About 34 minutes into the first “o7” – the EVE Online Show, there was a discussion with CCP Greyscale and CCP Nullarbor about Sov Null Sec.
To quote CCP Greyscale – “It has got kind of stagnant out there, people have, the major coalitions have basically solved the game and figured out how to win, and now they are winning and now it is boring for everybody”
CCP are working on fitting in some changes in the short term to try and have an impact on this. The initial steps should be detailed in a DEV Blog out around the second week of October, and will be based around movement and force projection. They mentioned capital ships, jump drives and clones.
I’m guessing at jump drive cool down timers and maybe range limitations on jump clones.
CCP indicate the CSM were mostly onboard with the changes, with some suggesting the changes don’t go far enough.
The people that have won EVE subsequently put out an open letter to CCP on what they think must be included in changes to Sov Null Sec.
It pays to be circumspect when listening to the propaganda of the Null Sec Lords. It is not difficult to see how they try to control the narrative of these discussions and debates. A classic approach is to say if you do not live and breathe Null Sec, your opinion shouldn’t be heard, and doesn’t matter.
At the forefront of the suggestions is to add NPC Null Sec space to every region. That will make it easier for people to stage offences into Sov Null Sec. It seems to have merit – until you stop and think about it. In a new world where Capital ship movements are restricted, it allows the current Null Sec Lords to leave caches of Capital fleets all over the map, safe in NPC stations. It allows them to bypass new force projection rules. It allows them to more easily harass other groups or defend themselves.
None of the suggestions will shake up the current status quo – it won’t open Null Sec up to new powers, it won’t topple the current winners of EVE.
Blastradius posted a similar warning on his blog:
If you are interested in EVE, you really need to be vigilant in reading between the lines when it comes to Sov Null Sec changes.
As I have remarked before, the current Null Sec Lords have done a brilliant job. Even CCP agrees they have won EVE. A part of me feels uncomfortable about just arbitrarily handicapping them for their success, or throwing away all their achievements and starting all over again with new rules. CCP is however in effect being forced to do something. The players at the very top could have done something to shake things up – but they have become too comfortable behind the diplomatic accords that ensconce them in their thrones.
Even risk adverse solo players who hide away in Hi-Sec can have an opinion on that.
Now the trick is to be patient, and do your best to enjoy the ride.
Very interesting read.
I think I was writing my post at the same time you guys were… LOL
Just edited mine to include the Breaking News!!
CCP gonna change Force Projection…. finally.
“A part of me feels uncomfortable about just arbitrarily handicapping them for their success, or throwing away all their achievements and starting all over again with new rules. CCP is however in effect being forced to do something.”
The problem becomes that if they force in a change by nuking existing sov holders, your just destroying everything people have worked for in the game. Consider how incursion runners would react if their income got nuked, since they’ve pretty much turned it into a formula. Think about how mission runners or miners would react in the same circumstances.
It’s easy to consider the effect this would have on the diplomats, the directors, the leaders of null and say “that’s acceptable, shake it up!” but consider how it affects the average line member. Throwing away huge chunks of what they’ve worked for because you don’t like that their group has become too effective at holding their ground is hardly the way to go about the changes.
While I don’t agree entirely with the changes put forward by the null leadership – I think occupancy based sov will not have the effect they think it will – I certainly don’t agree with many of the counter arguments. The problem is that people living in other sections of space couldn’t care less about the feelings of null players, so casually throwing all of their stuff in the trash is acceptable to them, even though regardless of the change, most of them will still not move to null.
You are right – clearing Null and starting all over again won’t likely change who is actually willing to live there. I wouldn’t take these discussions as being targeted at the Null Sec Grunt, and wanting to ruin their game. It seems more about what can be done to shake up the current stagnation – reduce the influences of the current super powers, give meaningful options for different groups to claim space and reduce the need for and impact from Titan and Supercarrier fleets. I personally would like to see a situation where it does not actually pay to blue your neighbours or live under non-aggression pacts. Easier said than done – but certainly worth striving for.
