hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 361 of 361 FirstFirst ... 261311351358359360361
Results 7,201 to 7,205 of 7205

Thread: The Shitposting Thread

  1. #7201
    Fara's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,603
    Quote Originally Posted by CivilWars View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fara View Post
    Peaceful diplomacy isn't the problem. The problem is reasons to fight and effort required for those fights. It's a constant balance act since ever, but personally I feel like they've implemented a lot of counterproductive mechanics in the last few years to incentivize conflict. Some good things, some bad things.. unfortunately more bad than good imho.

    IDK if its responsible for the lowtime right now, but it's not gonna help to incentivize future conflict tbh. If I look at the most fun fights I had, long before I joined INIT/PL it was over medium-high moons that our ~20man BS fleets fought against similarly sized BS fleets that didn't use their carriers on us because they've been dropped recently by Cry Havoc or SOT or whoever else had a lot of caps at the time. Owning that moon was significant for our small group, and because we were local we had no problem reffing towers every day with AFK battleships. Eventually bigger entities like huzzah and PL lost interest and just condeded the moons, and thus ensued fights from local smaller entities.


    It's sad when just mechanicaly that fight probably wouldn't happen today anymore
    You know what happens when a medium-high moon gets RFed by a small group? The large group that owns it, who already is 3-4 times the size of the small group, calls in anyone they can to protect it, and no content happens, or there is a 2k pilot fight over a 500m/month moon. We have lower login numbers than the "glory days", but I bet every major alliance is 1.5-2 times, or more, the size than they were back then. There is no place in EVE for the "little guy". That isn't because of mechanics, it is because of human nature, jabber, skype, slack, discord, etc.
    My point was, we did own several highend moons in Syndicate because we had the local advantage and were persistent despite being a 20man corp that had not a single cap. PL/SOT dropped us a few, but eventually they just called it because we reffed it everyday for days. Later when I was in PL many nerds gave up their r64s/r32s because despite being able to travel from delve to stain in 5min, it still took forever to rep/drop said shit and becomes uninteresting for the large guy. For a small group a 5bil moon is huge tho.
    This was pre phoebe. Now the small guy can indeed not do much in the very small influence area of a big blob, but there is more room to be outside of that box. Unfortunately this also means that no boogeyman can keep caps out of fights v0v

    Everyone who pretends this wasn't possible pre-phoebe just wasnt persistent enough or incredible dumb. I played both sides of the fence, I know what I'm talking about.

    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Fara View Post
    Peaceful diplomacy isn't the problem. The problem is reasons to fight and effort required for those fights. It's a constant balance act since ever, but personally I feel like they've implemented a lot of counterproductive mechanics in the last few years to incentivize conflict. Some good things, some bad things.. unfortunately more bad than good imho.

    IDK if its responsible for the lowtime right now, but it's not gonna help to incentivize future conflict tbh. If I look at the most fun fights I had, long before I joined INIT/PL it was over medium-high moons that our ~20man BS fleets fought against similarly sized BS fleets that didn't use their carriers on us because they've been dropped recently by Cry Havoc or SOT or whoever else had a lot of caps at the time. Owning that moon was significant for our small group, and because we were local we had no problem reffing towers every day with AFK battleships. Eventually bigger entities like huzzah and PL lost interest and just condeded the moons, and thus ensued fights from local smaller entities.


    It's sad when just mechanicaly that fight probably wouldn't happen today anymore
    Big wars have happened under the current system, ergo they can happen. The issue is that everyone wants some other dumb cunts to be the one who feed a single alliances worth of fleet into their coalition meatgrinder.
    Yes. I don't claim its all black and past the point of no return. I mentioned that it's a trend of new mechanics that don't exactly HELP fights to happen. Doesnt mean no fights, just makes them harder and harder to have because _EFFORT_ and a lack of resource incentive in some form or another. Drama wars will still happen, but even that I'd predict like it's going down since too many old vets have done it all. Granted this isn't something CCP can influence.

    Also my example was 20v20 action. Hardly an example of big wars I am however pretty sure, that my corp back then had virtually no play against a fortizar in late US prime wednesdays and no monetary incentive to alarm clock either.
    Last edited by Fara; June 27 2017 at 07:26:56 PM.

  2. #7202
    Malcanis's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Posts
    12,934
    What would be a mechanic that helps?
    Quote Originally Posted by Keieueue View Post
    I love Malcanis!

  3. #7203
    Super Moderator Global Moderator Virtuozzo's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,948
    Quote Originally Posted by Fara View Post

    Yes. I don't claim its all black and past the point of no return. I mentioned that it's a trend of new mechanics that don't exactly HELP fights to happen. Doesnt mean no fights, just makes them harder and harder to have because _EFFORT_ and a lack of resource incentive in some form or another. Drama wars will still happen, but even that I'd predict like it's going down since too many old vets have done it all. Granted this isn't something CCP can influence.

