BB 80 - Voices

Welcome to the continuing monthly EVE Blog Banters and our 80th edition! For more details about what the blog banters are please visit the Blog Banter page.

Blog Banter 80 - A Voice for All Players? 

CCP Seagull encourages you to get involved in CSM12 and put your name forward to be a Space-Politician. On his blog Neville Smit noted that CSM11 had done a good job with minimum of drama. However he said he'd not be covering CSM12 like he has in previous years as he sees no point. The power-blocs will vote on who they want and unless Steve Ronuken manages to get on CSM12 it is almost certainly going to have every seat taken by the big null-sec blocs. 

Is Neville right? Is the CSM moving more and more into just a voice for 0.0? Is this a bad thing? Are the hi-sec, low-sec and WH players going to lose out badly or is it really not an issue as its the same game? Could a totally null-sec dominated CSM 12 give a balanced voice for everyone?

* * * * *

EVE Online has always rewarded the largest groups of organized players. The Goons' dominance for so many years was predicated not only on their size but how well they worked together towards common goals. It wasn't until World War Bee when a larger group as well organized was able to dislodge them from their throne in the north west.

When the CSM was seen as ineffectual the null sec blocs mostly ignored the voting and a diverse group of players would get on. However, when the blocs saw some things they didn't like come from CCP without any or adequate resistance by the CSM, they responded with their most potent weapon: organization and coherence. The result has been dwindling diversity of playstyles on the CSM and an increase of bloc representation. Unless you have explicit and implicit endorsement of a null sec bloc (or two, or three), your chances of getting on the CSM are very low. And with the CSM downgrading from 12 reps to 10, things get even bleaker. You need to be in the top three choices of a lot of ballots to get elected.

While there may be more players in high sec, they lack the incentive to have cohesion in their voting patterns. Null sec pilots understand taking orders and not having to determine their own ballot, but the individualists in high sec have no pre-existing basis for even taking recommendations from anyone trying to organize the high sec vote. IF they can be persuaded to vote at all that is.

So yes, high sec, low sec, and wormholes are going to be under-represented on the coming CSM, if they have any at all. I'm hopeful that faction warfare can get someone like Scylus Black voted in to pull CCP's attention to iterating on Faction Warfare at least a little bit, but I'm painfully cognizant that even getting the militia pilots of four factions and numerous unrelated allainces/corporations on the same page is nigh impossible.

I hope I'm wrong.

BB 79 - Congrats on Subscribing for a Long Time

The current Blog Banter from Sand, Cider, and Spaceships:

Blog Banter 79 - Rewarding the Vets?
Should CCP put more effort into rewards for loyal customers? The mystery code from the collector's edition hasn't seen much use and whilst veteran rewards have been mentioned by CCP several times at Fanfests, we have seen nothing. Wasn't there talk of a special station only 10-year vets could dock in at one point?
Is this lack of gratitude towards loyal customers alienating? Do people wish for a change here? Is it too self-righteous to expect small signs of gratitude for being a loyal customer? Is a customer purchasing half a year in advance more loyal than someone plexing every now and than probably missing out a few weeks or months a year? How do CCP place rewards in game without hurting the economy?
Or is it just a case of there is no need and HTFU snowflake?

Its no secret I'm not a fan of the current skill point system which unnecessarily punishes new players compared to veteran players. I like that skill point trading gives newer players a chance to overcome some of that deficit, but really it does not go far enough in the end.

Regardless, when we talk about rewards for veteran players I have issues because not only do the vets have the advantages of having accrued massive number of skill points over the years they have been subscribed, unlocking all manners of choices in terms of activity and ships and weapon systems, these vets have typically accrued an amount of material wealth dwarfing what a newer player has many times over. Unless you are very active and careless with your ships and assets, you will inevitably gain wealth through normal activities, and the amount you gain increases over time.

And as wealth increases, we find ways to compound the interest so to speak: corporate welfare programs ship as ship replacement programs, money making fleets (mining or PvE), free ships, etc.

Add to that the frequent rewards players get at holidays and EVE's birthday like skins, free ships, collectibles, and it quickly becomes apparent to me that veterans are rewarded handsomely for being veterans.

So yeah, I honestly don't think veterans need much more in the way of reward for basically being subscribed for a long period of time.

Blog Banter 78 - The Big Reset

Blog Banter 78 - The Big Reset

Just for a moment engage your "willing suspension of disbelief". Imagine that CCP, at downtime today, reset everything in Eve Online. Everything! When you logged in you were in a starter system with your character... but now with less than a million skill points, a mere 5000 ISK and a noob ship (now with civilian afterburner!). Markets are pretty empty other than a few seeded items. All Sov is gone. All player structures are gone. All PI infrastructure is gone. No corps or alliances exist. Nothing remains. New Eden is suddenly a completely level playing field and the next great gold-rush is on? Or is it? What happens now?

Honestly?

I couldn't start over. I spent a decade, ten freaking unbelievable years, getting to where I am now. And where I am is someone with tens of billions of personal assets, billions more in investor's ISK, and enough skills to safely say yes to the question "can you fly this PvP ship?". I can't fathom going back to watching skill queues for unlocking modules, grinding missions or asteroids for ISK, rebuilding blueprint libraries and collected ships and items...

I would quit. I'd say "it was a good run, but I'm gone". I don't have the time or patience to rebuild that small little personal empire back to anywhere near what it is now. While I love PvP in EVE, and leading fleets and participating in big battles, I don't think that is enough to convince me to spend so much effort to feel comfortable in the game again with any ship class, weapon, or module.

Saying that makes me feel weak. Like I am not as much as a fan as the people would swear they would continue to play from the start again for the love of the game. But my free time is precious and accomplishments are treasured, and if I lost it all I think I would have to just love EVE from afar, like a former girlfriend I had fun with but just didn't want to make the journey through the dark times for.

Fortunately for me, I don't think I'm alone in this regard and I suspect CCP would not want to lose a lot of veteran players so they make sure the game data is backed up doubly so :)

Back When I Was a Kid...

Blog Banter 77 - The Malaise
Is there a malaise affecting Eve currently? Blogs and podcasts are going dark and space just feels that little bit emptier. One suggestion is that there may be a general problem with the vets, especially those pre-Incarna and older, leaving and being replaced by newer players who are not as invested in the game. The colonists versus immigrants? Is this a problem? Are there others? Or is everything just fine and it's just another bout of summer "ZOMG EVE IZ DYING!"

