Jita Park Speakers Corner

There is no way to make this work that can't be immediately abused by well organised groups.

Remember... Nullsec needs more small gang activities...

Always Promote flying in space activities.

Also promote small-gang oriented targets. While ships in space are always a good target, include other targets / objectives / mechanics centered around small gangs. There needs to be a middle-ground objective between killing a ratter and killing a POS.

Things like:

A mining deflector - A device you anchor near a moon mining operation to steal some of the harvested moongoo...

Player Created Incursion Events - A device that inhibits PvE activities in a system by imparting incursion-like penalties to NPC bounties, Ship resistances, etc....

Crucible is a bad example, since it was basically CCP saying 'oh god everything is on fire and our playerbase is in open revolt and Incarna was a horrible failure and our company is a total mess aaaaaaa' and taking a sawn-off shotgun to the backlog to rush out as many quick-fixes as they could in time for release day. It worked at the time to steady the ship, but it wasn't by any stretch of the imagination a focussed and co-ordinated project to fundamentally implement a set vision of some aspect of the game like we're talking about here, and a lot of that low-hanging-fruit has now been plucked from the backlog at this point.

That's part of the concern many of us have, I think - comprehensively fixing nullsec (and, for that matter, lowsec, and highsec, and industry, etc etc) requires some care and attention and for CCP to apply some joined-up thinking to do the right things in the right order. It's not something that can be done by picking a few random issues from the backlog. My worry is that CCP doesn't have a good track record of joined-up thinking and proper delivery in recent expansions and either we get another Dominion (announce a lot of things, drop half of them shortly before release, still not have released the dumped half three years later, whilst the half that was implemented turns out to be horribly breakable once the playerbase gets hold of them) or that we get another Crucible (seperate development teams cherry-pick those items easiest to quick-fix in time for release day and apply them in isolation rather than co-ordinated efforts to solve all the interlinked issues that make up nullsec's current problems).

Also, I mentioned this in a previous thread - the Nullsec Brainstorming exercise that was carried out by Greyscale last year : is that something that CCP are looking at using for their future development efforts, and if not are you going to wheel it back out into the daylight (not that Reykjavik sees much daylight in December) and remind them that it exists?

Nerf the titan bridge and remove moon goo as passive income for alliance leaders...Make this happe

I have been always the fan of diminishing returns in operational goals, but also making objectives have to hit several systems at once.

Making groups of 200 people no more effective than 20

Ie switch pos shoots to Pos hacks. dreads are massive computer ships that have a hacking strength, which will take x time to neutralize the POS Shield , Second dread would only provide 80% benefit, 3rd, 50%, 4th 20%, 5th 5%.

The rest of the fleet must guard these units as the structure hack. Once the hack competed the entire fleet can warp in and shoot the structure

For an Power Block like Cfc this would require them to split their Capital Blob to steam role an alliance, exposing vulnerability to smaller entities.

Pretty much.... Granted, the effects need to be reasonably balanced with the effort it takes to deploy it.... Obviously, spending 10 minutes to incapacitate a system for 24 hours is obnoxiously extreme. While I don't want to turn Nullsec into FW plexing, FW plexes are a good example where the locals need to respond quickly, or risk having their Sov hold diminished and eventually lost....

The player create incursion idea was basically, you come into system, anchor and then online the incursion deployment module. While onlining, it generates a warpable beacon for anybody and everybody to warp to.. Ideally the onlining process is long enough for the locals to form up a good response (debate-ably 15-20 minutes?), but not too long. Once online, the system experiences incursion like effects for a few hours.... and the locals just have to wait for the effect to diminish... Things to debate... Online timer length, deployment restrictions, period of incursion penalties, severity of penalties, etc, etc...

The Moon harvester deflector was more to punish distant landlords. If your alliance controls a moon on the other side of the galaxy, someone can steal your moongoo. And while it's easy to destroy these things, if you're not in the area, someone can reduce your harvest yield....

