Posts Tagged ‘speculation’

We’re All Individuals!

There is something about the CSM process that I find very depressing: Because the candidates all want to impress us with their grip on the things we want changed in the game, and the issues CCP face, we seem to spend 3 months a year dwelling entirely on the problems in eve, and why it is a terrible game. Because of this imbalance I have decided to write today on why I think eve has been so successful compared to other MMO’s and where it has succeeded. First off though I should address that there are those who choose to claim that eve isn’t successful,  because compared to wow, what is? So to this I say: balderdash. What game has gown year on year since 2003? What other games core has made international news so often, simply because its players are playing it as it is intended to be played? What other game allows 500 people to fight another 500 people on a regular basis? What game has pioneered the first cross-game cross-platform link? I could go on.  In my mind there can be no argument, eve is an immensely successful game, and I will broke no argument otherwise.
So here is the main question then: why is it so successful? Eve with it patched history, its outdated UI and its code base that even the developers are sometimes afraid to touch? What solar alignment caused this game reach its tenth anniversary, still going strong? I believe that this was caused by several factors, and the first is very obvious:
Space. Eve itself was on the first “big league” MMO’s to hit the shelves and since then, no other sci-fi based MMO has really seen much success.  Indeed most, like Tabula Rasa failed before they even left beta. The simple fact of the matter is that if you are interested in Sci-Fi, there are two MMOs you can play, Star Trek Online, or eve. This means that for Hard-core Sci-Fi fans like me, who don’t like elf’s and ponies as much as they like Space Marines and Starships, we are pretty much stuck with eve (in my opinion). That’s not to say its a hardship of course, but even if the last turkey in the shop is the best one, its still the last turkey.
But there is much more to the success of eve and the next factor is a huge one: difficulty. Eve is, as the now famous slogan goes, hard; and we (the older players) love that. Now some will argue that this is a failure of the product. Its to harsh, to unforgiving of new players and drives away to many potential customers. Here is the interesting bit though; these very same factors could actually be helping the game more than hindering it.
You see the human mind is a very fucked up piece of kit and one of its favourite functions is adjusting our beliefs, after the fact, to explain why we did something. For example lets say I am running a course on wine tasting; and its shit, properly shit. So I get two groups of people, the first group I give the course to for free; no strings. The second group I acquire by placing an advert in the local paper offering 10 free tickets to the best ten 100 word essays on the wonders of British Wine. Both are given the same course, the same (free) shit wine: but studies have shown that if asked afterwards the second group (who had to fight for their places), will rate the course’s quality much higher. An even stronger example of this principle of self deception is that of “Fagging” or “Hazing” to the colonials. Where initiates are given humiliating, dangerous and downright stupid quests before they can be admitted to a group. Once individuals have gotten through the rituals and into the groups, they will have a much stronger devotion to it than if they were simply admitted on request. This is because our minds have to justify our effort in getting something by valuing it higher. “of course I enjoyed that wine tasting” it says “or writing that essay would have been a waste of time”.
So here we come back to eve: Where our new initiates are greeted by an old UI, a game full of odd little quirks and bugs, and the often abusive behaviour of other players. We Fag our new players, we ritually abuse them just like we were abused when we joined; and a lot of people leave because of it. But the thing is, the people who do make it through, the few who stick it out and learn the system; much like the wine tasters, and the Public School Boy who is now a sixth former; they will be fiercely loyal to the game. After all: Of course I love eve, I fought through years of learning how to play (and still going) to get where I am now. If I didn’t love it I would have been stupid to have wasted all that time, right?
Further more, once you are in, and devoted. Eves skill system is a master class in manipulation. In games like wow un-subbing for a few months means pretty much nothing (except missing a few raids maybe). In eve however, every second your not subscribed, is a second that takes you further away from the people who joined at the same time as you. Every tick of that skill point number missed is a moment longer you’ll have to train for the next big thing. Not only that but unlike wow, there is no such thing as a complete character, nothing to get to and say “Well, done that now. Lets play something else”. Its truly masterful and wonderfully addictive, in what I think is a brilliant way.
The final reason is likely not the most important one, but it is the one I wish MMO makers would look at and realise the value of. Eve was released on May 6th 2003 (if you believe Wikipedia), and a certain other MMO was released on November 23rd 2004. Eve is a diametrically different from wow as you can get really:
  • Space / Fantasy
  • Ships / People
  • PvP / PvE 
  • Sandbox / Themepark
  • ~Perma death / minor penalty

