Saturday, October 12, 2013

Fixing Null-Sec Pt. 1: Sweetening the Pot

Many people decry the filth and horse poop being suggested in the Eve-O forums as a pubbie wasteland, but they ignore the larger issue: a landslide of Eve characters and many Eve players choose to live, die, and regenerate solely within high-sec.  This is a problem for Eve as a whole.  A society that doesn’t encourage its children to leave the cradle finds itself incapable of going about any serious business.

As a premise, I assume CCP wants Eve to be a game that rewards the intelligent, aware, and careful risk-taker, while allowing human nature to punish the stupid, the lazy, and the ignorant.  Miners often complain that gankers are overpowered, when – if they had spent any time in null-sec, they would have learned the aligning tactics that would keep them safe if a half-dozen Catalysts warp into their belt.  Wardecced corps complain about denial of service as a result, but fitting their ships with basic PvP in mind would allow them to make a choice other than to dock up and hide.

The issue isn’t so much that they complain about the inconvenience, but rather that their minds don’t immediately recognize the easy methods of mitigating these inconveniences.  Quite simply, they never learned them.  And why not?  Because they were comfortable enough in high-sec to never have needed to travel into low or null, where necessity would teach them these tricks.

That, my friends, is the problem.  High-sec is too comfortable; it’s too easy to make a comfortable living running level 4 missions in high-sec.  That results in two- and three-year-old characters who don’t understand how to handle themselves in PvP – in a PvP game.

I’m not saying players shouldn’t be allowed to do industry, mining, missions, or trading.  I’m saying you shouldn’t be able to make enough isk in high-sec to pay for PLEX each month while still holding down a full-time RL job.  It shouldn’t be that profitable.  Otherwise, we get the status quo: many players learning nothing, gaining the highest rewards without risk.

People will only accept risk if the reward is sufficient to justify it.  Right now, it simply isn’t.  While CCP is eliminating “tiers” with their ships, they cannot apply this same principle to play styles.  Tiericide for ships ensures that everyone can play any play style they choose.  Tiericide for play styles themselves keeps people in high-sec.

Why should CCP care about this?  The more risky play styles result in increased losses, and increased losses result in more PLEX sales.  Null-sec is stagnant, especially in the recent months in which TEST lost half its membership, a strong, worthwhile fight is hard to come by, and small gangs are dying.  Remember: large fleet losses are paid by alliance reimbursement, which has no interaction with PLEX.  Only small-gang and solo PvP, travel, and losses result in hits to individual wallets.

CCP should be very concerned at the loss of small-gang warfare.  A lot of these players solely PvP, and very rarely rat.  They sustain themselves off of other accounts, loot, and bounties (though they’re pitiful).  These are exactly the type of customers CCP wants.

But how would I go about improving the risk/reward ratio in Eve?  Here are a few modifiers I’d change.  Keep in mind the rules I stated in my intro... I'm suggesting equation and modifier changes requires little-to-no CCP development time (other than testing).

Missions


Mission locations should be changed so level 4 missions and agents only occur in deep low-sec (at least 2-3 jumps from high-sec).  Level 3 missions should be located in shallow low-sec, with agent locations in high-sec and those low-sec systems (same as mission). Technical change: adjust location of some agents, ownership of some stations, and modifier on mission spawn systems (from, say, 0.6-0.5 to 0.3-0.2).

Requiring the highest mission runners to enter low-sec will bring life back to this region, while still offering the protection of gate guns and sec status decreases.  This should give pirate corps a shot in the arm.  I predict we’d see a drop in level-4 mission running for a couple weeks, until mission players realize they need this riskier mission income.

A side effect of this change would be a vast decrease in pimped-out mission ships.  High-sec players would have to learn to fly what they can afford to lose and understand the importance of the value vs. cost relationship in a way high-sec mission runners don’t currently.  This will reduce the value of null-sec mission loot, particularly modules like the Pithum A-Type Medium Shield Booster and Pithum A-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field (800 mil and 1.6 bil respectively at present).  Keep this in mind for later.

The argument against this one will be, “Why are you forcing people who just want to run missions to PvP?”  I’m not; I’m forcing people who want to get rich to accept some risk.  You say you have no goal but to mission?  I present you with level 1 and level 2 missions.  All the dopamine rush of completing a task, none of the risk.  I’ve never known a rich person in real life who didn’t take risks; why should a multiplayer sandbox game be any different?

Mining


+5% and +10% ores should be removed entirely, base ore yields should be reduced 20%, and replaced with standardized ores: standard value in high-sec, 125% of standard value in low, and 200% of standard value in null.  Refined mineral sizes should also be decreased significantly, allowing easier transport.  Mining barges should be much slower to align than they are now.  Technical change: all of these are modifiers that can be tweaked: incidence rates, yields per ore, etc.

Mining in null yields targets for small gangs.  By reducing the yields, miners will either be flushed into low or null, or accept and absorb the reduced yields.  I recognize that many miners will simply plug on as they always have; that’s fine.  But this change would give an advantage to those willing to venture deeper into unfriendly territory, secure in the knowledge that the reduced size of refined minerals means they can ship their goods in a cloaky transport that much more easily.  This will create targets, both if miners and mineral transports… and when a mineral transport is caught, as rarely happens for a smart pilot, the killers will actually be able to scoop some of the cargo as loot.  Likewise, the slower align time will make mining barges who don’t know how to stay aligned into scrap, providing content for everyone.

The argument against this change is that it’ll raise prices across the board.  I doubt this very much, since it’ll also allow null-sec and low-sec to generate quite a bit of ore, some of which will be shipped to high-sec.  The rest would be used for the next adjustment.

Industry


Retribution included changes to boost the number of station industry slots in null-sec, and this is a good change, but we also need a reduction in job length for null-sec station and POS industry, too, perhaps 25%.  It’s easily justifiable, too… Ishukone isn’t going to make it’s fastest, most efficient factory slots available for the public while they plug along with rotting assembly lines, but a null-sec alliance servicing its own alliance members should give access to the best lines.

I would also introduce POS modules that can modify various functions; an Industrial Optimizer that would reduce job times by a further 25%, for instance.  That specialization would come with a cost, though: for every one you onlined, you’d be crowding out something else in your POS.  As an added kicker, these POS modules wouldn’t be anchorable in high-sec (they can’t be limited to null, since this would put them only in reach of sov-holding alliances, who are often reluctant to give POS management rights to line members).

Incursions


I know the least about incursions, but I can tell you that high-sec incursions should exist for no purpose but to teach pilots the basics of incursion fighting.  Incursions are a good way to learn countering of neutralizers, webs, scrams, and other ewar in a way other high-sec PvE simply cannot provide.  But remaining in the safety of high-sec shouldn’t be a viable option.

I would argue for a good mix between low-sec, sov null-sec, and NPC null-sec for incursions, with a heavy preference for NPC null.  Right now, NPC null is a good model for the type of null-sec I hope to see, and a good first step might be to shift some (but not all) of the sov null-sec incursions to NPC null as a way of building more traffic and getting people accustomed to null-sec warfare, and only after several months move them back to sov null-sec.  PvE-ers have to crawl before they can walk.

Summary

The purpose of these changes is to incentivize, but not mandate, travel into low- and null-sec.  CCP should allow for each play style to exist in each area of space, but not equally in all areas of space.  Isk-making and Ship-breaking should be heavily favored in null-sec’s favor, with low-sec as a happy medium between risk and reward.

One thing is certain: Eve exists and prospers based on its conflict, not it’s PvE.  There are dozens of games that offer more engaging PvE, and Eve cannot successfully compete on that alone.  All PvE should exist as a gateway to Eve’s basic premise: that you can do anything you want, without forgetting it’s basic business model premise: that players must be incentivized into a domino-effect of engagement, starting with one activity and being drawn in, through connections and progression, to other activities, the mix of which can only be found in Eve.

That’s how Eve will survive.

Fixing Null-Sec

Most folks who regularly traverse null-sec agree on a single, inescapable point: null-sec is broken, and is in bad need of attention from CCP.  A lot of suggestions out there recommend significant changes to sov mechanics or new features that would require considerable developer time, but those options really aren’t necessary.

What null-sec needs are small tweaks; changes that will allow Eve to move towards a more desirable state of null-sec.  In the next few posts, I’m going to discuss small changes I recommend, all of which consist of small adjustments to established mechanics, drop rates, and values within the Eve code.  Many of them are economic in nature.

But most importantly, I’m going to tie each to a serious null-sec problem and explain why this result is more desirable.

What is the end state of null-sec I hope for?  I imagine a null-sec populated by a significant number of smaller alliances, each holding enough space to be profitable, but not so much space that any entity needs to travel more than 10-15 jumps to find an enemy to shoot.  I want a null-sec that has much more small gang PvP, and significantly less bloc warfare.  I don’t want CCP to dictate how we play, but I do want the mechanics to be stacked in favor of this form of playstyle.  Essentially, I want Space Fiefdoms™, not Space Empires™.

And in the next few articles, I’ll describe why, and how we get there.

Part 1: Sweetening the Pot
Part 2: Sovereignty and Force Projection
Part 3: Countering the Blob

Thursday, October 10, 2013

What is the Purpose of the Warp Changes?

Long story short: changes too warp speeds will make virtually every ship, except for frigates. warp much slower.  It’ll take much longer to move battlecruisers and above from point A to point B.  Good luck getting anything anywhere.

Some secondary considerations… ratting carriers will take much longer to arrive at their destinations.  If a carrier warps to a site as a neutral enters system, that neutral will have plenty of time to identify the site and warp to it.  Keep in mind, the last 2-3 seconds of a warp – under current mechanics – see a ship travel very little.  Extend that to 6-7 seconds and you have a scan duration.  Add 20 seconds to align, and you have a dead ratting carrier.

Expect roaming gangs to either a) turn into cruiser-and-below exclusively or b) take much longer to reach a deep destination, so response fleets will have a much easier time intercepting their targets.  Small gang roaming will be even harder now, with blobbing response fleets.  I’d sell any battlecruisers you have now, before their price plummets.

But why slow everything down?  What does CCP hope to gain?

In considering this problem, the most obvious reason is to curb force projection.  But force projection is mostly done with jump bridges, and especially titans.  How would slowing traditional warp speeds affect this?

Okay, so force projection for attackers is out.  What about for smaller alliances?  Again, you’re more likely to rely on traditional gates if you only own a few systems.  This will definitely be a nerf to them.  They’ll have a harder time re-shipping in fleet fights, particularly for alliances that are rich enough for BC or BS ship reimbursement programs.  Is CCP trying to squash the little guy?

Consider the main problem of null-sec; too much space, too few people.  Is the goal to keep folks a home?  If so, reducing warp speeds will only create large gaps of space where no one travels.  Roaming gangs will tend to stick closer to home or deploy to an entirely different region (look at Curse at the moment; everyone’s there hamming it up).  Surely that isn’t what CCP would like to see.

Is the goal to make null-sec battles more like faction warfare, with smaller ships?  I can’t see this as being the case, since CCP sells more PLEX when expensive ships go boom.  Plus, you can only kill frigates and cruisers for so long before you lose interest.  People want Black Ops, faction battleship, and command ship kills.  If the whole game was like faction warfare, you’d see a lot of unsubs.  And let’s not forget, with cheaper ships being used, you don’t need as many ratting alts.  Even more accounts would unsub.

Do we have a problem with battle balance I’m unaware of?  Are too many battleships and carriers warping off to safety, reducing the risk they face?  Recent null-sec warfare suggests otherwise.

So what is the goal?

My friends, there can be but one solution.  After ten years and countless light-years, it has finally happened.

Our space ships are exhausted.  They need a breather.  Like horses.

Or CCP thinks slow ships are better targets.

Maybe.  But I’d go with horses.

Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Character & Cowardice

The way you conduct yourself in each situation builds a narrative about you.  This is called character, and equally applies to organizations, too.  In many cases, an individual character is much easier to redeem than that of a whole group.  Character, when publicly known, generates reputation.  But you control your character; you don’t control your reputation.  A deservedly bad reputation is a reflection of poor character.

A null-sec alliance should hold character in high regard.  Entities that respect their enemy, offer equal fights, honor diplomatic agreements – both in letter and in spirit – and have pilots who honor 1v1s, don’t scam, and abide by their word will face adversaries, not enemies.  Hatred, spite, and deceit do not contribute to a positive reputation.  Another player can respect your alliance even if they are opposing it, but only if you have good character.

I’m starting to think Insidious Empire has poor character.

Is that because I was killed afk-ratting up my sec status in Tenal while I put my daughter to bed?  No; I was afk, they killed me; that’s how the game is played.

Is it because Insidious Empire now controls Cobalt Edge, space Razor had previously controlled?  No.  We didn’t offer even one fleet to defend it.  Our plan was to use it for renters, but with the CFC rental program up and running, that plan went to the wayside well before any of us knew who EMP was.

No, the reasons I have no respect for Insidious Empire lie with how they operate, not what they do.

The first thing that made me question their character was Phreeze’s news postings on TheMittani.com about Razor’s activity.  Not only is it inappropriate for the leader of an alliance actively engaged in grinding structures from Razor to post updates about Razor, but he took the opportunity to spin the facts multiple times.

For example, I’d be okay if he said, “Insidious Empire conquered Cobalt Edge”.  Technically that’s true, but his boys faced no resistence.  But stating, “Insidious Empire conquered Cobalt Edge from Razor Alliance” without immediately following up with, “When contacted, Razor confirmed that it had no interest in Cobalt Edge and wished Insidious Empire well,” misrepresents the action entirely.  It implies that plucky pilots from EMP overcame noble defenders and deserve a triumph through the streets of Rome.  Even had another reporter written the story, it would be more forgivable.  As it is, he did a shady thing, for no real purpose; EMP has no hope of taking Tenal; Razor has no interest in taking Cobalt Edge.

But the other issue I have with EMP comes from the line members.  Beyond a general arrogance and fifteen-year-old demeanor in local (perhaps I’m just sensitive to this, since Razor has a no-local-talk policy that really makes sense), I’ve seen no evidence that EMP has any interest in engaging at equal numbers – or even when they slightly outnumber their enemy.

Where is this coming from?  Last night, I and six other goats were hunting a small EMP gang that decided to camp A1RR.  They had a Falcon, Vexor, Thorax, a couple tacklers, and a couple more DPS ships.  Yes, remember that: a Falcon.

We had a Vagabond (me), prober (my alt), Rapier, Harbinger Navy Issue, a Vulture, and a Sabre, and another DPS ship.  We were light on tackle other than our Rapier, but we did have a Vulture and a Sabre.

I believe we were dead even on numbers (if you include my prober, which was in a scary Buzzard), but that Falcon would completely eliminate one or two people from the field.  Had we been in EMP’s gang, we would have burned off from the gate, or warped to a nearby planet, set up, and engaged.

Their reaction?  They fled for the hills.  We tried to chase them – becoming strung out in the process – and they still fled.  That got me thinking about previous engagements with EMP.

I don’t believe any EMP pilot has ever agreed to a 1v1 with me.  I don’t believe any EMP fleet has ever engaged at equal numbers, regardless of composition (and, let’s be honest, the fleet we had yesterday was a kitchen sink response fleet; hardly very organized).

One might argue, “Yes, but they didn’t know what you had in nearby systems”.

If by “didn’t know” what was in the nearby systems, you mean they didn’t take the time to check local as they fled across the breadth of Tenal, then yes, you’re right. ::sarcasm::  They also have static campers throughout our major systems.  They did know what we had.

“But, do you expect them to engage when they aren’t assured of victory?”  Yes; we did.  It’s called a game.  If you only engage when the outcome is certain, what’s the point of playing?

We’re not talking about sov warfare here; nothing was at stake except a couple hundred million isk each – a paltry sum – but as they say, “blood will tell”.  When roaming pilots are risk-adverse, it says something about the character of the alliance.

They came come up with all the agit-prop they want; no one in Razor is going to fear them unless they demonstrate the warrior’s way, and ganking ratters isn’t it.  By all means, continue ganking ratters, just be honest about what you’re doing; padding your killboard, not improving your skill.

Not hating, just saying…

Sunday, October 6, 2013

Lessons: A Tremendous, Close Fight

The pinnacle of PvP is that close fight that comes down to the slimmest of margins.  I had one of those just a few moments ago, and I know I lost because I made very clear mistakes, but even those mistakes were the matter of a few seconds.

I was bringing an AAR/Rep Myrm back to Tenal from Jita through M-O.  I figured the chances of running into something dangerous were good, but the point of flying a ship like that is to get a fight.

Jumping into M-0, I ran into a Deimos on the other side of the gate.  I aligned out since local had a few neutrals in addition to him, but he caught up to me.  After a few seconds, I engaged, launched my drones, and applied my two webs and scram.

Here was my first mistake… I hadn’t grouped my drones beforehand, so I wasted a couple seconds (perhaps even an entire volley) scrolling down to find the drones I wanted to launch.  Inexcusable.

We were neck-and-neck for a while.  His AAR depleted first, and his armor started to go down, then mine depleted.  I was watching my cap and hit my booster, but not until my normal repper shut off, again costing me precious seconds.

Surprisingly, the thing I did very well during the fight was manage my armor reppers – I typically fly shield ships.  I started to pull range, getting away from his guns, but still in range of mine (I had autocannons), but for some reason I decided to get closer to get my ACs to my optimal damage.  I temporarily forgot that he was suffering for the range more with his heavy neutron blasters than I was.  I should have kept at about 7500 meters… that alone might have won me the fight.

He started attacking my drones, but I didn’t notice until it was too late… my heavies were dying quickly, and I managed only to save a couple.  With only Hammerheads left, I didn’t have enough DPS to beat his tank, though I didn’t know it at the time.  I hoped I might be able to slip in as his AAR reloaded again.

But I didn’t have the time.  I let up on my reppers when he stopped shooting for a moment.  I thought he was trying to disengage, whereas he made the mistake I had and forgot to activate his cap booster soon enough to auto-repeat his modules.

Letting up on my reppers, closing range, not grouping my drones… three mistakes that caused me to miss out on a Deimos kill, lose my Myrm, and turn this story into a hard lesson.

It was a very close fight, and I give catalysT criez credit… He beat me fair and square, though he made some mistakes too (cap booster usage, range).  At one point, he was down to 25% armor when I was at about 40%, so the fight could have gone either way.  My Myrm took a total of 56,446 damage, a tremendous amount for any fight, and we were engaged for three reload cycles of my AAR, so at least 5 minutes or so.

It was the most fun I had losing in a long time.

 
EDIT: I just found out, from another guy in local who was engaging him, that catalysT criez did have Loki boosts.  I actually feel much better; if I was going up against a guy with boosts and nearly pulled it out, I was doing something right.

Friday, October 4, 2013

Lessons: Being the Primary

A lot of folks who mention fleet fights in Eve talk about the importance of adhering to the primary called by the target caller.  Particularly for large fleets, focusing your fire on a single target is crucial for taking it down before the target can catch reps (also known as being able to alpha a target).  Doing so ensures a good number of kills for nearly the whole fleet.

If you’re a DPS ship in a fleet fight, it’s really just luck-of-the-draw whether you’re alpha’d by the enemy or not.  If you have a name at the beginning of the alphabet, you’re probably in more trouble than others.  Your only option is to broadcast for shield or armor reps the moment the enemy begins locking you and pray you can catch them in time.

But what if you know you’re going to be a primary before the fight begins?  If you’re flying a logistics cruiser, tackler, interdictor, or command ship, you’re also likely to be primary.  Must you simply surrender to your inevitable death?

Absolutely not.  But survival often means giving up on some kills or delaying your preferred fleet contribution.  You really have three options: kamikaze, serve as bait, or evade.

The “kamikaze response is most often chosen by interdictors, who realize they’ll likely die the moment they bubble an enemy fleet.  The only exception for dictors is when they bubble the enemy on a gate, immediately jumping through, then burning back to the other side and returning to the fight.  However, kamikaze logi isn’t unheard of, either.

The other two options, though, require a little more skill and wisdom.  Most pilots have expectations about how certain ships are fitted.  A Vagabond, for instance, is often fitted with 425s and barrage ammo to operate on the edge of faction point range in a kiting capacity.  Intentionally warping to an enemy at 100 and allowing tacklers to close distance on you is typically suicidal… unless you’re armor tanked with multiple faction webs and scrams (and no prop module) and a friendly fleet nearby.  Being bait can turn the enemy’s typical reaction to seeing your ship on its head, luring them to their destruction (similarly, a Scimi can –sometimes- fulfill this role, depending on the gang size).

The other option is evasion.  I don’t mean the “align and warp out of the fight permanently” escape option, though.  Let me give you an example.

In RvB, I was flying a Jaguar in a fleet of T1 cruisers and frigates.  I knew I was going to be primaried because I was a T2 ship, a less common sight in RvB fights.  So when my fleet warped to 0 on the gate to engage the Blue gang, I didn’t engage.  Rather, I waited unaggressed on the gate until a few ships targeted me; as the first damage came in, I jumped.

What did this accomplish?  First, they wasted the time it took for them – Cruisers and frigates – to lock and engage an assault frigate Jaguar, only to see him jump through.  That gave my gang enough time to destroy the first enemy ship and move onto the second.  It was an early advantage that removed a tackler from the equation.

Secondly, it forced the enemy FC to switch to another primary.  When I reburned to the gate and jumped back int othe fight, no one was expecting my return, so I was able to safely warp to a scout point, and then back in at range.  I was able to pick my targets on the outskirts of the fight and apply my TD to targets of interest.  It wasn’t until I had helped kill a dozen ships that someone noticed I was back on the field and engaged me.  By that point, we had won the engagement, despite being outnumbered.

I’d call that a successful example of recognizing an enemy’s tactics, evading them, and returning to do some damage in the fight.

Yes, I missed out on a few kills when I jumped through, but while I gave up one or two – and only one round of my guns on each – the tactic paid sixfold dividends.  I recognized the limitations of my situation and flew the best way I could.

Not a bad night’s work.

Wednesday, October 2, 2013

RvB is Awesome


A while back, I bought a character that had perfect fitting, gunnery support, armor, and shield skills with the intention of training her to be an excellent Minmatar character for either NPC-null or pirate small gang fighting.  While I’m training her up, I realize I’ll need to build a PvP record of her own – and not try to trade on Talvorian’s record – so I started looking for ways to boost my PvP experience.

I started thinking about faction warfare, but my brief experience of it a few months ago taught me it was actually a PvE enterprise hidden in PvP trappings.  I wasn’t looking to chase button-orbiters around four or five low-sec regions.

And then I remembered RvB.

A forever war in which your enemies are all two jumps away and eager to engage in fun, meaningless PvP?  What’s not to love?  The only real downside is the dearth of T2 ships.  I was flying a Jaguar and was considered “shiney”, which is quite a difference from null-sec roams, in which I wouldn’t dream of flying a T1 frigate or cruiser, particularly solo.  But T1’s back in a big way, and RvB is turning out to be an excellent way of learning all about these rebalanced ships.

So far, I’ve joined one fleet, killed about 450 mil worth of ships in exchange for my 35 mil Jaguar, and am having a splendid time.  It’s everything I wished faction warfare would be… constant PvP for the sake of PvP.

But it also provides another benefit that I recommend for nearly any player… even though the ships you’re fighting and losing are cheap, they are kills and losses.  The more engagements you’re involved with, the calmer you’ll be during a fight, and in that sense, RvB is perfect practice for other forms of PvP.  I highly recommend that it be the first stop for nearly any player.  You can learn not only PvP basics, but also to control that flutter in your heart when you engage another player.  And it’s better to learn to do that with a 10 mil ship rather than a 400 mil ship down the line.

I’m actually a little embarrassed that I’m only now giving it a shot.  It’s delightful mayhem.  As a veteran null PvPer, I heartily approve.

Oh, dear… I just realized I’ll now show up as yet another “high-sec character” on CCP’s stats… what have I done?