I think it’s impossible to make it not pay to blue your neighbours. There’s nothing you can reasonably do to make working together worse than working apart, so there will always be a benefit in creating pacts and agreements. The problem that exists at the moment is that the large groups own pretty much all of the space, so there’s no chance for newer guys to get into null without joining with those groups.
The open letter seems like an attempt to address that by condensing the existing groups freeing up more space for new entrants into null, but the problem is that it doesn’t tackle force projection and doesn’t push people away from just bullying any new group into being a renter or leaving.
The problem being as eve hermit says, is the “open letter” to CCP is a way of circumventing the incoming changes CCP sound like their going to do, and their proposals do nothing to change the status quo. The “you don’t live in sov,therefore your opinion doesn’t count” argument mittens used a while back is a way of trying to deflect things away and a attempt to control the changes and force things to their advantage, with anything mittens says or writes, you ALWAYS have to look for the ulterior motives.
but the thing is there’s plenty of people, corps and even alliances that HAVE lived in sov, and now don’t because they CBA with the sov mechanics, the politics and general BS that goes with sov, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have ideas, some of them good ones, some of which the signitories to said open letter wouldn’t like.
The occupancy idea in the proposal is just plain wrong, as it just concentrates sov players into a handful of systems, leaving larger swathes of sov empty, so things get even worse.
A better proposal I’ve seen for sov in terms of general pve is “floating sov sec status” where the more heavily farmed a system is, the higher the sec status of a system goes up, to 0.0 max as because xyz NPCs have been killed, the space has become “safer” and systems that aren’t used or infrequently used the sec status drops down, up to -10.0 as no one is dealing with the local NPC pirate problem.
This is in keeping with the farms and fields idea from a while back, as any RL actual farmer can tell you, if you don’t leave some fields fallow, you get poorer and poorer results from over useage.
I’d say it’s more a way of getting across what the current null leadership thinks is the right direction, so CCP consider that when designing their changes. Nobody wants to see the null leaders forcing design decisions, but then again nobody wants to see CCP wrecking their way through features with no consideration to the players wants and needs.
And the “you don’t live in sov, therefore your opinion doesn’t count” argument is sound. People sitting in highsec running highsec missions with no intention of ever being involved in nullsec couldn’t care less about how null sec players are treated. Their opinions are uneducated and based around how they feel about nullsec players, not about how nullsec mechanics would work. And if you read Mittani’s post, having lived in null gives a player some perspective and some validity to their arguments. The people that is aimed at are the people who have never touched null or have been away from it for a considerable time and still feel the need to tell people how it should be.
And while floating sov sec status sounds good on paper, the realism is that sov holders could continue to do as they do, just swapping between systems once in a while. Most sov systems are fallow fields most of the time as it is, so nothing would really change (though we’d probably game the system for max rewards).
I presume Lucas you have be adamantly telling the Mittani to shut up on giving out his opinions on what might be done to Hi-Sec?
I wrote a short blog piece recently on how EVE players short change themselves by limiting where they accept opinions from – https://evehermit.wordpress.com/2014/08/09/our-own-worst-enemies/ . I still agree with that.
The traditional Hi-Sec Carebear focused on Hi-Sec pursuits is generally not out to destroy Null Sec Lucas. They don’t care enough about it to be reading blogs or news sites and posting comments. The people making suggestions that might negatively impact on your way of playing will tend to be those already trying (and maybe failing) to ruin your day, who want it to be easier to achieve. Your main antagonists are most likely already living in or around Null.
I do agree about floating Sov Sec levels – it is an interesting idea, but likely easily gamed. I also suspect it would encourage the current powers to hold more space to allow them to cycle through systems in an optimal way.
I would certainly not take his opinion on highsec over that of highsec players, but then I don’t think I’ve seen him voicing much of an opinion over highsec mechanics beyond ones with universal implications.
And no, they don’t care enough to want it destroyed, and they don;t care enough to understand it either. Not all of them comment, but some of them do, and they state their opinions with little to no understanding of the way the system currently works or the implications of what they are suggesting. If it all falls apart, again, they don’t care.
