Phoebe, and the Null Resource Advantage

Let’s talk more about the dark side of Phoebe and the jump changes.
First, let’s state the problem that plagues all competitive multiplayer games but open ended games like EVE the most, the n+1 problem:

All else being equal, the side with n resources is at a disadvantage to the side with n+1 resources.

In EVE, n can refer to the amount of ISK, skill points, friends, experience, etc. Basically, there is always an advantage to have more of things available to you than your opponents. This is a fact of gaming life. As well as business and life in general.  There is a constant need for more resources.  Or as the last George Carlin put it, "The meaning of life is just trying to find a place for your stuff.".

In gaming this inherent advantage is addressed by caps on players, either direct or indirect. Limiting points, items, money, or other in-game resources.  Limits in skill discrepancies, always trying to find ways to give the "little guy",   i.e. the side on the lower end of the n+1 problem, the ability to punch up against the “big guy”.  Adding in diminishing returns, or more of a particular item or mechanic to try and bring "stuff" in balance.

A common complaint about any changes to nullsec is some variant of “this change benefits the big coalitions more than the little guys you want to balkanize null sec with because they have more of [insert specific resource here]“.  Well, DUH!  The larger and more organized group will ALWAYS have an advantage over the smaller and less organized groups unless the former choose not to take it. This is not a surprise. The goal of changes should be to give so many decisions and actions for large groups to take that they cannot press the advantage in all areas at the same time.  To diffuse their advantage across multiple areas to the point they still have an advantage,  but so that the opportunity for smaller groups to enter into the scuffle is always there.

This is what the jump ship and fatigue changes in Phoebe are trying to do: limit power projection of all capital fleets AND force large coalitions to make choices about how they use their n+1 advantage to the best effect, hopefully leaving opportunities open for smaller groups to gain footholds in the game. Right now, there is no choice to be made when faced with the question of smashing a smaller group because of the ease of tactical and strategic deployment of capitals, or rather the only choice is “do I feel like it?” and that’s not a good gameplay design.

So we get Phoebe. And one of the responses is “well, the large capital using coalitions will just put caches of capital ships all over the galaxy and use jump clones or interceptors to get to them when needed”.

Yes, yes they will.

The groups we are talking about are some of the most organized and affluent in EVE’s history, there is literally no mechanical solution to force projection they cannot buy and/or maneuver around with enough effort. But that’s the key word there, isn’t it? Effort.

Yes, they will create stockpiles of capital ships in various NPC stations and POS around the cluster (easier with regular caps than with super caps). Yes they will be able to avoid the jump fatigue mechanic with interceptors and/or jump clones to get to the caches as they need them. Yes, they will recruit or create more specialty accounts to accomplish this. Yes, they are still going to be able to throw their weight around considerably.

But hopefully the effort of making and maintaining these caches in an operational and ready to go state adds enough complexity to force projection to cause these large powerful groups to have to make decisions that leave gaps in the defenses.  The point seems to be that these concessions will force a train of thought that means these larger groups will not only have to expend vast amounts of resources to maintain their holdings.  Creating the opportunity for exploitation by smaller groups with a keen eye and ear to the ground.  A small group with proper planning and good intel could easily cause havoc for these larger groups, mostly by gumming up the deployment of these caches.  Thereby forcing redeployment and restructuring.  A very cat and mouse game may emerge.

Only time will tell.

The Future of Renters in NullSec

With all the speculation and moves being made in Null/Low Sec space in advance of Phoebe one would not be too far off base in expecting people to try and hang on to old methods and agreements of surviving in EVE.  Because as we all know, some EVE players really hate change.

Taking the sell-off of the Drone Regions from PL, and N3 allegedly moving to the SouthWest as an example, a lot of alliances are looking to still try and hold onto a slice of landlord/renter ISK.  Or they move into the space left behind in the SouthEast and try to replicate the success of the BOTLRD era.

Regardless of intent, the writing on the wall suggests that rental empires are not long for the sweet embrace of death.  As most SOV-holders are looking to focus on holding easily defensible areas and generating more easily defended revenue streams, there are only a few groups left that will vie for the inevitable scraps of the rental table.

The first group that must be discussed is the pirates and small gang PVPers. Pirates and other small PvP groups are not the competitors of renters. Renters do PvE, mostly ratting. Pirates don’t really want to rat. Chasing away ratters without ratting yourself is just dumb: the income from the rats in your land will be gained by no one. Renters have no loyalty to the landlord as we saw PBLRD members running to B0T or NA for better service. They are ready to pay to anyone who guarantees them the ability to rat in peace. Currently these are the big coalitions.

the other groups that will likely be brought up are new faces in the SOV game.  Smaller alliances looking to carve out a piece for themselves.  Assuming that any smaller groups decide to grind down the evac'd SOV ahead of larger groups and succeed, they will most likely have to focus on holding that SOV from other small groups and defending the revenue of those systems from aforementioned PvP gangs.  In all likelihood, small groups won't be renting space anytime soon.

Currently the strategic and tactical control are the same. If you own SOV, then – using jump bridges and bridging titans – you are able to drop an overwhelming force on anyone who is messing in your land. Pirates live by hit-and-run. Renters don’t have to fear them as long as they watch local. The pirates cannot reasonably attack structures because the landlord shows up with a supercap blob or 500 subcaps.

After Phoebe the strategic and tactical control will split. The regional power will still hold the SOV as it can still deploy and grind down everything in a week while stomping on any attempt from the locals to fight. However they will have to deploy to do so, at the cost of not being anywhere else. This means that outside of such deployments, the local pirates are free to plant their towers and siege renters. If the SOV holder scrambles whatever members they have locally, the pirates would likely beat them up. This creates an awkward dual-power situation: both the formal SOV-holder and the local pirates are owning the same land.
Whomever takes control of the situation on the ground from the larger region holding group, both groups will inevitably come to the conclusion that sharing wealth is better than trying to hoard it.  A split in renter income will be paid to the pirates actively holding said systems, and the SOV-holder of the region will likely demand a cut.  And in effect it will resemble the "protection" rackets of organized crime, in a less violent and chaotic sense.

In most cases, this will not happen at first. The landlords will be reluctant to acknowledge that they lost tactical control and can no longer demand full rent. The pirates will likely approach with an “I just want the World burn”. This can lead to an initial exodus from some regions. An empty land where no one does PvE is good for no one. The SOV-holder will realize that lower rent is better than no rent, while the pirates will realize that having income is better than no income while having blue ratters at least attract random roamers that they can kill, while empty space attracts no one. So after the initial hiccups, the rates of this dual-renting will be accepted and renters will continue ratting as they always did.

CFC Vs S2N + BL & Company

Fighting over an R64 POS in 6-4V20 in Cloud Ring broke out between the CFC and combined forces of N3/BL.  Fleet compositions on the N3/BL side seem to have been planned to counter CFC's tactics well.  The overall damage to both sides was close in terms of ISK.

CFC Tengus + Harpies + Various Capitals VS S2N + BL & CO Cerberus + Various Capitals


The outcome was very even With Nulli Secunda and BL killing 31 Billion Isk and losing 33 Billion. The capital battle saw both sides lose 4 Dreadnoughts while the CFC lost slightly more carriers, losing 6 and killing 4. The CFC can claim victory as they had the edge in the Isk war, as well as were able to save their POS.


https://zkillboard.com/br/11748/