While null sec gets most of the press on TheMittani.com and
Eve News 24, CCP knows full well that most characters in New Eden spend their
time exclusively in high-sec. Now, many
of these characters are market, trader, hauler, and mission alts of null-sec
players, and these characters will likely never leave the protective womb of
CONCORD. Yet there are thousands of
players who were turned off by the risk factor of null-sec.
Greedy Goblin makes a good distinction between two types of players,
competitive and objective-oriented. I
refer to them as experience and achievement players, but the dichotomy is
pretty much the same. I’d hazard a guess
that most high-sec mission-running players are achievement-focused. Calling them carebears and leaving it at that
is a great disservice both to them and to null-sec players. After all, someone has to fill and empty the
POS, run industry, etc. If it’s not an
achievement player, it’ll have to be an experience player, and the latter would
much rather spend their time killing folks.
One of the CCP’s objectives with the Retribution expansion
was to make PvP more accessible to the larger Eve populace, namely these achievement
players. And it worked like a charm,
drawing a whole new set of players into PvP.
It’s easier to try something new when you only have to risk a lose a
Stabber than a Vagabond. Rebalancing the
T1 ships made them viable again, and lowered the cost of entry across the
board.
Then Odyssey came, and with it came moon goo roulette. The CFC, Test, N3, and pretty much everyone
else lost their minds as they did the region shuffle. Wars were pandemic (see what I did there?),
supercapitals were welped, fleets of AHACs and Rokhs were wiped out. In Fountain, the CFC and Test Bros adjusted
their fleet comps to counter their opponents…
…by choosing talwars, caracals, and bombers?
Wait… what? Extremely
wealthy alliances are fielding T1 cruisers and destroyers, along with stealth
bombers?
I suspect this development is a problem for CCP. A while back, they revealed some stats about
player wallets, indicating that players were earning more isk, but were
hoarding it rather than spending it. I
know I’m also building a cushion in case something catastrophic happens to my
hangar. What that *something* is eludes
me, but I’m clearly not the only one doing it.
After Retribution, most of my hangar shifted from T2 to T1. It simply doesn’t make sense to risk 3x the
isk when I go solo roaming when I can get more fights – and ones I can win, at
that – with the T1 variants.
Alliances, on the other hand, have been nerfed significantly
by the Odyssey moon goo changes. Ship
replacement programs are in significant jeopardy now. Two alliances have asked for donations from
their members (donations!). The CFC
switched to caracal and bomber doctrines.
Test is fond of Talwars. I’ve
gone on several Tornado roams where Razor runs into T1 fleets. Normally, we decimate them, but when we don’t
it only takes a few Tornado losses to make the engagement isk-neutral or
unfavorable. I have to imagine this has
made some alliances (those interested in isk-efficiency) risk-adverse to using
their own shinies. From the way doctrines
have gotten less expensive, I’d have to guess that this has already started to
happen.
Why does this matter?
Two reasons. First, I wonder how
long T1 frigates will interest null-sec players, and even low-sec players for
that matter. I doubt a group like
Goonswarm will be discouraged (they’re famous for grinding structures for weeks
and months on end), but is that true of everyone? You can only spend so many days killing
Caracals or Talwars before you start to burn out and yearn for the sexier
kills. My heart skips a beat when I kill
a T3, an Armageddon, or a carrier because of the value of the kill.
And it’s definitely true that Eve matters because the losses
are significant. A 250 mil ship loss
hurts a lot more than a 40 mil one does.
When I engage some hapless pilot with my Cynabal, my heart starts
pumping and the adrenaline kicks in. By
the end of the fight, my hands are shaking – even if I’m only killing a
hauler. It’s not the fight itself, but
the possibilities… it could be a Battle Badger with a cyno and I could lose my
pretty little slug. A gate camp could be
waiting on the other side. When I’m
flying a Stabber? Meh, I just don’t care
that much.
Faction warfare is already a good refuge for players who
want constant, cheap PvP. And
Retribution provided a huge shot in the arm for faction warfare. It’s great, if it’s your sort of thing. But the changes to moon goo in Odyssey have
already undercut the high-risk PvP that draws a lot of people to null-sec.
And that brings me to my other concern. CCP has a vested interest in providing the
drug we’re all addicted to. When an
Asakai, Burn Jita, or a large wormhole fight happens and billions of isk is
destroyed, some portion of that will end up being replenished with PLEX. Granted, ship replacement and wormhole loot
will replenish most of it, but not everyone is as patient as that, and some folks
need isk immediately (especially after a Burn Jita when mission runners need to
replace their expensive ships before they can earn more isk – that event wasn’t
all about jump freighters!). When the
thousands of engagements happening every day turn from 250 mil Cynabals to 40
mil Stabbers, CCP loses. Fewer players
feel they need their ratting alts, so they unsubscribe. Fewer players suffer huge losses, so they
stop buying PLEX. And – to some extent –
fewer players get the same thrill from killing T1 throwaway ships and Bittervet
Syndrome becomes more prevalent.
I want CCP to make money, particularly in ways that players can
opt into and which don’t generate a pay-to-win situation, like PLEX. The more money CCP makes, the more developers
they can hire and the more advertising they can do to thwart player
bleed. I’m curious which has a larger
effect on the total amount of isk lost in the game: the increase in the number
of ships lost or the decrease in the individual value of those lost ships. I’m sure CCP is watching PLEX sales and isk
loss very carefully, and I suspect the T2 rebalances – and iterations of it - will
reflect those discoveries.
One further side note: there’s a lot of talk about CCP doing
away with moon goo as a passive income source.
I sincerely hope they don’t, because all it’ll do is eliminate most ship
replacement programs and encourage null-sec alliances to further down-shift
their doctrines. I shudder to think of a
null populated by slap-fights in ships that can literally be replaced by the
hundreds. A much better option would be
to help better distribute those moons – both by smoothing out the distribution
and introducing some advantage for living near the moons you own (which could mean
reducing the cargo size of silos, perhaps?
I like an Eve that has low, mid, and high value PvP available
to us pilots.
No comments:
Post a Comment