I always get suspicious when someone, even myself, laments that things were better in the past. If one digs deep enough we often find that its not that things were better in the past, but rather the new and unknown is scary and intimidating while the old known environment is comfortable like an old worn shoe despite the wearing seams and sprouted holes.

So let's apply a critical eye to some of the things being said in this month's blog banter.

Blogs and podcasts are going dark

Well, this has been an ongoing issue for years and not just an EVE phenomenon. Podcasts are always going dark as casters lose interest or move onto other projects (after all, no one is making money from free podcast episodes) and new podcasts come on the scene to replace them. As far as I can tell, there is the same amount of hours from talking heads in the EVE podcast community as there was 5 years ago, if not more. As for blogs, they have been replaced by a combination of EVE News Sites that take the most prolific writers and pay them for their services, and Twitch streaming that reaches wider audiences for showing gameplay experiences. Gaming blogs all over have been dying with the rise of Youtube and Twitch and others.

space just feels that little bit emptier

We literally JUST finished a massive null sec war (perhaps one of the biggest) that shook up the old guard political meta and had people logging in that had not been seen in years in great numbers. Now we're heading into the aftermath of that war in which traditionally a large number of the losing side pilots take a powder for a bit, combined with summer weather in the northern hemisphere that correlates to lower login numbers, and yes space is going to feel emptier as a result while the winners consolidate and losers recuperate and summer invigorates.

One suggestion is that there may be a general problem with the vets, especially those pre-Incarna and older, leaving and being replaced by newer players who are not as invested in the game.

Darn kids don't respect their elders like we used to! This seems like pure bunk to me, claiming somehow the "older" generation had some magic grit and perseverance that the younger generation lacks. While I grant that the gaming environment now compared to 10 years ago has changed, I don't think it means that newer players are less committed to the game than we were.

All that being said, I don't think its unreasonable that gamers coming of age today have different expectations of games than we did 10 years ago. As beautiful as EVE is in screenshots and cinematics, its not a visually entrancing game to actually play. As improved as the interface is over ten years ago, its still a monstrosity of menus, commands, and windows. Let's face it, EVE is a product of 13 years ago, practically a generation, and the visually stunning games available now tend to make EVE show its age. Make no mistake: EVE is an amazing game that has improved with age and has incredible depth that other games cannot match, but it IS a product of a previous generation or two in terms of game life cycles.

All that is to say, yes, EVE is dying. As I wrote last October in a post called Twilight:

After 9 years of play I can honestly say that EVE the game is in the best place its ever been.
But EVE is dying.
I don't mean "hemorrhaging blood from a gaping wound on the floor" dying. EVE's death is not imminent barring a sudden unexpected disaster in Iceland. I mean "we're over the hill and entering the golden years" dying. EVE's most vibrant and alive time is in the past and I don't think its coming back. We are fully in EVE's twilight.

Later on in that post I continue:

Couldn't EVE regain the glory days and subscription growth? I don't know, the world has changed a lot in the past decade and the potential pool of players has different expectations and that critical mass of players that grew like a black hole in a dust cloud has shed enough bitter veterans to poison the well just enough to break the feedback look. I think we still have enough to stave off immediate collapse, CCPs actions for the past two years have assured that, but we are never going to grow significantly again.

EVE is slowing down not because of any maliciousness or mishandling of the game, its simply gotten old. Unfortunate, but true. I think the game has a lot of life left in it and I'm truly excited for the coming winter and the next set of structures and the future in store. Its possible EVE's twilight could last another 10 years of great gaming as long as CCP keeps putting real effort into it. But let's not pretend that us of the original EVE players were somehow special in forging this gameworld community and that newer players lack that secret ingredient in their makeup.

EVE is still the best internet spaceships simulation out there and I welcome all old and new players in it.

Blog Banter 76 - Flagships

Welcome to the continuing monthly EVE Blog Banters and our 76th edition! For more details about what the blog banters are please visit the Blog Banter page.

Blog Banter 76 - Tanky McTankFace

At fanfest CCP Fozzie proposed a potential new ship class. Let's call it the fleet commander's flagship for now. This is to try and prevent "FC Headshotting" where the opposing fleet knows who the FC is and alpha's them off the field leaving the rest of the fleet in confusion and disarray. Fozzie mentioned a ship with a great tank but no offensive abilities. Is this a good idea? Is FC head-shotting a legitimate tactic? If CCP do go down the route of a "flagship" how might this work? Also is a new ship the answer or is there another way of giving an FC the ability not to be assassinated 12 seconds into the fight without letting players exploit it? 

Banter on...

* * * * *

Back in Blog Banter 70 last year which was about Dreaming, I talked about my dream of a Flagship

As a Fleet Commander, one thing I find myself doing when not in actual combat is listening to my scouts, looking at maps on Dotlan Maps, and trying to picture where all the ships of my fleet and known enemy fleets are located. It can be tough sometimes, and this is one instance where I think it should be tough as the skills and expertise of the FC and scouts combined can make the difference between a successful fleet and a complete debacle. 

That being said, at a certain point the number of chess pieces on the board as fleets and parties grow can become very unwieldy and it would be nice to have the option to command from a flagship with the tools to allow a fleet commander.
What tools you asked?

I want a ship with a command deck map that I can use to visualize the battlefield from my scouts and fleet automatically. It would connect with my fleet's transponders and my scouts d-scans and grid visuals to feed into my screen a map of known and previously known ship locations. It would also allow scouts to tag groups of ships as hostile or neutral or friendly, and give up to date status on my fleet position and composition. 

I think it should be tied to a ship, a tech II battleship based on the Rokh, Abaddon, Hyperion, and Maelstrom, so that the reward of having so much information at your fingertips is balanced by the FC having to field a delicious target. (PS make sure the Command Map mode does not work under cloak or in station or in POS bubble.) You want it balanced so that not every fleet includes one, but only the Super-Serious-Internet-Spaceships fleet includes them.

However, my vision of a Flagship above is not quite what this blog banter is about. My idea above is about a strategic command deck I suppose, whereas this banter is focusing on a field tactical command deck, the former about the bigger picture and the latter about the current local situation.

