|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 15:33:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Siobhan on 06/10/2009 15:34:24
This is a HARDIN post...
(Posting this as Siobhan as I am not actively playing EVE at the moment with Hardin and Siobhan's sub hasn't run out yet)
Before going into too much detail I would like to point out that opinions on 'Dominion' within the CVA are about as diverse as they are on these forums. Why? Because we simply don't know enough about the changes to be sure of anything.
However it is true that some in CVA see these changes as gamebreaking. Why? Because these very same people have spent gigantic amounts of time and ISK in developing Providence based upon a particular set of rules and assumptions and suddenly those rules have been torn up and they are back at square one. It would be like playing a football game, getting 3-0 up and then at halftime the referee announcing that the team with most goals actually loses now. Who wouldn't be upset with that - other than those who were losing of course
Aralis and Sir Prime are two of the biggest industrialists within the CVA - indeed probably within EVE - primarily because they have put huge amounts of time and effort into it. Yet now they see the rules upon which they have based all their work and investment torn up and thrown out by CCP. Of course they are going to be annoyed - especially when in their opinion many of the proposed changes will be counter productive to the development of 0.0 when they are finally implemented.
I don't necessarily agree with them, nor do many others within the CVA, yet the fact remains that these two individuals are more deeply ingrained in 0.0 industry and production than 99.9% of the EVE playerbase (I have seen their spreadsheets ) and as such their opinions should be respected even if you/we don't necessarily agree with the conclusions they are drawing.
My main concern is this. As it stands, based upon the information that CCP has released so far, NRDS as it currently exists in Providence will be unworkable. Yes, treaties will be coming in at a later stage but this means that the space holding NRDS alliances will have to spend time negotiating them with each and every single visitor. Not only that but our 'Holders' will have to do the same. As it stands someone with neutral status can fly to Providence now and make use of its stations, its ores, its markets and its belts as much as they wish - without having to ask permission or agree treaties with CVA or the various Holders. The proposed changes remove that freedom and are completely counter to the SPIRIT of what we have tried to build in Amarrian Providence.
For those of you who don't know Providence is probably the most populated, vibrant and successful piece of 0.0 real estate in the game - despite the fact that it has the ****tiest rats and ores. Why is this so? Well primarily it is because of the fact that CVA and our allies have provided no obligation/no questions asked use of our space to anyone who obeyed a few basic rules.
We have used our invulnerable Capital Ship Assembly Arrays, our markets and the associated manufacturing to subsidise a free and open Providence (as we sure as **** weren't gonna fund it out of ratting/mining). Well we no longer have those invulnerable arrays and manufacturing facilities and as such what is the motivation for us to continue providing security for everyone else - other than our roleplay history? Yes we now have new and exciting streams of income - in terms of upgraded systems - but the only way we can benefit is if we exclude others - which goes completely against our philosophy and the reasons why Providence currently 'works'.
To be continued...
-------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 15:39:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Siobhan on 06/10/2009 15:45:44
Personally I don't think it is as black and white as that. The Providence/Deliverance project was developed DESPITE the system which has ALWAYS disciminated against NRDS as a system. If we had wanted to go the easy route then we would have adopted NBSI from the word go.
Yes Dominion *MAY* make life more difficult for us - but that is the nature of change. You either adapt or die. As an alliance we have certain core values - our roleplay allegiance to the Amarrian Empire, our desire to create an adjunct of that Empire in 0.0 following Empire rules (NRDS) and our belief in 'truth, justice and the Amarrian way!'
Those values do not have to change - however the way we operate on a daily basis, the way we interact with our neighbours, the way we make our ISK will have to - that is the new challenge for CVA and one I am sure it is more than capabale of meeting.
Part 2:
Personally my main concern about these changes rests on the fact that CCP seems to be shrinking our sandbox. From my perspective NRDS is one of those things which has added diversity and interest to EVE yet the proposed changes will make it even more difficult than now for an alliance to implement any other system than NBSI.
While CCP like to bang on about the 'sandbox' and the ability to create the systems and Empire's that we want to, it is quite clear that their 'worldview' is only focused on the generation of combat/conflict which will create 'epic' stories of conflict that appeals to the masses and generates subscribers for them.
Who after all wants to hear about the creation of a caring/sharing civilisation managed by a group of benevolent protectors? Of course some people do but it seems to me that CCP is ignoring this demographic. It is one of the reasons why they have never implemented a proper 'bounty' system for allowing 'law-abiding' corporations to 'police' low-sec.
Forgive me for being a bit geeky/RPish but in most other MMO's you get an option on how you want to play. These are often called alignments and are arranged on a grid with Lawful Good on one corner and Chaotic Evil on the other.
Lawful Good - Neutral Good - Chaotic Good Lawful Neutral - Neutral - Chaotic Neutral Lawful Evil - Neutral Evil - Chaotic Evil
It seems to me that CCP are deliberately creating systems in this game which actively force players to choose evil/chaotic alignments (such as NBSI) - because they have no other choice if they want to succeed and prosper.
That is all good for CCP/EVE's PR as the 'darkest' game in the universe where everyone is a badass cutthroat scammer only in it for themselves, but it is undermining the original marketing of EVE as an open sandbox where players make the decisions and play as they want. If we want to be goody two shoes and be griefed because of it then so be it - We shouldn't be forced to roleplay/play? as paranoid schizophrenic uber violent capitalist psychopaths by the 'system'.
Yes we can still make decisions about how we play this game but they are all framed by the structure that CCP has created. No game can ever be a true sandbox but it seems that CCP are shrinking the sandbox rather than extending it. From my perspective hey are removing real choice rather than enhancing it.
It seems CCP think that the PR generated by 'bad stuff' (i.e. Guiding Hand Social Club robberies/bank frauds/backstabbings etc.) is more important to the future development of EVE than stories about how x or y alliance created a new form of civilisation/government - after all who really remembers ISS? Indeed from a purely commercial standpoint CCP may well be right!
CCP wants everyone to be space dictators with no 'civilisation' beyond that of warlord and seem to have crafted Dominion specifically to ensure that this is the outcome - I am sure many EVE players will be happy with that.
To be continued... -------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 15:46:00 -
[3]
Of course CCP would argue that this is not the case - that they have provided us with new tools which allow us to 'develop' our space - but they seem to equate the 'physical' development of infrastructure with 'civilisation', whilst completely ignoring the societal/political/governmental aspect of the sandbox completely.
Yes, we can all become space Emperors in EVE - but unless we do it by fitting in with CCP's view of the universe then it is almost an impossible task... And in my view is that EVE will be a much poorer universe when the only people playing it are 'roleplaying' as paranoid schizophrenic uber violent capitalist psychopaths
But then again I aint a Dev, I am not descended from a Viking and I vote Liberal Democrat! -------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 16:36:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Siobhan on 06/10/2009 16:36:32
Originally by: Gehnster I'm not sure I understand why you guys will have a harder time to maintain your NRDS system in Providence. If someone would link to me the reasons why that will be harder to do I would appreciate it, I'm very interested in this new expansion.
Another thing I don't get is why the industrialist in your alliance are complaining about "all that hard work for nothing". What are they talked about? Is there a goal out there still that you haven't achieved? Have they NOT been making billions upon billions of isk already in the current system? So what they are saying is because the system is changing, all of that money, items made, etc was a waste? How so?
It will become harder to manage NRDS because if you want to properly manage your space you will have to establish a treaty with every single visiting entity - if you are doing this you may as well be operating NBSI.
Of course you could choose to not implement treaties and let people continue to use our space - as such CVA will have given up its current income streams from manufacturing but will be unable to replace those income streams with enhanced ratting/mining/complexes because NRDS means that neutrals will be benefiting and not our pilots. As such what reason would we have for protecting the space as we do now?
