These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dear Jim'll CCP could you fix it for me to goto 0.0
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
C DeLeon
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#21 - 2012-09-05 09:45:19 UTC  |  Edited by: C DeLeon
I kind of agree with OP in some way. Of course it's not good to limit numbers. It's one of the significant aspects of eve that there is no limitations in the size of the conflicts. On the other hand there was a not intended limiting factor in the numbers game and it was the lagg. The lagg gave advantages to the defenders but it limited the offensive actions. TiDi turned the numbers game to an absolute I-win button and soon or later CCP have to deal with it because it's not good for 0.0.

The current situation drives away more people from null than attracts. The constantly growing powerblocks are leaving three options to individual small alliances:


1: joining the powerblocks: Some people keep saying it's a good way but it is not. It kills diversity which is not good for the sandbox. If it is keep going like that we will end up with 2 big factions and we can play wow in space.

2: Deploying back to npc null: I'm not saying it can't be fun, but it feels more like lowsec with bubbles than null. Also npc null territories are already overcrowded while sov territories are empty. A sign that there is something broken in null.

3: lowsec


My hopes are in the modular stations. Maybe with dust and the modular stations we will see a sov warfare overhaul too. I don't think we will see any significant change before that.

Edit: I hope that cloaky pirate base with jump drive wasn't just a side joke and they are taking it into account seriously. It could solve a lot of problem.
Aruken Marr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-09-05 09:55:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Aruken Marr
Startha Mewart wrote:
Aruken Marr wrote:
Why should small alliances be able to take on larger ones?

Because in nearly any other game, or even in RL, an entity must deal with things like Line of Sight, Area of Effect weapons, and much better guerrilla warfare tactics than are available in Eve. When the game is actually out of beta, and these things are fleshed out, you will see the blob fade.


Then reduce power projection. Don't place arbitrary limits on what alliances can deploy but rather limit how far they can deploy. Through reducing projection more space could be "claimable" for smaller entities. The optimal distribution, in my opinion, would be that alliances occupy roughly the same amount of space as they actively utilize. Large alliances can then occupy relatively large amounts of space and any small entity will face difficulty, as usual, in taking said space. However, it would then allow smaller entities to carve out a smaller area of their own that is otherwise unused. But I don't think small entities should ever be able to dramatically affect larger entities within their field of influence.

I have no idea how this could be done but I think it's something to be solved with projection rather than limiting numbers. Still smaller entities have other options such as force multipliers (more effective/valuable ships, better pilots etc.)
Chokichi Ozuwara
Perkone
Caldari State
#23 - 2012-09-05 09:58:25 UTC
Remove local, and 0.0 will get very intredasting.

Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.
Aruken Marr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2012-09-05 09:59:36 UTC
Chokichi Ozuwara wrote:
Remove local, and 0.0 will get very intredasting.


Move to WH space?
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#25 - 2012-09-05 10:02:42 UTC

People have already said so, there is already a mechanic in place for small entities to join the current big ones: diplomacy and blue standings, though they're not bullet proof.

I remember a little alliance that could called Vanguard and was doing just fine. Then when they had cleaned up all the garbage 'IT' had left behind the big alliance that let them do their thing in the first place revoked the blue status and kicked Vanguard out, which died very fast after that. Funnily history seems to repeat itself and Atlas that used vanguard as a broomstick is now way of the dodo them selfs.

Anywho, how do you want to control that I bring 250 from my side and not 500 -1 (499 so we still can have a "fight")?
Some sort of pre-fight sign up form? Ugh
C DeLeon
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2012-09-05 10:04:36 UTC
Aruken Marr wrote:

Then reduce power projection. Don't place arbitrary limits on what alliances can deploy but rather limit how far they can deploy. Through reducing projection more space could be "claimable" for smaller entities. The optimal distribution, in my opinion, would be that alliances occupy roughly the same amount of space as they actively utilize. Large alliances can then occupy relatively large amounts of space and any small entity will face difficulty, as usual, in taking said space. However, it would then allow smaller entities to carve out a smaller area of their own that is otherwise unused. But I don't think small entities should ever be able to dramatically affect larger entities within their field of influence.

