These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A Bittervet's Perspective on Nullsec

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lamparski
Last Exit.
#121 - 2012-12-26 03:49:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Lamparski
I have been playing since December 2007 as well, and I was in heaven when I found this game. Eve has changed quite a bit but change is neccessary and vital to keep the game from becoming stagnant and flavour of the month ships, fits, and exploits.

As I recall about half way through 2008 CCP nerfed micro warpdrives, and the era of speed tanking was pretty much dead. I remember 3 or 4 heavy assault ships would follow our 30 plus battlecruiser and battleship fleets and try and pick us off as we warped to the next gate.

This was awesome in my eyes and I trained to get into my speed boat but was too late, at the same time micro warpdrives and the inability to counter unless you were in a similar ship and setup was not healthy for the game. But the ability to go with 3 or 4 guys and cause havoc on ratting ravens and 30 man fleets was great, but everyone was doing it by the time CCP pulled the plug.

I have not played Eve on a regular basis for close to two years but try to follow the game, forums and patches and continue to train my characters. CCP needs to brainstorm on how to bring back small gangs and kill the nullsec alliances, and coalitions, but it may to big of a monster to tackle and change. anyways im rambling, fly safe......
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#122 - 2012-12-26 04:16:58 UTC
Lamparski wrote:
CCP needs to brainstorm on how to bring back small gangs and kill the nullsec alliances, and coalitions, but it may to big of a monster to tackle and change. anyways im rambling, fly safe......

Yeah having friends is evil and needs to be murdered in the most bloody manner.

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 ?
Frying Doom
#123 - 2012-12-26 04:45:12 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Lamparski wrote:
CCP needs to brainstorm on how to bring back small gangs and kill the nullsec alliances, and coalitions, but it may to big of a monster to tackle and change. anyways im rambling, fly safe......

Yeah having friends is evil and needs to be murdered in the most bloody manner.

Me personally I think the numbers in TEST and Goonswarm are great, however the massive amount of unused space you have under Sov and the fact that you can and do minimize risk with bridges, titan bridges and jump ships, makes Null kind of pointless and a bit like a hi-sec suburb.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#124 - 2012-12-26 04:52:00 UTC  |  Edited by: EI Digin
Sov is already tied to usage, if you never used or needed the sov nobody would show up to defend it. Fleet losses come at a price. You can't replace player morale with isk, and morale is something that every bloc-level FC in the game thinks of before they commit to a campaign. If you win a meaningless war at a high cost, people are going to ask questions and doubt your ability.

The fact that alliances hold large amounts of space isn't itself a problem, it's the fact that no one wants to even try to fight for new sov because the reward for winning a terrible solar system from a large alliance is a bill. Smaller entities biting at the heels of larger ones are currently 100% able to take sov from existing entities. If you want a good example take a look at WHY SO SERIOUS in Detroid/Wicked Creek who have defeated the mighty SOLAR while their back was turned and have founded their own coalition. There are just very little incentives for scenarios like this to play out right now.

If you made space more valuable, large coalitions spanning multiple regions would become more volatile as they simply become unnecessary. Situations may arise where space is abandoned in order to fight a "greater evil", or specific alliances don't pull their weight, and animosity will grow between allies.

The solution to the sov issue shouldn't be to put in place artificial limits, like a cap on sov systems you can take, a minimum military index, limiting the amount of players in an alliance, or to nerf/remove fast movement. They are only attempts at fixing symptoms. The solution is to address the problem head on. Make space worth holding for everybody.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#125 - 2012-12-26 05:02:44 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
The fact that alliances hold large amounts of space isn't itself a problem, it's the fact that no one wants to even try to fight for new sov because the reward for winning a terrible solar system from a large alliance is a bill.

Didn't want that sov (bill) anyway.