In that regard, I really like what the Command Destroyers have done for the small ship meta. They are extra tanky for destroyers giving me a more solid platform to command from, reducing the fear of headshotting a titch while also providing an easy link boost (which will become extremely important when on-grid AoE links are a reality) as well as the very cool tactical ability of a Field Jump Generator. Overall it has been a great Flagship for frigate and destroyer fleets.

I would like to see something of the same vein for large fleet types. When you get to cruisers or bigger, the command destroyer has a weaker tank and less likely to survive the conflagration, and will outpace the slower ships trying to approach for a tactical jump. But a larger vessel, say a Tech II version of the Attack Battlecruisers focusing on a big Tech II battleship level tank and Field Jump Generators instead of battleship level DPS could work really well. Alternatively, revamp one of the sets of Command Ships currently seeing little use in game to include less DPS but more Field Jump Generator.

At the end of the day, the best defense is being an unknown FC ;)

BB 75 - Uniqueness

Blog Banter 75 - What Does Project Nova Need to Be Successful? 

Welcome to the continuing monthly EVE Blog Banters and our 75th edition! For more details about what the blog banters are please visit the Blog Banter page.
What Does Project Nova Need to Be Successful? 

At Fanfest CCP showcased their current iteration of the FPS set in the Eve Universe. Following on from DUST514 and Project Legion, Project Nova is shaping up to be a solid FPS with CCP taking the decision to get the game mechanics right first. However with so many FPS out there what will Nova need in order to stand out from a very large crowd and be successful? What are the opportunities and perhaps more importantly, the dangers for CCP? How can Nova compete against CoD, Battlefront and Titanfall to name a few?

 There are a ton of quick and dirty PvP games out in the First Person Shooter genre, and I've played a few of them, a lot of the Call of Duty franchise and dabbled in Sony's Planetside 2 MMOFPS. I was really looking forward to getting into DUST prior to hearing it was a Playstation only title which meant I was not going to ever play it. I still feel that was a huge misstep for CCP.

Regardless of DUST, in the PC ecosystem there are a lot of FPS to choose from so CCP needs to distinguish themselves early and strongly in the minds of gamers in order to be successful.

First and foremost, Project Nova needs to have solid fundamentals: performs well, looks good, feels good (in terms of controls). Sounds easy but it is rare to find all three in a single game.

Secondly, it needs to have a lot of variety: lots of weapon types and abilities/utilities to choose from that are well balanced, maps with various designs and environments and elevations, and different types game modes (with lots of options to customize them in private matches).

But even with those two things all you have is a good FPS in a market flooded with FPS games. In order to truly be successful CCP needs to capitalize on their biggest strength and the unique tie in only they can bring to the table: tight integration with EVE Online.

That is the big selling point not only to current EVE players but the large FPS community at large. Being able to affect the large universe that is New Eden through their actions in Project Nova in collaboration with capsuleers. A tight integration beyond orbital bombardments and slight impact on Faction War will make the game a mainstay in the long run and not just an also-ran.

I look forward to shooting my opponents in the face on the ground and in space.

BB 74 - Building the Future

Welcome to the continuing monthly EVE Blog Banters and our 74th edition! For more details about what the blog banters are please visit the Blog Banter page.

The Most Important Reveal at Fanfest Was......
So when this Blog Banter goes live Fanfest will be over. Hungover geeks from around the world will be departing Reykjavik after a five-day binge of important internet spaceships and partying. Whether you were there in person, watched the streams or read the dev blogs on your mobile hidden under your work desk there was probably something in there that gave you a "nerd-boner". What for you personally was the most important thing to come out of Fanfest 2016?

* * * * *

I'm a sucker for prognostication. I love seeing plans and hints of plans and speculating about what it all means and how I would accomplish them, or change the plans entirely. So the most important things to me were these two pictures from Sand, Cider, and Spaceships blog on Day 3:

These two slides combined tell us the future of EVE and its propagation of user owned structures. 

So we know from above that Manufacturing and Research in outposts and POS are going to be covered Industrial Array structures in the fall. We can also speculate from the round tables and such that the Drilling Platforms for moon mining (and ring mining perhaps?) and reactions are a thing for next year, and I believe I heard that small "Stargates" are going to replace the jump bridges of the current POS networks. Not sure where Cyno Beacons and Jammers will fall, observatories or Admin Hubs? I'm still not sold on the need for Advertisemtn Center structures as per their description from the original dev blog:

H.     Advertisement Centers
Structures mainly aimed toward propaganda spreading.
Service module possibilities: Text advertisement, billboard replacement, being used as gigantic monuments with no purpose (except to show how big your e-peen is by showing the statue of your glorious alliance leader). Could also involve frozen corpses somehow.
Rigs possibilities: Anything affecting what’s above.

Regardless, we know now from fanfest that CCP is pleased with the direction and acceptance of Citadels and will continue to push forward with that vision. This is the most important thing to me to come out of fanfest. 

BB 73 - EVE Civilizations

Welcome to the continuing monthly EVE Blog Banters and our 73rd edition! For more details about what the blog banters are please visit the Blog Banter page.

Blog Banter 73 - The Other Eve Game?
So soon(tm) we will have Eve Online, Valkyrie, Gunjack and the as yet untitled FPS to replace DUST514/Project Legion. Are we missing anything else? Are then any other games CCP should be looking into? Colony building simulators in the style of Sim City or Rimworld. Should it be on a grander scale link Civilisation or Stronghold Kingdoms. How about RTS games ala Command and Conquer. Survival games such as Rust? Planet based combat like World of Tanks? Would you like to see other game types expanding the Eve Universe or should CCP stick to what it knows?

* * * * * 

Have you ever player one of the Civilizations game, or really any 4X game, on a harder setting where you just can't take every other civilization on singlehandedly, and you get into that position where you have to try and keep some happy while you deal with the others?

And you ever get into the situation where everyone decides they hate you and you end up at war with everyone anyway? Sound familiar?

Oh Dear God!

But everyone is going to think of that, right?

Another old awesome game is called Sword of the Samurai made by Microprose way back in 1989.

