These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What happens to Eve.....

Author
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#141 - 2012-01-09 13:43:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Jafit McJafitson
Jan'tor wrote:
Hey I'm a newbie and the 0.0 "end game" is sometimes fun, I've never met Mittani before and he's never told me what to think but I do listen to that guy who sounds like seinfeld while I fly cruisers and stuff. bark bark

well, bye


DBRB is just a translator for his dog who is the actual FC.
Taiwanistan
#142 - 2012-01-09 14:39:23 UTC
Elessa Enaka wrote:


Ok, so maybe the gold rush should be coupled with a reworking of Sov as we know it.

Give some form of in-game reasoning like whatever it was that killed everything in 0.0 (cause when I said that I meant, nuke everything out there, outposts, POSes, Supers just floating in space and have everyone that was in a 0.0 system when it happened be in the system that was their "n00b" system the next time they logged on) also killed all of the gates and only left the NPC stations because of some dark nefarious reason that we don't entirely understand.

Remap 0.0 as well, systems that were once neighboring systems could now have 56 jumps in between them. Reclassifiy 0.0 as "shallow WH" space that functions in a similar fashion to the way that null does currently and have what is currently WH space be classified as "Deep WH" (Even go ahead and make new moon goos there that might one day become useful but aren't currently since they are totally alien elements)

If 0.0 were to be redone in this way, I think it could be a much fairer gold rush. if the WH's that led to systems died and switched the way that typical WH's do currently, it would prevent the accumulation of large swathes of space by controlling a few chokepoints and then expanding deeper once you've consolidated the chokes. Leave it on the players to actually construct their own gate pairs in a fashion similar to outpost creation, let the colonists determine how the map of null looks permanently (by permanently, I mean gate travel, not Sov)

I think that would be some fun **** that wouldn't get immediately retaken by the current power-blocs.

0.0, no, the whole eve online thing is just a big mystery to you isn't it
you are sounding dumber by the post, but do continue

TA on wis: "when we have a feature that is its own functional ecosystem of gameplay then hooks into the greater ecosystem of EVE as a whole, and it provides good replayability."

Elessa Enaka
Doomheim
#143 - 2012-01-09 14:47:10 UTC
Taiwanistan wrote:
Elessa Enaka wrote:


Ok, so maybe the gold rush should be coupled with a reworking of Sov as we know it.

Give some form of in-game reasoning like whatever it was that killed everything in 0.0 (cause when I said that I meant, nuke everything out there, outposts, POSes, Supers just floating in space and have everyone that was in a 0.0 system when it happened be in the system that was their "n00b" system the next time they logged on) also killed all of the gates and only left the NPC stations because of some dark nefarious reason that we don't entirely understand.

Remap 0.0 as well, systems that were once neighboring systems could now have 56 jumps in between them. Reclassifiy 0.0 as "shallow WH" space that functions in a similar fashion to the way that null does currently and have what is currently WH space be classified as "Deep WH" (Even go ahead and make new moon goos there that might one day become useful but aren't currently since they are totally alien elements)

If 0.0 were to be redone in this way, I think it could be a much fairer gold rush. if the WH's that led to systems died and switched the way that typical WH's do currently, it would prevent the accumulation of large swathes of space by controlling a few chokepoints and then expanding deeper once you've consolidated the chokes. Leave it on the players to actually construct their own gate pairs in a fashion similar to outpost creation, let the colonists determine how the map of null looks permanently (by permanently, I mean gate travel, not Sov)

I think that would be some fun **** that wouldn't get immediately retaken by the current power-blocs.

0.0, no, the whole eve online thing is just a big mystery to you isn't it
you are sounding dumber by the post, but do continue


It really doesn't surprise me that you've resorted to insults immediately, given that you'd more than likely lose out if something like my idea were implemented. However, that was a really poor insult, didn't your Grand Fearless Leader teach you and the rest of the sheeple how to be more creative?

Devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been Eve is a great game if you can get past all of the asshats....

Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#144 - 2012-01-09 15:10:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Jafit McJafitson
Taiwanistan wrote:
If 0.0 were to be redone in this way, I think it could be a much fairer gold rush. if the WH's that led to systems died and switched the way that typical WH's do currently, it would prevent the accumulation of large swathes of space by controlling a few chokepoints and then expanding deeper once you've consolidated the chokes. Leave it on the players to actually construct their own gate pairs in a fashion similar to outpost creation, let the colonists determine how the map of null looks permanently (by permanently, I mean gate travel, not Sov)


Ahaha, controlling regions by gate camping chokepoints, that's so cute. 2005 called, they want their forum sperg back.

