Sound familiar?

"Will make things harder for people, and reduce power projection." - CCP

From the recent WH dev-blog

"Now with the benefits of hindsight this prediction appears amusingly naive. Ingenious players have quite easily overcome any and all challenges and created an entire society within this uniquely hostile environment." - CCP

Sound familiar?

Sound familiar?

The change was for ice products benefit not to nerf power projection.

I would like things to be reverted. but honestly I wonder if its not time to let carriers and dreads use gates but give them like 1au sec warp

I don't think the justification for the change (stimulating the ice market) holds particularly well, given what PotatoOverdose said and given the fact that while research poses are no longer necessary (iirc that being what prompted the change), there are now more reasons to have a POS in highsec than before, as well as more places to put one. It seems to me that the ice market would have done just fine without the change. And as a nerf to power projection, well... we can see that hardly had any effect on groups like us.

except the primary aim of increasing jump fuel requirements was to increase the market for ice products.

I don't think the justification for the change (stimulating the ice market) holds particularly well, given what PotatoOverdose said and given the fact that while research poses are no longer necessary (iirc that being what prompted the change), there are now more reasons to have a POS in highsec than before, as well as more places to put one. It seems to me that the ice market would have done just fine without the change. And as a nerf to power projection, well... we can see that hardly had any effect on groups like us.

INB4 thread goes all Dinsdalian and Tinfoil prices skyrocket.

Ah, I was confused when the devs stated otherwise at fanfest an on the forums.

That was just to try and keep some people happy about the change. Anyone who knows their stuff will know that you cant nerf power projection.

There are many ways to reduce drastically the ridiculous level of power projection that exists in the game today, and reopen null sec to many more player groups.

But none will be implemented because they will hurt the cartels.

There are many ways to reduce drastically the ridiculous level of power projection that exists in the game today, and reopen null sec to many more player groups.

But none will be implemented because they will hurt the cartels.

There are many ways to reduce drastically the ridiculous level of power projection that exists in the game today, and reopen null sec to many more player groups.

But none will be implemented because they will hurt the cartels.

Oh, you are still here. And I had wondered if you gotten banned after CCP Falcon slapped you down last time.

Oh, you are still here. And I had wondered if you gotten banned after CCP Falcon slapped you down last time.

But you have no control against the rising tide (or more accurately, the receding tide) of people dropping subs.

and then we will see the changes necessary to try to turn around the Titanic that Eve has become. The only question is will they step in quickly enough to save the game and CCP.

Bottom line, you and the other propagandists can insult me all you like, or derail a thread, or batphone a friendly ISD / community manager to stifle the dissent on the forums against the direction of Eve and CCP..

How do you stop us dumping the fabled 1000 Megathron fleet on your head?

Considering how much you're managing to bore your avg member, you'll be happy getting just 100 soon.

How do you stop us dumping the fabled 1000 Megathron fleet on your head?

Citation needed. And not some dumbass concurrency stats that you cherrypicked, either.




Oh, please elaborate. I would be very interested to hear what you think are the "changes necessary" to save the game.

3. Introduce a mechanism that the more ships / mass that are jumped into a system there is a sliding scale that increases the risk of ships not jumping, jumping into the wrong system, or being destroyed in transit.

You know what?

Not really interested in answering your troll crap.
I just listened to some Marvin Gaye, answered an oh so easy question from a goon, and am just not bothered to respond to you.
If you can't read an income statement, not much any of us can do for you.

5. Every time a Titan bridges, it will automatically jump with the fleet.

That would create many hilarious situations because usually many f1 monkeys miss the bridge and have to wait for another one.
Not going to happen tho, and to be honest that would be unfair for the Titan owner.

That would create many hilarious situations because usually many f1 monkeys miss the bridge and have to wait for another one.
Not going to happen tho, and to be honest that would be unfair for the Titan owner.

Look, arguing with Dinsdale is like arguing with a brick wall, difference being that wall gives you better answers.

Gee, I dunno...let me think for second how I could stop 1000 Mega's traversing the galaxy in a couple minutes.

How about a few things, for starters:

1. Bye bye POS based jump bridges.
2. Triple the distance between star systems.
3. Introduce a mechanism that the more ships / mass that are jumped into a system there is a sliding scale that increases the risk of ships not jumping, jumping into the wrong system, or being destroyed in transit.
4. Introduce a limitation on how many ships a Titan can jump.
5. Every time a Titan bridges, it will automatically jump with the fleet.
6. To fire up a bridge with a Titan at one end requires a Titan at the other end of the bridge.