    Also my example was 20v20 action. Hardly an example of big wars I am however pretty sure, that my corp back then had virtually no play against a fortizar in late US prime wednesdays and no monetary incentive to alarm clock either.
    That's the entire point of a mechanical design focus on content generation. It's the idea of burbs with expensive white picket fences rubbing against the next block where they have different white picket fences. Everybody gets a little niche to do their thing, a little area to do their thing - all very calculable and manageable. Going down the street is encouraged, but while you may kick a fence, it's the same as kicking the door, the car, the dog - and you can't really get some without stupendous effort where reward / pain doesn't match up to that. Which is logical, because in this design focus it's a bit of a holy grail to not let people burn the village down.

    The biggest player factors in this are that a lot of emphasis is put on greed mechanisms and - as you point out - there's nothing new. The next mechanism may be different, but it's same methodology for behavioural response. There's no new set of mechanisms that can push people to think and act out of the box. None. This is the pitfall of mechanical design, yes you get to control your rowdy molecules in that pressure vat, but you will end up having to shell out more effort / money to replace them and / or provide new things to do where the time of fun return lasts a little less long than the previous time.

    It's really the worst kind of approach to combine with greed mechanisms. But it is also an interaction where the sql doesn't show the behavioural effects until you're stupidly far along on that curve already.


    Incentivising isn't the only approach by the way. Keep in mind this too is subject to the same laws of diminishing returns as things repeat.
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    What would be a mechanic that helps?
    I'm still saying that EVE as a fun pressure vat and the real world in terms of fun and shit differ in three fundamental regards. EVE knows no entropy, and no cataclysms. On top of that EVE is small enough for people to equate mechanism with behaviour, unlike the real world where they believe plenty illusions in their trenches.
    First realisation for players and dev teams should be that mechanisms aren't / shouldn't be the same as behaviour. In EVE, all behaviour is known, quantifiable, calculable, predictable, repetitive. Regardless of new niches and types of mechanical models. It's only logical that the effort bar is raised. Trying to solve that with incentives is never going to be sufficient.


    What EVE has is fine, it just lacks chaos, the butterfly, contamination and little emotion buttons for groups (as opposed to the individual). Doesn't matter if you look at EVE from a pew pew perspective, demographical scope or economics. Nothing degrades, nothing decays, nothing requires maintenance (sure, people fuck up but all the textbooks have been drilled down so often that you have to be incredibly fucked up as an organisation to screw yourself), nothing is unexpected, nothing makes you behave differently. Every risk, every reward, all effort - it's math now.


    Short version: CCP coded the butterfly out of EVE in response to players behaving like butterflies from hell.
    J'ai violé votre vaisseau spatial. C'était amusant....!

    EVE once was about internet spaceships. Then those became serious business.
    Now all that is left is serious business, and spaceships are docked for two years till after the Dust of Incarna
    .

  4. #7204

    Join Date
    December 30, 2013
    Location
    Rolled Out
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by Malcanis View Post
    What would be a mechanic that helps?
    I have said it before, and I will say it again. These are not my ideas alone. 1. Make citadels and ECs vulnerable 24/7, and the armor and structure timers come out in the owner's chosen window. This would allow attackers to control the days when structures come out, and the defenders to control the time of day. It is easier to alarm clock on the weekends than it is on 2 Tuesdays and a Wednesday. 2. If a citadel or EC dies, and the owner of the citadel does not own the sov(high, low, and NPC null I am open to either option of 100% asset safety or RNG) in the system it is in, the assets suffer the same RNG as a ship or pos kill. Some drops on the spot while the rest goes to asset safety.

    No, these won't change the world, but it does provide more incentive and more opportunity for conflict, and is a pretty simple change.

  5. #7205
    Fara's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,603
    needs low intensity objectives that are nice to have but not the end of the world if your group of nerds lose them. I.E like money moons of old, but can be differently flavored. Preferably those objectives aren't locked behind tz tanking or huge effort structures to contest, perhaps with a force multiplier to create timers fast (but expensive?) if no defender is around.
    Possible rewards could be alliance skins (can be sold) or just some resource that makes it valuable enough to fight over it. With phoebe its unlikely that a well spread out resource would be controlled by too few people. Alchemy could ensure a price ceiling to limit cartel gains. Maybe drugs, maybe invention crap. W/E fun thing they can think of that players would want and can sell. No active harvesting preferred because dont make this time intensive, there's other things for that.
    Just be smart about it and dont place 80% of them in one corner of the map like tech, maybe have them rotate every 3-9 months or so if you want to promote smaller&agile groups to profit. Start with low numbers, see how it goes, add more of those objectives or adjust rewards/risk. It's ok to create 2-3 areas that are ~rich~ of that resource, but not like tech or previous moon clustering.


    suddendly you have something worth fighting over that isn't a huge pain to create timers with (i.e citadels) and wont make 1 group super rich forever because it's not clustered in 1 place and has safeguards against metagame cartels. Needs to be actively monitored and improved no doubt, because it's hard to make it perfect right away.


    The game drives of this hi-low intensity warfare mix. They removed the low intensity stuff. Pls bring it back so fill the time between these downtimes that will happen regularly regardless where the games is going.
    Last edited by Fara; June 28 2017 at 09:54:28 AM.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •