Schani Kratnorr
x13
IT Alliance
   |
Posted - 2010.09.13 14:20:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Niraia
The article over at massively mentions various rewards for participants. That's great for PvE types.
I wonder, does CCP have anything planned for the very attractive group of Sansha affiliated roleplayers who already greatly struggle to participate in current events due to security status issues inherited by their dedication in others?
The article looks like it was based on booth-interviews. I suspect the list of features is far from complete.
The only PvP content needed in the next patch, is a fix that will allow larger fights again, (without the randomly appearing performance issues.) Unless improved, we will never know for sure, if the changes made to sovereignty warfare are adequate.
You can stop reading here, the rest is rabble
Right now, the problem is twofold. When moving more than one hundred ships at a time for example, the delay on jumping causes a ten minute trip to become a forty minute trip. This tends to force the sort of regroup/CTA/blob behaviour where the focus is on getting your forces into the target system. After all, everything revolves around getting the upper hand. Not by engaging, but by outnumbering your opponent until he is forced to hand over victory. Everyone does this, even on a small scale, outnumbering your opponent has always been the way of things.
In 0.0 sovereignty-warfare, all this often happens without a shot being fired. Unless you count stations, ihubs, sbus, tcus and to some extent, towers.
Crying? No, I simply feel slightly disappointed at the lost potential
The reason I mention this, is because everyone who deals with large fights have met the Lagmonster. The problem is that CCP as a whole appears to have no idea what is wrong (apart from their code being old.) There are specific defects that prevent almost all aspects of their game design from achieving their goals. EVE lacks a smooth and consistent game play experience for 0.0 sovereignty warfare. It is an entirely different game than their designers use, when they argue their design choices and changes.
This is the real problem. Two plus two ceases to be four. Someone says "uhh an IHUB needs to have this many hit points." But while doing so, he fails to realize, that erratic performance routinely creates two scenarios very different from one another.
In one "normal" scenario, modules are behaving normally. Both attacker and defender can use modules to damage or repair the target in question. In the other scenario, the modules are not performing as they should. They "lag" if you will. This in turn reduces the functionality of modules, manoeuvring and targeting to mention a few.
My point is this. CCP are faced with a seemingly random state. Their system can effectively be in two different modes. In one, they can argue their changes, additions and nerfs, but in the other everything seems to go pear-shaped and even Melted snow balls appear a viable choice of ammo.
The consequence is that the game has, (arguably,) reached a dead end. CCP have hired a lot of content producing people. These are now stuck pouring theoretically sound material in to a game world that breaks things.
|