EVE General Discussion

So...being a bittervet is a status symbol now or what? Bittervet just means that you've been with the game a long time and hate it, but feel you must stay with it. Are you saying that you can't figure out how to pull away from a game you no longer like?

Good. This means that you will be DUST fighter ! nice !

I have my own suggestion for a partial solution. Currently their are only a few power blocks in null, and a lot of the space these blocks hold is very empty. The amount of space you own is not based on how much you can OCCUPY like in the real world, but on how many ihubs you can bash. I have a suggestion for how to force alliances to hold less space not through things like taxes, but through actual gameplay.


My solution in thread form:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=184770&find=unread

Basically Goonswarm can instantaneously teleport an entire armada across their space to defend any given point. In the real world if you attack an empire at a point where very few people live, your likely not to encounter very much resistance until the owner can muster an army and move it to that point.

Imagine for a second if during D-day one soldier with a flare gun could instantly bring in every member of the german army, that is what it is like in eve.

I propose getting rid of cynos in sovereign null. Jump freighters, covops cynos, and rorquals may cyno just as they do now, and NPC null, and empire low will be totally unchanged for all ship types.

At the same time I would BUFF titan jump bridges. Now you may jump both to and from a titan by using a jump bridge or another titan. The downside is now a titan has to use a stargate and move into the destination system. For traveling from sov space to NPC null and lowsec, an alliance would have to setup a anchored cyno generator in a heavily upgraded system that can jump capital ships back and forth from cyno safe space.




Under this system alliances would have to strategically distribute their capital and sub capital fleets. It would require additional effort to maintain a large empire, and any attack on someone far away would leave your space semi vulnerable. Titans would no longer be glorified jump bridges, but would be beneficially to remain vulnerable and on the field in a roll that resembles the flagships titans were intended to be. Because less space would be held by large entities, more pockets of space would open up for weaker alliances to move in populating empty parts of null sec. Providing more people to fight. Battles versus large entities would be more tactical, instead of just being how many supers we can log on or sitting around a titan waiting to be dropped in.

Also more supers would die and be unable to surprise buttsecks you from across space, fixing super proliferation.

Someone nearby? I mean your space is really big, if most of you live in VFK and another entity attacked you or one of your allies what is closer to said system, them or you? Are you really gonna go 10+ jumps with capital ships to fight over a system that nobody uses in your alliance? The system in question could belong to a reasonably powerful alliance and their home base could be only 3 jumps away. If one of your coalition mates is under attack would it be really worth it to go all the way over their to help them across multiple regions? How often will you guys be able to field large fleets if action isn't a titan bridge away and people start to get somewhat frustrated? Say your under attack on multiple fronts by multiple people, you have to go all the way across your space to fight each of them separately when before you can just be bridged in and rapidly redeploy once it has been taken care of. At the very least goons would have to deploy separate fleets to fight on multiple fronts make stronger alliances far easier to combat.

If some 200 man alliance sets up sov 20 jumps away that only borders an ally are you going to drop capitals or even a large subcap fleet on them? No. Now the usefulness of coalitions becomes less across large swaths of territory like what you hold.

Say a hypothetical test vs goons war happened, both sides forces would have to be permanently stationed near the fighting. Then if at any time someone attacks your territory on the other side you wouldn't have the ability to defend both sides, making a large territory unmanageable or at least significantly harder to do so. Your power would only be projected locally opening up new opportunities for new alliances to move in far away from your space.

If CCP added farms and fields who would have the power to hold them all? The person with the most forces, because those forces would have the power to project their entire fleet across the whole map. It would just be the same as moons but more spread out. In all seriousness HBC and CFC could conquer the entire game if they wanted to, but they don't. If all of null was equally valuable their would be great incentive to just keep going.

Good Read.

I started in 2007 so i've got a higher level of bitter trained than you do lol. A couple of "devils advocate" points.


High Sec incursions are a problem, and they aren't all at the same time. I've mention the pretty rank unfairness of being able to take a priate faciton ship and make the same isk (MORE when you factor in LP) with it than you could in null sec in a situation so safe you don't even have to have local chat up, and where the FC is doing all the mental heavy lifting for you. The worst that happen to you in high sec incursions is someone preloads certain sites or someone tries to awox by withholding reps (or ISN decides to contest EVERY site you go to, damn griefers ).

BUT, and this is a big but, overall Incursions aren't a huge isk faucet. Their is a solid cieling for how much they will pay out (only so many sites per system, and you will sometimes get contested, and only so many high sec incursions going on at once for people to spread out to.

Also, incursion isk is offet by the fact that all the people who were running missions and exploring in the incursion region can no longer do that. Sure, some will just move to another place till the incursion passes, some will join in on fighting the incursions. But some just won't log in till the incursion passes. So high sec incursion stiffle at least so isk making while they are going on.

I don't know what can be done with incursions, or even if they are a real problem, the last nerf almost kill the incursion community as the fair weather isk makers left, incursions are one of the best things in EVE and imo are fairly balanced as is.




Slowing supercap proliferation isn't going to change anyhting with titan bridges. Titans rarely die so the same level of force protection will survive just about for ever. I love bridges and titan bridging, it makes life easeir in null sec, but truth is, jump bridge range (and all jump capable ship ranges) probably need some serious nerfing.

Because invaders would not need to 'gate it' all over fifteen regions to invade. They just need to make one jump. So in order to control the vast amount of space you currently have, your coalition would need to stay spread out instead of sending the ktichen sink across all of New Eden to deal with that five man battlecruiser roam.
Players in null would need to actually occupy and constantly maintain a presence in space they want to keep. Shocking I know.

In no way am I saying there does not need to a slew of other changes to the game, but being able to send your military force over to one side of the map in the morning and be back home (no matter where in galaxy that may be) in time for tea is incredibly broken. Still don't believe me? From the other thread...

Getting wind of a small dread fleet in siege, forming up a vastly larger fleet and crossing four regions in less than ten minutes. Some will see that as great logistics, but I see that as EVE being a very tiny, tiny sand box.

Anyways, I'll leave you guys be to your complaining about lack of targets in null.

I actually lol'd at the comment on incursions. From what I can tell, at any given time there are no more than a couple of hundred players running them, at least half of which are making no more isk than a skilled L4 runner or multiboxing miner would in highsec. The ones that do make more isk do so in fleets that run with machine-like efficiency, with extreme focus placed on min/maxing their numbers. And that's not even counting the time it takes to actually get into a fleet, or travel time spent between incursions.

Compared to a skilled null player making a consistent 100m+/hr at home, with no time spent waiting to get in fleet....

i have a strong suspicion 0.0 will start to get overhaul next exp. (TM.) 1bil says so.

If you cant understand a word, try saying it aloud. If your still stuck, move on to the next word.

The problem with supers is the obsolesence of the idea that they are supposed to be so far above average.

Which is why I said price hikes is not the way to go. I'd prefer to see supers in the 5-10 bil range in regards to buildcost. with regular caps not far behind, Tackle and ewar immunity needs to go. Ehp needs to get knocked down to maybe 10 mil tops for titans to make stuff blow up more ofthen. Supercarrier vs Carrier DPS also needs an overhaul, if regular carriers could use Fighter bombers we'd see alot less supers out there relatively quickly.


Changes like this would make current supercap pilots pissed off though as their investment drops in value. Hell, Im in an alliance and corp that has invested conciderably into supers and we'd see alot of money flushed down the toilet if something like this is implemented. Does not make it any less necessary however.