This was an interesting combination of strategy and role playing where you are a Samurai lord and you must work your way up the feudal ladder to become Shogun of Japan. This game had many different modes as you played; armies on maps, sword fight minigame, overhead ninja game, province management, it was a deep and fascinating game for its time.

I think an EVE version of this game could be amazing. Not pure roleplaying but mission based roleplay / strategy of a Capsuleer rising through the ranks to become corporation CEO, then Alliance Executor, then Coalition Leader. The goal of the game would be to secure several regions in null sec (i.e. Shogun). It could have a large fleet battle where you pit your doctrines against the enemy's, a single ship mode where you fight off a sudden attack, station infiltration minigame, diplomacy mini game as you try to make allies, resource management as you build your empire of fleets and stations, etc.

I would play the shit out of that game as a simpler fantasy roleplay counterpoint to EVE's actual simulation gameplay. 

Huh, a roleplay game about a real-play game. I'm all in.

BB72 - Mapping The Way

This month's blog banter is based off of Sugar Kyle's blog post titled "Your Ideal Roadmap":

In the producer session, as we try to figure out how to fix and improve our communication with teams and how we figure out who should be gone to for features and changes, we discussed the road map.
We discussed what 'our' ideal roadmap would be. This breaks down into the individual roadmaps for each member of the CSM. After all, we are individiuals and we have different dreams for Eve. We have different goals and features that we want to move forward or go back to.
How close are we to what CCP is looking at and planning? We discussed their safety mesures to weigh the value of features. What will this feature do for Eve? It is not enough to have an ideal road map of things you want. Those things have to have value and that value needs to be enough to dedicate the time to the feature.
Do you have an ideal roadmap? A path for Eve to head in the next year or two once we move past Citadel?

 OMG, what an opened ended topic!

Its hard to think about what comes after Citadel this spring because that expansion is going to be so paradigm shifting its not funny. Space is going to radically change as Citadels spring up all over the place and the warfare around them erupts. Capital warfare is going to change radically as the promised revisions and new Force Auxiliaries arrive on the battlefield. Its going to take months for the ramifications to fully evolve and be seen.

That being said, I have ideas about where EVE should be aiming its sights at a high level. I believe a three pronged map is ideal.

1. Players Shape Space

I think the first road of the map should be to continue giving players the ability to shape their space and continue to devolve the functions of NPC and hardwired services. By that I mean as Citadels develop and provide markets, industrial facilities, offices, services, etc, these things should start being scaled back from NPC control.

In addition, we should expand the ability of players to create jump bridges and cyno beacons on or adjacent to the new structures as long as they require real effort to protect and maintain. I don't want defenders or system inhabitants to have complete comfort, but there should be more reward for living in and developing a system.

2. PvE Overhaul

This may not be sexy, but the goal of making EVE a vibrant and dynamic place to spend time in requires that the less headline grabbing side of the game is improved. Drifters, Circadian Sleepers, and Jove Observatories were a good start, but we need to go farther. A lot farther. All the old AI for missions and rats needs to be gutted and replaced so that the rats in belts and in missions act like the are alive and ready to fight and not just die. Warp Scrambling, Ewar, switching targets appropriately, trying to escape, microwarp drives, micro jump drives, everything! Ultimately the jump from high level PvE to PvP should be nearly seamless, but at the very least it has to be entertaining and challenging.

3. New Space

Ultimately, its time for new space with new rules and new challenges. Wormhole space as it stands now has been solved and conquered. There needs to be a new group challenge that baits the imagination and draws in both the veterans and the new players. Seagull Space, as its been called, is the next frontier that can tie together the disparate regions of space (Null, High, Low, and Wormholes) into a crossroads of danger and excitement.

What's on your roadmap?

BB71 - Analysis Paralysis

From the Blog Banter for this month:

Too Many Ships Spoil the Sandpit?
We all like important internet spaceships right? The more spaceships the better right? Or are we getting too many to be easily to remember them all. A Mastodon on scan? That the hell is that and what does it do? Oh! Never mind!
Are we getting too many ships. Is it too complicated to remember them all and what their traits are? Do FC's these days need an encyclopedic knowledge of ship types unless they want their fleet to DIAF. With more and more ships being released each year will we ever reach "too many" or do you think there can never be too many important internet spaceship types?

* * * * *

There was a time in EVE's past where the number of effective combat ships one might run into was pretty low.  Rifter and Merlins for frigs, Thorax and Rupture, Hurricanes and Drakes, etc. Sure, you'd run into the occasional newb in a Condor or Vexor but overall the meta was pretty static, enough that I can't remember during that time if I ever saw more than one Bellicose in space.

It was not a great situation. It was too static and predictable, too stratified against newer players, and wasted numerous hulls that were lower tiers and passed over so easily with quick skill trains.

Tiericide was the process to rationalize the ships, especially tech 1 ships, and bring about more defined roles other than "Combat" and "More Combat", introduce tech I logistics ships (remember the Osprey/Exeq/etc were originally mining cruisers!), and generally make the progression from frigates to battleships more intuitive and balance out the vast gulf of difference between tech II and tech I.

It was widely regarded as a success and the number of ships you could run into in space on a regular basis bloomed three or four times.

But as part of the Crucible era atonement CCP hit upon the fact that players loved their ships, LOVED them! And always a big hit with players was adding more ships. Tier III Battlecruisers, Faction Battlecruisers, Mordu's Legion pirate ships, Navy Faction frigates, Tactical Destroyers, Command Destroyers, Sisters of EVE ships, ORE mining frigates, not to mention an ever-growing list of Alliance Tournament prizes, gift ships, Tech II Logistics frigates... did I miss anything?

Now in PvP situations many of these ships are rarely seen due to unsuitability with combat roles or simple rarity but the fact remains that the number of ships a player must know the basics of in order to make decisions on a consistent basis in PvP has grown three fold if not more in this time. And there are more on the way in the form of the new Force Auxiliary capitals.

That's the current situation. The question is if we have reached the limit of too many ships for an average player / Fleet Commander to keep them all straight in the head now, or if we are close to hitting that wall in the future.

No and yes.

No in the sense that an experienced and competent Fleet Commander should be able keep track of the basic abilities and threat levels of all possible combat ships with the notable exception of Alliance tournament ships which are rarely seen in space. As new ship types get added its expected that the current FC cohort consumes the new data and integrates it into their OODA loop. Similarly, experienced pilots should also do the same to make sure they are up to date on the possible battlefield conditions.

