These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Nullsec Manifesto

Author
Tyrrhena Maxus
Exit-Strategy
Unchained Alliance
#1 - 2011-09-07 11:52:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyrrhena Maxus
A whole lot of words by Aaron Static, Tyrrhena Maxus and Giacomo Carissimi
Former CEOs & Directors of Igneus Auctorita [IGNE]

Contents:

1. Introduction
2. Who we are
3. The Problems
3.1 Income Disparity
3.2 Reasons to log in = 0
4. The Solutions
4.1 Remove Local Auto-Update
4.1.1 Balancing ideas
4.2 Let the ISK flow
4.2.1 Taxes
4.2.2 Paid to fight
4.2.3 Reimbursement mechanics
4.3 The Dynamic Universe

5. The tl;dr


1. Introduction

In this document we will identify some fundamental problems with nullsec from the perspective of an average alliance member and/or seasoned PvPer. What causes someone to stop logging in? Why has the universe devolved into a powerbloc NAP-fest of alliances pleading to their members to join yet another boring blob vs blob sovereignty fight that ultimately doesn’t really help average Joe alliance member in the long term? What are some simple changes to nullsec mechanics that can bring back the hordes of unsubbed players and make EVE interesting again?

From those within the larger powerblocs, to the enterprising members of smaller start-up alliances, it quickly becomes obvious that to make a life in 0.0, you have to be able to play a diplomatic game that mirrors UN talks. Everybody has to hold hands with someone else to get anything accomplished. While this idea can work in the real world, we’re playing internet spaceships; blowing up somebody else’s ship, taking their profitability, and locking them out of what was once theirs is not just half the fun, but a reason to log in daily to play a video game.
We’re in a self-perpetuating cycle of powerbloc formation, where to kill off the last ungodly number of pilots, you need more. There needs to be an end to this. While the development team is constantly working on accommodating larger and larger fleet battles by allowing systems to support over 1000 pilots, they’re only succumbing to the natural formation of blobs and powerblocs. There are no more small wars in EVE. There is no longer a reason to go head to head with the 80 dudes next door.

Nullsec needs two crucial elements to attract players. The first being profitability; a reason to step out of high sec. The second being action; a player created environment where anything can change.

This document is NOT about ship balance, supercaps being over/under powered or the monotony of sov mechanics. We feel that these topics have been discussed at length by countless others and actually don’t have much to do with the causes for the aforementioned issues. The solutions we present are simple changes to core mechanics that should echo throughout the game and bolster the existing macro level mechanics and meta-game while actually requiring the minimum of CCP resources which are obviously dedicated to other things (ie Dust 514, micro transactions and silly vampire MMOs).

Our goals are simple:
1. Reduce the stagnation of 0.0 combat; both strategic and small gang PvP and PVE alike.
2. Reduce the powerbloc formation within nullsec or at least make them more dynamic
3. Give unsubbed players some reasons to return to EVE
4. Give corps/alliances a better set of tools, thereby reducing boring tasks and encouraging members to login for the things they enjoy.
5. Encourage more players to seek out life in 0.0, to work towards being able to stand on their own two space-feet with their buddies and enjoy all that the game has to offer.


Read more: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S5zfDuMj3OUvXlrUJW0hAdXAs8a-SA9JaWjb5_p9zqA/edit?hl=en_US&pli=1
Efraya
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#2 - 2011-09-07 12:12:49 UTC
What is the logic of using a tinyurl? We can't see where we're being directed too and we can't decide if it's a malicious url or not. There isn't any reason to use a link shortening service, you aren't anywhere near the maximum number of allowed characters.

[b][center]WSpace; Dead space.[/center] [center]Lady Spank for forum mod[/center][/b]

Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#3 - 2011-09-07 12:15:58 UTC
Efraya wrote:
What is the logic of using a tinyurl? We can't see where we're being directed too and we can't decide if it's a malicious url or not. There isn't any reason to use a link shortening service, you aren't anywhere near the maximum number of allowed characters.

This. I was gonna read it til I saw the tinyurl link, and decided I didn't need any keyloggersLol

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Furb Killer
#4 - 2011-09-07 12:17:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Furb Killer
http://tinyurl.com/preview.php?num=3tp8hk5

Enable preview feature of tinyurl, is really handy for such links. But yeah you are right that it is ridiculous to use tinyurl links on forums.

