These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

What would happen if you couldn't control docking rights on outposts?

Author
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#1 - 2012-12-17 17:01:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Gizznitt Malikite
This is a theoretical what if statement:

How would the landscape of nullsec change if your alliance controlled outpost could no longer deny docking rights, med bay, and repair services to other players based on standings...
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2 - 2012-12-17 17:22:09 UTC
Other then a hostile fleet could show up and dock which I find wrong to some extent cause you are supposed to be able to control what happens in your system in null.

This is a case of what are you trying to accomplish and why should you be able to dock at any station ?
Right now an alliance can open it up to anyone for a docking fee.
Most don't.
s1n1ster m1n1ster
Brutor Tribe
#3 - 2012-12-17 17:23:03 UTC
i think then there would be less incentive in building them or owning them!

but I think it would be awesome alliances would have more isk generation from sales taxes etc..


i think it would add a cool dynamic to the game!

but it doesnt make much sence for a red pilot be able to dock at your station now does it!

dunno rly see good bits and bad "not logical" but lets see
Othran
Route One
#4 - 2012-12-17 17:38:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Othran
s1n1ster m1n1ster wrote:
i think then there would be less incentive in building them or owning them!


Whoever builds an outpost could have a limited period of exclusive rights/taxes regardless of sov. That would do it with some tweaks to avoid obvious abuse. Edit - shorter period for owning the station.

I'd be quite surprised if 5% of the people currently in a sov system with an outpost had a clue who built it.
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#5 - 2012-12-17 17:39:58 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
This is a theoretical what if statement:

How would the landscape of nullsec change if your alliance controlled outpost could no longer deny docking rights, med bay, and repair services to other players based on standings...


Look to NPC nullsec. Endless docking games and station camps. Wow. Talk about fun.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#6 - 2012-12-17 17:46:44 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
Other then a hostile fleet could show up and dock which I find wrong to some extent cause you are supposed to be able to control what happens in your system in null.

This is a case of what are you trying to accomplish and why should you be able to dock at any station ?
Right now an alliance can open it up to anyone for a docking fee.
Most don't.


I understand the desire to "control" your space... but I honestly think this same ability is hurting our game... With Sov Mechanics the way they are, it's very easy to kick out anyone that isn't a Major coalition... This creates huge regions of mostly unused space, and I think altering the mechanics to make that space utilize-able, by even hostiles, would really improve nullsec as a whole.

What does Sov really mean?
If we have a small Mexican town, who's sov is controlled by the Mexican government, but perhaps it's day to day life is controlled by the local drug cartel.... who controls that space? In essence, this is more-less the world I imagine being created...

Does it make sense? It makes complete sense that having your name on a system doesn't prevent people from utilizing that system. If it were a town, and you controlled the police and local government fairly rigorously, then you won't have any corrupt law-breaking individuals thriving there. However, if the government is controlled by a third party organization, that cannot be easily removed, then you have some interesting dynamics. I agree, if the U.S. controls the port of L.A., that they could/would prevent Chinese warships from entering port... and in this sense the idea doesn't hold a lot of water... but it would still be good for the game..

Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2012-12-17 17:56:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
OP I see your point but I am not sure if it would make enough of a difference I would rather see SOV pushed down to corps levels and allow the corporation to control there space.

There is too much dependency on alliances right now or should I say being in an alliance should give you some bonuses but it shouldn't lock you down like it does now.

alliances should be created cause it is convient for the time. Not the end result.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#8 - 2012-12-17 17:59:27 UTC
Ptraci wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
This is a theoretical what if statement:

How would the landscape of nullsec change if your alliance controlled outpost could no longer deny docking rights, med bay, and repair services to other players based on standings...


Look to NPC nullsec. Endless docking games and station camps. Wow. Talk about fun.


Have you ever compared the PvP statistics for regions like Curse or Syndicate vs ANY OTHER NULLSEC REGION IN THE GAME???

