Jita Park Speakers Corner

Fair. Being a w-space resident, I'm afraid I can't agree with the proposal of cloaking nerfs in any form, but it does seem likely that there are a million other issues to be dealt with this year instead, which would render this point of disagreement moot.

A lot of people have had that idea

And yes, some kind of usage-based sov system is what I will advocate to CCP. Along with vigilant monitoring and draconian penalties for using macros to game it...

What are your plans about lowsec?

we are glad to see that not all of the early candidates claim to think that they know everything about all parts of the game.

Once voting comes around I reactivate my other half and you get both of my votes.. unless Akita T runs too


[edit]Just got a little question for you too (wont affect above statement):
..could you imagine (once the sustainable population density in nullsec/lowsec is similar to a normal highsec mission running hub - if CCP ever manages this) that it would be a good idea (*) to reinvent intersolar traveling by giving everybody a jumpdrive (even capsules) and scale the speed similar to the warp speed (small = fast, big = slow)?

*) this naturally needs a different way of finding other ships than today, where the points of interaction are determined by celestials/gates/stations/ihubs/pos/moons/etc.pp.

Yes, but as you say, this would need a different way of finding ships, and space is big. EVE has realistically sized solar systems, and even a moderately sized 10AU system is a globe which will contain approximately 14,000 trillion possible 1000km grids.

I do actually like that gates can be "fight generators" by allowing hostiles to even find other hostiles, and although your idea is potentially interesting, I'd always want to keep jump gates as a desireable option. So (and remember that we're just doing a bit of a blue-sky speculation here) we could perhaps envisage simply allowing ships to warp directly to other systems.

63072 au is equal to 1 light year, so a cruiser would take ~17000 seconds to go that far (about 4 hours). It wouldn't really be practical to move fleets this way, but fast scouts and blockade runners might find it potentially useful: A dual warp-speed rigged Interceptor could travel 1LY in about 40 minutes. (And we'd finally have a real use for warp speed rigs)

Sadly this would all require a fairly fundamental rewriting of the way movement in EVE works, so I doubt it's something we're likely to see anytime soon. Fun to think about, though.

It's a complex topic, and very difficult to seperate from alliance logistics. What I'd ideally like to see would be that 0.0 alliances had stronger motivations to stay in or near their space before we start nerfhammering their capability to stray outside it.

Basically there are two aspects to the power projection issue: first the ability to to do it, and second the cost of doing it. At the moment, the first is very high and the second is extremely low. So what I'd like to see would be a more realistic opportunity cost for accumulating the entire PvP capability of a large bloc into a single point on the map (ie: all the stuff that's not being actively defended).

If a group of players want to launch an all-out attack on another group then we should not be standing in their way - after all, mighty empires and epic huge space battles are what sov 0.0 is for. But all-out attacks with nothing held back should mean leaving that groups assets and income streams significantly exposed. It should, potentially at least, cost.

After that's implemented, we can look at discussing whether the ability to launch those all-out attacks needs nerfing; lots of mechanics have been suggsted; cyno mass limits, increasing jump portal fuel costs, etc etc. It may be that it does, but then we need to define what sov space is for. Easy, cheap power projection is what drives ever-increasing group size, with the inevitable conclusion of 0.0 being divided into 2 major powerblocs, and maybe 1 lesser upcoming/declining one (and we're almost there). Lots of people complain about that, but I'm interested in hearing specific reasons why it's so bad that it shouldn't be allowed. If there is to be a space where players can build their own version of empire - and why shouldn't there be? - then surely sov space is it?

On a side note, I have been a long-time advocate of new types of space (as W-space was a new type of space), because in EVE as much as in real life, geography does dictate politics. It's easy to imagine for instance an area of space where the jump gates are old prototypes that can only allow battlecruiser and smaller ship sizes though, or where the systems are very widely seperated, so jump ships can only move but only very slowly, and so on. Different "terrain" types like those will lead to different styles of player groupings, just as W-space plays very differently to 0.0

And I definitely want to see more NPC 0.0. The north in particular badly needs a Curse-style region, close to empire with lots of stations. The NPC 0.0 regions are the spawning ground for small nullsec groups, a viable alternative to the big-bloc lifestyle, and a vital source of relatively small-scale PvP opportunities.

NPC 0.0 is a different deal, and requires less commitment. Basically it's the lo-sec to sov 0.0's empire. Regions like Curse are well populated and active because they're convenient.

EDIT: W-space life also places pretty strict limits on group size. It's not viable to have a medium-sized alliance based in a single wormhole. It's one of the options INIT. looked at before joining the HBC, but leaving Curse for W-space would have meant losing 2/3-3/4 of the alliance. But we were quite well sustained in G-0Q. IMO NPC 0.0 is important to provide incubation and regrouping space for alliances which want to break out into sov, or just exist alongside sov.

NPC 0.0 also provides an environment where a solo pilot can viably exist in 0.0, and that's also worth considering.

Hi Malcanis. I don't know you, and you don't know me. In fact noone does. I'm your average eve nobody, quietly doing my thing in internet spaceship game, and you will probably never see my nick again. My views and opinions don't really mean much to anyone other than myself, I'm sure, and that's as it should be.

And in saying all that, I just wanted to take the time to say that I think at this point you're going to be getting my votes this year. I've been reading a few of this years campaign announcements so far and they have been, quite frankly, laughable. Without knowing anything about you I fully expected yours to be the same.

I'm very pleased to have been wrong on that assumption. Not only did I find myself reading this entire thread, I read others linked along the way. I think you have some good ideas - not all of which I agree with - but more importantly they are well articulated and come across as thoughtful and well considered. I also think you - so far - have handled the pressures of this kind of public exposure extremely well, and your interactions with those that disagree with you or with whom you disagree have been calm, collected, and refreshingly mature.

It's not a case of me voting for you because you believe in the same things I do, but a case of me voting for you because I've been impressed by the person that you come across as, and I happen to believe that strength of character is everything.

Please don't prove me wrong between now and vote time :)

Theres far too many words (including the articles), with so many issues in EVE wouldnt it just be easy to bullet point what you think is bad and THEN write a short solution under it. I am all for reading but 15 pages and 6 links of text is a bit overkill.

It will allow people to focus on your ideas rather than ask the same question over and over in different ways too