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 ?
Frying Doom
#126 - 2012-12-26 05:04:39 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Sov is already tied to usage, if you never used or needed the sov nobody would show up to defend it. Fleet losses come at a price. You can't replace player morale with isk, and morale is something that every bloc-level FC in the game thinks of before they commit to a campaign. If you win a meaningless war at a high cost, people are going to ask questions and doubt your ability.

The fact that alliances hold large amounts of space isn't itself a problem, it's the fact that no one wants to even try to fight for new sov because the reward for winning a terrible solar system from a large alliance is a bill. Smaller entities biting at the heels of larger ones are currently 100% able to take sov from existing entities. If you want a good example take a look at WHY SO SERIOUS in Detroid/Wicked Creek who have defeated the mighty SOLAR while their back was turned and have founded their own coalition. There are just very little incentives for scenarios like this to play out right now.

If you made space more valuable, large coalitions spanning multiple regions would become more volatile as they simple become unnecessary. Situations may arise where space is abandoned in order to fight a "greater evil", or specific alliances don't pull their weight, and animosity will grow between allies.

The solution to the sov issue shouldn't be to put in place artificial limits, like a cap on sov systems you can take, a minimum military index, limiting the amount of players in an alliance, or to nerf/remove fast movement. They are only attempts at fixing symptoms. The solution is to address the problem head on. Make space worth holding for everybody.

No the solution is not just to buff the space up and make the mega alliances into super mega alliances.

The solution is very much that if you want to hold Sov on a system you must use it, yes some larger alliances might decide space is not worth it and not be multi region

But this is currently the problem, why does any one new want to go to Null and fight a Huge blob over a crappy system?

Just buffing null with no negatives will just make the current problems worse not better.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
EI Digin
irc.zulusquad.org
#127 - 2012-12-26 06:02:44 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
No the solution is not just to buff the space up and make the mega alliances into super mega alliances.
Just buffing null with no negatives will just make the current problems worse not better.

Large alliances already rule nullsec. How are they going to rule even more after changes are made? All of the isk in the world means nothing if you are not having fun, and large, rich groups not having fun will splinter. The fixes would allow for a new pathway to open up for progressively smaller blocs to jump into the fray, which is a Good Thing. At the very least there will be more targets for elite-pvp types to shoot up. Things can't get much worse than they already are in terms of coalition size.

There is very little to remove from nullsec because to be quite honest there is very little to take away from it in the first place without drastically changing nullsec life for the worse. When things get added, we can start talking about adjusting certain things. Namely local/dscan/intelligence gathering which is better off being discussed down the road because right now there are more important things to worry about.

Frying Doom wrote:
The solution is very much that if you want to hold Sov on a system you must use it, yes some larger alliances might decide space is not worth it and not be multi region

Forcing groups to grind systems in order to keep them is not a fun mechanic. You want to people to have an incentive to do something, not punish them for being too successful. Plus it doesn't even work well, if you wanted to have a buffer zone you could just let the space go and block anyone who tries to live there. It also gives an incentive for alliances to recruit as many people as possible (blob) so you can keep indexes up in every system they want to hold. It's a solution for the symptom. Bad space that an alliance doesn't want or isn't worthwhile to defend heavily would end up being taken by a smallholding alliance if it was worth it.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#128 - 2012-12-26 06:14:40 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Forcing groups to grind systems in order to keep them is not a fun mechanic. You want to people to have an incentive to do something, not punish them for being too successful. Plus it doesn't even work well, if you wanted to have a buffer zone you could just let the space go and block anyone who tries to live there. It also gives an incentive for alliances to recruit as many people as possible (blob) so you can keep indexes up in every system they want to hold. It's a solution for the symptom. Bad space that an alliance doesn't want or isn't worthwhile to defend heavily would end up being taken by a smallholding alliance if it was worth it.

Blobbing and ratting CTAs sound like fun. Also, we could always use more structure shooting. Eg: The rats set up a proper gate camp, complete with bubbles, instalocking ships and capitals waiting for a cyno. You must then kill their SBU, which, because NPCs are dumb, has 10x the EHP of a player SBU.