Sov nullsec has great Sov battles, and some systems are good areas for PvP, but in general, Sov Nullsec is pathetically lacking in solo, small gang, or even medium gang warfare... NPC nullsec, where the alliances don't give a crap about sov, have lots of good pew pew, and its mostly NOT docking games and station camps...

s1n1ster m1n1ster wrote:
i think then there would be less incentive in building them or owning them!

but I think it would be awesome alliances would have more isk generation from sales taxes etc..


i think it would add a cool dynamic to the game!

but it doesnt make much sence for a red pilot be able to dock at your station now does it!

dunno rly see good bits and bad "not logical" but lets see


Building a station would be a double edged sword... you essentially give oppenents a potential staging area.... at the same time, you also give yourself a permanent staging area that you can't be evicted from. It also means your stuff will never be "trapped" in a station. I think the benefits would definitely make building a station worth while...

Potential after thoughts: only allow tier 3 stations to limit the docking rights of your opponents... or perhaps create a "destructible" add on that limit's docking rights.... ideally I would the risk / cost ratio to be prohibitive enough that docking-rights-limited stations were a rare thing, and not the norm.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#9 - 2012-12-17 18:03:13 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
OP I see your point but I am not sure if it would make enough of a difference I would rather see SOV pushed down to corps levels and allow the corporation to control there space.

There is too much dependency on alliances right now or should I say being in an alliance should give you some bonuses but it shouldn't lock you down like it does now.

alliances should be created cause it is convient for the time. Not the end result.


I don't think this would change anything.... Would you rather your neighbor be blue or Hostile? In general, people will group together for strength and eliminate any nearby hostiles... This change makes it much more difficult to remove those hostiles..
Slumpert
Hookers and Quafe
#10 - 2012-12-17 18:07:19 UTC
I would like to a see a "Third" option

Allow the station to "delay" docking for non-alliance members.

Make me wait a 5min timer to dock up while staying in range would be a win-win.

Cynthia Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2012-12-17 18:09:57 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
This is a theoretical what if statement:

How would the landscape of nullsec change if your alliance controlled outpost could no longer deny docking rights, med bay, and repair services to other players based on standings...

what if you never locked the door to your house.
your neighbours would be able to waltz in and out as they please.
this makes no sense to me.

Post with your lickā„¢

Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#12 - 2012-12-17 18:13:56 UTC
Cynthia Gallente wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
This is a theoretical what if statement:

How would the landscape of nullsec change if your alliance controlled outpost could no longer deny docking rights, med bay, and repair services to other players based on standings...

what if you never locked the door to your house.
your neighbours would be able to waltz in and out as they please.
this makes no sense to me.

Bad analogy, as everything you have in station is safe.

Status on the undock would be interesting.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs

Jimmy Gunsmythe
Sebiestor Tribe
#13 - 2012-12-17 18:23:39 UTC
Simetraz wrote:
Other then a hostile fleet could show up and dock which I find wrong to some extent cause you are supposed to be able to control what happens in your system in null.


In that situation, perhaps the option to allow only blues and greys to dock while prohibiting reds from doing so would be a good option.

If I can just pass through as a neutral and can't dock up for a moment to take a break, why should I even bother going out to nulsec?

John Hancock

Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#14 - 2012-12-17 18:28:54 UTC
Jimmy Gunsmythe wrote:
Simetraz wrote:
Other then a hostile fleet could show up and dock which I find wrong to some extent cause you are supposed to be able to control what happens in your system in null.


In that situation, perhaps the option to allow only blues and greys to dock while prohibiting reds from doing so would be a good option.

If I can just pass through as a neutral and can't dock up for a moment to take a break, why should I even bother going out to nulsec?


As a neutral you don't want to dock if you can help it. Preferably you bring a cloak and/or you disconnect in a safespot. Stations can easily be camped, while random spots in space can't.
Othran
Route One
#15 - 2012-12-17 18:31:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Othran
Well the thing is that sov null doesn't really "work" all that well in terms of numbers of players involved there.

NPC null tends to work a bit more like sov null should work - in terms of having almost functional markets when you compare them to empire.

I do know that sov null has its own "hubs" and corp/alliance inventors/etc but a very large proportion of outposts are dead. Nothing much happens in them other than a few people ratting/docking and logging. Oh and no they're not off on a "roadtrip" to other sov, its usually like that.

It's boring is the real tl;dr. More people docking at outposts = more activity = more fun.

Its obviously not as simplistic as I've made out here but I'm not doing a wall of text.
Simetraz
State War Academy
Caldari State
#16 - 2012-12-17 18:33:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Simetraz
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Simetraz wrote:
OP I see your point but I am not sure if it would make enough of a difference I would rather see SOV pushed down to corps levels and allow the corporation to control there space.