Anyway for those who also dont trust the preview, redirects here:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1S5zfDuMj3OUvXlrUJW0hAdXAs8a-SA9JaWjb5_p9zqA/edit?hl=en_US


Edit: Anyway read a very little bit and:
Quote:
Once past the initial ‘honeymoon period’ for a new player ends after entering New Eden, reasons to actually log in and play for a person mainly interested in 0.0 PvP begin to dwindle. Hours are spent scouring constellations for targets, camping choke-points, checking the map for spikes in gatejumps and rushing to an area hoping to find SOMEONE but usually just coming upon bots that warp out and cloak the second a neutral scout enters local.

Fair fights are rare in 0.0, though with more opposing gang activity the chances for an engagement go up. Gang vs gang/ fleet vs fleet is the biggest motivating factor for PVP players because of the fact that you and your buddies are going ‘all in’ and risking all your ships with no definite idea of the outcome. This is exciting and rewarding regardless of whether you win or lose, as you have fun and learn for next time. We need something that encourages more gang engagements.

As someone who is becoming very much bitter vet, I agree on this. However what surprises me comes next:

Quote:
Remove Local Auto-update

Okay, so what do they think the results of that will be?

Quote:
. An alliance would also be forced to gatecamp constellation entry points to protect their ratters.

Quote:
.With no local, PvE, PvP and mining pilots will be required to work together. For example: a small gang with some scouts and EW would suffice to make it possible to rat. Position your scouts in adjacent systems on the gates to watch for enemies

This was exactly the problem in the first place? Boring gatecamps and sitting on gates hoping something happens instead of ~good fites~.
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#5 - 2011-09-07 12:20:14 UTC
Thanks Furb, the preface there actually looked interesting

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Prince Kobol
#6 - 2011-09-07 12:23:10 UTC
had a quick skim... i tbasically read as we want more more ways to make massive amounts of isk in null
Tallian Saotome
Nuclear Arms Exchange Inc.
#7 - 2011-09-07 12:33:36 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
had a quick skim... i tbasically read as we want more ways to make massive amounts of isk in null

FYP

Also, you failed to notice 'we want more ways to gank people who grind isk solo'

Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.

Vin Hellsing
#8 - 2011-09-07 12:39:21 UTC
Tallian Saotome wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
had a quick skim... i tbasically read as we want more ways to make massive amounts of isk in null

FYP

Also, you failed to notice 'we want more ways to gank people who grind isk solo'


This part, I don't encourage. Know why? If we want more people in null, we need to encourage both solo and small groups in null. If they get ganked all the time, they would have no incentive to come to null.

Sorry, that's the reality.
Cyzlaki
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2011-09-07 12:48:32 UTC
OP post isn't liked, not gonna bother wasting my time reading
Solaire Solette
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2011-09-07 17:57:25 UTC
I have read and strongly support every aspect of this document. I'm a new EVE player, but this certainly concisely airs the EVE dirty laundry. EVE could be so much more than it is with just a little bit more attention to the high end gameplay.
Joe D'Trader
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2011-09-07 22:27:38 UTC
Cyzlaki wrote:
OP post isn't liked, not gonna bother wasting my time reading



The feature is working as expected.
Cipher Jones
The Thomas Edwards Taco Tuesday All Stars
#12 - 2011-09-07 22:43:40 UTC
OT in a serious thread but....

If you are afraid of a tiny url you fail at personal computing.

internet spaceships

are serious business sir.

and don't forget it

Zubaida Maram
Another Bloody Corporation
#13 - 2011-09-08 03:53:05 UTC
Sometimes I open Constellation chat and say "Is there anyone in the area who didn't close this?"

I have never received a reply. I'd like to see it have a use.
Richard Hammond II
Doomheim
#14 - 2011-09-08 03:58:23 UTC
Vin Hellsing wrote:


This part, I don't encourage. Know why? If we want more people in null, we need to encourage both solo and small groups in null. If they get ganked all the time, they would have no incentive to come to null.

Sorry, that's the reality.


QFT I know you 0.0 guys wanna kill the noobs an carebears etc, but they die a few times too many, theyll be encouraged only to go right back to hisec.

Goons; infiltration at its best - first bob... now ccp itself. They dont realize you guys dot take this as "just a game". Bring it down guys, we're rooting for you.

Joe D'Trader
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2011-09-08 10:52:52 UTC
Zubaida Maram wrote:
Sometimes I open Constellation chat and say "Is there anyone in the area who didn't close this?"

I have never received a reply. I'd like to see it have a use.



I always wondered why constellation chat existed in the first place. I think this is a pretty fair trade off of removing local. And it would really screw with bots.


Just the constellation change alone makes it worth a look.
Ladie Harlot
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2011-09-08 11:02:54 UTC
That document is horrible and you should feel bad for posting it.

The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet.