Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Greetings fellow forum warriors.

I haven't checked out the forums in some time but was just sat watching some of the CCP stuff on youtube and had an idea for sov mechanics that could be good for the game in its current state.

In one sentence it could be explained as "Release some areas of space, i.e single constellations that can only be conquered by alliances with less than x players total."

The idea being to give the smaller guys something to aim for that the big boys can't just come and take away. Sovereignty is probably too stronger term to descibe its conquered state, principality a little to gay, but something along these lines might be what 0.0 needs to reinvigorate it. While I agree it will breed a certain amount of elitism in that these kinds of alliances will only want the best players as with incursion corps / fleets at the moment, I believe the price would be worth paying.

Anyway it was just an idea, more likley than not, already thought of, but thought I'd have a brain fart and see what others thought.

And just before the flamers get in:

No I'm not mad, the bad man didn't touch me anywhere, I will not 'come at you' bro, I am not jelly, nor am I an ex-(alliance name here) bittervet.

Cheers

BogWopit.

I think it would be much better to make it abundantly clear to any sov holding alliance leadership just how much ISK they are earning/losing in each system.

Sov cost 6M ISK/day regardless of the system. If an alliance has on average 10% tax for their corporations, ratting would require 60M ISK in rats (roughly 60 rats) killed in that system every day.

Taking a system like O-LJOO as an example, 4 NPCs killed in the last 48 hours means that the corporation & alliance likely only directly received less than 1M ISK from this activity. In this example, 33 moons leaves lots of possibilities for the alliance operating sufficient starbases that 25% fuel savings is worthwhile (somewhere between 3 & 7 large towers depending on their setup).

Here is another example, this time a system with an outpost, P-E9GN. In this case, there are only 6 Moons. Yesterday more than 60 rats (avg of 1M/isk per) were killed so the corporation/alliance may have made its cost back for the day (assumes they were the ones ratting/exploring). The stations market is likely quiet and if every moon as a profit making POS, fuel savings might make up for the cost of daily sov.

So, why is making this cost/benefit analysis abundantly clear and straight forward important to opening up null-sec to small organizations?

"Big Alliance" leadership might start to shed systems that have little or no value to them and their members. They might maintain a Starbase on a valuable moon (which they already do in some areas of low-sec), but they are less likely to busy themselves with a system they are clearly losing ISK on.

I think the WH space is what you are looking for