which is a terribly underused and broken feature, as well as faction warfare, which is something I would love to have updated.

You have my vote Hans. and good luck.

+1 You have my vote.

The PDF must be down atm - I can not open it so sorry if my next question is already covered somewhere.

What is your position on low sec gates and stations shooting their own militias?

War decs will always be more or less "griefing", because the aggressor is the one who gets to chose whether or not there will be PvP. Logically, they will only declare wars they think they can win or at least profit from (barring edge-case stuff like RP reasons). So the corp being war-dec'd will usually be at a disadvantage vs a stronger opponent (which is what gets called "griefing" these days, although you might as well say that cats "grief" mice because they pick on easy prey instead of something that would put up a fight, like a goat or something).

One possible addition that might prove useful to the wardec mechanism would be 'defensive treaties'. Industrial corp A makes a defensive treaty with Mercenary corp B in return for a regular weekly payment. So long as A maintain the payments, then any Wardec corp C which wardecs A will then also be automatically at war with B as well. But if A declares war on corp D, then B are not involved (of course they can still declare war in the normal way if A pay them).

Defensive treaties could be optionally private, meaning that declaring war would have some hidden risks, or public in which case they could act as either a deterrent or even an incentive, depending on the confidence of the wardeccers. Meanwhile, merc corps would be able to arrange a steady income for ongoing defensive contracts, placing a premium on reputation: a powerful merc corp should be able to sustain quite a few contracts, giving them a nice income for doing nothing.

What's your view on ECM, and the mechanics behind it?
Would you suggest changes, and if so, how would you change ECM to bring it more in line with other forms of E-WAR?

lol, I'd be happy if ECM was nuked from orbit, after being smashed repeatedly with the nerfbat.
I'm just wondering what Hans' view is.