Regarding your second point have you ever played a game such as Hearts of Iron/Civilisation. You put in huge amounts of effort building up and protecting your country/Empire. Then the game crashes. Then you discover that you had forgotten to save it. You are now faced with the prospect of having to rebuild everything you had already built all over again. You wouldn't turn it off, swear profusely and go do something else? Now multiply that frustration by 5 years! Hell when I type a huge forum post and some bug prevents it from posting and I lose the whole thing I tend to say 'sod it'.
The people who have been successful in EVE to date have in general done so because they have been willing to work harder and better than their opponents. People like Aralis and Sir Prime may have built vast fortunes but they have also spent vast fortunes. Now they see CCP's changes threatening everything they have built. Yes here is your sandbox, 'oh those are nice sandcastles you built' now we are going to stomp on them because the kids on the other side of the sandbox who had the same opportunity to build sandcastles are ****ed off because they can't build better sandcastles themselves and wont be able to smash yours without our help.
Regarding your third point everyone was playing by the same rules. Sovereignty was never a static thing and that can be seen simply by looking at the galactic map. Why should the rules changes halfway through the game? Okay we need to get more people to 0.0 - good reason - POS warfare is boring - good reason - however for many experienced 0.0 dwellers the feeling comes across that CCP don't really know how this will turn out in practices and that it's all just a big experiment at the players expense.
I think you are quite right in suggesting that we have to adapt or die. I completely agree. The point is that the consequence of that adaption means that Providence in most likelehood will be a lot different to what it is now - and considering that a large proportion of EVE's most keen PvPers think that Providence is the dogs *******s when it comes to having pew-pew fun in EVE that will be a bit of a shame...
Indeed a CCP representative said somewhere that they hoped that the changes in Dominion would make all 0.0 more Providence like - I am just flagging up that in the process of making these changes they may very well be killing their 'model'. Of course until everything is published we wont know - but I am trying to put the reaction of some CVAers into some kind of context... -------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 17:35:00 -
[5]
Ranger
The CVA currently makes minimal ISK from mining/ratting/complexes. Why - because the neutrals we allow in our space use it for us.
As such what will be the incentive for us to upgrade our space under the proposed system? Indeed upgrading our space under an NRDS system will simply attract more neutrals.
Sure we may make some extra ISK on docking fees/refines/clones etc. but that will be mininal and certainly does not make up for lost manufacturing opportunities.
And then there will be treaties. These are not even going to be in the game to start with but assuming that they will allow you to lease certain systems to 'partner/pet' alliances in return for a cut of their take.
How do you think these partners/renters will feel if we then allow neutrals to use the same systems that they are? All of this appears to make NRDS unworkable.
Even if the treaty system is flexible it still means that we have to negotiate/reach agreement with everyone who wants to use our space - as such we may as well be running NBSI. The beauty of Provi NRDS as it stands is that people can just use it... The proposed system will make it economically and logistically unworkable (not that the present system is particularly NRDS friendly anyway).
Yes we can probably try some halfway house, maybe ban neutrals from specific systems but that in itself goes against our entire philosophy of making Providence simply a 0.0 extension of the Amarr Empire and basically means that we are adapting the way we play simply because the sandbox has shrunk...
I also touched upon manufacturing. Yes you can play 'hide the shell' games with CSAA's but the fact is that prior to Sov 4 coming in one of the most popular 'griefing' tactics of the uber blob alliances was CSAA destruction. It will probably happen again. -A-/Razor wanting a fight with CVA over a weekend - okay let's go hit a CSAA system.
As it stands there is too much uncertainty and if there is one thing that super-cap manufacturers don't want is risk. Maybe this will change as time progresses but the fact is that if CVA (which is one of the large independent suppliers of super-caps in the game) is having doubts about 0.0 cap/super-cap construction post Dominion then many others will be too.
The fact is that CVA and friends can pull together a pretty large force but it doesn't match anything the Northern block/Goons/-A- can put together. If we as an established alliance are having doubts about Super-Cap production in 0.0 going forward then it is probable that super-cap production will be limited to uber-blocks who can protect themselves which will infact lead to even more napfesting and mutual protection agreements than currently exist.
