These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Dear General Discussion, please imagine ...

Author
Commander Spurty
#1 - 2015-01-16 19:19:17 UTC
.. .it's 18months in the future and the mechanics have changed, if you could take sov in space that's "empty" with only 250 people in a max of 4~8 hours, would you?

If you would, please explain why.

If you wouldn't, what else needs to be done to lower the bar and make it a goal for all Alliance CEOs?




There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Commander Spurty
#2 - 2015-01-16 19:26:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Spurty
notes:

Lowering the bar to sov:

What if you only needed to be a Corp to hold Sov?

What if the creation / upkeep of an Alliance was tied to you first owning sov?

What if a corporation could only be as big as the largest number of players that can cram into a system (about 2,500? with current hardware)?

What if in-order to invite a corp to join your alliance, you needed to take Sov in another 'system' first?

What if your corp upkeep bill came monthly and came with a tax bill that was based on the largest number of characters you held blue standings to (minus those in your corp) that month?


That would certainly make the map look more interesting. It would mean every member needed to do 'something'. Sitting and spinning in your ship would be costly.


Why all of this imagination?

It's just that I don't see what the point of any work with sov is, if there's no "want or desire" for it.

Come to the table with 'ideas' so you have something to do rather than just 'point at jeer at the guy there trying to help make the game a better game'.


Having been lurking reading the forums, it seems that the sentiment regarding the current sov is one of apathy. This trend is more disturbing than any individual post.

It seems that the players have lost their desire to claim space and put their names on it. Just too many inhibitors:

Inhibitors that are clearly too much stress / effort / completely unbeatable:

- API system allows one person to control the destiny of tens of thousands of players
- Emails about structures being hit gives timely information
- End of Level 1 boss with Level 999 hitpoint structure grinds
- Multiple timers for any useful objective (with zero proof it's GOOD FOR THE GAME. Just good for lazy people).
- Unbridled hoarding of characters in Corps/Alliances/Blues
- Reward of 'clustering' .. this is space right? Not the #9 bus to Acton Town ..
- Lack of purpose for 99% of those members

Every player in EVE should have a purpose. Spinning ships in station waiting to undock and press F1 is not a purpose, it's slavery like a minitard. You really shouldn't be accepting your lot as a 'line member'. You have more than 30mill skill points, you really should be taking a bit of space ..

EVE is currently not what EVE should be.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP

Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#3 - 2015-01-16 19:27:32 UTC
Why does the bar for taking/holding sov need to be lowered? Holding space is a big endeavor, and having more numbers would (or I should say, should) always still have an advantage in Eve. The "number of people it takes" is not hard-set by mechanics, but rather by your opposition. If I wanted, my 10 friends and I could try to take a system tomorrow. We won't, because we'd be going against a coalition of thousands of people, but there's no "bar" that stops us from trying.

What nullsec needs is not vaguely "lowering the bar" to holding sov. It needs lowering the bar on the number of people required to make a difference and generate content, or other changes to "spread out" the fun and make the area more engaging for everyone involved (aggressors, defenders, etc).

P.S. That's a pretty awful title for a thread.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

T8497
Torgue
#4 - 2015-01-16 20:31:16 UTC  |  Edited by: T8497
Got too long, didn't read.

Let me make it longer! (yeah she said that I guess)

I'd like to see something more comprehensive done with nullsec. I don't want it to be like the jump drive changes....I wanted a jump drive nerf to stop the instant gratification aspect(and I suspect many others did as well)...the actual nerf was just an annoyance. They can take all the stupid timers and can them, just make it so capitals and bridged ships don't land on grid with the cyno. You want to use jump capability, you gotta put some skin in the game instead of a no-tank stealth bomber. The same goes for nullsec changes. I don't want it to become all about ghost capping or any other annoying aspect. I want it to be about not having 200 systems and only having members in 10 making enough isk to hold the rest of the system for eternity. Or, in the event that they fail it should be hard or impossible to get their assets out.....because when they do they just go ruin the game for other players. Like when BL/PL spend all day with cloaky alts in lowsec waiting to light cynos....that's a sign that they've been given too much isk and not enough to do with it.

Of course, I don't expect the nullsec community that is extremely well-represented here to agree with me. But if CCP ever wants to retain more players a huge step forward is stopping advanced players like me from wrecking newcomers out of the gate(AWOX tactics, easy wardecs with locator agents, outdated CONCORD mechanics, nullsec being so boring that nullsec waits to hotdrop lowsec or goes off suicide ganking to drop their free sec-status that comes with isk grinding).

I don't want to make EvE easier, I just want the old EvE back. EvE is hard =/= EvE is for bored trolls even if that has been what CCP turned it into.
J'Poll
Perkone
Caldari State
#5 - 2015-01-16 20:40:33 UTC
Before that all possibly happened.