But like I said, not a chance any of these changes to the game mechanisms will occur. Not a chance the cartels will let them pass.

Hey Dinsdale, lets make a lopsided trade because you were right all along.

We, the denizens of null sec, will trade you, the good people of honorable high sec, all of our bots, our moons, our RMTing BMW buying websites, our jump bridges, jump capable ships and isk making activities. As bonuses we will not only hand over the vicious dictator known as "The Mittani" for trial at the Interstellar Court of Human Rights in Jita, but we will make all of the null sec controlled CCP DEVs quit and go work for Riot Games (oh wait, they already did that last part, never mind).

You just have to give us one small thing in return. One tiny, inconsequential thing you won't even miss.

High Sec gives up CONCORD. That simple and we'll call it Even Steven.

Fair trade, no?

What would you like me to say?
PCU is way down.
CCP 1st half 2014 gross income was down 200K u.s., and that was post dual training, pre-Crius.

Citation needed. And not some dumbass concurrency stats that you cherrypicked, either.

How about a few things, for starters:

1. Bye bye POS based jump bridges.
2. Triple the distance between star systems.
3. Introduce a mechanism that the more ships / mass that are jumped into a system there is a sliding scale that increases the risk of ships not jumping, jumping into the wrong system, or being destroyed in transit.
4. Introduce a limitation on how many ships a Titan can jump.
5. Every time a Titan bridges, it will automatically jump with the fleet.
6. To fire up a bridge with a Titan at one end requires a Titan at the other end of the bridge.

But like I said, not a chance any of these changes to the game mechanisms will occur. Not a chance the cartels will let them pass.

Yeah Im not seeing the massive nosedive that Dins makes it sound like.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

"Will make things harder for people, and reduce power projection." - CCP

From the recent WH dev-blog

"Now with the benefits of hindsight this prediction appears amusingly naive. Ingenious players have quite easily overcome any and all challenges and created an entire society within this uniquely hostile environment." - CCP

Sound familiar?

Malcanis' Law comes to mind....

Or they could get rid of the foolish, combat breaking cap drain for using your own damn Jump Drive.

What happened near the end of 2011 since the overall graph put us around that level?

Incarna happened in June. Crucible was in November, but many people had already left due to the fiasco.

what happened with Incarna that so many people left?

what happened with Incarna that so many people left?

It was a combination of development focus having strayed away from the core of the game (spaceships), a very limited implementation of WiS (only one of the CQs was implemented, Amarr IIRC) considering the amount of time it took to release the expansion, ridiculously overpriced vanity items, and a leaked internal memo advocating the expansion of microtransactions into "pay to win" territory.

what happened with Incarna that so many people left?

what happened with Incarna that so many people left?

Gee, I dunno...let me think for second how I could stop 1000 Mega's traversing the galaxy in a couple minutes.

How about a few things, for starters:

1. Bye bye POS based jump bridges. You do realize this was how thigns were for a long time, and you still had massive blobs ala BoB, ASCN, RZR, etc. So removing jump bridges just means they blob comes at you slower. You are still gonna die. That's why the term 'steam rolled' was coined. GBC used to slow boat through systems and steam roll anyone in there path.

2. Triple the distance between star systems. Won't change much... just take more fuel and time to cycle cynos.
3. Introduce a mechanism that the more ships / mass that are jumped into a system there is a sliding scale that increases the risk of ships not jumping, jumping into the wrong system, or being destroyed in transit. Uh.. what? Do you even think these things all the way through? So if the hard cap on a system is 1k people, all I have to do is plug my system with 1k, then as you jump in to attack you lose a huge portion of your fleet. Not to mention with the other changes, you will have to prep your system for attack, thus I will know what system you are heading too and be ready. Really now, even as a FAILED alliance leader I can tell you this idea is crap

4. Introduce a limitation on how many ships a Titan can jump. Not too bad, but in the case of the CFC and PL they will just have several titans act as bridges so nothing changes
[/b
5. Every time a Titan bridges, it will automatically jump with the fleet. *shrugs* so i'll bridge you next door a few min before the fighting starts, then jump back. Will be easy to have logistics lock and recharge my cap. So nothing changes.
6. To fire up a bridge with a Titan at one end requires a Titan at the other end of the bridge. [b]Uh why? All I am going to do is drop my syspers and carries, toss them in triage with some carrier support, drop my ttian, open the bridge, bring in my fleet and then jump out. I'll have enough fleet to defend, not to mention the enemy will be coming after I locked the system cap down so they will lose a lot of there fleet.

But like I said, not a chance any of these changes to the game mechanisms will occur. Not a chance the cartels will let them pass.