Ever since wow became the success it is known as today, every one and their dog has been trying to emulate it and by proxy is success. Eve is the only one which has lasted as long (as a top ranked MMO), or done even close to as well. I believe that is because it is in pretty much no way influenced by it (It can’t be). Eve started life from the minds of its creators, not the greed of a Corporate Finance Officer. It is truly unique and makes no efforts to kowtow to the “accepted norms” of MMO design. I’ve tried out pretty much ever attempt at a major MMO since wow was released, and every time it has come up lacking because it was just another wow clone. Eve doesn’t have that problem, and EA et al should take a look at that for inspiration.
Eve is a massive success for lots of reasons, and these are just some examples, but I think that during the CSM campaign season its a good idea to keep in mind that we do play a great game which is successful with the formula it has used so far. I hope it never changes that, and remains the success that I love to this day.
Fly like a champ,
Hark

Two Steps forward: An Awkward POSition…

I’ve been waiting a while before commenting on the current POS storm caused by the CSM minutes (mixed with Two Steps Stirring) simply because I wanted to see how CCP responded to the oncoming Threadnaught. And I think I have been right to do so, as I still remain fairly unsure about the implications and intent of the original statements made by CCP, and indeed what the origin of this whole debacle was.
Certainly, if read in a particular light the original quotes in Two Steps blog seems to indicate that the POS system is just too large to do right now, and as such they will be completely ignored until CCP can tackle them in a meaningful way. This appears to be how Two Step is publicly interpreting it, given his rally to the community for reinforcement. 
With this in mind I scanned through the whole of the CSM notes, looking for more references to POSs as a main subject line, and I found surprisingly few:
Page 12: Hans states CCP need to ask questions about Why we need modular POS’s
Page 14: Unifex clarifies about themes and the new expansion plans. He acknowledges POS’s need work and uses them as an example of how needed work can be done over several expansions being worked into the themes.
Page 21: Unifex responds to Two Step asking why POSs aren’t in the next expansion for sure. Unifex responds “We can’t do everything in our long-term plan in the next 6 months”
Page 99: Hans questions the Art team about their work on the new POS’s in reference to the blocker between art and design resources.
Very little supports that modular POSs are being dropped altogether, indeed my interpretation is that they very much are coming, just in a slow and staggered release, only the last comment (excluding the POS gate  quotes) on page 99 shows any CSM exacerbation on the issue, where Hans is lamenting the chicken and egg scenario CCP has with scheduling.  
So why is it that in just this one meeting, suddenly the CSM have their hackles up about the lack of POSs? Even within just that one meeting the context, and indeed the phrasing, just doesn’t sit right with me; let me bring some of the surrounding discussion into the light here: At this point in the summit the CMS is attending the first of two Null Sec meetings in which CCP Greyscale has attempted to get “a collective priority” from the CSM for the future of Null Sec. He states that they want to do with Null what they did with FW; tackle the issues to bring it towards a better version. All good so far right?
However seemingly for no reason UAxDeath suddenly pipes up telling Soundwave that CCP has promised the players POS’s, which they no longer intend to deliver. Blam, kinda out of the blue right? Don’t get me wrong, I suspect that UAxDeath had a very sound reason for bringing it up (as I will explain later) but here is the crux of the issue, the response:
Greyscale gives a pretty harsh kneejerk generalisation:
“Greyscale replied that coming into meetings with the mind-set of CCP promising a certain feature 
is a fallacious, and flat-out wrong, mind-set.”
Unifex, fires of a concise salvo stating CCP’s position:
“Unifex stated that what CCP did was spend effort and prototype what would make a good POS system. It 
would, however, only affect the group of people who manage POSes. Focusing that amount of time and 
effort on some small singular aspect of the game and delivering only that ‘is what will kill the business’ “
Note that Unifex, did NOT finish this statement with “So we aren’t going to touch them for now” or, “So were not doing it”. People are taking the inference that Greyscale made about promises, mixing this with Unifex’s comment about POSs being hard to do and reading that there are no plans to progress POSs.;Adding two and two together and getting six.
However there is clearly more at work here, we are defiantly missing something in the noise. I suspect that we are seeing the result of processes started outside of the official meetings, finally exploding into the light. Note that the issue seems to be been settled as its not brought up in later sessions, except by a slightly world weary Hans lamenting business processes. Two Step doesn’t stand on the table in the meeting and demand CCP start the POS making machine; nor does the topic ever come up again during the Null Sec sessions. Indeed the paper doesn’t even note he said anything during this exchange. So whats going on? Well I believe the following has happened:
1. A comment was made to the CSM off the record about POS’s not being in the next expansion. I suspect it was probably an off the cuff comment, maybe on Skype, maybe when they were picked up from the airport, something along the lines of:

CSM: Were looking forwards to seeing the modular POS progress

CCP: Don’t get too exited, there not in the next expansion!

2. The CSM let this little gem brew between each other exacerbating the issue and working themselves up.

3. During the early meetings it seems clear that the POS’s will get tackled, but only in a long term plan (page 14/15).
4. The CSM seem happy with this, but Two Step (at least) is worried about just how long this plan is.
5. During the Null sec debate xDeath takes the opportunity of Greyscale asking for Null Sec visions, to explicitly talk about POS’s hoping to bring out an official statement (which doesn’t work).
6. xDeath takes the next vague opportunity to outright oust the issue.
7. After a short thrashing leading to a stalemate the issue is dropped and the discussion moves on. CCP is happy they have explained that POS’s are a long term goal, and will be slowly addressed over the next few expansions.
Two Step, (at the very least) is not completely happy with this result. He still holds the worries from point 4 and wants to be sure that CCP get started on the POS problem asap because it is an important point for the community. I’m not sure why he (or indeed any) or the CSM didn’t directly say in any of the meetings “But you are going to do something for them in the next patch right?”. Perhaps they want more than just a verbal assurance, perhaps they don’t think it wouldn’t do any good?  Maybe its just a fear CCP will simply say “No”. But Two Step (I believe) wants to be sure CCP gets a move on with this and sees the urgency so he writes a blog post and starts the thread, and shows CCP just how important the issue is to us.
So here we are a Threadnaught later. Seagull has posted on the thread stating that the “small part of the community” statement by Unifex was in reference to their prototypes test catchment. In my opinion though this is either a manipulation of the truth, or the original statement was very poorly phrased  (especially from a man who usually considers his words very carefully), but that is besides the point.
So where do we go from here? Two Step has raised a point CCP thought they had covered, and suddenly the comunity is up in arms. Its pretty clear what is now laid out by Two Step and the forums:
  • It is acceptable for CCP to attack POS’s over the next few expansions
  • It is acceptable for CCP to bring in a short term fix to the current POS system, we are unable to see the first implementation of modular POSs in the next expansions.
  • It is unacceptable for zero progress to be made on the current POS system between now and the Summer release
  • CCP must communicate clearly what the intend to do with POSs

I would suggest that CCP who are likely still pre-planning the Summer expansion theme and content should hurry up at least the section regarding POSs. Because they need to release a clear plan for the replacement of the current system. I would advise that this should be heavily weighted with caveats so it doesn’t fly away in the minds of optimistic players:  
Here is our plan, here are the steps we expect in it. We don’t know when each step will be taken or even if we might have to change the plan (don’t worry we will let you know if we do!), but we are aware of this problem and we are taking steps to tackle it. Look we can even confirm step 1 will be completed in the summer expansion.
People are upset about modular POSs because we are worried this will be another ambulation*. The community knows that some things take time, but open honest communications could easily waylay fears and speculation. Lets face it with some of CCPs history, they cant really blame the community for being pessimistic about things.
It all seems like a bit of a storm in a teacup to me. Reading the notes, I am confident that CCP is already committed to delivering something for POSs in the Summer expansion. But I believe that Two Steps goal in this was to ensure CCP was aware that the players expect progress and soon. That’s a worthy goal, because the POS issue does need to be tackled, so with that in mind I would say to Two Step: Mission Accomplished. You saw an issue you knew was going to cause disappointment with your electorate. You attempted to raise the issue with CCP (maybe this should have been done a little more thoroughly) and when this failed you took the issue to the people and asked them to make their voices heard. That is the job of the CSM. 
Keep Clam and Carry on Posting,
Hark.
*I am referring to the 5 or so years spent waiting for it to come, not the Incarna debacle once it was

A sword forged from the skulls of my enemies..

Just a quick one today ladies and gents. Between my new toy and the fact that I appear to have started the process of moving jobs its been a busy few weeks here again. I have also been pursuing the now published CSM notes, and came across this little gem.

Being primarily a 0.0 pilot I skipped through the initial sessions (taking note of POS-gate in passing), and dove right into the null sec points. It was hear that i came across  this wonderful gem of a feature which, if I am reading it right was almost, but not quite implemented over the last few expansions:

On the topic of creation and destruction Soundwave brought up a “neat” game design mechanic that CCP were unable to squeeze into a previous expansion. He explained the mechanic wherein there were a new set of system upgrades, “IHUBs on crack”, that were incredibly powerful. To temper the power creep, the mechanic allowed for only three of such structures to exist. Further, the only way to get said structure is to physically take it from someone else. Elise was quick to praise the idea. Soundwave continued that if he were ever to go into the issue of making an end-game objective that he would definitely put a similar type of hard-cap on it to keep the goals in check.

Trebor added that it could in fact be a soft cap that increased (or decreased) depending on a variety of metrics. Using a hypothetical example of how such a feature could be used, Trebor brought up Titans and Supercaps in general. Using this type of soft-cap mechanic, Trebor suggested that to build a new supercap would require the “core” of a dead supercap. So to build a new ship you would need the same materials and time, but also a supercap “core” that has a chance of dropping after a ship is destroyed. With that plus an adjustable drop rate of the cores in rare NPC spawns, one could manipulate the population of the ships. Two step liked the idea and talked about the issue of difficulty scaling; accumulating resources shouldn’t universally make everything easier.

Wow is all I can really say. This really is a stunning idea for a feature, and indeed Trebor’s expansion on the base, is equally awesome. An instant cure to power creep in end game content, fantastic. As is evident from some of my previous posts, I am very much against both super capital proliferation as well as the current overpowered nature of the SC beast.  However as a realist I can see exactly how this situation came about. CCP designed super capitals with the feverant believe (some might argue for ignorance) that they would never be used en-mass. Maybe they didn’t believe that eve would still be about by the time it was a problem. Maybe they assumed that they would eventually find a natural equilibrium of  creation against construction. What ever the reason, they were designed as behemoths of space, with an arsenal to match. Most of the suggestions that I have seen to cure the “Supercap issue” (including my own suggestion) have always been around adding new features to curtail the prevalence of the super capital. However this simple suggestion by Soundwave, expanded by Trebor, could, in essence go back in time to make CCPs assumption correct. An iteration on super caps which would make them function as intended: as a rarity. With this in mind, for the first time ever, I could consider myself in favour of a massive boost to the destructive ability of super capitals. Make them kill dictors, give them a doomsday on every hard-point that fine, as long as there are only ever 5 in existence…  I would still argue that there is a place in the battlefield for a dedicated capital/super capital killer ship, just to ensure that we don’t have single alliances hoarding  large percentage of the Super capitals.

Even ignoring this as an idea to limit  super capital proliferation, and taking it on its merit to allow for future development its a fantastic idea. The concept of adding a “Limited numbers” feature into the game could be a massive conflict driver for nullsec. Adding more items which are coveted (and not tied to a single geographical region of space) we could see a new reason for Alliances to clash broadswords (pun intended). Furthermore, should CCP really take their thinking to another level, Imaged if the destruction of this theoretical item could be accomplished by a relatively small number of players? We could give small alliance a method to hurt larger alliances and, at the same time, boost their own funding and standing in the process. At the moment Nullsec alliances are made or broken by the space they own. Don’t own space and you’ll never make it anywhere in nullsec. At the same time, if you want to own space, you need to have the numbers and funding to do it (for which you need space). Its a classic chicken and egg scenario, which players currently get around by seeking “sponsorship” by alliances/coalitions which have already “made it” in 0.0. Give 0.0 alliances/coalitions a golden goose which young aspirants can steal from them could give groups a new entry into null.

This truly is a fantastic idea and I really hope that it is implemented. However I also hope that CCP takes the time to consider the best way(s) to do it as well.

Fly uniquely

Hark

Combat Frigates: Tormentor Edition

After my last post on Fears for Tiers its seems only right that I should update now that some more information has come out regarding how these changes will actually proceed. CCP Ytterbium (what a name!) has posted a thread in the Ideas and discussion sections of the forums on the proposed changes to 5 frigates for Inferno.
Two first points of interest. Firstly the location of this thread is an indication of the content; i.e. and idea not solid fact. However it does give us a very valuable incite into exactly how the collective mind of CCP is thinking about these changes.
Here is a summery of his first two posts for those not willing to trawl the whole thread:
The Attack Ships will be:

Tormentor: role changed from mining frigate to medium range combat vessel
Punisher: improved role to fit close-medium range brawler
Merlin: overhauled role to fit medium-long range turret platform (may be reconsidered as resists loss is pretty hefty)
Incursus: overhauld role to fit close range brawler
Rifter: role untouched, it already is made of win and dipped with awesomesauce

Attack ships are expected to be a well balanced mix of spank tank and speed, with the slight draw back of capacitor issues (still under consideration). The aim of this class is pretty much to all be similar in power to the Rifter, which is receiving only a minor change (very slight cap nerf very slight HP boost).
In my previous post I was a bit puzzled as to where Mining Frigates were going to sit in all this, and in the end assumed that they would simply classed as a Support Frigate. I couldn’t have been more wrong. With the benefit of 20:20 hind sight this does make sense. CCP has stated that the aim of these changes is to make ALL T1 ships viable in combat in equal measures. We also know that the tier chart below (from a previous dev blog) clearly shows the T1 ships should be more of a versatile platform.
With this in mind we can clearly see that the decision to revamp a ship specialised for mining into a more general combat role, does make clear sense. But the question remains; what will happen to newbe mining progression? Ytterbium adds that they are currently considering adding an ORE frigate and/or giving some more mining roles to the newbe frigates.

This does also portend to an interesting future for the eWar frigates.Ytterbium Mentions that they will retain their current split (EWScanning) but need a boost. Judging by the statements given on each role in the initial dev blog, they will still require far more damage and mobility, with a small buff to tanking in-order to fit with the role described (again summarised in my previous post)

This is some great stuff so far; and if CCP can really turn all these frigates into Rifter equivalents, we could be seeing a lot more variation in frigate combat than we are at the moment, all of which encourages the emergent content which seems to have been leaking out of the game of late.
Looking even further into the future (as this will likely be the template used for cruisers and above), we will likely see the same changes to mining cruisers and perhaps similar boosts/nerfs to all ships as per their class classifications. My only worry is the time frame for these changes, going slow to receive feedback is one thing: five ships per 7 months seems a little to slow for my liking*.
Thank for reading
Hark¬
*This is pretty unfair of me, CCP  spent a lot of this time looking at all ships and the roles themselves, and have already stated that they are short on development time for this change. These are mitigating circumstances, but if my time in development has taught me anything, its that there are always mitigating circumstances.

Fears for Tiers

Just because everyone and his dog is blogging about Mittens, I’m going to concentrate on what’s really important right now; Internet Spaceships. Just before Fanfest (2012, hello readers from the future) CCP announced their intent to do away with the Tier system of ships working class by class up the ships converting them to a “Ship Lines” along with a fleshing out of missing classes and inconsistency’s in the skill tree.
Currently, frigates are divided up into 6 or 3 tiers depending on who you ask. Players talk of 6 tiers (one for each ship not including the newbie frigate), whereas the dev blog which talked about these changes specified that there were currently 3 tiers (including the newbie frigate). I’m going to go with the player version of tiers, as the CCP grouping makes no sense what so ever (more on this later).

The new Ship Lines will have 5 types which specialise as below:

Ship Line

Damage

Defence

Mobility

Notes

Combat

++

++

++/–Range

Attack

++

+/-

++

Bombardment

++

+/-

+/-

++ Range

Support

+/-

+/-

Force multipliers

Industry

+/-

Mine or haul

So let’s talk generalisations:

Tier 1 – 3 all have 6 slots and are never well tanked, if CCP’s intent is to make all frigates equal the first step with these should be to bring them up to par with the current tier 6 ships, giving them 10 total slots or balancing them to make up for this deficit.

Tier 1 is a clear cases for the Industrial line with balancing they should make good miners/mini haulers

Tier 2 is all about speed making them most likely to become Attack Vessels. To match this profile they will likely require a boost to damage and a minor buff to their defences.

Tier 3 ships are exploration ships. By process of elimination, these scanning ships cannot be any of the damage centric lines, nor can they be called Industrial by nature. Therefore we must argue that they indirectly Support fleets. Currently these ships are very under par in damage and would require a buff to fit this class.

Tier 4 has 8 or 9 slots (generally if this tier has 9 Tier 5 will have 8 and vice versa). The tier centralises on racial electronic warfare hence I suspect the variance in slots. This class clearly goes into Support.

Tiers 5 and 6 have 9 and 10 slots respectively. They are all combating centric and each race tends to have one specialised in each of their primary and secondary damage types. Although all these ships are combat centric, they are very racially individual as to whether they are Attack, Combat or Bombardment ships. This is a good thing in my opinion and the spread should be kept.

So where does this leave us? We now have 6 frigates spread with:

1 Industrial

1 Attack

2 Support

And two other ships spread between Combat, attack and Bombardment (different for each race).

For a well skilled experienced player this seems like a great change. As these ships are used a lot for cheap solo PvP where before we all used the tier 6 or occasionally tier 5 (Rifters and Kestrals) we might now consider the Tier 2 speed ship as a viable option.

In terms of how much CCP should boost these ships, I believe that price should be a good reflection of power. Currently T1 average around the 0.7M ISK range. Whereas the T2 versions are closer to 18M average range; roughly 25 times more expensive. I would not advocate a 1 for 1 price to effectiveness ratio, but if CCP boost the frigates until T2 is only 12-13 times better that the T1 equivalent, we might just see more T1 ships in combat.

It’s an interesting change, and in my opinion keeps the complexity and variability of EvE while at the same time making it easier to understand*.

Thanks for reading

Hark

*No I don’t think these things are mutually exclusive.

New Module: Lock Breakers

I have finally had a chance to catch up on some of the videos of fan fest this year. Having just finished watching the New Module presentation just one thing has caught my attention. Targeted lock breakers.

This is going to be a game changer. For anyone who has not seen the presentation I will quickly brush over the concept:

It is a module which breaks all locks on you. The module is chanced based, but the calculation includes the number of people currently targeting you. E.g. If one person is targeting you the chance of success is low, with 20 the chance is high. It was also noted that this would be a sub-capital only module (at least this was my interpretation; the exact phrase was “Doesn’t work on capitals” this could mean the reverse and its covered by the anti-ewar caveat on capitals, let’s hope not thou).

I’m sure your keen mind is already boggling at the possibilities, just as mine was.

Before Fanfest I discussed the “leaked” micro jump drive, and analysed my thoughts on how this would affect the game and whom it would affect (incidentally that module was also officially presented at the presentation), I want to do the same now with this.

First and foremost this could change the landscape of 0.0 warfare. For a long time now large fleet fights have concentrated on large groups of people attacking single targets in the enemy fleet to ensure its speedy destruction. This module (depending on its penalties and fitting requirements of course) could well change all that. Large blobs could soon find themselves frustrated by targets breaking lock and running from their malevolent grip faster than a soapy nun in a poker house.

However its effectiveness dependent on how the module is implemented. If it activates at the end of its cycle, it’s is likely to be too late for the defending ship, as blobs over a certain size (especially alpha fleets) will have killed them stone cold dead long before the cycle ends (even if it’s only a short one). On the other had if it’s activated on click and then has a cool down timer, we might see the emergence of super-fast locking battleships, which lock, lose lock and re-acquire in a matter of seconds allowing them to still blob the target.

What is good to see is that even in their most powerful form these modules are still going to require skill to both use and counter, and could see the emergence of new kind of psychological warfare (which I love). Assuming they have any kind of activation delay the skill of this module is going to be in when to press it. If you’re being targeted by an entire fleet, do you attempt to break lock early and warp out, or hero tank for a bit to cause maximum damage, but risk getting alpha’d. Equally there is a skill based counter to the module. If you know the cool down time, you could attempt to scare a selection of targets into activating early (locking up a tertiary target early, and re-lock them, then primary them before the cool down finishes). Equally FC’s are going to have to learn to keep a VERY fast locking ship back from initial tackling to hopefully catch anything attempting to run away, alternatively bubbles get even more importance on the battlefield.

One thing this will not do however is end the blob. I’m sure that some people are hoping this will mean a gang of 10 can take on a gang of 50 with far better odds. But assuming that large fleets have good discipline this is unlikely to happen. There is still no disadvantage to brining 50 people against 10 people. It just means each of your 10 engage 1 enemy and still win. At worst fleets will have to hold back some of its members from engaging in case the initial group lose lock. If the blob has a Hic or a Dic it the module makes no odds at all, except just how long it will take to die.

Outside of 0.0 fleet fights we could also see some interesting uses of this module; will they for instance work on NPC’s? Could we see people tanking PLEX’s and missions by breaking locks? Could it even make Mission/Incursion running even less of a risk, as with multiple NPC’s targeting you, your guaranteed to be able to break a mission gangers lock on you and run away?

Finally the biggest effect which we might see is dependence on logistics. Let us assume for a moment that this module is good enough to make primarying a single target with 100 people in effective. let’s say that when someone is targeted they pump the module and warp off before a new lock and be acquired (bubblers have been killed early in most battles). It would mean that it is now more effective to break your fleet down into squad based groups (1 tackler, 5 DPS lets say) and allow them to engage as a smaller group. This is going to make fleet MUCH more dependent of logistics. Now instead of all damage going onto a single target (with 60% of it being over kill) we have damage being applied across and entire fleet. Logistics are going to have to work harder than ever and may be required more than ever.

TL;DR

                – Invest in SEBO BPO’s

                – Invest in logistics

                – Keep investing in bubblers

                – don’t be surprised when the blob adapts

– <3 your logi.