Everybody would be bearing it on in high-sec, cause CCP made high-sec 100% risk free.

Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy

Help channel: Help chat - Reloaded

Public roams channels: RvB Ganked / Redemption Road / Spectre Fleet / Bombers bar / The Content Club

Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#6 - 2015-01-16 21:07:19 UTC
J'Poll wrote:
Before that all possibly happened.

Everybody would be bearing it on in high-sec, cause CCP made high-sec 100% risk free.


Sooo... 12 months in the future then? Big smile

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?

Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#7 - 2015-01-16 21:25:35 UTC
Quote:
Dear General Discussion, please imagine ...
.. .it's 18months in the future...


Sorry. I might be able to imagine five days. Maybe even a week. But eighteen months just ain't gonna happen. Might as well ask me to imagine a century hence.

Mr Epeen Cool
Deck Cadelanne
CAStabouts
#8 - 2015-01-16 21:45:57 UTC
Personally, I find it ironic that 90% of the time I am flying through sov space, there is nobody home. Kind of suggests that that space isn't actually "owned" by anybody and should in fact be free for the taking, but the timer BS guarantees that the absentee landlord can land an uber-blob on anybody who tries to take it.

Get rid of timers on SOV structures and I expect we will get the kind of "emergent" and dynamic game environment most of us would like to see.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."

- Hunter S. Thompson

Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#9 - 2015-01-16 21:52:03 UTC
Deck Cadelanne wrote:

Get rid of timers on SOV structures and I expect we will get the kind of "emergent" and dynamic game environment most of us would like to see.


Timers for taking down structures were introduced to counteract "timezone wars", which are tiresome and no fun for anyone. They're there for a reason.

That nearly everything is behind either a timer, an obnoxious amount of HP, or both, prevents more emergent/dynamic content than the fact that CFC and RUS can't blitz each other's sov back and forth every day.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Noriko Mai
#10 - 2015-01-16 21:55:55 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Why does the bar for taking/holding sov need to be lowered? Holding space is a big endeavor, and having more numbers would (or I should say, should) always still have an advantage in Eve.

Because I should be able to take sov in a one man corp if I am able to! But why do I need an alliance? I'm the über MOFO so I have my own system! If I can defend it with mercs or on my own or with diplomacy, who cares. As log as I can hold it, it's mine!

"Meh.." - Albert Einstein

Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#11 - 2015-01-16 22:02:02 UTC
Noriko Mai wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Why does the bar for taking/holding sov need to be lowered? Holding space is a big endeavor, and having more numbers would (or I should say, should) always still have an advantage in Eve.

Because I should be able to take sov in a one man corp if I am able to! But why do I need an alliance? I'm the über MOFO so I have my own system! If I can defend it with mercs or on my own or with diplomacy, who cares. As log as I can hold it, it's mine!

Because if you can't afford the 1 bil isk cost to make an alliance, you are definitely not ready for the cost and effort of sov.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
#12 - 2015-01-16 22:35:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Would we take it? No.

No interest in Sov. Holding it also requires defending it, when really:

1. Most of the time we prefer to just go pvp in different places
2. Sitting around waiting for someone to come so we can defend our territory is pretty paranoid and seems boring
3. CTAs are not a thing we do, we prefer more casual play
4. Rather spend ISK on ships to die in than outposts and POSs and other structures that aren't fun. NPC null is fine.
5. Most of our guys prefer wormholes
Deck Cadelanne
CAStabouts
#13 - 2015-01-16 23:21:36 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:


Timers for taking down structures were introduced to counteract "timezone wars", which are tiresome and no fun for anyone. They're there for a reason.

That nearly everything is behind either a timer, an obnoxious amount of HP, or both, prevents more emergent/dynamic content than the fact that CFC and RUS can't blitz each other's sov back and forth every day.


I get that, then I find myself thinking...let them. Seriously, let them blitz each other into ashes and see what emerges on the other end of it.

I know that would break a "thing" of huge fleet fights that are basically arranged in advance via this mechanic. But from what I hear from participants, as a player those fights are boring as hell except in abstract "I was there, man!" terms. I guess the alliance leaders and the CCP marketing team get jazzed about it maybe.

I would just remove the whole existing sov mechanic. Want to build a station or deploy a tower or a POCO? Go for it, if you have the resources. System "upgrades" ought to be based on some sort of rolling average based on players active in that system. Mine a lot and more mining anomalies spawn. Kill a lot of rats and more combat anomalies spawn.

This whole thing about sov effectively being based on indestructible flags and timers is a complete load of crap, really. Just creates a dynamic where it's all about the absentee landlord, anybody tried to take a system and a) they need to commit a fleet of ships to grind the structures, then they need to commit a huge number again...at a time chosen by their enemy...to finish the job. That's just lame.

