EVE General Discussion

Or convince large alliances to recruit miners and industrialist players away from highsec. I'd be tempted, if it was made interesting.

If it is avoidable, it will be avoided. And those that are best able to avoid it will be those who are best able to deal in large volumes. Rorq pilots can just jump to where the taxes are favorable, and the new guy in the mining frigate gets stuck paying the local tax.

What I'm getting at is that it isn't really necessary to try and tax any new source of moon goo. Rather than add taxes and try to enforce them, just allow alliances to collect the taxes/fees that average player already pays and are currently an isk sink. It also keeps it as an alliance owned source of income that can be fought over. Losing a station means losing all the sales tax and clone fees that came with it. It might also promote setting up stations as freeports and creating regional trade hubs for alliances living in space that doesn't have some other advantage.

Didn't you guys try that in Delve? How did that work out for you?

Yes. But, that is an entirely separate matter although one that is, to us, moot.

I think adding PI to moons [and thus moon mining] would be a good idea. Though first you would have to 'iterate'
on PI [space elevators anyone?]. Would probably take longer to do than wit planets consdiering the numbers of moons.

No reason why ring mining & moon PI [MI?] couldn't take place at the same time.

My .02c is ring mining is more important than pos changes. Pos changes are necessary, but ring mining adds a completely new dimension to the game and a completely new group activity.

Fair enough.

I brought up the idea to see how it would play out and to learn about certain aspects of the game further. I was not aware that moon mining was such a long, drawn-out process. If there's no intention to change that, then dynamic resources would simply be a huge annoyance.

I look forward to hearing more about ring mining.

All that would achieve is forcing alliances to have huge buffer zones, like the DMZ between North and South Koreas. This will not bring conflict. One thing it will ensure is that large alliances gain a stranglehold over null sec since holding productive null sec space means you have to hold lots of unproductive null sec space filled with "neighbour nigglers". If such nigglers have a range measured in light-years, the problem becomes worse due to the non-linear nature of the jump-gate network. "Neighbouring" systems aren't always the same distance apart, and the system 2 jumps over isn't necessarily further away than the system 1 jump over.

This has been discussed before, and The Mittani told you point blank that such a system was a foolish idea that would only be abused by large power blocs to shut out smaller power blocs. Of course, perhaps CCP has the idea that null sec would be better if there were only a few entities controlling null sec.

If the "neighbour nigglers" have a range of 2 LY, you'll need to establish a 2LY "demilitarised zone" layer around your productive space. All that space will need to be filled with these nigglers. If you are a small alliance controlling a 2LY wide volume of productive space, the volume of space you have to police and populate is 8 times as large as the volume you're actually using. If you are a large alliance controlling a 5LY wide volume of space, the volume of space you have to police and populate will only be 3 times the size of your productive space.

You could fall back to that naive theory that small alliances could take hold in the "unwanted" space that has no sovereignty. But that doesn't work, since the "unwanted" space is simply buffer that the sov holding alliances in the neighbourhood don't want to spend ISK on maintaining. Just because they have no sovereignty doesn't mean they don't control that space.

So a system where you can upgrade your space at the expense of someone else's will only ever be a way for larger alliances to starve out smaller ones. Thus implementing such a feature would indicate that CCP only wants one entity controlling null sec, and the game would effectively be dead.

Nullsec is not only about giant alliance fleets smashing into other giant alliance fleets.

Yeah. I just thought it about since posting. What it will lead too is allies swapping bonuses. Goons take a +10% mining bonus, giving Test a -10% mining decrease, while Goons take a -10% manufacturing decrease, giving Test a +10% manufacturing bonus. That sort of thing. There'll likely be little in the way of taking from enemies, rather allies swapping what they need and don't need.

So, yeah, you're right, it won't drive much conflict, rather players will simply game the system among their friends for the most benefit. As EVE players do with every mechanic. :)

The lesson in any EVE game mechanic is to ask "How can the system be gamed?" before expending any additional effort in trying to flesh out the system. The desired goal of the mechanic has to be achievable even in the face of the expected min-maxing.