Since it became possible to titan bridge an entire fleet right past chokepoints, that kind of chokepoint complaint has become the exclusive domain of high-sec pubbie sperglords who's experience of null-sec is limited to jumping into ECP-8R in their Raven and getting blapped by a bubble camp.

However if you can come up with a sovreignty system that doesn't involve wiping eve and starting over, and which doesn't involve shooting structures, I'll gladly listen to you.

Also another nullsec galaxy cluster accessable via wormhole with buildable jumpgates as you described might be interesting, but in addition to current nullsec rather than replacing it.
Taiwanistan
#145 - 2012-01-09 15:14:01 UTC
nah it's just that your ideas are shitstupid but don't let my opinion alone put you down
chin up little newbie and tell us how you'd like everything to be

TA on wis: "when we have a feature that is its own functional ecosystem of gameplay then hooks into the greater ecosystem of EVE as a whole, and it provides good replayability."

Elessa Enaka
Doomheim
#146 - 2012-01-09 15:29:49 UTC
Jafit McJafitson wrote:
Taiwanistan wrote:
If 0.0 were to be redone in this way, I think it could be a much fairer gold rush. if the WH's that led to systems died and switched the way that typical WH's do currently, it would prevent the accumulation of large swathes of space by controlling a few chokepoints and then expanding deeper once you've consolidated the chokes. Leave it on the players to actually construct their own gate pairs in a fashion similar to outpost creation, let the colonists determine how the map of null looks permanently (by permanently, I mean gate travel, not Sov)


Ahaha, controlling regions by gate camping chokepoints, that's so cute. 2005 called, they want their forum sperg back.

Since it became possible to titan bridge an entire fleet right past chokepoints, that kind of chokepoint complaint has become the exclusive domain of high-sec pubbie sperglords who's experience of null-sec is limited to jumping into ECP-8R in their Raven and getting blapped by a bubble camp.

However if you can come up with a sovreignty system that doesn't involve wiping eve and starting over, and which doesn't involve shooting structures, I'll gladly listen to you.

Also another nullsec galaxy cluster accessable via wormhole with buildable jumpgates as you described might be interesting, but in addition to current nullsec rather than replacing it.


Well, I pretty much laid out the thought that I had, if it were to be used as a replacement for the current 0.0 or as an expansion of existing 0.0, either way, I feel that it would be a good addition.

TBH, though, if it were to be an "in addition to" sort of thing, I would hope that the WH's had a mass limitation that was low enough to prevent existing power-blocs from just moving all of their **** over into the new frontier 0.0, keep it more small-gang dominated rather than blobfest.

Another thought that I just had (which TBH, I think is actually someone elses) would be basing Sov on occupancy. If you stop using a system for whatever reason, your Sov there starts to erode.

I also am not suggesting this as a way to give existing power-bloc more power, I am hoping that were something like this to be implemented, it would serve to allow those small corps (such as my own) who would like to get into 0.0 and Sov a chance to do so without being pets or renters.

BTW, my experience with bubblecamps is in 7Q-8Z2 and so you know, despite the number of bubbles and drakes on the gate, the dumb ******* still couldn't get me

Devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been Eve is a great game if you can get past all of the asshats....

Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#147 - 2012-01-09 16:19:53 UTC
met worst wrote:
Ladie Harlot wrote:

...the only things an alliance has to do to remain a member of the CFC is show observable participation in coalition-wide pursuits...

Lawl. A long winded way of saying "gogogogogogo - NOW".

"CTA" is just too strong a word for your sheep and it's this softcock approach that sucks your members in. Unsaid, but absolutely implied, if you don't - you get nothing from "He who owns all things" and "Frowned upon by he who bequeaths all things".

All in all, the terminology is a pretencious approach to be told what to do. The extraordinary thing is you all think Mittens is being "nice".

CFC are all Lil' Olivers. The difference being that Oliver woke up to it in the end.

Sad.



you are so dumb lol

it's like you won't stop alternating between "We didn't want the north anyway" and "**** goons they didn't commit to save my dying alliance" - basically, get lost

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
#148 - 2012-01-09 16:20:31 UTC
Taiwanistan wrote:
nah it's just that your ideas are shitstupid but don't let my opinion alone put you down
chin up little newbie and tell us how you'd like everything to be


WI dot dropping more TCUs in GC.
Your posts belongs to us.