"Owning" a system ought to start with your group being present, full time, and making a concerted effort to exploit that system's resources while denying them to others. I suspect a lot more groups, smaller and more agile, might get interested in holding sov if that were the case.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."

- Hunter S. Thompson

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#14 - 2015-01-16 23:40:19 UTC
As I have said for years, were it up to me™ I would just kill all SOV mechanics and let the players deal with it.

The way it was proved bad enough. The "fixes" to SOV years ago with these magical space units and "capture the flag" mechanics made it worse.


Just drop it all. Let the players sort it out. They can and will and will do so in amazing ways that only a sandbox can provide.

(Funny all this "Eve is a sandbox HTFU" rhetoric I see in the forums is only applied to dislike of highsec playstyles yet nullsec SOV never gets addressed for it's present anti-sandbox mechanics)

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Serene Repose
#15 - 2015-01-16 23:51:03 UTC
Imagine it's 18 HOURS into the future. If you could take a Radio Flyer full of left-handed wombats on a trip to the mall, what shop would you hit in the food court and WHY???

We must accommodate the idiocracy.

DaReaper
Net 7
Cannon.Fodder
#16 - 2015-01-17 00:20:29 UTC
Honestly,
Sov should remain at an alliance level, and any sized alliance, even a single man alliance, should be able to take sov in an unused system with no real worries. If the system is unused, and no one is there or comes to defend it, then why should it be a pita to take? This is like if the US decided to abandon California, pull its resoruces out of it, but still say we own that, that I would have to get a group and destroy there resources to take it. Where as in reality all I need to do is claim it as mine and glare at anyone who says otherwise. If no one comes to take it back, then by right its mine.

So getting sov, of empty or unsed space should be simple and easy... HOWEVER keeping sov is another issue. If I made a one man alliance, and took... mm lets go with FAT- because no one lived there and when I taking this...' no one came to defend then I should not have to grind it. But if a 1k alliance comes in and says 'yea GTFO noob, we own this system' then why should they have to fight so hard if they kill me off in a split second. OR If I go to FAT and say 'this is mine!' but 1k guys are already there, it should be easier to toss me and my claim out.

Sov that is unused should be EASY to take. Why have timers if alliance a can't be assed to defend there space? Why even have sov if again, alliance a can't be assed to use there space. I believe ccp should do occupational sov, a use it or lose it easily type of play. If you use it, it SHOULD be harder to take. But if say Alliance a is 1k and alliance b is 2k, and alliance b whipes the floor with alliance a and they give up and ditch the system, then why should alliance b have to keep working on the stuctures if no one is comin to defend their claim? Never made sense.

Timers are good if you are going to defend, but if you are not, or you got killed way before that timer hits 0.. then there is no point in having them.

CCP was also thinking of no sov.. but that won't work either, humans will just claim space like we did in the old days. there just won't be flags.

I prolly went off topic but meh.

OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!

Eve For life.

Yarda Black
The Black Redemption
#17 - 2015-01-17 09:06:23 UTC
You could give TCU's a "decay level" very much like a POS now has with fuel. Unless reset, the TCU will go down.

Other than that, I think claiming SOV should atleast require some display of military force. Maybe less than is required now, but everybody and their mother claiming SOV just because the undocked something else than a cloaky for a change.... No thanks.
Adrie Atticus
Circle Mercs
#18 - 2015-01-17 09:33:09 UTC
Yay, now you have sov as a one-man alliance.

What are you going to do with it? Make whirring noises while you warp between planets in something you own by name?
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#19 - 2015-01-17 09:45:54 UTC
In my design example the timer for switching Sov is 24 hours to allow the opposition to react outside time zones. The system may be still unstable and squabbling over it may take any amount of time but at least 24 hours as a window are necessary for fairness' sake.

The number of people needed to destabilize and take over a system is theoretically one. It merely scales positively with more people involved. Also it depends on the method used to take over. Slash, burn and plant is the least ISK efficient but most blob friendly way and may be the quickest if you have the people and resources. Intrude, subvert and conquer requires more time and finesse but you can retain all structures.

Really, the problem of the current system is the lack of sandbox. With those huge EHPs sov structures it looks more like assorted concrete slabs in a rock garden.
Deck Cadelanne
CAStabouts
#20 - 2015-01-17 14:58:56 UTC
No TCU's, no SBU's, no timers. Screw this "capture the flag at a pre-arranged date and time" nonsense.

"Must be present to win." If you aren't actually in the space you claim, it isn't yours. Simples.

Right now the whole sov mechanic feels very much as designed by and for the big blue doughnut crowd. Boring, stale and a big barrier to the whole "get out of highsec" thing for everyone else.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn professional."

- Hunter S. Thompson

12Next page