As I said above CVA will have to adapt - but in the process Providence could change from the region we know and love today into another just another generic 0.0 region... -------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 17:47:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Siobhan on 06/10/2009 17:47:42
Originally by: Gehnster Yeah I'm still not understanding why you would suddenly need treaties for neuts in your system. What would happen if you didn't make a treaty with them? Perhaps I missed the information given to us that would explain that NRDS won't work in its current model with the new sov system.
I have explained it in the post above but I will repeat it. The CVA does not make ISK (of any significant quantity) from ratting/mining/complexing. The reason we have been able to protect NRDS/neutrals and build so many Outposts/POSes is income from manufacturing.
Under the new system ratting/mining/complexing are supposed to be the income stream that can be upgraded - helping pay for Sov claims/defenses etc. However under an NRDS system it will not be CVA benefitting from such upgrades. - it will be all the neutrals living in our space enjoying our hospitality.
With the removal of Sov 4 the whole process of manufacturing in 0.0 becomes decidely more risky. As such one of the primary sources of income used to fund 'NRDS' will have been removed.
Yes we can continue to operate NRDS - but only at the expense of potentially bankrupting ourselves or finding some compromise system. As such Providence - which has been held up as a shining example of a prosperous/populated 0.0 region could potentially end up as depopulated as the rest of it - subject to the fine detail being provided. -------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 19:12:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Furb Killer
Honestly, i agree here with ranger, i havent seen any argument yet why we would be worse of in providence compared to other 0.0 entities.
What other 0.0 entities operate NRDS? -------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.07 13:35:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Jason Edwards
How? Nothing it seems to have been said you require to be blue.
Please read my previous replies - all of them. I have explained several times already why NRDS will be problematic under the proposed system and will potentially put us at a severe disadvantage as opposed to regular 'NBSI' 0.0 alliances.
I am not saying that it will be impossible - I am saying that it will be difficult (even more difficult than it is now). Hell we are the only people in 0.0 who open our space up to everyone as it stands - so we do have the most experience in game of understanding how it works and the logistics involved in the management of such a system.
As I have said previously CVA will adapt to these changes and try and maintain our core 'values' including NRDS. However Providence will in all likelehood be managed very differently than it is now.
As such there is a substantial risk that those qualities of Providence that many EVE players (and Devs apparently) admired, high population, lots of targets, extremely well utilised space (the only 0.0 region to have achieved such) will be seriously damaged.
Will anyone care? Probably very few beyond CVA and Providence Holders and those who enjoy roaming the region for pew pew.
I and the other CVA posters who are flagging this up are not doing so in attempt to preserve the Sov system as it stands (hell we don't like fueling towers anymore than the next man) - but we do want to ensure that CCP is aware of our concerns that the system as proposed (as much as we know of it to date) discriminates against NRDS systems even more than the current system does - and as such will not increase diversity in EVE 0.0 but could seriously damage it.
There are currently a huge number of drawbacks and issues in managing NRDS systems (most of which come down to a lack of ingame tools or assistance from CCP)- which is why we (and our allies) are the only ones who have pursued it consistently - primarily for roleplay reasons.
Yet NRDS has created the one 0.0 region in EVE which is properly occupied and utilised (which is the apparent overarching goal of Dominion). You would have thought that in proposing changes the Devs would have implemented changes that made it easier to manage/run NRDS (or alternative) systems - yet from the viewpoint of many the proposed changes make it even harder to operate NRDS than it already is. The changes seem to have been created by people who's only experience in game is NBSI - and as such they are automatically biaised towards that system.
Now you could argue that as 95% of EVE is NBSI that is the right thing to do and you may be right - however ask yourself why 95% of EVE is NBSI and why NRDS is so derided/avoided? Could it be because there is a structural inbalance in the way the game operates which makes NRDS so unattractive?