However, I say yes in the sense that for a new player and new aspiring Fleet commander, the current array of possible ship names, classes, and threat levels to assess is staggering and daunting. I have concerns that this is going to recreate the stratification effect we had to begin with and make it difficult for new players to get into PvP or commanding fleets.

The new overview with icons per hull class help a little bit, but only a little. You can tell a frigate from a cruiser, for example, but you can't tell a combat frigate from an exploration frigate from an assault frigate without knowing the ship names and their classes intimately.

What I think should be added is a one click button on the overview to get a ship info card (not the whole Show Info window) that gives the basic information on a ship: its image, Faction, size, role/class, and if applicable main weapon types. That would help a lot for newer players and even older players that got rusty (or are just bad).

One thing is for sure, more ships in the future is probably the rule of the land.

Suspension of Belief

Welcome to the continuing monthly EVE Blog Banters and our 69th edition! For more details about
what the blog banters are please visit the Blog Banter page.

Because of Space-Magic
CCP sometimes get stuck between a veldspar 'roid and a hard place when they try to blend realism with sensible game mechanics in our sci-fi simulator. Sometimes they create a scientific answer such as 4th dimensional drag to explain our 'submarines in space'. Other times, not so much. When a null-sec Citadel is destroyed players 'stuffz' is to be magicked to another station. Why should a citadel be different to a titan? Should CCP ensure that 'space magic' always has a plausible explanation or do we need just to say "Well, its only a game!" and engage the willing suspension of disbelief? How should it work when a citadel goes boom, how do we balance risk with reward, and how should any "space-magic" be explained?

* * * * *

CCP has done a marvelous job at combining game mechanics and the game's lore over ten years.

Want to have players simply respawn? Cloning and neural transfers. Want players to learn skills over time? Implants. Want players to be considered near-god-like figures in the universe? Capsuleers with perfect control over their ships. The list goes on and the environment is rich for additional extrapolation with near god-like technical abilities that the people of New Eden have access to. I have tried my hand at combining game mechanics and lore in the past as well:
Common Damage Types Used in Naval Parlance
Essay - The Unintended Rise of the Capsuleer and its Effects On Cluster Politics
The Non-Signatory Factions to the Yulai Convention
Time Dilation
Stargates - Introduction to Cluster Politics

However, there are some instances where it falls down and no amount of techno-babble or hand waving can save grace. How massive ships are assembled in seconds in stations, for example, or why the empires allow capsuleers to wage massive destruction within their borders, or why suicide ganking is considered a viable form of gameplay (although that last one can be explained by 'capsuleers are all psychotic crazies' which is not far from the truth).

Its these instances of stretches of imagination that somewhat break the suspension of disbelief and pull us out of the game's environment, but its a necessary evil because no one really wants to play a realistic game that puts all the same constraints and limitations on us that real life already does. Suspension of belief in these cases is required to allow us to continue to enjoy the game due to the mechanics and gameplay as opposed to the explanation behind it.

Which brings us to Citadels.

CCP was faced with a difficult problem. They wanted to create massive player built structures that could effectively replace outposts of starbases but didn't want to accept the risk-reward model of either one: outposts have relatively high risk (high price tag and risk when deploying the egg) and high reward (all the functionality of a station and is invulnerable and you don't lose your stuff but can be locked from it); while starbases have low risk (low price tag, relatively fast and quiet setup) and low reward (living out of a POS is painful and requires fueling, vulnerable to attack). In order to cleave this problem cleanly for citadels they opted for a middle road where citadels offer a lot of the reward of outposts with some of the risk of starbases (i.e. destruction).

All is well and good except a roadblock to the hybrid model presented itself. Players, either individually or via corporations/alliances, store massive amounts of stuff in stations and outposts, dwarfing the piddly amounts found in starbases. The added risk of complete and utter loss of material could be enough risk to prevent widespread adoption of citadels which was directly opposed to CCP's plans. The hybrid reward model needed a hybrid risk model and thus born was the mechanic that your stuff in citadels didn't get lost, but rather simply impounded at the nearest NPC station and liberated for a fee. (Super capitals, wormholes, exceptions, etcetera) But how do you explain this via the lore? What possible reason could there be for this mechanic in the universe that houses the game?

One solution would be to simply accept that mechanic needs trump lore needs and that a suspension of belief is called for to resolve the issue. Another option, which I suspect CCP will lean toward, is to posit that the new NPC corporation that is providing the background for the introduction of citadels will also provide the in game infrastructure for securing and transporting player/corporation assets in the event of a catastrophic citadel failure, and that capsuleers pay for this insurance via fees and everyone understands that interfering with any asset recovery will mean immediate lockout from all citadels in New Eden (much how I try to explain why players do not directly interfere with stargates).

In the end, the important overriding concern is if the game is fun. All else can be sacrificed on the altar to ensure this goal.

BB68 - Its Not Much, But Its Mine

Blog Banter 68: This is My Rig

This is my Rig, There are Many Like it...
What do you play Eve on? I'll show you mine if you show me yours! Are you pew-pewing on a laptop? Plotting universal domination on a 12 monitor set up? Mining away on a 50" TV? Is your set up located where your other half can speak to you or do you lock yourself away for hours in your Eve themed shed? How do you play your important internet spaceships?

I don't have the fanciest setup in the world, single income family with three growing boys, but it gets me by.

First off I run on two monitors, a 25" main which runs at 1920x1080 resolution and  a 17" whose resolution I don't care enough about to remember. I use the second monitor for voice comms, dotLAN maps, and Aideron slack channels when I'm playing.

My PC is an old 2010 build from a local parts store that went under a few years back. Its processor is an "Intel Pentium G6950" at 2.8 GHz with 4 GB RAM. I tried to upgrade the RAM to 8 GB but the motherboard couldn't handle it. Back in 2010 it was top of the line almost for my price budget and it shows its age now with newer games, but still runs EVE and World of Warships decently enough.

Jek 14's Stealth Fighter and a Sith Infiltrator on top of it for good luck.

My keyboard is a Logitech G19 with back lit keys and lots of programmable options. I primarily use the G keys for drone commands and broadcasting for reps. I do love the nice volume scroll knob though.

