Ugh... Internet Spaceships

 Well, I haven't updated this blog in quite a while. Truth is, I don't play Eve right now.

 Eve is a game about research, planning, preparation, and finally action. The "action" consists of getting into internet spaceships to do "stuff". Unfortunately there is a problem...

 That "internet spaceships" part of Eve just isn't fun. Until CCP can reinvent that part of the game they won't see the sort of growth they are hoping for. Worse yet, their baby is going to get stolen by some of the bolder new IPOs on the market.

 We'll see what happens.

 MJ

Quick Dust Update

So I sat down and gave Dust another shot. In all fairness, it is a fun FPS game. There is still a lot of work to do but I can't get much more specific then that.

Everything in my previous post still holds true for me, though.Therefore I think Dust is being released at a severe disadvantage. However, because its free there will definitely be an influx of players. Will those players buy anything and pay CCP's bills? That's something I certainly can't answer...

 MJ Out

Dust 514: Implementation Is Everything

Below is a blog post I began writing well before Dust 514 was in Beta. Hence you'll notice that most of the critique does not center around game play, nor should it. I believe all of my arguments still hold true today -even more so after extensively playing the beta... I will have even more to say later once the NDA is lifted.




So first things first: I hate incessant whining and blogs where the author complains about everything endlessly. They aren't fun to read, especially when little or no constructive criticism is given. With that said... Its about time to explain why I am not excited about Dust 514 in the least.

Unsustainable Platform and Fickle Customer Base

 At some point the decision was made to put Dust exclusively on consoles. It was then realized that the only console with a gaming network capable of supporting what CCP wanted to do was Sony. Hence we have Dust coming out on the PS3 only.

 First lets look at the platform. The PS3 is near the end of its life cycle. Sony has publicly stated they do not intend to release another gaming console -whether this is true or not we don't know. Either way the PS3's days are numbered. How much longer will the console even be supported by Sony? One Year? Two years? Perhaps this doesn't matter to CCP, but it should. (I will explain why below.)

 Our next consideration is the transitory nature of console gaming and gamers. We all know the pattern well. Play the hell out of a game for a week or two, then move on to the next "big thing". Perhaps the game will be picked up again some other time, but most likely it will just be put back down again. This marketing model benefits Sony. Does it benefit CCP or any company marketing a long term product? Obviously the answer to my rhetoric is no. Sony doesn't want us playing console games too long. They want us buying the next hot product. This is the strategy Sony uses to make money, and what the customer base expects, and to a large extent, wants.

 As the customer base on the PS3 falls off, which it will, the players left will find less and less reasons to play. Anyone coming back to the game will find less opportunities to play. This is the the spiraling problem of online games developed exclusively for consoles. CCP has effectively attempted to merge a very short-term venture into a very long-term universe. What could have solved this? Releasing a PC version, for one.

 For these reasons I think  releasing Dust on console only, and exclusively for PS3 was a huge mistake. Once any initial excitement wares off CCP can expect zero support from Sony and a dying customer base.

Duplicated Development Paths and Limited Tools

 CCP has spent a vast amount of resources completely rebuilding Eve Online from the ground up in a way that supports future development and all new environmental rendering, aka Walking In Stations.

Do you think this rendering engine could support an FPS game?

 This begs the question: Why would CCP then pay to use the Unreal 3 Engine (U3E), which is dated and has inferior graphics to reproduce a large portion of the work they have already done? For a game directly tied into Eve? Clearly they did not choose U3E for cross-platform compatibility. Was it for a faster development to market cycle? For ease of console programming? Whatever the reasons it is a clear duplication of work already done for the Carbon engine.

 Of all the poor decisions made by CCP regarding Dust I find this one to be the most striking. They have locked themselves into an engine with severe long term limits. There is only so much retro- fitting one can do to the Unreal Engine graphically or algorithmically. I guarantee you CCP has already hit a number of these limits. Worse yet, how much the two games can be inter-connected is permanently limited by this decision. More on this one below...

 A Future Vision Lost

"Eons ago" when CCP first gave clues they were working on an FPS game at Eve Fanfest I was really excited. An FPS game in the Eve universe? What could be better? As any dreamer would, I began to imagine... I could see myself docking in a station to take a shuttle to a planet. I could see wars spanning from battles in space, to fights in stations, to fights on the planet surface and beyond. I could see all this intertwined within a single system in which players could take on different roles with the same character, or at least within the same seamless universe.

 Sadly, none of this possible, at least not between Dust and Eve. Platform and Engine incompatibility has created a hard wall which limits any possibilities of major expansion between the two games. Could Eve ultimately be updated in this way? Perhaps... But certainly not any time soon, especially with such a large portion of CCP's staff working on an entirely different product. I really think a massive error was made here and great opportunities lost. The vision of a true science fiction simulator was thrown by the wayside.

The Culmination of Errors

 So lets recap:

 - A game released on a single console with an extremely limited software life cycle.

 - A user base that does not stay with any game for too long.

 - A dated engine that limits expansion.

 - No possible cross platform compatibility.

 - The repeating of work done to produce 3D environments for Carbon and the Unreal Engine.

 - Future merging of these two worlds is largely impossible.

  I really can't see Dust doing well at all. Note you, I haven't even begun to talk about the game itself. These are all simply business decisions.


 For these reasons, when CCP Helmar issued a public apology I fully expected it to end with him stepping down as CEO. Why? Because his business decisions as the leader of the company had been so poor. Those of you not living in the states may wonder why our companies tear through CEOs so quickly sometimes. The reason is simple. When leaders exhibit a certain level of incompetence it compromises the trust others can give them. This includes subordinates within the company, but more importantly investors and customers. Do I question Helmar's ability to lead CCP into any kind of future considering the disastrous decisions he has made regarding Dust? You bet, but then again, I want to be proven wrong (more on this below).

I Hope to be Proven Wrong

 I am not one who enjoys condemning others to failure or simply being right. I hate the "told you so" mentality and general negativity. I want Dust to succeed and CCP to prove me wrong. I own a PS3 and intend to give dust another go on its official release. However, for all the reasons given above I cannot see Dust being successful long term.

 Maybe CCP doesn't care as long as they can make enough money in the first 3 months -who knows? But to be honest, I am nervous. I think CCP is a good company full of smart people who love what they do. I also think Dust failing miserably could end CCP games, or at least geld it so badly recovery isn't possible. Only time will tell, but this one where I really want to have gotten it completely wrong.

 So what do you think? Got a strong argument why I am wrong? Do you love Dust 514 as it is now?

"And the noobs shall inheret the internet space ships"

 So in my absence from blogging my corp joined Test Alliance. I was very nervous about this move. What could trolls and noobs do in Eve? Well, the answer is.. Everything.

 After joining Tests I got a fast and very informative lesson on what makes alliances successful. To put this more succinctly, I got a lesson in what makes social groups of semi-anonymous nerds over the internet successful.

 The first proof that something was different about Test was that they... Responded! That's right, they responded to our request to join quickly. We had contacted other alliance of "elite PvPers" and been waiting for weeks. This was with sponsors inside these alliances attempting to get us in... Pathetic really. Test contacted us promptly and was very friendly. The rules for joining were clear, as were the expectations. Behind this veil of idiocy was a well organized leadership.

 After joining we were given access to a massive amount of information to help new pilots, and those new to Test. These were pages and pages of wiki  documents that clearly took hours worth of someone's time to produce, and all to help the new player be successful. Having been in some great alliances, I was stunned by this. I had never seen anything so clear and informative in my years of playing Eve.

 After sorting everything out and joining fleets it was clear operations were quite different here. Test wears their stupidity like a badge of honor. They laugh with their new pilots.. and at them, but its all in good fun. After seeing pilots get yelled at and kicked from other alliances for fits, and foolish losses, this was really a great change.

 Test has created an environment where new players can flourish and have fun. Attrition will kill "eliete PvP alliances". As all their 100M+ skill point pilots lose interest in Eve what will they do? The answer is they will die.

 While nothing is perfect, and I could live with a few less EULA violations.. Say once every 15 minutes instead of once every 5 in fleet chat... It is quite obvious that alliances like Goons and Test are going to run this game. Alliances that turn their nose up to new pilots and the inexperienced are going to slowly die off as the Eve universe expands.

 Get ready because a swarm of scrubs are coming to piss on your parade.

Well, its been a long time my... self?

 It has been a while. Most of my limited free time has been spent actually playing Eve instead of blogging about it.

 Think I need to update this page at least once a week from here on out.. So.. Here we go!

/* RANT!

 If I ever got the alliance leadership bug again, which I most likely won't.. but if I did the alliance would have exactly six rules. Honestly I think six is too many but it was hard to boil it down any further. These are listed in order from most important to least important:

 1) We are nobody's bitch
 2) Don't  be a bitch to other alliance members
 3) Don't be stupid
 4) Don't shoot blues
 5) If you pirate someone and they agree to pay a ransom you HAVE to keep your side of the bargain.
 6) Everything else is just guidelines

 Now I really want to talk about rule number one... Why in goddamn hell would you play a computer game to be to be some other alliances little bitch? What do I mean by this? They tell you where to go and live, what you can and can't do, who your friends and enemies are, and who or what you are shooting.

 In the modern real word we all have to get along, and to do that we have to accept all sorts of things we hate. Bosses who treat you in a degrading manner, jerks who let their dog shit all over your yard, old ladies who think they are protected enough to yell at you from their front porch -and these are just the little things. In every one of these situations you have to take the high road and accept their poor behavior. In fact, they know they can get away with acting so bad exactly because most of us are socialized and decent enough to not walk over and snap their neck. When you think about it, these asshats are depending on the good will of others just so they can turn around and treat those same people like shit.

 In Eve you don't have to accept this bullshit. If someone acts like an asshole you can lay plans to kill them and take their stuff. Even if you don't have the time or inclination for a planned killing you can just tell them where to stick it and kill them if the opportune moment comes. This is part of what makes Eve fun. So why in the hell would anyone, let alone a whole damn alliance willingly subject themselves to degrading subservience? To get better rocks to mine? To make more isk? To build bigger ships? Perhaps they are thinking "Hey, maybe if we keep our head down and do what we're told we can become a big dawg like our masters!" This shit is pathetic.

 Just like in RL, if you want to play with the big boys you have to earn respect. And you do that through experience, skill, cunning, and diplomacy -not through being someone's lap dog. I'd take 100 competent pilots over 1000 scrubs who just want to mine any day and don't know shit about how to fight or survive in 0.0. Why? Because at the first sign of trouble the latter is going break down like a crack whore who can't hit the pipe.

 One final note. I have in the past been part of leadership which offered other alliances the ability to be "our bitch". Our offerings were of a small scale -pay us a few hundred million to move your freighters through space safely, be set blue for 1 week, etc. But make no mistake, as the deal was made and we collected I was laughing to myself and thinking "You sorry assed little bitches."


 RANT END! */

Risk Bad!!! Boring Good???

So good old Jester wrote his post on Dumbing Up. It always surprises me how him and I think about similar things. In any case, my response was long enough I posted it here:

 In his previous post he brought up the general reduction of stupidity in Low Sec/0.0 . While he has a point, I also think he is missing a factor which has been building up for a while and threatens to pose a serious problem to Eve. That is the PLEX.

 Players are highly risk averse because losing a ship, and now implants can easily cost 4 to 5 hundred million that not only hurts your wallet, but is posted for all to see. This is the equivalent of losing $20.

 Worse yet, looking at the amount of PLEX passing through Jita alone it is obvious the "have nots" of Eve are using this system for cash injections. Who wants to spend 20$ just to lose it in PvP? My guess is PLEX prices will continue to rise, item prices will follow, aversion to risk will become dangerously low. Why should I risk anything when I can just buy a PLEX to fit my CNR and grind out free isk all day?

 I didn't understand this until it struck me how many players take pride in simply accumulating virtual crap in a virtual world. They don't play the game to challenge themselves against others, or react to situations differently then social rules dictate you can in modern society. They play Eve to accumulate shit and feel good about themselves. Spending $20 just to lose it doesn't make you feel good about yourself. Especially if you're god awful at PvP and aren't really interested in getting better. To me this style of play is terribly boring, but to each their own pitiful existence.
 
 Also, on another note, Eve being a niche game is part of what has kept it alive so long. If CCP ever thinks they can or should compete with the likes of WoW, AoC,  or the other content based theme park MMOs it spells the beginning of the end. This is course has nothing to do with simplifying item names, which is a good thing. (Read the linked posts to see what this pertains to.)

 MJ

Quick Post: T3 BCs

 So I'm still experimenting with the Naga, but so far it seems amazing. Sure, it doesn't do the most damage, but its range is unbeatable.

 Oppositely, the DPS of the Talos is just plain crazy, but like all Gal blaster boats, you have to get dangerously close to do that DPS. The Naga, on the other hand, puts out a nice consistent stream of hurt while kiting enemies all day long.

 In the event Drakes are actually changed (aka nerfed) this may be the new anchor of sniping shield BC fleets.

Untippable Scales

 Anything made by humans is prone to error, and massive multi-player online games are prone to massive multi-layered errors. This is especially true when it comes to game balance.

 The traditional mantra in online games has been pretty straightforward. If something is completely unbalanced to the point its simply game breaking or reduces overall enjoyment the best way to bring attention to the problem is not by complaining on some community message system, its not by crying about it in game, and its certainly not by blogging about it -its by completely abusing the unbalanced mechanic to your advantage. When everyone is utilizing only a few skills, characters, items, or whatever it is, people stop playing and bad press is generated. This in turn forces companies to spend resources on the game or lose revenue. Tip the scales overwhelmingly in one direction and you get a response.

 Eve has proven to be a different beast entirely. The game has grown so big almost no one has actually experienced every part of it. This is especially true of PvP. Most Eve players rarely even leave high-sec. This translates into gaping holes in the PvP system not even being experienced by a large portion of the player base. The end result? Balance adjustments can't be forced by simple and absolute abuse of over powered mechanisms, at least not in any timely way.

 What does this mean for us, the players? ABUSE AWAY! So lets take a look at broken mechanics that can work for you. DISCLAIMER: The following techniques well make people cry, questions your sexual orientation in local, and set you red.

ECM

 Okay so this might seem obvious, but its always stunning to me how rare ECM pilots are, particularly good ones. ECMs can effectively remove enemy players from the fight at a 1:1 module to ship ratio.  They are guaranteed versus frigates, T1 cruisers, and most Minmatar ships. If for some reason one module doesn't do the job just use 2 on a particularly important target... Like your enemy's ECM ship.

 For new pilots ECM ships can be hard for one simple reason... You are despised by all enemies. You will be primaried and unless you know how to handle this you're going to die. When and how to use ECM properly and survive takes time and practice, but the payoff is.. well, game breaking -its as simple as that.

Boosters

 You see a lot of tearing on the forums about how underpowered active repair is. When it comes to skirmish battles nothing could be further from the truth. A standard Large Armor Repairer does about 800 points per cycle. However fit on a Hyperion with the proper skills, rigs, and boosters this one repper does over 2000 points per cycle. Fit 2 reps and you're repairing 40% of your armor in less then 10 seconds. When the amount of enemies involved in an engagement is low this is simply unbreakable. Active repair assault frigates were good before the last patch... They are truly amazing now. What can I say here.. Bait, bait and more bait. 

 The skill books needed for boosters are expensive, but depending on the kind of PvP you're doing they can pay for themselves pretty fast. Once again, a totally broken mechanic.

Passive Targetting

　This one is just wrong. A large part of skirmish PvP is about who has aggression and how. This is especially true in Low Sec. If you catch possible prey making a mistake and think you have the alpha to one-shot them passive targeting can get you a free kill. This is almost never used and can really surprise people.

This list goes on and on...

　A lot of attention is given to how broken super caps and titans are (which they really are), or how unfair the Drake is, but in reality these are just the most obvious in a huge list of balance issues within the game. So I say to you! Abuse and abuse again! When you find something you think is totally one-sided you may be right!


 Remember, there is no "unfair" in Eve. There are only winners and losers. Let the guy who cries after you blow his ship up think otherwise, not you.

That Dirty Thing Called Mining

 My, my so many things to talk about....

 So anyone that has read the CSM minutes, or been involved in the Eve "community" for a while knows that there has been a great deal of talk on the lack of incentives to mine anywhere but high sec, and the most insulated regions of true null. If you take a look at all the rocks floating around in Low, NPC, and true 0.0 you know this is a real fact. There are vast resources that go untouched. However, if we're going to talk about improving incentives I think we better talk about some serious game mechanics issues at the same time. One of those is mining ships.

 Take a look at any T1 or T2 mining ship. They have decent armor, shields, and hull strengths but their slot load out is awful, and their CPU/PG pathetic. Even under the best circumstance how do you protect these ships? The answer right now is: You don't. There is absolutely no way -no amount of logistics that can keep these ships alive. I know this from personal experience not as a miner, but as a responder. Worse yet, they don't even have the tools to defend themselves. Its impossible to fit any kind of shield or armor tank, and fitting guns isn't do-able either.

 Mining could be made the most interesting and isk producing activity in all of Eve and under the current system the only result would be mining ships exploding by the thousands. So what am I hoping for? I'd like to see groups of miners be able to fit guns, remote repair, and a heavy enough tank that they could give a disorganized group of invaders a run for their money, or least have a chance of staying alive until support can bridge in or arrive from a few systems away. Every other ship in Eve can do this. Why can't mining ships? Under the current system mining ships have such weak tanks you can bring logistics and a large defense force in and your enemies can still wipe your whole mining fleet away right in front of you.

 Next time I'll take a look at some other topics around low/null sec.

Confidence and Experience

 A bit of nostalgia, along with an experience in Eve today got me thinking...


 Today my corp attempted to engage another corporation. We brought 3 Abbadons, and 3 Domnix. They had 2 Abbadon Navy Issue, a Mega, a Machariel, a Drake, 2 Guardians, an Oneiros, and a Chimera... They would not engage... Why?

 Recently I was also looking back to some of my funnest days in Eve with the alliance Cry Havoc. This was the best alliance I have ever been in and probably will ever be in during my time with Eve. Cry Havoc had a very serious work ethic and high expectations of their pilots. At the same time everyone was friendly and easy to be around. CH did some crazy things in their time. It was common place for us to engage 50 enemy pilots with half their numbers... and win. We would take on our even numbers plus multiple carriers and multiple supers and win -really crazy fun times. Ultimately no one would engage CH without utterly overwhelming numbers. Why?


 In Eve, I think 99% of all players will not get in a fight unless they see a clear and usually obvious path to victory. When any group of players can prove to their enemies that through experience, skill, and success what would normally seem like an obvious win may actually not be so, those enemies react in the only way they know how: To never ever fight you unless they can be absolutely certain of a win. And for most players that absolute certainty lies solely in massive numbers advantages.

 What ultimately killed CH was the release of Super Carriers and Titan changes which made it clear CCP (for a time, at least) wholeheartedly embraced the idea that massive numbers and massive ships should dominate in all scenarios. With the game growing worse and worse, and no end in sight all of the leadership, and many of the original core membership simply stopped playing Eve -and who could blame them?


 Well, luckily times have changed. CCP seems to be acting like they pulled their head out of their proverbial ass and things are much better then they been in a long time. While some parts of the game are still completely and utterly broken, it is possible through ingenuity, planning, practice, and most importantly perseverance to simply outplay opponents and win in situations that seem impossible.

 So I guess the point of all this is: If you take the time to practice, learn the engagement scenarios, and understand the risks you can do some crazy things. I hope more high and low sec dwellers get a little less risk and loss averse, and go through the tough learning curve required to improve their PvP game. There really is a whole other world waiting for you right through that gate.

Up and Coming: Things to Watch in the Eve Meta

 The Crucible expansion brought an amazing amount of changes to Eve. So many its going to take a long time for the community to sort out the efficacy of these changes. Here are a few things to look out for:

  The Gallente

  I've been running the numbers, as well as field tests and all I can say is watch out! Gallente ships now do as much damage with rails and drones as most other races do with short range guns... At a superior distance! Worse yet, if you are unlucky enough to actually get caught up close to a blaster fit ship the damage output is simply overwhelming.

I think once the complainers fade players may actually start saying the Gal are too powerful now.


  The Naga

　High range? High damage? Yes, I'll take it! Its about time there was another reason to fly Caldari ships besides the Drake and Falcon. Sadly, even with the addition of the Naga I can still count all of the Caldari's viable PvP ships on one hand.

 Maybe CCP devs will get wild and give the Moa, Eagle, and Ferox this same bonus! We can always dream, right?

  The Moros

 For older pilots with all relevant skills trained to level 5 this ship has become the capital beast of the skies. Why you ask? Sure, Super Caps and Titans do more damage, but they can't be docked or insured -needless to say, they cost a whole hell of a lot more the a dreadnought, too. When comparing apples to apples, the DPS on the Moros is so far ahead of the other dreads right now its not even funny.

War Economy! The profitability of Destruction and Loss

Below this line is an essay I have posted to the Eve forums. Feel free to comment here, as well.

---------------------------------------------------

Greetings,

 Its really fun to fight over stuff and blow things up in Eve. I am always looking for new and even more fun (and devious) ways to blow things up, or create opportunities to blow things up, or get pad to blow things up. What you will find below is a set of ideas I have been considering for a while regarding combat, loss, and ways to make it more interesting and profitable.

Steps towards Something Greater

Recent updates have brought changes that, while seemingly small in scope, have the power to change the fundamental economic drivers of Eve Online. The first, and perhaps most powerful of these changes was the ship insurance payment changes.

 Insurance reimbursements for lost ships are now paid based on the actual value of materials required to build them. This implies an extremely powerful concept: The ISK value of items within Eve can be derived and refined into a single clear number based on aggregated market data. This also implies that such a value can be determined for any item sold via the market. Simply by tracking the ISK value of materials required to build items, the market value of the items themselves, or some combination there of, anything from Meta 1 Scramblers to a Tech 3 Cruiser can have a mean ISK value. This is a key concept for proposals given further in the essay.

 The second of these recent changes was the addition of many faction items to the market. The actual ISK value of these items has quickly become clearer since their addition. Some faction items can still only be bought and sold through contracts. While contracts are perhaps useful for rarer items, common items can be tracked more easily through the market. There is also much more price fluctuation in contracts. Multiple items being sold in one contract also makes determining ISK value for items with no market equivalent near impossible. As stated above, determining ISK value is key.

 Finally, the most recent update has brought the ability to see what implants were lost when “giving someone a quick trip home”. This is truly the crownpiece of any aggregated ISK value calculation system. We can now know everything lost upon ship and pod destruction and therefore determine down the very last cent (or ISK in this case) the value of all assets involved.

 Together I believe these changes warrant a serious rethinking of bounties, kill rights, and factional warfare. An incredible new world of opportunities to enrich the game play experience within Eve Online lay before us. Systems where destruction and loss have clear value, and more importantly, clear rewards are now possible. There are many possibilities –many more then I can relay here and keep my essay any reasonable length! I will try to hit on a few of them below.

Bounties that mean something!

Instead of silly pod destruction Empire generated bounties could pay out a percentage of the target’s assessed losses until the total bounty prize was depleted. Players could freely add their own funds to such bounties as they desired. Private bounty contracts would not only be possible but desired! Two parties, be they single players, corps, or alliances could enter into a contractual agreement where by a third party’s assets were targeted and destroyed. A percentage value of the destroyed items would be paid out to the aggressors.

Under such a system payments could only occur for items which were destroyed, not dropped. However attackers would now gain from both drops and destruction. No more cursing the wicked drop fairies because your targets faction modules did not drop! (At least not so profusely)

 Its also interesting to consider pricey “uninsurables”, such as T2 ships under such a system. So you finally caught that annoying nano fit Vagabond? While he gets 30% of the value of a tech 1 stabber for that loss, you on the other hand are operating under a private bounty agreement and get some portion of the actual value of his T2 hull. Lucky you!

Killrights

Within such a system kill rights could be updated to allow destruction of the aggressor’s assets up to the assessed value of incurred losses. This also begs for a reconsideration of transferrable kill rights. That however is not within the scope of this essay.

War Declarations revisited

Instead of a flat fee to attack any given corp or alliance, limited destruction rights within empire space could be purchased. Mercenary corps could no longer endlessly attack groups of industrialists for a flat weekly fee. At the same time attacks which serve a specific purpose could be executed more freely for considerably less isk. (Caveat! I am not supporting one system over another here, just giving some possibilities. Troll for life Brutha!)

Faction Warfare could be truly profitable!

With a more granular loss calculation system in place Faction Warfare payments could be expanded beyond simple Loyalty Points. Cold, hard ISK could also be paid out. This would allow a new income stream in Eve for FW participants! It might also help balance out some of the disparities between opposing empires that currently exist. More opposing FW targets would mean more possible profit and more danger!

Suicide Yarr!!!

 Did those guys who just trashed your freighter in high sec with a suicide gank do it for the “LOLs”, or because they were paid off? Anyone really dislike you? You may never know. I like to imagine this as a nice replacement for the recently lost insurance payments.

 As you can see there are many possibilities. I believe the examples given above only scratch the surface. The key to all of this is an aggregated market evaluation system capable of giving an arbitrary value to each and every item bought and sold.

The Value of Conflict

 The goal here is to create a War Economy: A system where destruction and conflict have value -not only an immediate value, but a speculative one as well. Conflict is what drives Eve Online and makes it the engaging experience we all love. I believe such a system would give players the tools to fight with one another in new rich and robust ways. It would give us new excuses to blow up important internet spaceships. And most important, it would be fun.

Smart people working hard for Internet Spaceships

 Seleene, a current CSM member made an excellent post on his blog here. What started out as a simple reply quickly turned into something too long to post as a comment so I decidedto just drop it on my own page.


 From a purely business perspective CCP's choices make a great deal of sense. "We have standardized and unified our code base. We are expanding our product line. We are creating new environments for consumers to experience over our entire product line, and testing these environments in our current products." All this sounds really good, and to a large extent is. However from a creative perspective these choices are mediocre at best. Its like spending years creating the best canvas possible but never getting around to actually painting a picture on that canvas. Also, all these choices do little to keep consumers interested in their flagship product, the one that actually pays their bills. To rectify these problems its going to take a complete rethinking of what CCP is about, and perhaps a change in management.

 Unfortunately there is very little historic precedent for such radical paradigm shifts without major crises. Whether it be within individuals, vast empires, or some mid-size company in Iceland, such large changes in culture and thinking do not come easy to our species. Is this to say its impossible? No, but highly unlikely. Sadly such a crises would probably come from CCP being unable to pay their bills as a company and ceasing to exist. It is exactly this scenario the passionate player base is trying to avoid. Ironically, I think this is exactly what CCP is trying to avoid as well, but addressing the problem from a completely different perspective.

 I personally do not completely disagree with the overall choices CCP has made. I think there has simply been a tipping of the scales too far in the direction of business oriented decisions and away from creative iteration. All of the original creative ideas in Eve have had many years to be tested and retested. It is time the results of these years of testing and experimentation be used to rethink some of the underlying core mechanics of Eve that are seen as broken and inadequate by all parties involved. To put it clearly, the limited resources of CCP need to be shifted back in the direction of significantly improving their current product. I really think this is all it would take.

 The answer coming from company management for along time has been "Yeah, we will get around to fixing that stuff..." By the time they get around to it there may not be a game left to fix. Irregardless of the CSM or outcry from a devoted, and perhaps dogmatic consumer base, the gamble is theirs to make in the end.

EDIT: All of these thoughts and much more is clearly and articulately expressed in this Eve Radio Chat.

MJ

Ship Iteration Part 1, Overall Mecahnics Changes

 Hello again,

 Here's the first part of some ideas for mechanics changes to Eve's PvP system. I feel this still needs a lot of editing, but I might as well throw it out there to get things started.

Overall Problems with Ship Combat:

 As it stands now smaller ships have minimal value in combat. The larger the fight, the less ship types are valuable, and the faster smaller the ships die. This goes against some basic concepts of what combat in Eve should be about:

-          All ships have roles

-          All ships are valuable in fleet combat

-          New players can serve a valuable role and enjoy combat in that role in all scales of combat

-          Veteran players can serve a valuable role in any type of ship -not just the largest

-          Capitals need sub-capital support fleets and should be supporting large sub capital fleets –not the other way around.

 There are some specific reasons small ships are less valuable. In particular these are:

-          Drones of any size can be fit on any ship thereby giving large ships a powerful and often unending counter to any smaller ship class.

-          Energy Neutralization does not scale well versus smaller ships. One shot from a large neut and your frigate or cruiser is out of cap.

-          Capital class ships are effective against smaller ships. This is in part due to the formerly stated drone problem. However Fighters deal significant damage to cruiser class ships, while Titans can single-shot anything –and do.

-          ECM does not scale well. Smaller ships have weaker sensor strength and fewer slots to counter ECM. It is an “I win“　button versus smaller ships, and most T1 ships.

 Many of these issues need to be examined holistically. They cannot be dealt in an individual way. Let’s being with drones.

Drone Size Restrictions:

 Endless light and/or medium drones on large ships are a problem. The larger the ship, the more drones it can hold. There needs to be some changes to how drones deal damage, and restrictions placed on what type of drones each ship can carry.

-          “Drone Slots” need to be added to the game.

-          Smaller ships would be limited to light drones.

-          Cruisers and Battlecruisers would be able to carry only a small amount of light drones (less then 5), and mostly medium drones.

-          Battleships would carry a small amount of medium drones (less then 5), and mostly heavy drones.

-          Capitals could only carry heavy drones and fighters.

One exception to these rules would be the Gallente drone boats. These ships have less high slots, turret hardpoints, and a limited power grid. Their alternate toolsets for fighting smaller ships is much more limited. Therefore these ships would be allowed one full flight of 5 drones of a smaller type. This would be quite potent, but limited to only one set. As an example, the Vexor would have 5 light drone slots, while the Dominix would have 5 medium drone slots.

Lets give some specific examples to help visualize these changes:

Megathron: 3 medium drone slots, 5 heavy drone slots

Vagabond: 2 light drone slots, 3 medium drone slots, drone bay increased to 30m, bandwidth unchanged

Drone movement, tracking, and damage dealing:

All drones should be able to shoot their target if they are in range even while moving. The issues with drones warping, to stop, to shoot, to warp needs to end. However the amazing accuracy of large and medium drones that are not in warp versus smaller targets needs to end, as well.

-          All light drones should be effective at dealing damage to frigates. This means some tracking boosts to Acolytes, Hornets, and Hobgoblins.

-          Medium drones should deal some damage to frigates, but not an overwhelming amount.

-          Large drones should deal next to no damage to moving frigates. They should deal some damage to moving Destroyers, Cruisers, and appropriate damage to moving Battlecruisers.

-          Sentries should exhibit the same characteristics as large drones in this area.

-          Fighters, should deal solid damage to battleships. As the target gets smaller, though their damage should reduce down to nothing quite quickly.

-          Fighter Bombers should deal no damage to moving sub-capital ships.

Energy Neutralizers:

 In their current form large Neuts simply destroy smaller ships. One shot takes a small ship’s capacitor to zero. Overall neutralizers are quite strong and give a very high reward for simply being in rage of the target. Lerger neuts certainly should give some advantage to larger ships without completely making fights one sided. To this end I suggest neuts remove the lesser between some percentage of a target’s capacitor or the neut’s maximum given value. Lets give a specific example:

 Current Large T2 Neut: Energy Neutralized, 600 GJ

 Suggested Change: Energy Neutralized, 600 GJ or 40% of Target’s Capacitor, whichever is less

 This change would cause all ships to lose less energy as their cap got lower. 40% is still a significant amount of any ships capacitor, but conversely, as targets grow larger the base flat values would take over meaning smaller neuts could not overpower larger ships. Ships with bonuses to neutralization would see all bonuses given to both the percentage value and the flat value. On a side note, because of the way Energy Vampires work I believe the framework to implement this change already exists.

Challenges with ECM:

 As Stated above, ECM scales terribly in its current implementation. Additionally, unlike tracking computers and sensor boosters, the modules used to counter ECM serve no other purpose. ECM drones are also incredibly strong with little skill investment required, and in many cases even stronger then ECM modules, themselves.

 The design goal of the following changes are to continue to allow ECM to be a strong EWAR platform (ECM is all the Caldari do so it better be good) while allowing smaller ship some chance of not being completely countered. It’s also important to maintain some sort of sensor level advantage for T2 ships and larger combat ships such as battleships and carriers.

To begin with, I would like to see the current sensor strength of all ships removed and replaced with a percentage value. All T1 Ships up through battlecruisers would have a base value of 100%. T2 ships and those larger than BCs would gain sensor strengths greater than 100%. Specific values could be played with.

Second the ECM modules themselves would have a base percentage jamming chance. The calculation for jamming success or failure would be (ECM Strength/Ship Sensor Strength). As an example, an ECM module with a jamming strength of 20% would give .2/1 versus a T1 frigate,  which is obviously a 20% chance.

Next, the racial strengths and weaknesses to jamming would be moved to the ECM modules. So Caldari percentages would be lower, while Mini percentages would be higher.

Finally, ECM drones would see their percentages lowered to 1/4 of the ECM module counterpart –so somewhere around 5%, give or take some percentage points for drone size. This would lower the odds, but hopefully not make ECM completely useless.

Overall the goal is to get smaller ships back in the game, while maintaining ECM as a strong platform.

I'll post more parts to these suggestions as I get them ready. Comments appreciated!

MJ

Essay 1: Eve, MT, and the Future of the Game

Here is my first, in what I hope to be a body of essays. As with all my essays, I reserve the right to edit after it has been posted. Enjoy!

Who Am I?

I have been playing Eve since late 2007. Most of my activities centered around PvP. While the single server aspect, and subsequent international player base intrigued me, what got me really interested in Eve was getting my ship blown up and losing my stuff. In my second week in Eve these guys hunted me down, killed me, and made my pod go splat. I was upset about the whole ordeal for upwards of 5 minutes. Then I realized “Wait a minute… I was being a complete idiot… And I just got killed for it and lost everything I had worked for… You can do that in this game! I love Eve!” and was hooked.

What Makes Eve Good?

Real Loss

 Almost all items in Eve are destructible and have a market value. When I lose a ship and get podded I don’t spawn on a “Res Pad” with all my stuff. It’s all gone -every bit of it. Items lost in Eve are gone forever. I have to figure out how I am going to generate the income to replace them. This perceived loss creates an environment where choices matter significantly more then in other games.

Conflict & Challenge

 Whether it be blowing up your enemy in space, or undercutting your rival on the market, Eve is about conflict and challenge. This isn’t pre-scripted conflict told to you in blathering dialog by some NPC with an exclamation mark over their head. Everyone involved are real life players, just like you. There are going to be winners and losers, and the outcome is uncertain.

Cumulative Advantage

 Eve is about building an advantage. While it isn’t as simple as this, advantage can generally be viewed in three areas:

-          Military Advantage

-          Economic, Industrial, and Logistical Advantage

-          Socio-Political Advantage

 Cumulative advantage can build quickly or over time but its results are always quite obvious. If you’ve out gunned your opponent, are better monetized, have a better logistical chain, and can bring powerful friends into the equation then you’ve already won the fight. Just land the knockout punch and get it over with.

Not Because of Internet Spaceships

 For me Eve is not enjoyable because it is a science fiction game. I could be happy if we were all elves firing lightning bolts at each other, or gas mask wearing mutants in some post-apocalyptic setting. What makes Eve interesting is that it’s a wild free-for-all where losses add up, where I am constantly challenged by others to kill or be killed, where alliances and choice make a difference. Eve is survival of the fittest. The smart and ruthless prevail. The foolish and lazy are given a quick trip home to update their clone.

 Not even the graphics are really that important. It’s funny that the end result of most strategic and tactical operations is some tiny white boxes on a dark background with lines being drawn between them (Pew! Pewpew!) It looks like Atari 2600 on a really high resolution monitor but boy is it fun!

Cash Transaction in Eve

 What if we could buy a ship, ammunition, even something as seemingly benign as a faction blueprint with cash wherever we were in Eve? How simple this seems… No pesky market to deal with, no middle men, no transporting, no 20 jumps to Jita. What’s wrong with that? And yet, all these steps, no matter how boring they seem, are what make Eve online the special game it is.

Buying an item for cash would bypass the entire Eve economy, and every aspect of the game. This isn’t simply about the person who is not able to sell a similar item on the market. It’s about the materials required, the industrial process, and the logistics required to move the item to market. It’s about the bypassing of the never ending price war. It’s about removing all risks involved in transporting the new equipment to its intended destination.

Worse yet, an advantage would be instantly been gained. Advantage that could be accumulated simply by spending real world cash would redefine how alliances (lower case ‘a’) are made and broken, how wars are won, and how success is achieved. The winners would most likely be those ones who simply spent the most cash.

In other words, everything that makes Eve great, the risk of loss, the challenge and conflict, and the accumulation of advantage through all these difficulties would be severely damaged, if not completely destroyed. Advantageous in-game items for real money would end Eve as we know it.

But what about PLEX?

 You may be asking yourself where PLEX fit into this. To take the argument above in its purest form one could argue that PLEX give an advantage of isk and therefore break the system. At face value I would have to agree with this. However, looking more closely at the PLEX system I believe this is not completely true.

 First of all, PLEX only cause an in-game transfer of isk from one party to another. That isk is not added or subtracted from the system, and must still be used within the system. This is very, very different from isk or an item just appearing out of “thin air” within the game.

 Second, PLEX are part of a multi-faceted approach to countering RMT, and it appears to be working. This is one area players really need to be giving CCP some credit.

 I believe the benefits of PLEX far outweigh any consequences they bring. The problems they have brought CCP, however are a different story (more on this below).

What about Vanity Items?

　I have no issue with vanity items. They give no advantage, and just like PLEX can be sold on the market to cause a movement of isk. They are completely different from items that give advantage or are in any way are directly related for the daily conflicts in Eve.

Other Ideas Worth Considering (WARNING SPECULATION AHEAD)

The Glut of PLEX, or “Why CCP REALLY REALLY wants you to buy a monocle”

 Examining the Jita regional market show an average of approximately 2,500 PLEX sold every day. This comes to around 75,000 PLEX, or 6250 years worth subscriptions moving monthly through Kimotoro, alone. My guess is there are large stockpiles of PLEX in Eve -enough that a large portion of the player base doesn’t need to pay a monthly subscription for quite a long time. While this was large boost of quick revenue for CCP, it has certainly hurt their sustained income flow. Chances are CCP wants you and I to burn our PLEX on vanity items as fast as our little hands can click that “buy” button… In fact, I bet they are desperate to have you and I do this.

 Most companies work off a quarterly profit system. As the amount of PLEX in game surge, less players are paying a monthly subscription. Worse yet, the player base has no need to purchase more PLEX quickly because they are only useful at a rate of 1 per month. This probably means quarterly profits from subscriptions are at a terrible low, even as the player base is growing. And we wonder why CCP is talking internally about expanding in game items…

Dust 514 and Cumulative Advantage

 A few years ago CCP T0ri said something quite peculiar on stage at Fanfest regarding Dust: “No, you cannot buy win”. Dust is going to a subscription free game dependent totally on micro-transactions. How can you not sell players “win” and make money? The answer is you can’t. Buying “win” is what Dust is going to be all about. But wait a moment… Isn’t dust going to allow Eve players the ability to fight over planetary control? And don’t planets give you resources that actually have considerable value in Eve? Then that means people buying “win” in dust have an advantage and… Uh oh… That advantage is transferred to Eve where it can accumulate in the form of profits for players who spend the most money in Dust… I see a considerable problem here. Is there anyway to avoid this problem? Interstingly, yes I think there is. I’m even going to go so far as to lay these ideas out for you right now.

Items

 All items in dust will need to be destructible (real loss!). Perhaps something will be salvageable from corpses and destroyed equipment, but like Eve, what “drops” and what does not should be fairly random. There should be a base set of items that all players gain access to that cost nothing. I suppose you could compare this to the Civilian modules in Eve. Destructible items are good for the game and good for CCP’s revenue.

Currency

Dust will need to have one, and only one form of currency for anything but vanity items. That currency is ISK. However, unlike Eve, the prices for all items will need to be set by CCP, not the market. There will be no “manufacturing” like in Eve. Items are just there to be purchased. There would be three specific ways players could accumulate isk to buy equipment. The first would be by engaging in PvE and PvP operations outside the scope of Eve player initiated invasions. Perhaps through…(drumroll)… Faction Warfare mechanisms. The second would be through payments from players and organizations in Eve. The third would be through purchasing isk directly as a micro transaction. That’s right, buying isk with real life cash.

One Way Economy

Eve players could hire Dust players and pay them for their services. However, no isk from Dust could ever make its way back into Eve. This is the key point to the entire system. This way the advantage Dust players could gain by “buying win” would only be felt on the battlefield within Dust, itself.

 With an endless loss of items through death the “isk sink” would always be draining. It would be the job of Eve players to help fill the sink back up, but our only advantage in doing so would be the possibility of success in planetary control. (Remember, your opponents can hire and finance mercenaries, as well.) Also, CCP would still have its much needed cash revenue.

EVE is JUST A GAME! Why are you wasting your time writing all this garbage!

 First of all you need to go watch this Youtube clip of Herm Edwards 100 times. Back?  Why do we read books, paint pictures, play sports, or do anything not directly related sustaining ourselves on this cold, hard rock of a planet? Probably because there is some inherent value in creative thought and the developmental process… But that is another essay or book to be written. This has also been a great exercise in formulating, and (attempting to) articulating ideas to others.

I hope this short essay has gotten your thought wheels turning. Eve is in for some big changes. Each of us needs to have a clear idea of what we expect, find acceptable, and unacceptable to properly decide how we will handle these changes.

MJ

Welcome!

 Hello,

 This little page will be my place to rant on about general topics revolving around Eve Online, or anything else I feel like.

 Who am I (In Eve)?

 My oldest character is named Mirei Jun. I've been playing for about 3 and a half years. During this time I've tried my hand at may parts of the game, but most of my gaming hours has been spent in 0.0 doing PvP.

 What you'll find here

 The goal here is to make an environment with a bit more structure where ideas can be considered carefully. In most cases, this blog won't be updated daily. Instead it will be a running record of short essays and thoughts I have on the game. If you have comments or constructive criticisms about any of these essays feel free to respond. If anyone sends me a really good essay that counter argues any points I have made I would love to post that as well.

 Even if you don't agree, perhaps these essays will help you formulate your opinon more clearly.