That blog post is interesting, and to a degree I agree with it, people living in the situation can tend to look at things from a pretty narrow perspective. But in any situation where the system already works (which from the number of players who enjoy nullsec it clearly does) I’d always want to consider the opinions of those in the system way before the ones of those outside, since the ones from the outside will also be narrow and will often not take into consideration how the current players would be affected.
…they’ve pretty much turned it into a formula. THIS is the problem and IMHO deserves nukeing because of :formula:. Yes there will be tears and truly epic whining from deep nullsec… so?
Does anyone think nullsec is healthy the way it is now?
Change null so it is NOT Run by Das Mitten and his posse… change it so solo players and small gangs, corps and Alliances have the ability to successfully fly and compete and yes, players WILL try null… but never so long as it is pwned and operated by Goons and their ilk.
Mebbe it’s time for a little revolution…
“you don’t live in sov, therefore your opinion doesn’t count” argument is sound. Bullshit.
I live and fly in New Eden, hell I actually ‘live’ outside of New Eden in Anoikis, but I am an EVE player and ALL of EVE affects me and I affect it. Whether you are in the middle of the sandpit or sitting on the edge, we are all in the same sandpit… and my opinion does count.
“…in any situation where the system already works (which from the number of players who enjoy nullsec it clearly does)…” Uh… you just shot Mitten’s in the foot man. The “Null Deal” itself states Null NEEDS changes… so uh, no, it is not “working”.
Sometime the only way to shake things up is to shake things up… and let he ships fall where they may.
Mining, trading, incursions, missioning. These are all also formulaic. Perhaps everything should be nerfed because people have found the best ways of making them efficient?
And change it how? What stops people grouping together? How can you force people to not cooperate? Whatever changes, you can be damn sure we’re going to continue working shoulder to shoulder and any small group that gets in our way will be crushed.
If you have no experience in null, then no, at least to the degree of null players, your opinion does not count. Talking about a subject from the outside and talking about it from within are two completely different things, and since you don’t play in null, you don’t need to care about whether or not it unfairly negatively impacts the players in nullsec. If you haven;t actually lived in null you’ve got at best a third party view of what goes on in null, which is not enough information to make comprehensive judgements about what goes on in null.
And yes, null needs change, but that doesn’t mean it’s broken in every way. Large parts of it do work, and thousands of people log in every day to play in null. Whats your interest in reshaping null? Do you want to move to null but want it to be different from how it is? If that’s the case, perhaps the problem is your section of space being so dull you don’t want to be there.
Well. Indeed it is understandable that people worry about “destroying everything people have worked for”. But, first, that happened in the past when current sov mechanics came live. not that what we have now is perfect, but we live with it; second: it is very suspicious those particular people making loud noise about that issue (i admit, it is subjective/personal one); third: what have had experienced, hard, null-living pvpers – which enjoy and embrace risk and danger – told to crying whining carebears of highsec? ah, i remember: adapt and stop whine. ups.
Clearsighted, wellwritten, a piece of highly relevant critical journalism, more of that please Hermit (especially in these after Jester times) 🙂
Best not read the rest of my blog, you will be sorely disappointed! 🙂
Plus one and I agree… Kudos Hermit.
“Post Jester times”… if your name is ever used thusly, you really had an impact.
I think Lukas Kell has absolutely no idea who would move to null sec if small groups could actually hold or use space there without bowing their heads to the current player hegemony. Lukas’ entire belief system is so steeped in the Goon mindset that high-sec “pubbies” are subhumans that he is no longer capable of identifying his own bias.
HUUUGE numbers of players in high/low/wormholes would move to or at least operate in null regularly if changes made it possible for them to do so with a reasonable chance of having fun. There almost needs to be a separate class of null space for small groups that want to live in null but be autonomous from the player empires. This class of space could be rich in valuable but specialized resources to promote trade and/or conflict, possible for small groups to hold and fight over, and impossible for huge groups to hold as empires. Even high sec mining and industry corps would love to move to null for increased profits at increased risks, but the current ecosystem makes those risks completely unmanageable for small groups — loss is not a chance; it is a certainty. The Goon myth is that these players are completely risk averse; really they’re just not so stupid as to sacrifice themselves when the deck is so thoroughly stacked against them.