Lupe Meza
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
106
   |
Posted - 2015.05.04 14:28:11 -
[1] - Quote
I don't know why SP has become such a talking point. SP certainly plays a role in how well you can bring out the potential in your ships, but the bulk of success and failure in PVP situations comes down to awareness and what you're fielding vs. what you're opponent(s) bring against you.
The irony here is that some folks accusing the capsuleer of not wanting to engage are the cause of the behavior. They fail to include themselves in the calculations for risk. For all the glorious tales of the 10 year veteran downshipping into t1 frigs and t1 guns and going on apparent bushido roams, there are 10 more leveraging their years and years of isk on logi, link, ecm alts; or entire corps that will drop caps or carriers on anyone "brave" enough to undock a fleet that might actually kill one of their HAC or T3 subcap fleets.
So fleets and individuals don't take what it 90% of the time bait, because they are so "risk averse" and the vets are left wondering why. It is a sandbox game, and there is nothing wrong with the tactics in and of themselves; whether hotdropping or using neutral assistance it boils down to overwhelming the opponent with insurmountable force. Players don't get any benefit for not stacking deck and everything to lose for not doing. In this game so why wouldn't you if you are able?
The issue really arises from players no being able to because of whatever the reason, being unable to or unwilling to commit the amount of isk to level the playing field themselves or through diplomacy getting allies, so they are extremely selective in their fights, if they take any at all. But again, sandbox, what is good for the good is good for the gander and if one side can borderline eliminate risk to themselves with isk, numbers, and subterfuge the other should be able to not be there for the ambush in the first place. Players are the #1 determining factor of risk. That is why null and wh's are probably less dangerous than much of low security space even though if the game lore seems to hint at the prior two being more dangerous. That is a player created situation.
Anyway, that the one element of the game population directly influences the behaviors of another means the sandbox works as intended. The behavior that wins a player fights could also be behavior that denies them future fights as your opponents adapt and learn.
One way to avoid losing is to win. The other way to avoid losing is not to fight at all. The current state of the game just makes the second the most easily executable option. And it's not just carebears that employ it i.e. the "weaponized boredom" philosophies of warfare CCP is seeking to alleviate or eliminate.
|