TO :CCP

RE; The subject of the sucking chest wound ,and the law of unintended consequences

I have lived in 0.0 i was in some major alliances at one point even ran a smaller alliance my self
No you probably wont recognize this character as it is a long disused alt and i wont post with my real one Because this post will definitely not make any friends.

I order to have conflict you have to have one or more of 3 things
1. a need for space or resources ( this is usually the least motivator )

2. a natural rage toward a group aka the pissed off factor (the largest motivator )

3. just a flat test of your mettle .... aka lets see if we are strong enough to hurt these guys


I have fought in major battles for all of these reasons at one time or another

Every time you CCP have changed the sandbox it has had unintended consequences

1 TCU SOV
Best idea you have had ever ,when you did not interfere : i say this because when they first came out it was
you sat down a TCU and you worked to improve your space and you could make it just as good as anyone else depending on the effort you put in to do so notice how many small alliances sprang up and flourished and started to grow

Then you couldn't wait for conflict ,so you said hmm lets bring back true sec and make new rules regarding havens and sanctums etc and nerf them out regardless of what you have already spent in upgrades and improving your space

Wham Kick in the nuts to those little guys trying to grow up to be big guys , now they did not have the isk to grow. or the reason for players to stay with them cause there were better places out there to be .Look how many alliances folded with in a month or so of that change , mine included
The problem : no resources to grow and not strong enough to fight yet for better, Because the ones that held the now good space had had that space for a while and had the numbers in their favor
so any war of attrition was a losing battle ......

reasons for war

the first alliance i was in ever ,was not that big but we had a neighbor not too far from us that enjoyed coming in and messing with us cause it was fun by the same token we would go in and mess with their space the would pull nasty stuff ,we would try nastier stuff
the more we got tired of the constant crap and i am sure they did as well , the more the sheer hate grew ,they kept getting bigger and so did we, with the goal in mind that one day we would have the power and might to destroy them
finally got big enough to give it a go
We laid siege to their system with everything we had they did not know we had made some powerful allies to assist us
they were unprepared for the hell we rained down on them this was back when you had to bash every pos and out pos them to gain the space it took us about a month of battles but we made it happen we were victorious

that is an example of the natural rage one day you just get tired of being picked at and you rip their head off of their shoulders and parade it around on a pike for all to see
this kind of rage takes time to build and to fester but when it releases the battle is grand and glorious and has a cause
We didn't need or want their space in fact we gave it to the Allie that helped us.
It was not about resources because we were both in the same region .
it was about getting them out of our face once and for all .

war for space and resources : I bring you the Great north war
Bob invaded the NC i was in the NC at the time , we all know how that went , for those that don't look at the wiki entry
This was also a war for honor we knew that if we did not fight hard with every thing Us and our friends could muster it was a one way ticket back to high sec

the main Point is you can not expect a conflict if you don't allow another group to grow as big and as powerful as the next biggest guy on the block
i understand you look at the economy at worry about keeping it Strong BUT because of those efforts a big sucking chest wound of a Power vacuum has formed
when you took the drone alloy you sealed the deal the Russians were the only ones getting big enough to rise up
against goon

SO now goon is the biggest kid on the block, with no one to fight that can really give em a challenge
and they continue to grow stronger with no equal , and no Worthy adversary to challenge them

and you have only yourself to blame CCP
You cant blame the Goons because they found the technetium weakness and exploited it
If you were smart you would have spread the tech out across all of 0.0 eve and not left it bunched in one area
a few in the north a few in the drone regions a few in delve or fountain maybe one in scalding
distance by its very nature that would make ownership of all harder

Lastly i throw in this to the goons the miners you gank today may be the very people you depend on tomorrow
Do you really think any of them will want to join you if you at one point have managed to grief them out of the game they love ?
I hope they are not that dumb ,if they are they deserve to be slaves

I would rather die on my feet , than live on my knees