I use Sony Wireless headphones when playing EVE. They are comfy enough but very warm.

My mouse is a Logitech wireless trackball (with the regular cheapie mouse for kids in red). I love thumb trackball mice and use them at home and work.

Finally, my microphone is a Blue Snowball with webcam camera (hidden inside mic shell right now) which I use for both voice comms and recording podcasts.

I'm saving up to upgrade my machine, hopefully next year.

Blog Banter 67 - CCP TurkkDMC

Welcome to the continuing monthly EVE Blog Banters and our 67th edition! For more details about what the blog banters are please visit the Blog Banter page.

I am CCP X
There has been a catastrophic accident in the CCP Offices in the style of the Robbie Coltrane movie "The Pope Must Die". A leftover open bottle of Brennivin hidden behind a filing cabinet from the last Christmas party has mutated and released fumes affecting several senior CCP staff leading to some staffing changes. CCP Chair is now the CEO and CCP Cub is Executive Producer assisted by CCP Kitteh. In a freak accident your player account has just been upgraded to a senior CCP staffer leading a development team! With CCP now led by an inanimate object supported by a very young child and a fluffy cat, there is nothing to stop this from happening!

You are now CCP -Insert Your CCP Name Here- and have a team of developers eagerly awaiting your commands. So CCP X, what are you going to have your team work on?

Call me Turkk. Actually, CCP TurkkDMC.

Playing World of Warships has again brought to mind the differences between open sandbox PvP and arena PvP. In the former there is rarely a balanced fight, you are often chasing after targets or running from a larger fleet. Occasionally two fleets rush into battle but usually one side has the upper hand and wins handily. Only rarely, very rarely, is a pitched battle won by the slimmest of margins in EVE. Even in the tournaments a lot of the battle is fought and won or lost in the pre-match planning and meta maneuvers, with only the result being revealed in the unfolding battle.

In World of Warships and other "arena PvP" games, the opposite is true as the game is designed to pitch two equally matched teams against each other and allow (as much as possible) the players with the better overall skill to come out on top. While blowouts are not uncommon, there are a lot more close battles and occasional draws.

I enjoy both kinds of PvP. The hunt and chase, with scouting and intel gathering and marshaling forces and fleets, really appeals to the planner and strategic thinker in me. On the other hand, the pitting of pure piloting skill in the arena PvP is awesome for the visceral rush of hand to hand (or ship to ship) combat.

It bugs the ever living crap out of me that EVE producers have not seen the wisdom in expanding the sandbox to encompass both kinds of gameplay, literally freezing out a large potential pool of new players who want spaceship combat without the meta-battle that requires so much experience and friends virtually all the time.

Yes, there are tournaments, but they are modeled after EVE's DNA as well, dominated by the rich groups with tons of meta experience and practice. There is no drop in and play a match there, it is significant commitment and effort and then the battle's outcome is mostly determined before ships start moving. There is less imbalance than free form PvP in the wild, so to speak, but its not a large measure of individual PvP skill so much as its a measure of group meta-PvP skill.

Yes, there is the dueling mechanic, but its a small tool in the sandbox that is easily used and abused by the nefarious against the unsuspecting. Its just another tool of the meta-game, for the most part, and rarely actually used for a contest of PvP ship flying skill.

"Let the players handle it", I hear the cry! Things like the Syndicate Competitive League are held up as examples where players can get involved in arena PvP at a lower barrier to entry. But like all of EVE's tournaments, its afflicted with the same meta-gaming overhead and time commitment requirement that exclude the casual drop in and play crowd. Not to mention that CCP has been derelict in providing any readily available tools to facilitate these functions.

No, given the reigns of CCP what I would do is formulate a plan to introduce actual casual drop in PvP arenas, free of the meta-gaming overhead and massive time commitment that currently plagues arena PvP in EVE.

I would designate a number of systems, probably around ten, spread throughout the high sec, low sec, and NPC null sec regions, where a special station exists where arena battles are held. Each station would host battles for certain ship classes, for example, one station in high sec hosts battles only for tech 1 frigates and only with tech II modules (i.e. no faction or deadspace modules or ships) while a station in low sec hosts battles between cruisers and smaller.

You dock in the station with your ship or ships and enter a queue with your current ship (assuming it meets criteria) and the match maker transports you and 13 other queued players to a deadspace pocket with various terrain in system where you are divided into two teams and you have 15 minutes to battle it out to victory. In this pocket links, boosters, fleet bonuses, and implants have no affect. Just you and your ship, good luck.

Victors receive modest rewards in the form of ISK and Loyalty points for the special store in the new stations.

"But!" I hear many players wailing, "this will kill normal PvP in EVE!" No. No it will not. Because the people who want this gameplay, casual drop in PvP, are not currently in space or tournaments doing "normal" PvP, they are off playing other games. Adding arena PvP like this will increase normal PvP as players come into the game and try everything it has to offer.

Its time to expand the sandbox and CCP TurkkDMC is the one to do it.

Art By Any Other Name

Eve Blog Banter 66 - Caldarification

The art team has been working on many art assets recently and there has been talk of the "Caldarification" of Eve related art. Recently examples have been the WIP images of the Thrasher class destroyer redesign and the citadel. Do we need to keep the lines between the races designs clear cut or is some blending of more generic sci-fi styling a good thing? Should Matari be flying/floating scrap heaps? Should Gallente be 'all about the bass'? Or is a bit of generic sci-fi styling needed to bring new life to our important internet spaceships even if it leans a bit to Caldari?

Let's take a look at examples of these WIP images:

Yes, the aesthetic of the models does seem to invoke a lot of the designs of Caldari ships and structures, especially when viewed without colour as in these images. The Thrasher in particular could be a mutant brother of the Jackdaw Tactical Destroyer:

So what's going on here? Being a 9 year veteran to the game gives me some perspective on art in the game so let's dig up some old screenshots of mine to look at what being Caldari used to mean:

Excepting the Badger, every ship in those images are asymmetric. There were some mostly symmetric ships in the Caldari line when I started, like the Merlin and Caracal, but they were the exceptions. Over the years and redesigns that started to go away from all the empire's lines, replaced with a more generally pleasing symmetric look to new ships.