Go back to EVE failtard.
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#149 - 2012-01-09 16:21:46 UTC
Elessa Enaka wrote:
Jafit McJafitson wrote:
Taiwanistan wrote:
If 0.0 were to be redone in this way, I think it could be a much fairer gold rush. if the WH's that led to systems died and switched the way that typical WH's do currently, it would prevent the accumulation of large swathes of space by controlling a few chokepoints and then expanding deeper once you've consolidated the chokes. Leave it on the players to actually construct their own gate pairs in a fashion similar to outpost creation, let the colonists determine how the map of null looks permanently (by permanently, I mean gate travel, not Sov)


Ahaha, controlling regions by gate camping chokepoints, that's so cute. 2005 called, they want their forum sperg back.

Since it became possible to titan bridge an entire fleet right past chokepoints, that kind of chokepoint complaint has become the exclusive domain of high-sec pubbie sperglords who's experience of null-sec is limited to jumping into ECP-8R in their Raven and getting blapped by a bubble camp.

However if you can come up with a sovreignty system that doesn't involve wiping eve and starting over, and which doesn't involve shooting structures, I'll gladly listen to you.

Also another nullsec galaxy cluster accessable via wormhole with buildable jumpgates as you described might be interesting, but in addition to current nullsec rather than replacing it.


Well, I pretty much laid out the thought that I had, if it were to be used as a replacement for the current 0.0 or as an expansion of existing 0.0, either way, I feel that it would be a good addition.

TBH, though, if it were to be an "in addition to" sort of thing, I would hope that the WH's had a mass limitation that was low enough to prevent existing power-blocs from just moving all of their **** over into the new frontier 0.0, keep it more small-gang dominated rather than blobfest.

Another thought that I just had (which TBH, I think is actually someone elses) would be basing Sov on occupancy. If you stop using a system for whatever reason, your Sov there starts to erode.

I also am not suggesting this as a way to give existing power-bloc more power, I am hoping that were something like this to be implemented, it would serve to allow those small corps (such as my own) who would like to get into 0.0 and Sov a chance to do so without being pets or renters.

BTW, my experience with bubblecamps is in 7Q-8Z2 and so you know, despite the number of bubbles and drakes on the gate, the dumb ******* still couldn't get me


purging 0.0 without touching empire would be dumb as **** much like you are

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Ira Theos
#150 - 2012-01-09 16:26:24 UTC
Skydell wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Skydell wrote:


EVE is a job. If you don't have an RMT investment, it is simply too much work to be fun in any way. It has always been like this. The current EVE is only different in, now that the lines are drawn and the winners of EVE have pretty much been written in stone, now all they can do is trade space with thier alts to give EVE an appearance of dynamic.


What?


You would be the second person to imply you didn't understand what I said. If that's genuine, you will need to read the thread I replied to and quotes. Read my response and put some thought in to it. If you have an historic understanding of EVE and null sec politics it will make sense. if you don't, the train came, went and has been decommissioned. It isn't something you need to worry about.


Never try to explain politics or economics to a sheep. You can't succeed in doing it and it annoys the sheep.
Elessa Enaka
Doomheim
#151 - 2012-01-09 16:28:34 UTC
Andski wrote:
Elessa Enaka wrote:
Jafit McJafitson wrote:
Taiwanistan wrote:
If 0.0 were to be redone in this way, I think it could be a much fairer gold rush. if the WH's that led to systems died and switched the way that typical WH's do currently, it would prevent the accumulation of large swathes of space by controlling a few chokepoints and then expanding deeper once you've consolidated the chokes. Leave it on the players to actually construct their own gate pairs in a fashion similar to outpost creation, let the colonists determine how the map of null looks permanently (by permanently, I mean gate travel, not Sov)


Ahaha, controlling regions by gate camping chokepoints, that's so cute. 2005 called, they want their forum sperg back.

Since it became possible to titan bridge an entire fleet right past chokepoints, that kind of chokepoint complaint has become the exclusive domain of high-sec pubbie sperglords who's experience of null-sec is limited to jumping into ECP-8R in their Raven and getting blapped by a bubble camp.

However if you can come up with a sovreignty system that doesn't involve wiping eve and starting over, and which doesn't involve shooting structures, I'll gladly listen to you.

Also another nullsec galaxy cluster accessable via wormhole with buildable jumpgates as you described might be interesting, but in addition to current nullsec rather than replacing it.


Well, I pretty much laid out the thought that I had, if it were to be used as a replacement for the current 0.0 or as an expansion of existing 0.0, either way, I feel that it would be a good addition.

TBH, though, if it were to be an "in addition to" sort of thing, I would hope that the WH's had a mass limitation that was low enough to prevent existing power-blocs from just moving all of their **** over into the new frontier 0.0, keep it more small-gang dominated rather than blobfest.

