It started with this devblog by CCP Greyscale: http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2351
Which was followed up by this one: http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=2353
The community response was positive overall, and so CCP opened up some threads to get Feedback based on what was discussed in the second blog. It has now been ten days and while all the feedback threads have been active, a few have certainly stood out.
The feedback thread on nullsec mining has gardnered twice as much interest as the second and third most popular discussions. This makes sense because two game-breaking situations, bots and supercarriers, are tied up with how mining works and is maintained in the game. There are four particular topics that seem to have the most tread:
- Taking Ice out of Highsec. This topic seems to pit nullsec miners against the rest of the mining community. Some feel that it should stay in high-sec because the quantities used by players is so massive, and others feel that it should be strictly found in low-sec or even null-sec, since most of the ice products are used in low-sec and null-sec to power everything from POSes to Capital ships.
- Remove ABC Ores from Wormholes. This one pits small time Wormhole operators against null-sec powerhouses. Many of the 0.0 alliances are clearly profiting from bots (either by improved mineral availablity for ship construction or by RMT) and considering the natural limitations to operating in Wormholes, it just seems to me that the botters are doing their best to distract CCP from their own operations.
- Make mining more interactive. This is seen as a double bonus by active players. Efforts to make mining more of a “mini-game” would have the profession be more fun, more engaging, and something people might actually want to do. It also has the potential to make mining bots invalid and unable to be usable in game.
My Verdict on the Mining Thread: I don’t see how moving Ice to be low-sec and null-sec only really helps Eve as a whole. I think had this been done prior to Dominion, it would have been a no-brainer.. but right now many of the 0.0 alliances have too much of a stranglehold on 0.0 space as it is. Increasing the difficulty of the fuel necessary to invade and break up large monopolies just colsolidates their power more. As far as removing ABC ores from the wormholes.. I think this is just a distraction designed to take blame away from those really causing problems, the botters. And finally.. making any aspect of Eve fun to play is always a positive.
– Smallholding –
This next aspect has been well recieved by the Eve Community. The ability to go into null-sec space and operate without necessarily holding sov (and dealing with the problems therein) resonates with a large number of the Eve Community. So far, the discussion is centered around two non-exclusive aspects of doing this:
- Minor Outposts – There have been various suggestions and ideas on this, but essentially the thought has been to have something that you can establish in a null-sec system that cannot be easily destroyed, but has very limited functionality. Many of the suggestions revolve around either strong POS-like structures or Rorqual/Orca/Supercarrier type systems that can be move from system to system with difficulty.
- Treaties – The ideas being discussed here range from new corporate roles like “Rental officers” to new game “rental”, “treaty” or “trade agreement” mechanics that would manage people using “owned” null-sec resources.
My Verdict on the Smallholding Thread: I’ll have to say that I am a big fan of this idea, but it’s going to be a gotcha for CCP. Really, to impliment any of this well, it is going to take time and lots of it. It is also something that Eve Online needs, right now, to revitalize their player base.
Ideas on this seem to focus on having an anchorable structure that provides intel to the sov owners or having intel be determined by “networking of sensors” where any red detected by friendlies is communicated to all friendlies of the sov holders. These discussions are usually punctuated by the desire to have the capacity of detecting AFK cloakers.
All in all, there really isn’t much consensus on what should be done, though having an anchorable structure seems to be a core of most of the ideas.
– Small Gang Combat –
The final one I am going to review, Small Gang Combat, has a plethora of ideas. However, no one seems to be consistant other than to claim that “local” is the cause of all these problems. That is a viewpoint I find highly suspect, as have others, who note that not having local (without anything better, that is) would mean that a 3 hour roam now would take 5+ hours and since you don’t know what you are going to run into.. you are more likely to bring more people. Many of the ideas were, in my opinion, worse than the ones given on the original devblog. So far, ideas for making the mechanics of smaller gangs better than larger blobs have been very, very few.
I had a couple ideas about Intel and Smallholdings which I posted, but more importantly, there are a lot of thoughts going around and it certiainly is a good idea to go through and look for the gems that might be something you’d like to see.