I have no idea how this could be done but I think it's something to be solved with projection rather than limiting numbers. Still smaller entities have other options such as force multipliers (more effective/valuable ships, better pilots etc.)


The claoky pirate base with jump drive. If an entity is sitting on a huge unused territory, it could attract ninja ratters/gankers enjoying the fruit while not paying the bills. It could limit the powerblocks offense. Why should they conquer unecessarily huge teritories and paying the bills while the territory will be used only by ninja ratters :)
Aruken Marr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2012-09-05 10:08:55 UTC
C DeLeon wrote:
Aruken Marr wrote:

Then reduce power projection. Don't place arbitrary limits on what alliances can deploy but rather limit how far they can deploy. Through reducing projection more space could be "claimable" for smaller entities. The optimal distribution, in my opinion, would be that alliances occupy roughly the same amount of space as they actively utilize. Large alliances can then occupy relatively large amounts of space and any small entity will face difficulty, as usual, in taking said space. However, it would then allow smaller entities to carve out a smaller area of their own that is otherwise unused. But I don't think small entities should ever be able to dramatically affect larger entities within their field of influence.

I have no idea how this could be done but I think it's something to be solved with projection rather than limiting numbers. Still smaller entities have other options such as force multipliers (more effective/valuable ships, better pilots etc.)


The claoky pirate base with jump drive. If an entity is sitting on a huge unused territory, it could attract ninja ratters/gankers enjoying the fruit while not paying the bills. It could limit the powerblocks offense. Why should they conquer unecessarily huge teritories and paying the bills while the territory will be used only by ninja ratters :)


What stops it from attracting Ninja ratters/gankers of their own? It makes some sense, but sounds extremely farmable by the larger entities.
Rifter Rafter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2012-09-05 10:15:51 UTC
Add more npc stations and regions or just divide 0.0. Coz now 0.0 is for bots and isk farmers doing stupid anomalies and plexes..
So divide 0.0 for more sectors with npc stations give ppl docking posibilities
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-09-05 10:16:37 UTC
I don't know if i can go on much longer...

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
C DeLeon
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#30 - 2012-09-05 10:17:42 UTC  |  Edited by: C DeLeon
Aruken Marr wrote:

What stops it from attracting Ninja ratters/gankers of their own? It makes some sense, but sounds extremely farmable by the larger entities.


Because of the distance it's hard to reship and form a defense fleet when someone is in trouble. Also the lack of intel. Currently it is easier to run agents than going out and ratting if someone is forced to live in npc null. Of course it could make farmable by larger entities but that would mean they can defend the territory anyway from ninja ratters because their staging system is close. In that case the station could move away to a more safe place.

Edit: sorry for the posting fail :)
Aruken Marr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-09-05 10:22:22 UTC
C DeLeon wrote:
Aruken Marr wrote:

What stops it from attracting Ninja ratters/gankers of their own? It makes some sense, but sounds extremely farmable by the larger entities.



Is there meant to be a reply there? P

(I misunderstood what you said in the first place. So you suggest a sort of unscannable wormhole thingy opening up in unused space?)
AzAkiR NaLDa
Council of Exiles
Brave Collective
#32 - 2012-09-05 10:22:39 UTC
A lovely tears. Even if your small you can still find ways to get sov or become active in null without renting or having sov at all.

So instead of whining about the sov warfare blobs you could just try harder.

Lone Star Warrior
C DeLeon
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#33 - 2012-09-05 10:29:15 UTC
Aruken Marr wrote:
(I misunderstood what you said in the first place. So you suggest a sort of unscannable wormhole thingy opening up in unused space?)