Another thought that I just had (which TBH, I think is actually someone elses) would be basing Sov on occupancy. If you stop using a system for whatever reason, your Sov there starts to erode.

I also am not suggesting this as a way to give existing power-bloc more power, I am hoping that were something like this to be implemented, it would serve to allow those small corps (such as my own) who would like to get into 0.0 and Sov a chance to do so without being pets or renters.

BTW, my experience with bubblecamps is in 7Q-8Z2 and so you know, despite the number of bubbles and drakes on the gate, the dumb ******* still couldn't get me


purging 0.0 without touching empire would be dumb as **** much like you are


Again with the insults, you guys really need to organize some form of in-house creativity workshop cause yeah, these insults are just appallingly poor.

I'd be happy to teach such a workshop for you tools, I just need 500m ISK per participant upfront to secure a suitable CQ to hold the conference in, don't worry, it will be returned upon completion of the workshop.

Big smile

Devour to survive, so it is, so it's always been Eve is a great game if you can get past all of the asshats....

Shukuzen Kiraa
F4G Wild Weasel
#152 - 2012-01-09 16:35:43 UTC
Jafit McJafitson wrote:
Asuka Solo wrote:
Stop voting for testi or goons CSM candidates.

watch them fail at eve.


Yes... we're so successful because we manipulate the game through the CSM. That's why we've got a game full of overpowered supercapitals and we rely mostly on sub-caps. Supers still murder subcaps.

Shall I tell you why we're successful? It's because we don't take Eve at all seriously. We're terrible at this game and we know it.

Come to Hakonen and sit cloaked off the 7-7 station. Watch us engage a hostile gang 100km off the station, we'll wander over there in a hap-hazzard fasion one by one and the wrecks will pile up, before realising 'hey guys, maybe we should fleet up and, y'know, co-operate?'

We'll send a 150 man alpha fleet up against White Noise and Raiden knowing full well that Raiden have their supercaps logged on and ready to drop on us, but it's Friday night and we've been shooting structures all week so f*ck it , let's do it anyway, and laugh while they press the win button before they spam 'gf gf gf gf gf o7o7o7o7o7o7m8m8m8m8m8m8' in local.

We read corpmails and forum posts from other alliances courtesy of our spies, CEOs sperging out over sh*t-fits and embarassing lossmails. Meanwhile our KB has a weekly hall of shame at the top showcasing our most expensive losses (Farewell morale Kronos, you will be missed). Not a week goes by in Fountain that we don't lose a 3 Tengus or an Archon because some dumbass was ratting while there were neutrals in local.

So we aren't easily affected by ingame defeat, our community is more important than ingame events. You can kill our internet spaceships, take our sov, kill our supers if we had any, but you'll never take away our local-spam, fleetchat p0rn, or our Teamspeak concerts.



I kinda wanna join now after reading that lol. :)
Ira Theos
#153 - 2012-01-09 16:38:40 UTC
met worst wrote:
Taiwanistan wrote:
TREMBLE AND GROVEL, OR PERISH AT THE FURY OF HIS EXCELLENCY, PRESIDENT FOR LIFE, FIELD MARSHAL AL HADJI DOCTOR THE MITTANI, VC, DSO, MC, LORD OF ALL THE BEASTS OF THE EARTH AND FISHES OF THE SEAS AND CONQUEROR OF THE DRF EMPIRE IN THE NORTH AND BRANCH IN PARTICULAR

A Brit perchance? Odd that you'd suck up to a Yank.


LOL

That one made my day Met.

"Suck" is an especially appropriate word, given the context.
Ira Theos
#154 - 2012-01-09 16:58:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Ira Theos
Jita Alt666 wrote:
Elessa Enaka wrote:
Mar Drakar wrote:
The fact is that EVE endgame is all about meta-game and winning it, nowadays the war is won on jabber, broadcasts, spying, forums etc, and to be competitive a force, a coalition needs an immense infrastructure that is capable to withstand DDoS, hacking attempts and be as 1984-ish as possible to catch, bait and burn opposing spies. In the end it boils down to actually creating a resilient enterprise out of volunteers with actual professional skills at IT, management, HR and others.
End game has evolved that much, that toppling current status quo will need a matching oponent, and well... when starting a new alliance - how many of you would think : OK... amazon-cloud-based mumble, cloud based forums, content distribution network ... hell most of ppl have no idea what it is, if even that they need it.


^^precisely the reason why CCP needs to flush every asset held by anyone in 0.0, leave nothing aside from NPC stations and then reset all Sov back to Unclaimed....


Do you mean: Reset and then have a gold rush to reclaim? or: Reset and no longer have sov as we know it?