Numbers will always win in a straight up fight....

I think there needs to be a random element to taking sov that benefits people that occupy that system. Consider this for a moment:

Currently, to take Sov from someone, you role in and SBU their system. You then RF some structure, and get a timer that tells you exactly when the next fight will be. This means, as the aggressor, you just leave system and come back.

While alarm clock fights, as the above scenario is all about, are wonderful for big battles, there needs to be a component that isn't about alarm clock fights. That component needs to center around flying in the system, ideally maintaining a continual presence so you can take advantage of "random" events that have the opportunity to alter the Sov Battle.

Imagine, rather than having a TCU's blow up, once you shot a TCU into some critical state, it underwent a slow 24 hour destruction. Now, do to whatever reasons, you can't start onlining a new TCU until the old one finishes its demise. Pretend for a moment that the TCU is a complex system of computer data centers, where each "data center" represents the system control codes for the planetary systems and stargates and whatnot.... As the TCU burns, the various control centers become compromised, and to save the valuable system date within, these "data centers" are ejected into space. Pilots in system could then locate and retrieve these "data canters" to be used when onlining a new TCU. A new Goal: retrieve enough data centers, install them in an onlining TCU, and perhaps the onlining process for the new TCU is reduced from 8 hrs to 1 hour or maybe less. Now, maintaining a presence in system could be important, because your opponent might try to collect these data-cores and ninja-online a new TCU, forcing you to repeat the sov grind.

This system has it flaws, and I'm not suggestion it as is. Instead, I'm trying to provide an example of a mechanic in which occupying a system is influential and important to the Sov Conquering Mechanics. Collecting the "datacores" doesn't require shooting superstructures, and most importantly, it might be an achievable objective that a single pilot could perform. Tweak the retrieval mechanics and suddenly we have a small gang, guerrilla warfare targets that encourage 24 hours of opponents vying for system dominance while warping around trying to achieve objectives. This is much more along the lines of what I'd like to see incorporated into sov.... Not more pos bashes, not more RF'ing superstructures....

While I made that thread in November, I originally posted the idea in April, at which point I suggested a 1m isk price. Sadly, I thought I posted it in the "ideas for new modules thread", but for some reason didn't. Anyway, 1m isk and a 25% yield theft rate was reasonable and not too excessive at that time. Obviously, it's not soo much the case now, but it's nothing minor tweaks can't remedy. Thank you for running the current numbers to point this out.

What other issues do you foresee beyond "it's not profitable enough"... Really, profitability can be addressed by tweaking cost, theft rate, storage volume, etc.... Additionally, if you allow this device to continue to steal moongoo even when it's maxed out it's storage capacity, then your looking at non-negligible economic damage to the Moon Harvester's Owner.

Finally, it is not something an alliance needs a big response for.. The goal is to make a harassment device that an individual alliance member could take out.

Removing mineral compression does absolutely nothing to fix the problem. Alliances will continue to just import completed hulls instead of raising their local prices for low end minerals enough to induce miners to mine low end ores in belts. I suppose you can argue that JFs should be nerfed and so on as well, but the further you take it the more you're getting into spiteful "let's try to make it work by kicking nullsec players in the balls" territory instead of "lets try to make it work by making it worth doing".

In any case I should note that the proponents of the compression nerf in the development strategy document as well as CCP itself support the notion of reasonable local production anyway, and the CSM, at least, acknowledges that compression can't really be nerfed until local production is available. So there.

You've got a point on the reduced man-hours thing, although I'd point out three things. First, my example was just that - an example - and I didn't account for man-hours at all. Second, it's not necessarily a bad thing anyway, as nullsec also has fewer miners to begin with. And third, if CCP were to adopt the idea and decided it was a bad thing, it's easy enough to tweak any or all of the units required to refine, the ore volume itself, or the content of a refine to adjust the man-hour number.