Something like that. It was mentioned in the CSM minutes in the modular POS section
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#34 - 2012-09-05 10:30:56 UTC
Frank Gallagher wrote:
I just thought i'd get a discussion going on how you could possibly fix 0.0 so that smaller alliances could get out and take on the bigger alliances for their sov.


Essentially you're asking for CCP to make it so that a small fleet is better than a big fleet.

The answer is: W-space.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Aruken Marr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2012-09-05 10:35:05 UTC
C DeLeon wrote:
Aruken Marr wrote:
(I misunderstood what you said in the first place. So you suggest a sort of unscannable wormhole thingy opening up in unused space?)


Something like that. It was mentioned in the CSM minutes in the modular POS section


I could get behind something like that.
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#36 - 2012-09-05 10:37:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Inquisitor Kitchner
EVE NullSec is a reflection of real life politics and government over history condensed into a couple of years.

Everyone started out as small roaming tribes, then they got together into larger entities with rules and a form of leadership, then they form individual city states, then they evolve into regions within a landmass, then they evolve into countries, countries evolve into international governance (E.g. The EU) then in theory international governments form a world government. At each stage the individual gives up more rights and freedoms and is subject to more laws in exchange for increased safety and stability.

It is an evolutionary habit for humans to band together in larger and larger social groups in order to defend themselves from "everything that isn't us". EVE is just a reflection of that.

If anything there should be less NPC null in the middle of player Null, those places create a sort of "no mans land" between actual governing entities without giving them a form of recourse.

Imagine if you will putting somalia (or some other pirate ridden country) in the middle of the US (or any country), but without the US army being able to invade it because of magic.

Personally I'd say make low sec more appealing to live in and remove NPC null entirely.

In terms of "pirates" operating in nullsec, if an Alliance over stretches itself and is unable to police its systems then yes it should be possible for pirates to operate out of the systems effectively, as that's what would happen if a country couldn't police itself.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#37 - 2012-09-05 11:17:51 UTC
All large alliances started out as small gangs.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#38 - 2012-09-05 11:19:42 UTC
Just remove cynos

Fights are fun in wormhole space where people can't just magick supers out of their assess

Strategic placement and movement of fleets and trapping stuff would also get new meaning. I mean this is how all other strategy games and RL wars work, you actually need to move **** to places, not just teleport them anywhere.


'

.
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#39 - 2012-09-05 11:21:30 UTC
Just remove supers. Crap ships that CCP has never been able to balance right.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#40 - 2012-09-05 13:35:34 UTC
Sabrina Solette wrote:
Frank Gallagher wrote:
I just thought i'd get a discussion going on how you could possibly fix 0.0 so that smaller alliances could get out and take on the bigger alliances for their sov.

The blob has always caused the lag issues and node crashes, for which you gave us TIDI. The outcome of all battles will be decided on who has the most numbers in system. But what about the smaller alliances in game, how do they get a foothold in 0.0 to grow their alliances ?

Fleets have a maximum number, and i think that should be all that you are allowed to bring to the fight. 250 vs 250 in a system would reduce TIDI and probably the stress load on the sever, plus fights would come down to skills and FC's abilities. Just imagine going into fights knowing that your 5 years of skill training and pvp experience will have some sort of outcome on a fight rather than it being who has the greater number of pilots.

Give the minnows and skill based pvp a chance please.



I think Sov killed 0.0, all it did was create bigger corp/alliances.

Small alliances in 0.0? You could always take over systems nobody else wants or pay a large alliance to stay there.


Isn't the point of any MMO to play with other people?

Of course it is, you're just not used to the fact you can play with more than 20 dudes inside stormwind without crashing servers.
Flash news, in Eve you can participate in whatever side including as neutral (best option to mess with everyone) and all of this in numbers well above 2500 in the same system, unique and absolutely fantastic.

This only means you have opportunities to make more friends and have fun together. Stop being entitled to your little "whatever-game" experience and open your mind to this unique social experience that is Eve.

brb