Personally, I would prefer that CCP structure the game in such a way that new forces were encouraged to form in HighSec and assault the establishment powerbases of Zero. Unfortunately that can't happen under current mechanics. The major resource centers of Zero have been taken over progressively by two forces, one a metagaming "club" of thousands and one a metagaming group of RMT businesses. "Middling" sized groups of new players wanting to actually play Eve have no choice but to join the existing groups under "serf" terms or simply stay out of Zero. The fact that less than 12% of the Eve Population dwells in Zero is proof of this.

I have played Eve for six years, five of those years in zero, and observed this trend increasingly entrenched. CCP's failure to retain new subscribers is directly related to this problem. CCP is shooting itself in the foot in terms of revenues by catering to these metagame groups.
Prince Kobol
#155 - 2012-01-09 17:09:41 UTC
I've seen a lot of people claim that the majority if not all null sec alliances are nothing more the RMT plantations and such.. does anybody have any hard evidenceQuestion
Farethria
Perkone
Caldari State
#156 - 2012-01-09 17:10:09 UTC
Ira Theos wrote:



Personally, I would prefer that CCP structure the game in such a way that new forces were encouraged to form in HighSec and assault the establishment powerbases of Zero. Unfortunately that can't happen under current mechanics. The major resource centers of Zero have been taken over progressively by two forces, one a metagaming "club" of thousands and one a metagaming group of RMT businesses. "Middling" sized groups of new players wanting to actually play Eve have no choice but to join the existing groups under "serf" terms or simply stay out of Zero. The fact that less than 12% of the Eve Population dwells in Zero is proof of this.

I have played Eve for six years, five of those years in zero, and observed this trend increasingly entrenched. CCP's failure to retain new subscribers is directly related to this problem. CCP is shooting itself in the foot in terms of revenues by catering to these metagame groups.


This. Until game mechanics change, especially with regard to small fleet access to 0.0, the Goons are playing the game given to them by CCP, the same as NC and Bob before them. There's a few ways this could change: ship or equipment changes, sov changes, or more ways into zero-zero. CCP has probably considered them all, but at some point it's time to grasp the nettle and damn well get on with it.

I'm for easier zero-zero access and adjustable sov. to promote more small fleet fights, which is what most people seem to love to do.
Ocih
Space Mermaids
#157 - 2012-01-09 17:15:32 UTC
Farethria wrote:
Ira Theos wrote:



Personally, I would prefer that CCP structure the game in such a way that new forces were encouraged to form in HighSec and assault the establishment powerbases of Zero. Unfortunately that can't happen under current mechanics. The major resource centers of Zero have been taken over progressively by two forces, one a metagaming "club" of thousands and one a metagaming group of RMT businesses. "Middling" sized groups of new players wanting to actually play Eve have no choice but to join the existing groups under "serf" terms or simply stay out of Zero. The fact that less than 12% of the Eve Population dwells in Zero is proof of this.

I have played Eve for six years, five of those years in zero, and observed this trend increasingly entrenched. CCP's failure to retain new subscribers is directly related to this problem. CCP is shooting itself in the foot in terms of revenues by catering to these metagame groups.


This. Until game mechanics change, especially with regard to small fleet access to 0.0, the Goons are playing the game given to them by CCP, the same as NC and Bob before them. There's a few ways this could change: ship or equipment changes, sov changes, or more ways into zero-zero. CCP has probably considered them all, but at some point it's time to grasp the nettle and damn well get on with it.

I'm for easier zero-zero access and adjustable sov. to promote more small fleet fights, which is what most people seem to love to do.


Both posts are true.
One of the common digs for CVA was, you only have Provi because nobody wants it/
That's pretty true of all null. 12% have it because 88% don't want it. Sure they would love to have access to the content but the surcharge is just too high.
Jafit McJafitson
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#158 - 2012-01-09 17:24:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Jafit McJafitson
Ira Theos wrote:
The fact that less than 12% of the Eve Population dwells in Zero is proof of this.


Welp, it has been fun, but your mental acrobatics are too much for me.
Marduk Nibiru
Chaos Delivery Systems
#159 - 2012-01-09 18:02:59 UTC
met worst wrote:
Sirinda wrote:
Eh, I'll just make a fortune selling tinfoil.

Seriously, you keep telling yourself that. Whose gonna stop 'em?


Well, last time it was them.
Ira Theos
#160 - 2012-01-09 18:34:54 UTC
Jafit McJafitson wrote:
Ira Theos wrote:
The fact that less than 12% of the Eve Population dwells in Zero is proof of this.


Welp, it has been fun, but your mental acrobatics are too much for me.

That was apparent before you even tried.