Another thing to not is how plain the ships look on their skins. Not a lot of shadows, tones, spikes, lights, moving parts, etc. They still looked very sci-fi but also a little plain compared to the gorgeousness we see in game now.

Let me get to the point I'm trying to make: EVE's overall look for ships has changed over the years from many asymmetric designs to symmetric ones. In addition, the capabilities of the graphics over the past decade have advanced so that the designers can be more imaginative on smaller scales to differentiate the empires, and as the artists get these new abilities their designs change and grow in new directions.

Looking at WIP images tend to look like Caldari right from the start because Caldari over-arching design concept leans heavily on the blue-gray spectrum, but I bet that once the Thrasher gets its multiple layers of shading and skin it will no longer evoke the Caldari aesthetic.

Finally, its not unusual that in a galaxy getting more and more connected via internal social changes (i.e. rise of the casuleers) and pushed together via external threats (Drifters, Sansha, Rogue Drones) that technology would coalesce as well and more overlapping in designs could evolve from that.

And I for one, welcome our Caldari engineer overlords. :)

Attribution

This month's blog banter is all about your attributes:

Attributes and Skills
Does Eve need attributes? It's been discussed a lot recently. Unlike other MMO's your characters attributes don't make a difference in day-to-day gameplay. They simply set how fast you train a skill. Is it time to remove attributes from the game or totally revamp their purpose? Do they add a level of complexity to the game that is not needed? If you really need to use a 3rd party application to get the most from it should it be in the game? Should they be repurposed with each attribute adding a modifier to your ship? Are attributes a relic from the past or are they an important part of Eve - You make your decision and deal with the consequences?

* * * * *

I couldn't tell you what my current attributes are on any of my characters. I can't remember the last time that I cared.

Early on in the typical career of an EVE pilot you tend to care a lot about your attributes and remapping them to maximize your skill training speed, many times to the point of making convoluted skill plans to maximize each 6 month portion. But its a perfect example of the Law of Diminishing Returns: at a certain point, no matter how fast I accrue skill points its just a tiny drop in the large bucket of my overall skill point total. Who cares if I gain 0.11% new skill points this month or 0.12%?

Its also very telling that the only time I really care how long a skill takes to train anymore is if its blocking me from a new module or ship I want to try out, and since I've cross trained every combat ship there is in the game the pressure to get the most skill points per hour definitely drops off. Medium Railgun Specialization V in 29 or 31 days, whatever!

But just because I don't make use of them doesn't mean other people don't spend many hours pouring over skill plans and trying to optimize the attributes and neural remaps. The question is: does it add positively to the game?

From a role playing perspective, I find the concept weird: I can get a neural remap and become more charismatic but have a poorer memory? I can be smarter but less perceptive? Does that actually carry over into anyone's roleplay?

From a gameplay perspective, it feels out of place in EVE. In a game that is very collaborative and competitive and interactive, its a component that is none of those things, instead its very insular, min-max power-gamer-ish, and pure number crunching. Other than how fast a number ticks over, attributes have no other bearing on the game.

Honestly, I don't see the long term value in attributes, they are left overs from a different gametype, and I think they should be removed, replaced with something more relevant to the reality of how we play that game now, not how it was first envisioned 12 or so years ago.

I think we should replace attributes with skill categories, and let players take certain long-lasting boosters that assist with skill training in those categories. Make these new boosters manufacturable by players to create an economy, have different quality / strength levels, make the components hard to find or other found in certain parts of space (like low sec!), and its a gameplay that slides seamlessly into the current paradigm instead of hanging off the rest of the engine like a vestigial organ.

BB 64 - Arms Race

Blog Banter #64 is up at Sand, Cider, And Spaceships!

Torpedo! Torpedo! Torpedo!
With the Aegis release we will see missile boats get their own version of the tracking enhancer and the tracking computer. On the forums there have been calls for new 'missile defence eWar' to counter these new modules. Is this needed? Are smartbomb 'firewalls' enough? Do defender missiles need an overhaul to make them actually worth using? Do we need the missile version of the remote tracking disruptor? Or do we go all Star Trek and have Point-Defence Phaser Banks? Banter on!

Related to this topic is the official Dev Blog announcement for the new modules:

First of all, we are introducing two entirely new module groups to enhance performance of all missile systems in the game. 

Missile Guidance Enhancers – these are passive, low slot modules that give bonuses to missile velocity, missile flight time, explosion radius of missiles, and explosion velocity of missiles.
Missile Guidance Computers – these are active, scriptable, mid slot modules that give bonuses to missile velocity, missile flight time, explosion radius of missiles, and explosion velocity of missiles. Using ‘Missile Precision Script’ or ‘Missile Range Script’ you can double the bonus to either range or application, sacrificing the other. 

For both module groups we are starting with a Tech I variation, a ‘Compact’ meta variation with reduced fitting requirements, and a Tech II variation. You can find details on their statistics in this forum thread.

For the record, the current missile module, the Ballistic Control System (used to be Ballistic Control Unit hence why we sometimes call it BCU for short) gives bonuses to rate of fire and damage.

I'm a fan of these new modules because one of the issues missile ships always had to contend with was the inability to successfully "hit down" ship classes as you moved up to cruisers and battleships, a problem that turret equipped ships could circumvent with tracking computers and tracking enhancers. The only real option for missile ships was to sacrifice damage and range by using the rapid light launchers which is essentially fitting frigate sized weapons on cruisers / cruiser sized weapons on battleships. So yeah, modules that allow missile ships some flexibility in hitting various targets at greater range or better "guidance" while trading off tanking or tackling modules or whatever is something I generally approve of.

However, there is a downside. The dynamic always was that turret weapon systems got the trade off of being able to hit smaller targets with correct application of webs, tracking enhancers/computers, and know-how about transversal and optimal range, while missile systems had a simpler mechanic in that you needed only to know your range and the damage was pretty consistent but you had a harder time hitting smaller targets as it was very deterministic. But now we have modules that decrease that downside without the counterbalance of more complicated mechanics or the possible presence of a tracking disruptor in the enemy fleet.

