EVE General Discussion

Alliance Sov Costs

The other complaint I’ve seen a lot of is the fact that 0.0 is essentially dead and controlled by major players and there is no sign of that breaking up because the revenue from rental alliances and corporations is too good to rock the status quo.
People out in 0.0 want more battles and more people out there. People in empire that opportunistic want an opportunity to carve their own fortune in 0.0 without being instant blobbed.

I feel the rental aspect needs to be discouraged to an extent. While renting space is great for those that don’t want to PvP and reap the benefits of what 0.0 has to offer it has created a stagnant universe that many of the veteran pilots do not like (unless they are receiving a cut of that rental income of course).

The costs to online TCU’s should increase by the scale of the alliance while giving benefits to controlling segments such as a solar system / region.

• Constellation – Say an alliance controls an entire solar system. There would be a decrease in the overall TCU costs as well as ihub costs. This gives smaller entities the opportunity to control a piece of 0.0 and actually utilize it and build it up.
• Region – for the larger alliances and coalitions control of an entire region would provide less of a decrease in overall TCU costs as well as IHub costs but would still provide an incentive for a conquest.

These discounts would be offset as the alliance expanded its efforts. Let’s say alliance ABC successfully took control of a Constellation. They have started receiving the discounts that come with this. They now have their sights set on the adjacent Constellation. They drop an SBU and begin to challenge Sov of a system. Once they take Sov of said system it would then disrupt the opposing alliances (DEF) discounts for owning the entire constellation. It would also inadvertently increase the cost on that new TCU as war is expensive and they are fueling their own incursion / conquest of said constellation. Now Alliance DEF could respond by trying to counter and get a Sov system in ABC’s owned constellation to increase their costs of the war as well.

Moving on a larger scale control of a region would provide decreased TCU and IHUB costs. However it allows smaller alliances to drop SBU’s and try to punch holes at these larger alliances and blocs. Thus increasing the costs and penalties associated with owning such vast space. You could expand this to further player content where individuals could use similar devices like siphons but on TCU’s and IHUB’s that detract from the benefits of owning a constellation or solar system. Perhaps reduce IHUB effectiveness or left alone long enough can have a substantial increase in the cost to have sov
Simply put an entity should not own 0.0 space if they do not have the man power to control their borders/systems. They should only own what they can keep track of and defend (and this does not mean blob cap fleets).

Owning multiple regions by a single alliance would increase the multiplier for the costs of TCU’s owned by that alliance which would offset the benefits of owning multiple entire regions.

The idea here is to add more flavor to 0.0 space and more variance. Not necessarily to hit at the mass organizations. Add more fighting to 0.0 and making it so it isn’t so unsurmountable for a player to say I want to create my own little empire in 0.0. Add more hit and run tactics as well as more strategy to 0.0 outside of choke points and moons.

reserved

In the end game mechanics wont really change anything, the state of null is player made

This seems like a Feature and/or an Idea.




If only we had a place for such things.

Playing since 2005


Too stupid to look at system security or post in the right forum

I realize that you've put a lot of thought into this, but I don't see this as a solution as the number of moons in a given region is constant. Larger alliances/coalitions would not be affected as much by variance due to the number of moon's accessible, but smaller groups that hold a handful of systems could be wiped out due to over dependence on specific moons. I think this would do far more harm than good, and only benefit the largest actors in null sec.

CCP is fine with the way things are otherwise they would have changed it long ago.

Does it matter that some dev's are sitting on the councils that rule these bloc's? Of course not.

Just because a word ends with an s doesn't mean you have to stick an apostrophe in there.

I like how OP, even after being told how stupid he is, both directly and point by point, insists this would help small blocs. As if the larger blocs don't have the manpower to constantly re-scan their moons and break into 600 different bajillion alliances to keep costs down. I'd almost say he's a shill trying to argue for ways his alliance can get stronger, but then I remembered his alliance lost all its space and is currently hemorrhaging members.


So there is that.

Smash moon goo monopolies: Make moons produce P0s and react them into P1s and moon materials. Now anyone can export P0s to a POS and react moon materials. Rarer moon materials may require several P0s and/or produce fewer moon materials per cycle with equal or more P0 need.

WTB: Wormhole to hide in.