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 ?
Frying Doom
#129 - 2012-12-26 06:14:41 UTC
EI Digin wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
No the solution is not just to buff the space up and make the mega alliances into super mega alliances.
Just buffing null with no negatives will just make the current problems worse not better.

Large alliances already rule nullsec. How are they going to rule even more after changes are made? All of the isk in the world means nothing if you are not having fun, and large, rich groups not having fun will splinter. The fixes would allow for a new pathway to open up for progressively smaller blocs to jump into the fray, which is a Good Thing. At the very least there will be more targets for elite-pvp types to shoot up. Things can't get much worse than they already are in terms of coalition size.

There is very little to remove from nullsec because to be quite honest there is very little to take away from it in the first place without drastically changing nullsec life for the worse. When things get added, we can start talking about adjusting certain things. Namely local/dscan/intelligence gathering which is better off being discussed down the road because right now there are more important things to worry about.

Frying Doom wrote:
The solution is very much that if you want to hold Sov on a system you must use it, yes some larger alliances might decide space is not worth it and not be multi region

Forcing groups to grind systems in order to keep them is not a fun mechanic. You want to people to have an incentive to do something, not punish them for being too successful. Plus it doesn't even work well, if you wanted to have a buffer zone you could just let the space go and block anyone who tries to live there. It also gives an incentive for alliances to recruit as many people as possible (blob) so you can keep indexes up in every system they want to hold. It's a solution for the symptom. Bad space that an alliance doesn't want or isn't worthwhile to defend heavily would end up being taken by a smallholding alliance if it was worth it.

Actually it can get worse, the current power blocks will easily devour all comers if they do not have to do anything in there space as they do now, while being able to jump easily many systems away and if you add on to this the ability to make more per hour in isk as well as the ability to produce everything them selves and yes things would get a lot worse.

There is little to no reason to go to Null now, if you buff null with no draw backs all you will have is a form saying "Sign here for mega alliance membership", as any alliance smaller than a few thousand will just get bulldozed out of Null.

And all the systems will still be empty most of the time just like they are now.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Frying Doom
#130 - 2012-12-26 06:26:10 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
EI Digin wrote:
Forcing groups to grind systems in order to keep them is not a fun mechanic. You want to people to have an incentive to do something, not punish them for being too successful. Plus it doesn't even work well, if you wanted to have a buffer zone you could just let the space go and block anyone who tries to live there. It also gives an incentive for alliances to recruit as many people as possible (blob) so you can keep indexes up in every system they want to hold. It's a solution for the symptom. Bad space that an alliance doesn't want or isn't worthwhile to defend heavily would end up being taken by a smallholding alliance if it was worth it.

Blobbing and ratting CTAs sound like fun. Also, we could always use more structure shooting. Eg: The rats set up a proper gate camp, complete with bubbles, instalocking ships and capitals waiting for a cyno. You must then kill their SBU, which, because NPCs are dumb, has 10x the EHP of a player SBU.

Personally I think the entire structure grind thing is kind of pointless.

I would like to see it completely done on usage to keep sov and improve a system as well as taking sov off someone.

You work inside someone else's system mining, ratting running complexes ect.. and this decreases their Sov level over time. So no not CTAs per say but actual use.

The amount of isk now in the economy as a whole has really made any isk based payments kind of pointless. So I feel a you use it or you lose it is the best strategy.

But we get to find out if we are about to get a Star Wars level event when the CSM minutes come out.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Sebastian N Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#131 - 2012-12-26 08:51:08 UTC
Ocih wrote:
mama guru wrote:
Supers needs to get nerfed into Tier 2 Capitals in terms of price and ability. Thats it, there is no realistic alternative solution to supercap proliferation that doesnt involve a massive price hike in the form of either material cost or buildtime/accessability.