There are defender missiles. No, wait, let me correct myself: there are jokes about defender missiles. Even if they worked as intended (i.e. missiles that shot out and destroyed enemy missiles coming at you), they lack the same wider application that a tracking disruptor provides in that it lets you affect the overall performance of tracking on the target ship regardless of what its shooting at.

Something needs to be done to rectify this imbalance between the major weapon systems. Either existing tracking disruptors need to be able to negatively affect some or all the four "hitability" factors of missiles (velocity, flight time, explosion radius and explosion velocity) OR we need a new module for guidance disruption. I'm a fan of the former option as I always felt that Amarr ewar boats suffered from being unable to impact missile ship weapon systems as they don't use cap and are not affected by tracking disruption.

While you're in there, CCP, maybe look into Remote Tracking Computers, will you?

The Blog Banter Is Moving Blogs!

It has become apparent that as my responsibilities at work increase that I cannot properly host the Blog Banters which require a focused and dedicated mind to keep them operational. And I'm pretty scatterbrained lately.

So I contacted Drackarn of Sand, Cider and Spaceships who has been a consistent blogger and Blog Banter participant and he kindly agreed to take over curatorship of the venerable institution in my stead.

Good Luck!

Personalize

In hindsight, its amazing that EVE was as successful as an MMO for as long as it was.

In a marketplace chock full of games and universes where people could recreate the avatar of their dreams and shape their environments around them in increasingly complex ways, EVE is drab and monotonous. My Atron looks exactly like every other Atron, my Raven looks the exact same as every other Raven. Same with stations (both exterior and interior). Sure, there was differences in the station types themselves but players didn't get any say in any of it. You could really customize that character portrait though!

Later on, when Incarna started to stumble on the stage, pilots of all types loved the character creator with its almost real life facial expressions and body types and clothing styles. It was revolutionary in terms of customization and players had been starving for it. To have it followed up with a video card overheating locked captain's quarters that could NOT be customized in any manner was a vast letdown and contributed greatly, I suspect, to the Jita riots that followed. I'm not saying they would not have occurred anyway but CCP might have had some players on their side if Incarna had been better.

Regardless, in other games players get housing decorated with trophies and mementos while EVE pilots are lucky if they have their own POS which, except for the name and position of structures, looks like every other POS in the game. For the actual client, you can move things around and pick the theme colour, but third party modding is strictly prohibited (which for the record I'm not disagreeing with) while in other games modding communities thrive and are even encouraged.

Even in the most wide open and player driven theater in EVE, null sec, your options for player customization are limited to the aforementioned generic towers and upgrades on them like cyno beacons and jump bridges which shape the space but are not really player customizations, and Outposts (and let's not forget that wormhole players have less than even that).

When CCP finally launched the pilot program of ship skins through the awkward mechanic of blueprints which changed a ship to another ship with the exact same stats but different skinned model (e.g. Incurus became Allistria Incursus), the goal was to see what the player uptake was to judge if there was enough support to develop a permanent solution, the response was enthusiastic and sustained. So soon we are getting Super Kerr Induced Nanocoating which will allow wider adoption of skip skins with a greater selection and no awkward mechanics. Players may not be able to totally customize their ships' look and appearance yet, but we're getting closer, and we're excited.

The initial presentation of the future of structures in space proves promising as well, with a wider range of structures and fitting opportunities to allow deeper customization of development of space resources, so instead of just POS and outpost we would have a wider spectrum with more variation along it. This is exciting in the possibilities but still too early for any certainties in implementation.

Still, even with ship skins, the promise of corp logos on hulls, and more varied structures with customization options, there are still some things I think need to be addressed.

We need Incarna V2, we need to personalize our captain's quarters, and we need to be able to have our avatars in the same space. Make it happen CCP, I believe in you.

Blog Banter #63 - Customization

Welcome to the continuing monthly EVE Blog Banters and our 63rd edition! For more details about what the blog banters are visit the Blog Banter page.

* * * * *

Super Kerr Induced Nanocoating, new structures that can be fit like ships with modules, the promise of player built stargates... the ability to shape your space and change the look of your ships is finally coming to EVE. What other customization options of EVE would you like to have? What would you like to do to be able to shape space and environments? What would you like to change just for you in the client or in any 3rd party tools?

Let your desires run free in your imagination.

Participants:

Inner Sanctum of the Ninveah - Personalize
Eveoganda - Customization?
Supposedly Solo - Customization
A journey through the mind - Customization
Sand, Cider and Spaceships - Paint Me, Like One of Your Gallente Girls
Just For Crits - Customization
Morphisat's Blog - Modding

Related:

Interstellar Privateer - Naming Rights

Attitude

I've covered my opinions on Incarna frequently in the past; good idea with a poor implementation. Its easy to forget in the heat of the the fury of Incarna's sloppy release (single room, single avatar, overheating video cards, $70 monocles, "18 months", etc) that there was a broad and deep enthusiasm for Walking In Stations and the new avatar creator unleashed a lot of experimenting and artistic renditions that was indicative of the desire to be more than a spaceship in this grand space opera that is EVE.

Incarna destroyed that enthusiasm and made anything to do with "space barbies" toxic in the general discourse for a while, but it has not been ground down completely. You can see it peeking out from requests for hats or different coloured outfits, and excitement for new tattoos and cybernetic enhancements for the avatars. Its still there, still deep and wide, but traumatized from the botched introduction of its first time on the centre stage.

So when the minutes were out and I was reading the art session and saw this line I physically groaned and rolled my eyes.

Xander said that he would officially like to be documented as protesting any art time going to avatars instead of spaceships.

I know there is a section of the EVE population that is vehemently Spaceship-Only. I get that they probably stood up and cheered at reading that line in the minutes. But imagine if in a session about wormholes someone stood up and said "I would like to officially be documented as protesting any design time going to wormholes instead of null sec."

That's a big "screw you" to all the players who enjoy wormholes and want them iterated on, right?

I understand that Xander is speaking for players who want only spaceship development of EVE, as shortsighted as I think that is. But the grandstanding Black-and-White-No-Grey viewpoint of it in the middle of the art session was not the time to forward that opinion. That is something that should go into general planning and long term thinking of the game where everyone can represent the factions they feel strongly for equally.

The CSM is a body that should understand and respect other viewpoints besides their own, even if they strongly disagree with them. Knowing when to speak up about your position is an important part of respecting differing ones.