I also get the feeling that some of the ideas behind this change are based on the idea that infrastructure = population. After all you could argue that Provi is so busy because we have built all those shiney stations - yet this would be the wrong 'assumption' to make. It is the system we created which attracted the population which in turn created the income to allow the development of the infrastructure. CCP may be putting the cart in front of the horse in Dominion.
You can classify this as 'whining' if you wish but from my perspective it is the considered viewpoint of highly experienced players who have more firsthand experience in managing a non NBSI 0.0 society than anyone else in the game.
Now there is a rider to this and that is we have yet to see the full detail of the proposals - it is quite possible that the finished article will address some of these concerns - however it would be stupid of us not to voice them in order that they are at least taken into consideration. -------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
Siobhan
Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.09 08:57:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker Do CVA actually play EVE or do they just whine on the forums? I remember when factional warfare came out, the whole forum was overrun with CVA roleplayers arguing that it was unfair, unjust, and unwise of CCP to develop a factional warfare system without designing it specifically to suit CVA's particular needs.
We did not overrun any forum nor did we ask CCP to design it to our needs. We made a number of arguments about how Factional Warfare could have been enhanced - indeed most of our 'concerns' have since proved to be true.
Originally by: Joe Starbreaker I'm starting to think this is just how CVA sees the world. "CVA's been here a long time and it's not right that CCP change things without taking CVA's needs into consideration! CVA is displeased!"
Did you actually read the CVA posts or just decide to have a pop?
Originally by: Siobhan
Before going into too much detail I would like to point out that opinions on 'Dominion' within the CVA are about as diverse as they are on these forums. Why? Because we simply don't know enough about the changes to be sure of anything.
Quote: However it is true that some in CVA see these changes as gamebreaking. I don't necessarily agree with them, nor do many others within the CVA, yet the fact remains that these two individuals are more deeply ingrained in 0.0 industry and production than 99.9% of the EVE playerbase (I have seen their spreadsheets Wink) and as such their opinions should be respected even if you/we don't necessarily agree with the conclusions they are drawing.
Originally by: Siobhan Yes Dominion *MAY* make life more difficult for us - but that is the nature of change. You either adapt or die. As an alliance we have certain core values - our roleplay allegiance to the Amarrian Empire, our desire to create an adjunct of that Empire in 0.0 following Empire rules (NRDS) and our belief in 'truth, justice and the Amarrian way!'
Those values do not have to change - however the way we operate on a daily basis, the way we interact with our neighbours, the way we make our ISK will have to - that is the new challenge for CVA and one I am sure it is more than capabale of meeting.
Originally by: Siobhan Indeed a CCP representative said somewhere that they hoped that the changes in Dominion would make all 0.0 more Providence like - I am just flagging up that in the process of making these changes they may very well be killing their 'model'. Of course until everything is published we wont know - but I am trying to put the reaction of some CVAers into some kind of context...
Originally by: Siobhan As such Providence - which has been held up as a shining example of a prosperous/populated 0.0 region could potentially end up as depopulated as the rest of it - subject to the fine detail being provided.
Originally by: Siobhan As I have said previously CVA will adapt to these changes and try and maintain our core 'values' including NRDS.
Originally by: Siobhan I and the other CVA posters who are flagging this up are not doing so in attempt to preserve the Sov system as it stands (hell we don't like fueling towers anymore than the next man) - but we do want to ensure that CCP is aware of our concerns that the system as proposed (as much as we know of it to date) discriminates against NRDS systems.
Originally by: Siobhan You can classify this as 'whining' if you wish but from my perspective it is the considered viewpoint of highly experienced players who have more firsthand experience in managing a non NBSI 0.0 society than anyone else in the game.
Originally by: Siobhan ...we have yet to see the full detail of the proposals - it is quite possible that the finished article will address some of these concerns - however it would be stupid of us not to voice them in order that they are at least taken into consideration
Are we being so unreasonable or is CVA not allowed to have an opinion? -------------- Avenging Angel -------------- |
|
|
|