Supers might be a problem but they are also a lense. People want to be on the field longer than 12 seconds, they get in a Super. Every nerf, buff, expansion, patch has evaded the one constant in EVE. Nothing tanks below super capitals. For reasons unexplained, CCP have refused to make Defense a valid play style. We adapted and simply refuse to fight battles we deem not worth the loss or loss of no strategic value. They can have it two ways. Fights that don't always end in a kill mail or no fights. They choose no fights.

Well, this is due to the fact that damage don´t really reduces your ships capabilities. You are 100% effective until you explode. If your ship would be less and less effective with damage, slower, modules offlining and so on... then and only then the alpha strike would only be viable for VIP-targets, for the normal case a fleet with numerous damaged ships would be less effective than a fleet that is perfectly fine aside from losing one ship. Until damage will have an effect, fleet fights will remain alpha vs. logi.

I got lost in thought... it was unfamiliar territory.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#132 - 2012-12-26 08:56:16 UTC
Frying Doom wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Lamparski wrote:
CCP needs to brainstorm on how to bring back small gangs and kill the nullsec alliances, and coalitions, but it may to big of a monster to tackle and change. anyways im rambling, fly safe......

Yeah having friends is evil and needs to be murdered in the most bloody manner.

Me personally I think the numbers in TEST and Goonswarm are great, however the massive amount of unused space you have under Sov and the fact that you can and do minimize risk with bridges, titan bridges and jump ships, makes Null kind of pointless and a bit like a hi-sec suburb.


Actually, very few of the systems we hold are never used. You can find activity going on in any of our systems each day.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#133 - 2012-12-26 09:06:03 UTC
Sebastian N Cain wrote:
Ocih wrote:
mama guru wrote:
Supers needs to get nerfed into Tier 2 Capitals in terms of price and ability. Thats it, there is no realistic alternative solution to supercap proliferation that doesnt involve a massive price hike in the form of either material cost or buildtime/accessability.



Supers might be a problem but they are also a lense. People want to be on the field longer than 12 seconds, they get in a Super. Every nerf, buff, expansion, patch has evaded the one constant in EVE. Nothing tanks below super capitals. For reasons unexplained, CCP have refused to make Defense a valid play style. We adapted and simply refuse to fight battles we deem not worth the loss or loss of no strategic value. They can have it two ways. Fights that don't always end in a kill mail or no fights. They choose no fights.

Well, this is due to the fact that damage don´t really reduces your ships capabilities. You are 100% effective until you explode. If your ship would be less and less effective with damage, slower, modules offlining and so on... then and only then the alpha strike would only be viable for VIP-targets, for the normal case a fleet with numerous damaged ships would be less effective than a fleet that is perfectly fine aside from losing one ship. Until damage will have an effect, fleet fights will remain alpha vs. logi.


Yoru modules can get damaged and knocked out once you start taking structure damage.

Most people don't notice because, once into structure, they die faster than they notice the modules taking damage. Either that, or they are already overheating and not noticing the extra damage.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#134 - 2012-12-26 09:20:00 UTC
EI Digin wrote:

The solution to the sov issue shouldn't be to put in place artificial limits, like a cap on sov systems you can take, a minimum military index, limiting the amount of players in an alliance, or to nerf/remove fast movement. They are only attempts at fixing symptoms. The solution is to address the problem head on. Make space worth holding for everybody.


Of course, but then you still have vastly more advantage in the "space now is worth having" scenario as an huge alliance than not. Economy of cost, raw numbers, ability to affect the markets...

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
I Love Lesbians
Doomheim
#135 - 2012-12-26 09:20:34 UTC
Remove alliances from the game and get back in sync with the lore that eve is all based aruond Megacorporations. Limit the standings list to max 10 entities for corps as well as players.

Revamp POS so you can have a sov claim module, ship dock module and some other things to make it worthwhile to live from that.
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#136 - 2012-12-26 09:25:21 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Lamparski wrote:
CCP needs to brainstorm on how to bring back small gangs and kill the nullsec alliances, and coalitions, but it may to big of a monster to tackle and change. anyways im rambling, fly safe......

Yeah having friends is evil and needs to be murdered in the most bloody manner.

Me personally I think the numbers in TEST and Goonswarm are great, however the massive amount of unused space you have under Sov and the fact that you can and do minimize risk with bridges, titan bridges and jump ships, makes Null kind of pointless and a bit like a hi-sec suburb.


Actually, very few of the systems we hold are never used. You can find activity going on in any of our systems each day.



The funny thing is, we aren't the bad guys in this whole "unused space" issue. It is an issue nullsec has, but we are hardly the worst offenders. But Nullsec == Goons for so many here.

Of the great nullsec empires, the in-game map only shows me one that keeps unclaimed space in its borders. And it ain't the GSF.

Our space is used, upgraded, and we even have our POCOs on the vast majority of the planets.
Frying Doom
#137 - 2012-12-26 13:43:47 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Frying Doom wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Lamparski wrote:
CCP needs to brainstorm on how to bring back small gangs and kill the nullsec alliances, and coalitions, but it may to big of a monster to tackle and change. anyways im rambling, fly safe......

Yeah having friends is evil and needs to be murdered in the most bloody manner.

Me personally I think the numbers in TEST and Goonswarm are great, however the massive amount of unused space you have under Sov and the fact that you can and do minimize risk with bridges, titan bridges and jump ships, makes Null kind of pointless and a bit like a hi-sec suburb.


Actually, very few of the systems we hold are never used. You can find activity going on in any of our systems each day.



The funny thing is, we aren't the bad guys in this whole "unused space" issue. It is an issue nullsec has, but we are hardly the worst offenders. But Nullsec == Goons for so many here.

Of the great nullsec empires, the in-game map only shows me one that keeps unclaimed space in its borders. And it ain't the GSF.

Our space is used, upgraded, and we even have our POCOs on the vast majority of the planets.

I was not specifically meaning null and test for unused Sov space but we have intrepid crossing
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/42SU-L

Goonswarm low to no use in the last 48 hours

http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/XCBK-X


Test
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/F-9PXR
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/O-IOAI
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/T5ZI-S
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/9O-ORX
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/A8-XBW

frankly I didn't check them all, but there are rather a number of areas with not even so much as 1 NPC kill in a 48 hour period.
A lot of these did occur in other alliances space as well so it is not just about goons or test.

As to POCOs these are another set and forget idea, by use I mean mining, ratting, plex running ect...

You know actual use, by people present in the system.

So like I said you should use it or lose it but atm we are just waiting to see how far down the proverbial creek the CSM sold us all.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#138 - 2012-12-26 14:34:35 UTC
masternerdguy wrote:
I've been playing since December 2007, so basically the start of 2008.




you call yourself a bittervet, I still call you a noob.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#139 - 2012-12-26 15:19:16 UTC
Gilbaron wrote:
mining is (much) worse

do not forget that you also 'have to' mine stuff like gneiss and spodumain, picking the raisins does not work for anything that involves a group of players. it is also a major pain in the ass and very very expensive (a minmatar outpost and several amarr outposts, several towers, rorquals, and at least one JF if you actually want to mine and/or produce on a corporation or alliance basis)

so you mean mining in high-sec is much better? mining when you often can't just run 2+ cycles of strip miner because average asteroid tends to deplete?
I remember how i tried to mine in empire after 0.0: it was really painful because of small scattered roids. Quite a big difference with 0.0 when you sit semi-afk in one place mining 1 roid and droping your ore into can.

on the other side: how did it happen so ABC got so cheap? When i used to mine in 0.0 i remember ABC were giving quite nice profit above all other ores.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Karrl Tian
Doomheim
#140 - 2012-12-26 15:32:33 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
[

Most people don't notice because, once into structure, they die faster than they notice the modules taking damage. Either that, or they are already overheating and not noticing the extra damage.



Really? Cool. Pity there's not a way to blast a ship into structure and only take out its modules so you could disable a ship but not killing, would make ransoming easier.