Sadly, no matter how badly you nerf power projection short removing ability to leave any system ever, having more friends will always mean you have an advantage.

So what it really comes down to is convincing those guys that your side is the best. "Come join [insert group here] we have kittens!"

That's how the real world tends to work. Even within the groups themselves (I'm looking at you, Un-named political system).

Don't be too eager to get out the pitchforks for "N+1" as a force multiplier.

Since this isn't a flight sim and thus skill has no real bearing on the game, your major force multipliers that come outside of fleet comp are numbers and pricetag.

And pricetag is immeasurably worse for the health of the game than numbers. This is because pricetag shuts out new players from participating. New players, by virtue of the game's skill system, cannot overmatch a veteran player save in one way. And that way is numbers.

Furthermore, if pricetag becomes the game's primary force multiplier, it essentially becomes an arms race for the most effective and expensive ship. And as we learned from Titan proliferation, eventually that stops being a barrier. And then of course you have "N+1" gameplay anyway, just with an enormous isk wall in front of it.

So like I said, don't be too eager to ladle on the hate for "N+1". It's a multiplayer RPG, the reality of it is that numbers do play a large part, and they should.

Likewise, bling ships are by no means the be all and end-all of fac war compositions, quite the opposite in fact. This would seem to suggest that what you say is not quite correct.

The Caldari have the advantage in number of raw pilots in the militia, not in actual living pilots being fielded.

Caldari has more people enlisted because their LP is the most valuable of all of them, since Caldari Navy ammo is used for two weapon systems. Which means they have more bot farming accounts.



You miss the point, it seems.

I am not saying that pricetag is the major force multiplier right now. What I am saying is that everyone who cries "nerf having friends!" fails to realize is that if they get their way, pricetag will become the major force multiplier afterward, and they still won't get what they want. And it will hurt the game besides.

I'm disagreeing with your point that in the absence of N+1, raw isk will be the deciding factor because in fac war, neither of those things are occurring. It is an existing system, live in eve, where neither N+1 or "pricetag" is the dominant strategy. I am using it as a counterexample to your assertion that the only way other than victory by N+1 is victory by pricetag.

Don't act like faction warfare is perfect either.

Sadly, no matter how badly you nerf power projection short removing ability to leave any system ever, having more friends will always mean you have an advantage.

So what it really comes down to is convincing those guys that your side is the best. "Come join [insert group here] we have kittens!"

The following statement is true.
The previous statement is false.

Well, before I address anything else, you're crazy if you think people aren't clamoring to fix faction warfare. They do this every day, loud enough that they devoted a balance pass to buttons recently, making cloaking devices useless and accidentally dramatically improving the quality of life for every defensive plexing bot farmer in the game.

It's broken, every bit as much as sov. They just aren't as loud about it, nor is the problem as visible or as long standing.

Unless you're willing to put in arbitrary ship size class exceptions into whatever Macguffin you plan on using for sov fights, you will not get what you are aiming for from faction warfare transplanted into sov.

Because the ship restrictions? Those are the major driving force behind faction warfare being dynamic in any way.

If the cause (N+1) is true in any new sov system, so too will the effect come to pass. Sooner or later, it is inevitable.

N+1 is only part of the issue and you are likely targeting the wrong thing to deal with the N+1 issue like most people.

N+1 is only part of the issue and you are likely targeting the wrong thing to deal with the N+1 issue like most people.

That would be difficult, given that I haven't targeted anything at all.

It's up to CCP to choose what gets fixed - and when. Rather pointless to "target" something at this stage.

War zone control is not "shifting". It goes to one side

I dispute your cause.
...
There is no "quick fix" to what we have right now. The cat is out of the bag, and the lines are already drawn.

Oh we know what needs to be targeted.

Empire sprawl, N+1, capitals, sov. We even know in what order CCP needs to fix them and that there will be huge changes that are needed on our part.

I would love to hear this elaborated, to be honest.

You're rather more of a veteran of the system than I am, haven't lived in null since before I made this toon. So I would be interested to hear your take on it.

We can break it down into sections which, oddly enough, fits in well with CCPs new development plan.

We start off with addressing the need for empire sprawl. Right now there is a cap on how many players can actively rat in a single system, this currently stands at ten per system. This means groups like ours require vast areas of space to support our members.

"But most of your space is empty!" I hear you cry.

Yes this is true but that is down to another problem which is truesec. You see, the primary form of pve in null sec for your average pilot is anoms and they are tied to truesec. Most systems in null offer worse isk generation than blitzing level 3 missions in highsec with a mach. The best systems in null are on par to slightly worse than can be earned in high sec level 4 mission blitzing.

So we have a double whammy of poor isk income from most of null and the low player cap of 10 per system. This needs to change if we are to shrink the current two blocks from half of EVE each to a single region each and it must happen before any changes to sov.

Simply adding more anoms won't work, not only would a player cap still exist but you would also flood too much isk into the system. Inflation is also why you cannot just add more isk reward to anoms. Anoms must be replaced as the primary pve content and isk generator of nullsec. By far the easiest way to fix this issue is to add mission agents to player outposts. They allow for an unlimited population and null missions provide greater reward than highsec but importantly they will inject far less isk into the system than anoms and will be far easier to implement for CCP than a whole new system.


We then have to deal with capitals. Right now you either have a capital force that can match the two big powers or you are an irrelevant sideshow. Capital issues are all over the place and need several big changes. Firstly, carriers are going to have to lose access to sentries and move to a fighter based platform. Secondly, supers are going to have to lose their E-war immunity however they also need something big in return. Supers and titans must be allowed to dock in outposts. We have to end the bleeding of high SP subs because they are trapped in a space coffin that doesn't see much use. Lastly we must deal with their invulnerability to subcaps, this is covered in the next and most controversial fix.

N+1:

People rightly hate the blob, but why do they hate fighting outnumbered?

Well, its because they cannot hurt it. Right now fleet meat revolves around one simple fact, you must be able to alpha past the logistics of the enemy fleet. If you cannot do this then engaging is pointless. Logistics are going to have to be nerfed if smaller alliances are to stand any chance in null. Equally, it is logistics that makes capital fleets impossible to kill with a subcap fleet. It is going to be painful, it will mean much bloodier fights and chances are I will be among the first to fall in any fleet engagement but if we want to fix null it must happen.

Sov:

Another need for big balls of ships is the way sov fights are handled. At the moment you fight a handful of timed fights over huge amounts of EHP. This system needs to go. Not only does it mean you need lots of ships to grind down the structures but it also means you need equally or bigger fleets to defend. Remove the ehp and you remove the need for the massive fleets.

The current sov system also lets us dominate huge areas of empty space so long as we can pay the bills. So to end this sov needs to move to residency based. At a stroke you would make at least 80% of the current sov claims drop as all of the unoccupied systems drop. This is by far the most complicated part of the null overhaul and should rightly come last.

Were it up to meGäó The smaller the ship the less ships can lock it up before locks on the ship start becoming unstable (too much noise in the tracking system) and falling off.

N+1:

People rightly hate the blob, but why do they hate fighting outnumbered?

Well, its because they cannot hurt it. Right now fleet meat revolves around one simple fact, you must be able to alpha past the logistics of the enemy fleet. If you cannot do this then engaging is pointless. Logistics are going to have to be nerfed if smaller alliances are to stand any chance in null. Equally, it is logistics that makes capital fleets impossible to kill with a subcap fleet. It is going to be painful, it will mean much bloodier fights and chances are I will be among the first to fall in any fleet engagement but if we want to fix null it must happen.

EvE is dieing/dying (thanks Mallak), or it's dead?

Is that the gist?

I hope so. Normal programming around here.

This changes nothing in the overall scheme of N+1. While it may make the game more fun (which is good), you've simply replaced a rep race with a dps race. What you've done is made it more fun to be farmed by a larger entity (because it will be easier to get kills), but at the end of the day you're still being farmed by a larger entity.

No one wants to be farmed, so the same old choice presents itself: smaller entities either leave sov, or join one of the two supra-entites so that they too can "win" and claim to have "more friends" than the other guy.

This changes nothing in the overall scheme of N+1. While it may make the game more fun (which is good), you've simply replaced a rep race with a dps race. What you've done is made it more fun to be farmed by a larger entity (because it will be easier to get kills), but at the end of the day you're still being farmed by a larger entity.

No one wants to be farmed, so the same old choice presents itself: smaller entities either leave sov, or join one of the two supra-entites so that they too can "win" and claim to have "more friends" than the other guy.

This changes nothing in the overall scheme of N+1. While it may make the game more fun (which is good), you've simply replaced a rep race with a dps race. What you've done is made it more fun to be farmed by a larger entity (because it will be easier to get kills), but at the end of the day you're still being farmed by a larger entity.

No one wants to be farmed, so the same old choice presents itself: smaller entities either leave sov, or join one of the two supra-entites so that they too can "win" and claim to have "more friends" than the other guy.

Context seems to be not that relevat nowadays... I blame twitter and facebook!