There is too much dependency on alliances right now or should I say being in an alliance should give you some bonuses but it shouldn't lock you down like it does now.

alliances should be created cause it is convient for the time. Not the end result.


I don't think this would change anything.... Would you rather your neighbor be blue or Hostile? In general, people will group together for strength and eliminate any nearby hostiles... This change makes it much more difficult to remove those hostiles..


Actually you struck on the very core of what is happening in Null.
An alliance takes over a region and then shrinks back to the center if you will giving them a buff zone.
As you say leaving those outer edges un-used.

By forcing SOV down to the Corp level an Alliance could still do this but for for those corps that hold the center they will potentially have hostiles in there systems from the other corps of the alliance.

I want to change the dynamics of null and I will be honest my objective is not to stabilize it.
Corp SOV increases the chance of lots of small wars going on.
Not the massive an alliance collapses and everyone loses SOV.
I am giving those stronger corps a chance to survive even flip sides at the same time I am promoting small scale wars.

In some respects it does stabalize Null but in other respects creates weaker alliances as there is very little to hold them together so corps have choices.

The problem is right now null is so used to thinking in the box and CCP can only do so much with the current system.
IT needs to change.
Kari Juptris
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#17 - 2012-12-17 19:16:39 UTC
Yeah, because station games are soooo fun. Have you ever been in NPC nullsec?
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#18 - 2012-12-17 19:28:21 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Have you ever compared the PvP statistics for regions like Curse or Syndicate vs ANY OTHER NULLSEC REGION IN THE GAME???

Sov nullsec has great Sov battles, and some systems are good areas for PvP, but in general, Sov Nullsec is pathetically lacking in solo, small gang, or even medium gang warfare...


I haven't lived there but I have travelled through there enough to know that by "small gang warfare" you mean 4:1. It's just blobbing on a different scale. It's rare you find single people hunting ANYWHERE in Eve, not just nullsec.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#19 - 2012-12-17 20:00:36 UTC
Ptraci wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Have you ever compared the PvP statistics for regions like Curse or Syndicate vs ANY OTHER NULLSEC REGION IN THE GAME???

Sov nullsec has great Sov battles, and some systems are good areas for PvP, but in general, Sov Nullsec is pathetically lacking in solo, small gang, or even medium gang warfare...


I haven't lived there but I have travelled through there enough to know that by "small gang warfare" you mean 4:1. It's just blobbing on a different scale. It's rare you find single people hunting ANYWHERE in Eve, not just nullsec.


I spent a years living in NPC nullsec, I've regularly found excellent small gang and solo fights there. I personally think you have a very skewed view from your "limited" travels through the regions.

"it's just blobbing" -- Really???? You don't find "even" fights in most of EvE, but that doesn't mean most fights are blobs...

My definition of blobbing is when one side engages with such overwhelming force that all the "sport" is removed and we're left with shooting fish in a barrel.

For example...
If your 4v1 consists of 4 AF's vs a hurricane... this could be a fun and interesting battle, far from "blobbing". Sure, the cane will probably lose, but if he's fit right, he'll probably take 2 of his opponents with him!

If your 4v1 is a falcon, a scimi, a vigilant, and a Cynabal vs that hurricane, then this is simply a gank. They'll immobilize and nullify the cane taking all the "fight" out of the engagement.

Solo is not as rare as you may think.... Most of the PvP I engage in is solo and small gang oriented, and learning when to fight, when to run is part of the game. Yesterday I took my Vexor on a Solo Roam through 5 Regions of Russian space, killing a ratting Maelstrom, a hulk, a Raven, a Cynabal, and died trying to solo a hurricane.... This proposal is simply to increase target density... People don't like to travel through 50 systems to find targets...and the current Sov Mechanics make it way to easy to push out any hostiles in the area, leaving Sov Nullsec mostly barren, interspersed by the occasional "hotspot". Why not open it up?
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#20 - 2012-12-17 20:01:43 UTC
conquerable 0.0 would be exactly the same as npc 0.0 but with much worse outposts (and many fewer player-built ones)

why did you even need to ask this question

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

123Next page