For the best experience use full HD.

Friday, November 30, 2012


No, that's not a misspelling in the title. It's a play on words. Why? Well, because the up coming "expansion" is not really an expansion but it certainly does contain just about everything left what needs iterationalizing. That's not a real word either but it relays what I need it to. And after reading through that long, long list I want to say, good job CCP! You seem to have left very few stones unturned in this iteration of the iteration expansions. It seems the many stones you have turned have been carefully considered too. I see evidence of this when I read dev posts that say things like,
"Yup. The immunity of corp hangars (and other special bays) to scans and their inability to drop loot was a neat workaround, but it was also essentially unfinished functionality, rather than an intentional feature. We recognize the need for secure hauling in the current environment, hence the scan immunity on blockade runners, but feel that the way it's being provided currently is unintuitive and clunky, and that the "safe hauling" capacity on Orcas is unnecessarily large. Blockade runners should pick up the slack on high-value, low-volume items, while for higher-volume shipments, we're leaving it up to players to figure out how to handle the new situation."
The emphasis is mine. I love it when reasons for doing something are so plainly stated without a hint of remorse because it was a GOOD decision. And BTW, I used that no scan hold almost exclusively in high-sec to avoid gankers so this affects me greatly. Yet I still think it's a good decision. I agree with CCP Greyscale, this should have been the role of the Blockade Runner not the Industrial Command Ship. Kudos to CCP Greyscale and the team!

All that said, I hope this is the last iteration oriented update. Don't get me wrong, it was great when Crucible came along. Gods know how many things needed tweaked, fixed, and fiddled with because they just weren't working as intended. Unfortunately so much of that sort of thing had built up during the epoch of the killer-feature expansions one single iteration update was not enough. This is the third (!) but I think there is finally light at the end of this fix-it tunnel.

Some areas still need some developer love to be sure. Sovereignty is possibly one of them as several other bloggers have pointed out. But null-sec is what it is. Sovereignty grinding is what it is. Is it boring? Yes, it is. Is it necessary? Yes, it is. As Stabs said in his latest post, "structure grinding is about where it should be so people don't lose their hard-won space too quickly or too trivially." Changing it to become easier because it better suits certain people's disposition is no reason to make a change - especially if it adversely affects another. Can you imagine what it would be like if citizens could change Constitutions the way some EVE players want major game mechanics changed?

No, CCP needs to take a very cautions approach to how they change something like sovereignty mechanics.  They tried it once before and arguably caused more issues than they resolved from what I've read. But since I'm not an expert on the subject, I'll stop here. CCP just needs to proceed very cautiously is all I put forward.

And, while they are pondering their next iteration and proceeding very cautiously, they can put all those devs to work on something new! After the last 18 months of iterations and fixes, I find myself jonesing for some newness in EVE. It's not that I'm bored with the old stuff. There is much of it I haven't even tried yet. But I'm tired of the status quo. I want something on the lines of Apocrypha, which ushered in worm holes and an entirely new way to live and die in New Eden. There have been some ideas bandied about in blogging circles already.

TurAmarth over on A Carbon Based Life has blogged a lot recently about walking in stations and what that could mean to EVE Online. I too would love to see a first person shooter expansion to EVE Online. If variety is the spice of life, our current set of spices in EVE Online are all herbs (if you don't see the analogy it means all our game play options revolve around some type of ship based activity - PI is the only exception.) I'd like to see some other types of spices added to the recipe!

Today on Stabbed Up, Stabs outlined an idea for an expansion with a null-sec theme. I like this idea too. I'd just ask CCP to place the gateways very carefully. I recommended faction warfare systems in Stabs comments. I also recommend a power requirement that has to come from a planet based power station so that DUST 514 players have to be involved to make it work. Both these are to prevent any current large alliance from taking over the gate system and becoming EVE's highwaymen.

I know there have been others. I invite any blogger reading this to post a link to their idea in the comments and tell us a little bit about it. If you are not a blogger but have an idea, leave that in the comments as well. I'm curious to know what players might like to see in an Apocrypha type expansion. What new worm hole level feature would you like to see come to EVE Online?

Fly Careful

1 comment:

  1. Would really nice to see some new micro professions and/or the existing ones to be developed to full time professions.
    We know that capsulers are not the first ones to walk in New Eden, so how about the following :
    - Planet/Moon surveys to find hidden places of long gone civilizations. After you have the marks on a planet, get a Dust team to go there and scout the area for a % or isk for that location.
    - Hacking, why are there no attempts to hack into to opposing ship's computer system ? I would love to see hacking modules to cause random effects (e.g. modules getting deactivated, weapon system stopping and changing ammo etc) with a passive module called firewall to proctect against.


Be civil, be responsible and most of all be kind. I will not tolerate poor form. There will be no James Hooks here. We are all better than that.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.