These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Changes to 0.0 to promote population growth
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#81 - 2012-06-10 18:33:43 UTC
I'd like to see sov behave a bit more fluidly or dynamically, perhaps i-hub and tcu hitpoints should be proportional to the amount of sov-holding alliance activity in the area. What I'm thinking is

Supreme Overlord Alliance holds tons of territory. Suddenly SO finds themselves under assault from both sides by two major alliances. Meanwhile, the Pissant Alliance decides to try and take some backwater -0.1 sec status system with no moons. Supreme Overlord notices this, and decides its not even worth sacrificing an AFK cloaker to defend, and instead focuses their efforts to defend their borders from the more pressing threat. The i-hubs and tcu's will have full hitpoints in the system where much of the fighting is occuring because the bulk of their forces are there for weeks, but the backwater system i-hub and tcu has its hitpoints reduced due to lack of alliance presence.

Just a thought, maybe it could make it easier for smaller alliances to take unworth territory without needing to shoot structures for hours. Could also be interesting to play sov structure hitpoint games with your own forces, trying to juggle them.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#82 - 2012-06-10 18:34:05 UTC
Salonmom wrote:


Yes, and you bring so much more to the table. Obvious troll is obvious.

I bring more "to the table," trolling, than you do with your idiotic posting.

"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin
Cameron Cahill
Deaths Consortium
Pandemic Horde
#83 - 2012-06-10 19:04:46 UTC
Ned Black wrote:
Well, simply because then you are part of the everyday nullsec political bullcrap where you either log into one of the daily CTA fleets or you get kicked out for not doing your part.


We have no CTA's...
Seriously we don't.

And the standings system simply makes NAPs easier for those involved. You remove it and people will still create coalitions etc.
Spurty
#84 - 2012-06-10 19:47:02 UTC
I'm fairly sure 0.0 is just a big box of frogs dumb right now.

Forget coming here, its broken.

There are good ships,

And wood ships,

And ships that sail the sea

But the best ships are Spaceships

Built by CCP
Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#85 - 2012-06-10 20:49:32 UTC
Qolde wrote:
Limit bubbles in NPC space. That would be interesting.


Yeah, we could call that place ''Lowsec'' in order to signify that it it between highsec and NPC nullsec.

 Though All Men Do Despise Us
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#86 - 2012-06-10 20:54:00 UTC
i'm confused are we some sort of slaves to our alliance leaders where we do CTAs 8 hours a day or are we guys swimming in spacebucks because of moon goo and local?
JitaPriceChecker2
Doomheim
#87 - 2012-06-10 21:02:36 UTC
For one make PVE available for all ship sizes.
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#88 - 2012-06-10 21:30:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
Since players can build outposts, the NPC stations stopped having effect on the size of the null population.

What does reduce the population however, is the excessive projection of power, allowing a few NAP-trains to keep the rest of null-space culled. The main reason for this is the negligible cost of jump- and bridge mechanics.

A massive increase of fuel cost will mean caps and especially supercaps will only be used for defensive and alliance-level strategic operations (mostly against direct neighbors), instead of bored roams on the other side of the map. It will be the end of easily affordable batphones and when people go fight several regions over, they'll actually have to commit to staying there for a while, because there won't be a cheap titan-bridge home for you to do some late-night sanctums.

This would also make it impossible to fund the defensive enforcement of OTEC-like cartels.

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#89 - 2012-06-10 21:51:55 UTC
Sigh. It's like people can't fathom this. I'll say it very, very slowly so maybe people'll understand:

FUEL COSTS
WILL NOT
LIMIT
FORCE PROJECTION.

That is all.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#90 - 2012-06-10 23:06:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Lord Zim wrote:
Sigh. It's like people can't fathom this. I'll say it very, very slowly so maybe people'll understand:

FUEL COSTS
WILL NOT
LIMIT
FORCE PROJECTION.

That is all.

I think he's dreaming of it costing a month of tech moon to take a capfleet one jump. Consider that if the cost was infinite we'd never have any jumpbridges or capital ships.

He clearly thinks that making null into WH lite would make it better.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
David Cedarbridge
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#91 - 2012-06-11 00:52:57 UTC
Tobiaz wrote:
This would also make it impossible to fund the defensive enforcement of OTEC-like cartels.

This is what people who have never used a jump bridge actually believe.