Schani Kratnorr
Internal Revenue Service
   |
Posted - 2011.03.26 15:53:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: "CCP Greyscale"
While it's been successful in making more space more useful, it's also become a damper on conflict in nullsec.
This is wrong and any changes you make based on it will be wrong too.
Upgrades and anomalies specifically have nothing to do with stopping conflict in 0.0 space. In fact, having 'room' for more than two people in each system is making 0.0 potentially useful. By prematurely nerfing that because of the 'titan ratting'-isk-faucet-problem will just elevate something else to the forefront of the "most isk/hour"-que.
The real cause of the lack of conflict in 0.0 (asuming there even is one,) is the fact that the game cannot handle a hundred people jumping into another hundred. The sov. Capture-the-flag type sov. warfare system is partially responsible because it forces the opposing sides into blob warfare by default. "Just get online, get in target system and wait guys!..."
This kind of gameplay is booring and results in limited participation thus creating a set of "vicory conditions" for the side that cares the most.
What we are seeing now is the emergence of a new middle class of multibillionaires who rake in tons of isk from bounties and often leave the loot to rot. These bllionaires are the cannonfodder in a super-capital arms race. The feb-march O2O system wars are the beginning of the kind of gameplay we kan expect to dominate 0.0 sov warfare.
By effectively talking about nerfing the way upgrades effect isk/hour you are scewing the playing field further and not adressing the main problem - raw bounty payout.
I seem to recall a while back when the bounty-to-loot ratio in missions was changed. the argument then was that it should require effort to "get your reward." The same approach is needed now more than ever. Just have a look at the source of most of the isk coming in to the system and realize how the players gravitate towards the place where they don't have to pick up scraps to get paid. Bounties go into wallet, and from there back into fun & games. If you change that, you change how people use and abuse sov. upgrades.
That is just part of it though. Until you effectively re-design sov warfare the major players cannot effectively fight each other. In the long run, the erratic performance simply wont allow anything remotely interesting to take place. Some times both sides load (mostly,) and get a proper fight where tactics and individual skill mean something, but more often than not, you are stuck with the "three modes of EVE."
Working // modules cycle as normal w. 0-10 sec. perceived delay.
Rubber band // player experience changes dynamically from 'normal' to 'stuck' and back. Veteran blob warfare logistics pilots will have a good idea what I mean. You have to anticipate and stay one step ahead of the 'zerg-like' targeting by the opponent. The very action of coordinating your actions causes nodes to overload. So each "change of primary" is usually accompanied by an increase in the number of outstanding packets. This then results in "poor client performance," which in turn is what puts a "damper on conflict in nullsec."
Soul-negating-lag // node cannot keep up, number of outstanding packets climb, player behaviour starts to compound the problem.
So before you abuse you powers and use ****ty server code, isk faucets and uninspired sov.warfare design as a reson to nerf one of the many isk faucets, please consider the facts.
Facts
- Excluding cynoships, there are now only eight ships worth piloting when it comes to sov.warfare
- The apocalyptic do-or-die nature of sov. results in lemming-behaviour, which in turn funnels players into single systems. Their numbers inevitably exceed the limits of any system you can design (and pay for at any given time.)
- ISK-direct-into-wallet bounty payouts still dominate the "top ISK/hour guides."
/TLDR: nerfing anomaly upgrades wont fix 0.0 warfare
|