EVE General Discussion

@Maddie Gunslinger:
That's a lot of stuff. Some ideas sound nice, actually, like the "Large alliances can become factions" .. sounds intriguing, though there would have to be a lot of detail work to do to make that a sensible thing, I guess.

Some other things I don't quite get, like.. From what I've seen so far is that T2 generally means more specialisation for ships, and better performance/higher requirements for modules with specialisation playing a part there, too, see T2 ammunition.
Why do you want to turn that around?

Some things like "special areas for faction war fights with ship number restrictions and no access for all but a few people" I really don't like.
To me Eve is interesting because of the lack of most of such artificial restriction.

1. Make all local like WH local.
2. Open ISK/AUR Exchange for players. Buy AUR, sell isk. PLEX will still be sold on regular market for ISK, or ground down for AUR to sell on the exchange.
3. Corp/Alliance logos and color schemes on ships, which can be turned on/off by players while in station.

1. Have NPC Empires semi-controlled by players

2. NPC corp banned from entering into another Empire Hi-Sec

3a. Remove HI-Sec jumps between the Empires

3b. post something stupid on forum so CCP Goliath and Punkturis can answer with something stupid as well.

I had a really hard time getting it all in one post, I hope you can excuse the lack of detail in some areas of the post Did not want to make two.

Techicide:
The thing with what I called Techicide, what I meant with that is with the combined issue of people reluctant to PvP due to high costs, with specific skills just for single modules(T2) and the disused modules which simply serve, more or less, only a purpose on the market and hardly deliver any real useful properties apart from existing and low cost. So I suggested giving them all unique peak properties, removing them from the linear limelight and instead adding more special function, such as unique falloff, optimal, ammo hold, launcher ROF etc.
And from those modules you build your standard T2 module with around 90% of those peak values, good at everything, master in none, so to say. And all skills would still benefit all your T1 modules, no need to just "T2" fit your ship and you're done, because that is too simple I think. Sure there are some tight fits out there with T1 modules, but the most ships are straight up T2 fit or its sub par.

A player with extreme desires for alpha damage from his lasers could possibly use a prototype T1 with a high damage muliplier instead of a T2, losing some general purpose benefits such as cap use, range and other things in the process but gaining a possible 10% more alpha, or even more depending on the balancing boundaries.
A person who wants the absolute lowest cap use from a repper, and passes on the T2 to go for a T1 with minimal cap use, there are many ways to go about making the T1 modules more attractive, and I just thought I'd post this one, I find it pretty decent for just that and it grants versatility in fitting as well as roles.

There is the issue where the standard T1 and the T2 would be very similar, in this case the T1 could be the low fitting cost one, and the T2 the general purpose high fitting cost one.

I just have a hard time seeing the set quality differences for "Tech" as anything good in the game, and they are more detrimental to ships and modules as I see it, since you eliminate a whole group of items for no reason other than to introduce a single bland "best" option. Don't get me started on the higher value modules , in short, I don't like linear things when options are so easy to allow, and when something is "best" for everything(T2/T3) I kind of get cold shivers down my back.


System combat:
The part with the system combat I had to narrow down a whole lot to get in, what the whole idea is about is to allow small corp/gangs to have a system of their own and defend it in factional warfare, and in that system not be challenged until skill is the deciding factor, by winning over the local defenders who themselves set the number of attackers needed to challenge them, so no blobbing to take over that system, straight up 8v8, 15v15 etc. in a single grid, where the losers warp out or explode.
There would be a possible invasion only if the defenders lost this initial strike, and in which case the whole system would be open for factional invasion from any number of pilots, and to be defended by any number of pilots.
These systems would be more focused due to the timers and lockouts so more people could find their way to them and then participate in large scale fighting to compensate the blob lockout in the initial battle, more fight, fair fight and slower system switching.

I understand the POV that limiting something to such a small scenario initially would possibly be considered as dumbing down the sandbox, but the only way to keep numbers(blob) somewhat in check and attacks at least a little bit more coordinated something like that would be needed I think.
It is like a defenders prerogative, if you want to take that system, then you need to beat the defenders by skill, not just plant 10 battleships in their back yard with the odd 20 BC and send some frigates to circle some select complexes and then leave the system with in a LP galore.

You can go in to fight them in a blob for LP for ship kills, or you go in to take over the system with skill for the system benefits and LP, or just fool around solo or with what you want but not farm LP without real combat.
It would not affect skirmish attacks, the couple guys looking for kills or anything like that, it would only affect the actual invasion of the system, disallowing a massive force to just take a system by sheer numbers in a short time, and systems going back/forth, if they lack the skill to beat the defenders in the initial fight, they cannot invade, they failed, they can still enter and fight people in the system, but not take over the system.

So how I see it, you get dedicated system owner corporations which participate in small gang warfare and gain some taxes from people using the system and present a first line of defence for interesting key systems. If they lose the system they lose everything in the stations as well, also losing the initial battle may allow another friendly corp to take over by defence.

These are all my opinions of course, and open for debate in any regard.
Out of letters...

1: Bring back live events
2: Make sure the live events happen
3: Don't let live events get quietly dropped as has happened every time before

1) stop listening to marketing managers who yell about "increasing market share" because that means making the game generic, average and crap

2) make low sec useful by moving some often used mineral to low sec only. That way you create a pull towards lowsec which will attract miners and pirates and will end up creating active, well rounded corps with both bears as pvpers. It would be a very "fearless" change but it would be good: short term bad, long term good is how CCP should think, instead of listening to their managers who only think "short term good and who gives a fck about long term"

3) SERIOUSLY restrict jump capabilities, both for jump/bridge capable ships as jump bridge networks, it makes the EVE universe too small and it becomes too easy to project power over vast distances resulting in empty 0.0 and bullshit warfare. Yet another fearless change but again, long term it would be good

Addendum: I'd probably get someone in charge who actually understands combat, game mechanics, game play types and balancing because that seems to be lacking. I'd do pretty well in that role tbh

Let's do this.

1. POS, the new thing mentioned in CSM minutes, next Winter? .... TOMMOROW!!!
2. Improve managing multiaccount holders (master accounts), Improve character handling (logging off/on, to stop/start training within the same account, etc...)
3. Improve communication with players, blogs definetly are not frequent enough.

Oh look, a coffee shop I need to visit come April!!!

Now, about my cannonball run idea...lol

No. EVE is a sandbox game, if you want to play you either adapt or you GTFO. I suggest the latter, since you've already expressed your unwillingness to do the former.