These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Eve Down Under Bombshell: No Sov overhaul until at least Winter 2014

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#201 - 2013-12-02 19:55:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Herzog Wolfhammer
Jenn aSide wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
This is exactly what I am talking about, its perfectly okay to nerf nullsec and leave it in terrible shambles but, any attempt to bring highsec in line is resisted with huge tantrums.




If nullsec is so bad, why are people paying so much ISK to rent space there?

What are these renters doing out there? Do they rent space, put up a POS, and then it's to the forums to complain about nullsec being nerfed?

Or are they bearing it up just like they would do in highsec, only pay the rent and risk it in nullsec for... what reason?

Would that be more ISK?

Is the goon rental program not going well? Will more goodies mean more profit renting out space? Will space be rented out that is not normally rented out, or will it become possible to raise the rent?




Answer this question. How many renters are there compared to high sec lvl 4 runners?

You asking why a small, tiny minority (renters) within another minority (null sec dwellers) are risking it out in null sec, without asking the real question: Why aren't more players doing this is the rewards are so good.

The answer to the quesiton is complex, there are people renting and doing stuff in null. It might be because in their situation the isk is better, or the danger is more fun, null is a change of pace and so on. But that doesn't change the facts about high sec's capability to support people, which is why a lot of non-renter null players like me have high sec alts for isk making.

As tedious as i sometimes find incursions (can't do more than a couple hours before leaving fleet to decompress), it's steady null sce like isk for nothing more than my investment of a scimitar and watchng broadcasts so i know who to rep (and for the love of God someone teach these people where the "IN POSITION" button is).




Perhaps we are dealing with a "window of capability" that is not entered through a linear graph? Such that nullsec is going to be too much work at one point in this graph (for individuals or organizations) and after a certain point, it's easy enough to justify the cost of rent and risk of aggression?

This might be the case then. But boosting and nerfing then means we screw over one side of the graph in favor of another rather then investigate why the curve is so sharp and/or addressing whether it should be so sharp or not.

Nothing gained or lost then. I still think the lack of involvement in nullsec, be it in an alliance or as a freebooter, is more like a lack of commitment to the game (though viewed as a crime to "some" people around here) that many players do not have complete control over - RL being what it is. The success of a large organization may be more due to requiring less commitment from members than appealing to those who have more.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#202 - 2013-12-02 20:06:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Quote:
The larger your "space empire" is, the easier it should be for small groups of insurgents to do serious harm. At some point your infrastructure gets too big to effectively police in it's entirety.


Um, what? This is entirely contrary to reality, let alone to good game design.

Any tool you give that can be used to good effect by ten people, can be used to much greater effect by ten thousand. Face the facts, "small groups" do not have any business being in sov null.

This Rebel Alliance mentality bullshit needs to stop.


I think by "larger" they were referring to the quantity of territory held, not the number of people involved in the enterprise. 100 people holding 10 systems should be easier to attack than 100 people holding 1 system, etc.

Obviously more people would have the inverse effect.


And if we were talking about feudal fiefdoms, where you had to walk or horseback to your various territories, which necessitated placing garrisons in areas across your land, then it might make some sense.

But we are mighty space warlords with teleportation at our disposal. To expect that people would, or should have to, garrison their systems at all times to ensure someone doesn't timezone flip it is beyond asinine.

Furthermore, this would also only be feasible if each individual area was worth living in, instead of some 40-50% of it being worthless truesec barely fit for renters.

Actually, Null Sec is (or should be) exactly that. The Scifi equivalent of feudal fiefdoms.

You are correct, currently the ability to "teleport" around your territory is a problem... it should never have been introduced into the game in it's current form. Placement of capitol assets should be critical strategic decisions, and moving them to another location (for offensive or defensive purposes) should be a major undertaking... one not taken lightly.

Fortunately CCP is starting to take steps to make things a bit more difficult, like the new deploy able 1 shot cyno jammer, but game mechanics changes should be considered as well.

I'm not suggesting this as laid out (not enough time has gone into the concept), but things along the lines of...

Jump Bridge networks become easier to use but also MUCH easier to take out. Each point in the network would allow you to jump to the next without changing systems. However this inter connectivity comes at a price, as if one link in your bridge goes down the entire network goes off line, and takes a while to bring back up. These should be an Achilles heel for large Sov holders, and not terribly difficult to take one out.

Something similar could be done with other types of a Sov holders infra structure. In most cases bringing down one link in the chain shouldn't bring it all down (depending on how things are set up), but might bring down significant portions.

I know Sov holders have their headaches right now, but from a game play perspective the mechanics need to allow for significant vulnerabilities as territorial holdings get larger... especially vs smaller groups but vs larger as well. There needs to be more incentive for people to try and take what others have and that doesn't necessarily mean making certain real estate more valuable... you can also adjust how vulnerable it is.

If the idea of vulnerabilities manifesting for larger organizations that don't exist (at least to the same extent) for smaller ones doesn't make sense to you, think about it this way (crude as the analogy is).

An effective sheriffs department may be able to keep crime rates relatively low in a small town, while a large police force finds themselves unable to cope with the crime rate in a large city. It's too easy for the criminals to do their damage and then escape into the labyrinth the larger city's underworld offers. Or a small country may find it's borders easier to secure than a sprawling but sparsely populate region... with key points (utilities, rail systems, industrial area's) being much easier to disrupt or attack. You get the general idea.

Steps like this are the only way I can think of that allow us to break the paradigm of "what works for a small group works even better for a large group". This has always been the challenge, and the only solution (to me) seems to be to emphasize through the basic design of the game mechanics the inherent drawbacks that can come with being a "large group".

I should also point out that there should (of course) still be significant financial and military perks for being a large group, and holding a lot of territory... but most of those tend to come about as a natural consequence. We certainly don't want to force players to abandon the idea of forming large groups and acquiring large amounts of territory. But logical vulnerabilities also need to be built into the mechanics at a very fundamental level.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#203 - 2013-12-02 21:28:36 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
La Nariz wrote:
This is exactly what I am talking about, its perfectly okay to nerf nullsec and leave it in terrible shambles but, any attempt to bring highsec in line is resisted with huge tantrums.




If nullsec is so bad, why are people paying so much ISK to rent space there?

What are these renters doing out there? Do they rent space, put up a POS, and then it's to the forums to complain about nullsec being nerfed?

Or are they bearing it up just like they would do in highsec, only pay the rent and risk it in nullsec for... what reason?

Would that be more ISK?

Is the goon rental program not going well? Will more goodies mean more profit renting out space? Will space be rented out that is not normally rented out, or will it become possible to raise the rent?




The rental program runs fine, but consider that the entire rental alliance population is a couple of thousand and we are sitting on 100 or so systems, and thats more or less economically necessary for individual renter corp members to make decent isk. ie renters with more time to farm or not, we can't break the same fundamental economic limits that have always affected sov holders the same way. ie I have wound up reserving a system via rent for myself. because that is actually what works.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#204 - 2013-12-02 21:34:33 UTC
xttz wrote:
We're kind of stuck in a catch-22 right now. We do have people making big, sweeping suggestions on what to do with sov and null-sec - some of these ideas are good, others aren't so much. However the troubling issue is that rather than bite the bullet and move forward with them, CCP are absolutely terrified of making any changes beyond little stat tweaks (more factory slots in outposts, woop woop).

I've tried to help break out of this cycle by proposing a package of changes in Digin's thread that instead focuses on one aspect of sovereignty. These changes address many common complaints about sov warfare (making it easier to understand, reducing structure grind) in a way that is small enough to be handled and tested within one expansion cycle. The idea is to modify existing game mechanics in a way that doesn't break everything else connected to it.

Once implemented, CCP are then free to come back and look at other aspects of null-sec in similarly manageable chunks. They can then follow up by overhauling other components, such as:

  • What factors cause sov levels to rise (such as player activity in local, producing items nearby, etc)
  • Income rebalance - how ratting, anomalies, mining, PI and other activities interact with sov.
  • Taxation - how alliances gather income from their territory
  • Upgradability - what improvements can be made by owners of territory to leave their mark on their space
  • Objectives - what reasons do people have to take sov?


There's no reason why sovereignty can't be broken down and focused on as one aspect at a time. We didn't have all ships rebalanced at once, V3 textures weren't all done in one expansion, and hell we didn't even get all Captains Quarters in the same patch.

What CCP need to be doing is to stop putting things off out of fear of change, bite off a chunk of the sov system, and chew on it until they're done. Then take the next bite.

This is pretty much where we are. One of the negative consequences of the Incarna fallout is that CCP has played it safe and essentially packaged together a loosely-linked selection from the 'Thousand Little Things' for their more recent expansions. This was all very well in Crucible when the company was essentially in full crisis mode, there were 8 weeks left to throw together an expansion, and frankly any spaceship content whatsoever would have been an improvement on Incarna. Right now though, it's harder to justify, and the low-hanging-fruit from the Thousand Little Things lists has long been picked.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#205 - 2013-12-02 21:41:28 UTC
Man, I love when a 2nd hand summary of a quick comment becomes the new word from on high Lol
xttz made an excellent post so I'll use a response to it as my clarification:

xttz wrote:
Rainbow Dash wrote:
Everyone wants sov to be revamped, but no one has a good idea how.


Reiisha wrote:
Instead of complaining about it, why not offer solutions that could actually work? CCP is just a stumped about it as you guys and are looking for a proper way to do it.


We're kind of stuck in a catch-22 right now. We do have people making big, sweeping suggestions on what to do with sov and null-sec - some of these ideas are good, others aren't so much. However the troubling issue is that rather than bite the bullet and move forward with them, CCP are absolutely terrified of making any changes beyond little stat tweaks (more factory slots in outposts, woop woop).

I've tried to help break out of this cycle by proposing a package of changes in Digin's thread that instead focuses on one aspect of sovereignty. These changes address many common complaints about sov warfare (making it easier to understand, reducing structure grind) in a way that is small enough to be handled and tested within one expansion cycle. The idea is to modify existing game mechanics in a way that doesn't break everything else connected to it.

Once implemented, CCP are then free to come back and look at other aspects of null-sec in similarly manageable chunks. They can then follow up by overhauling other components, such as:

  • What factors cause sov levels to rise (such as player activity in local, producing items nearby, etc)
  • Income rebalance - how ratting, anomalies, mining, PI and other activities interact with sov.
  • Taxation - how alliances gather income from their territory
  • Upgradability - what improvements can be made by owners of territory to leave their mark on their space
  • Objectives - what reasons do people have to take sov?


There's no reason why sovereignty can't be broken down and focused on as one aspect at a time. We didn't have all ships rebalanced at once, V3 textures weren't all done in one expansion, and hell we didn't even get all Captains Quarters in the same patch.

What CCP need to be doing is to stop putting things off out of fear of change, bite off a chunk of the sov system, and chew on it until they're done. Then take the next bite.


Working on sov in chunks is exactly the plan. The close to exact words I used at Down Under were "Summer won't have everything you're hoping for". What I was trying to convey was exactly the fact that this is not a project we're going to be putting in one giant patch. That's been the plan for quite a while now, and was the plan we were working from when we released Odyssey (you may remember some slight changes to nullsec in that patch Lol). We will keep working in that same way, taking on 0.0 gameplay improvements in layers and iterations.

The chunk we are attacking in Summer 2014 is not the specific mechanics for taking systems. That comes a bit later in the plan. Part of our post-mortem from Dominion was the realization that CCP had looked at sov with too narrow of a focus, leading to a release that caused as many problems as it solved (another part of that post-mortem was "**** HP based objectives").

Summer 2014 will improve some targeted parts of nullsec mechanics (as well as other areas of space) and will get us ever closer to the patch that drops changes to the flashy conquering mechanics that are often mistakenly considered the only "sovereignty rework" that matters.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
NickSuccorso
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#206 - 2013-12-02 21:45:39 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Fun fact, you do understand that N3 hold nearly 50% more regions than the CFC....in fact they hold more between them and their renters than CFC, DTF, Stainwagon and CVA combined.....literally half of the SOV regions in the game.

...but yeah they are going to get stomped, however, I wouldn't put money on a CFC homogeny, as usual there will be a power vacuum and the perhaps someone else can form up and fight for a new region. Everything moves around and the corps from the defeated alliance(s) will either reform or megre with others.


....and **** grinding 18 regions, hell no.


I think we all remember once upon a time when null sec was a series of regional conflicts. The days when wars were fought between neighbors. The introduction of jump bridges and titan bridges changed that forever. There will be total and absolute homogeny in the CFC. There will not be any new players entering the null sec game.

To demonstrate my point. We are a medium sized alliance that could easily field enough capitals to take a region from most null locals. In my flying around null in recent months, I noticed the Period Basis didn't have a soul in it. It is literally empty! So how many siege cycles do my dreads stay alive if there isn't a hostile within 50 jumps?

I am guessing my last dread would be a space can by the sixth seige cycle. They would be killed by a force of pilots that assembled on the other side of Eve and used the powers of "stupid" and "bullshit" to cover the length of the universe in minutes.

It seems childish for anyone to imagine any other outcome. The only lack of homogeny within the CFC will be Goons booting members one at a time as they run out of targets to shoot.

And I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you will be grinding all 18 regions. Go ahead and say no. All your space will be held by the Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere before you even know what happened.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#207 - 2013-12-02 22:01:33 UTC
NickSuccorso wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Fun fact, you do understand that N3 hold nearly 50% more regions than the CFC....in fact they hold more between them and their renters than CFC, DTF, Stainwagon and CVA combined.....literally half of the SOV regions in the game.

...but yeah they are going to get stomped, however, I wouldn't put money on a CFC homogeny, as usual there will be a power vacuum and the perhaps someone else can form up and fight for a new region. Everything moves around and the corps from the defeated alliance(s) will either reform or megre with others.


....and **** grinding 18 regions, hell no.


I think we all remember once upon a time when null sec was a series of regional conflicts. The days when wars were fought between neighbors. The introduction of jump bridges and titan bridges changed that forever. There will be total and absolute homogeny in the CFC. There will not be any new players entering the null sec game.

To demonstrate my point. We are a medium sized alliance that could easily field enough capitals to take a region from most null locals. In my flying around null in recent months, I noticed the Period Basis didn't have a soul in it. It is literally empty! So how many siege cycles do my dreads stay alive if there isn't a hostile within 50 jumps?

I am guessing my last dread would be a space can by the sixth seige cycle. They would be killed by a force of pilots that assembled on the other side of Eve and used the powers of "stupid" and "bullshit" to cover the length of the universe in minutes.

It seems childish for anyone to imagine any other outcome. The only lack of homogeny within the CFC will be Goons booting members one at a time as they run out of targets to shoot.

And I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you will be grinding all 18 regions. Go ahead and say no. All your space will be held by the Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere before you even know what happened.


Guess the SRF fund is covered then.

...holy buttmad.
Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#208 - 2013-12-02 22:07:21 UTC
A lot of people cried end of times when BoB was "about to conquer all of space".

Then something small and insignificant happened along the path, punched BoB in the balls and took the crown. Even assuming CFC took all of space, blued all the rusrus, became kings of all space, landlords of a thousand renters something tells me this situation wouldn't last forever.

I'm glad it's not being done in one sweeping change though - gives time to fix issues that are discovered after features dependent on the broken one are shipped.

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#209 - 2013-12-02 22:39:08 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:

if you want some stats to tweak for summer: the invention upgrade for a caldari station should give bonuses to reverse engineering jobs and slots

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#210 - 2013-12-02 22:53:48 UTC
NickSuccorso wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Fun fact, you do understand that N3 hold nearly 50% more regions than the CFC....in fact they hold more between them and their renters than CFC, DTF, Stainwagon and CVA combined.....literally half of the SOV regions in the game.

...but yeah they are going to get stomped, however, I wouldn't put money on a CFC homogeny, as usual there will be a power vacuum and the perhaps someone else can form up and fight for a new region. Everything moves around and the corps from the defeated alliance(s) will either reform or megre with others.


....and **** grinding 18 regions, hell no.


I think we all remember once upon a time when null sec was a series of regional conflicts. The days when wars were fought between neighbors. The introduction of jump bridges and titan bridges changed that forever. There will be total and absolute homogeny in the CFC. There will not be any new players entering the null sec game.

To demonstrate my point. We are a medium sized alliance that could easily field enough capitals to take a region from most null locals. In my flying around null in recent months, I noticed the Period Basis didn't have a soul in it. It is literally empty! So how many siege cycles do my dreads stay alive if there isn't a hostile within 50 jumps?

I am guessing my last dread would be a space can by the sixth seige cycle. They would be killed by a force of pilots that assembled on the other side of Eve and used the powers of "stupid" and "bullshit" to cover the length of the universe in minutes.

It seems childish for anyone to imagine any other outcome. The only lack of homogeny within the CFC will be Goons booting members one at a time as they run out of targets to shoot.

And I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you will be grinding all 18 regions. Go ahead and say no. All your space will be held by the Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere before you even know what happened.

fyi

why would we contest the initial reinforcement of the systems in question

when we can just wait for the RF timers to exit

the only way we'd be able to form up in time to contest the initial rf timer is if we had a spy telling us when your op was

and even then we could take our sweet damn time getting down there and if we didn't have titan bridges or jump bridges it'd be no big deal
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#211 - 2013-12-02 22:59:17 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
NickSuccorso wrote:
Onictus wrote:
Fun fact, you do understand that N3 hold nearly 50% more regions than the CFC....in fact they hold more between them and their renters than CFC, DTF, Stainwagon and CVA combined.....literally half of the SOV regions in the game.

...but yeah they are going to get stomped, however, I wouldn't put money on a CFC homogeny, as usual there will be a power vacuum and the perhaps someone else can form up and fight for a new region. Everything moves around and the corps from the defeated alliance(s) will either reform or megre with others.


....and **** grinding 18 regions, hell no.


I think we all remember once upon a time when null sec was a series of regional conflicts. The days when wars were fought between neighbors. The introduction of jump bridges and titan bridges changed that forever. There will be total and absolute homogeny in the CFC. There will not be any new players entering the null sec game.

To demonstrate my point. We are a medium sized alliance that could easily field enough capitals to take a region from most null locals. In my flying around null in recent months, I noticed the Period Basis didn't have a soul in it. It is literally empty! So how many siege cycles do my dreads stay alive if there isn't a hostile within 50 jumps?

I am guessing my last dread would be a space can by the sixth seige cycle. They would be killed by a force of pilots that assembled on the other side of Eve and used the powers of "stupid" and "bullshit" to cover the length of the universe in minutes.

It seems childish for anyone to imagine any other outcome. The only lack of homogeny within the CFC will be Goons booting members one at a time as they run out of targets to shoot.

And I hate to be the one to tell you this, but you will be grinding all 18 regions. Go ahead and say no. All your space will be held by the Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere before you even know what happened.


Your whole argument is flawed as Period Basis is very much "not empty" anymore, sorry. You sound interested in living there, though - should I have one of my rental management team associates contact you? P

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#212 - 2013-12-02 23:03:18 UTC
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Period_Basis#jumps24
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Period_Basis#npc24

guys period basis is EMPTY look at all those zer... wait no there is a lot of **** going on nevermind
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#213 - 2013-12-02 23:20:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Scatim Helicon
NickSuccorso wrote:
I think we all remember once upon a time when null sec was a series of regional conflicts. The days when wars were fought between neighbors.

That's odd, because the historical sov maps that still exist show that nullsec has been mostly split between a small handful of large multi-region alliances/coalitions, interspersed with the occasional minor power or two, pretty much constantly since 2003. Whether it was Stain Alliance, Xetic, The Five, Redswarm Federation, the Greater BoB Community or the Drone Russians, the names change but the pattern has remained.

Random example: Look at dem fuggen NAPfests

Unless of course you meant 'once upon a time' in the same context as a parent would use to introduce a fairy tale to their child.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#214 - 2013-12-02 23:43:04 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
NickSuccorso wrote:
I think we all remember once upon a time when null sec was a series of regional conflicts. The days when wars were fought between neighbors.

That's odd, because the historical sov maps that still exist show that nullsec has been mostly split between a small handful of large multi-region alliances/coalitions, interspersed with the occasional minor power or two, pretty much constantly since 2003. Whether it was Stain Alliance, Xetic, The Five, Redswarm Federation, the Greater BoB Community or the Drone Russians, the names change but the pattern has remained.

Random example: Look at dem fuggen NAPfests

Unless of course you meant 'once upon a time' in the same context as a parent would use to introduce a fairy tale to their child.


wow, you have no clue what you're talking about
you do know some of us actually played this game then, right?

"honestly guys, it's always been like this"

you're either part of the problem or part of the solution.
take a stab at which one you might be. Roll

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#215 - 2013-12-02 23:44:24 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
Scatim Helicon wrote:
NickSuccorso wrote:
I think we all remember once upon a time when null sec was a series of regional conflicts. The days when wars were fought between neighbors.

That's odd, because the historical sov maps that still exist show that nullsec has been mostly split between a small handful of large multi-region alliances/coalitions, interspersed with the occasional minor power or two, pretty much constantly since 2003. Whether it was Stain Alliance, Xetic, The Five, Redswarm Federation, the Greater BoB Community or the Drone Russians, the names change but the pattern has remained.

Random example: Look at dem fuggen NAPfests

Unless of course you meant 'once upon a time' in the same context as a parent would use to introduce a fairy tale to their child.


wow, you have no clue what you're talking about
you do know some of us actually played this game then, right?

"honestly guys, it's always been like this"

you're either part of the problem or part of the solution.
take a stab at which one you might be. Roll


I'd love to believe you played then but you're hiding behind a three day old alt so I don't really have any evidence.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#216 - 2013-12-02 23:46:18 UTC
The problem is, the people that own 0.0 really aren't interesting in fixing it .

Your CSM members aren't interested in fixing it.

They just want to tailor it to suit themselves.

They either don't realize they are themselves are standing examples of just how terribly stale 0.0 is or they know and will fight tooth and nail to make sure the status quo never changes regarding their own hold on power.

I lived in 0.0 from late 2003 until 2007. The early years benefited from a natural adolescence in the game but we always saw the writing on the wall.

Very very early on a fight could be determined by sheer numbers, either in respects to your opponent or in respects to the node stability....

However real problems came into play when CCP made it ever more easy to sizes to scale larger, moving easier... many many things have been added to this game with little thought before or after as to what it would really do long-term to the game.

The game focused on facilitating what was becoming the greatest threat to sustainability... massive blobs. And not just in-gang and on-grid.

To paraphrase Jeff Goldblum's character in JP, CCP was always wondering if it could and never stopped to wonder if it should.

Should one person, or organization be able to control so much of anything? Should there be a point of diminishing returns or exponential increase in costs?
Should one person be able to control an entire network of POS?
Is a given mechanic going to put a snuff on actual player versus player game play? (as in: blue list EVERYTHIGN!!!)

I could tell you how to fix it,

about how to break up the blob

about how to severely limit corp, alliance and blue list sizes

about how to change ownership scheme so that corps and allies might be incentivized into turning on each other
(pvp? whats that? we're all going to stay blue because there is NO REASON NOT TO)

about how to remove the "smallness" of Eve so that Jita doesn't seem 2 jumps away from the deepest 0.0
(goodbye jump freighter, hello covert freighter. goodbye jump bridge, hello... well, hello nothing. just goodbye jump bridge)

about how to fix the logistical issues with systems and stations that make living sustainably in a constellation without needing supply lines to high sec impossible
(hey, let's all 400 of us live in this station with a handful of building and research slots! what could go wrong?)

about how adding inter-regional market tools....

you get the point

but you'd just get the regular **** posters from the same old stale alliances telling you how it just wouldn't work

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#217 - 2013-12-02 23:46:58 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
Scatim Helicon wrote:
That's odd, because the historical sov maps that still exist show that nullsec has been mostly split between a small handful of large multi-region alliances/coalitions, interspersed with the occasional minor power or two, pretty much constantly since 2003. Whether it was Stain Alliance, Xetic, The Five, Redswarm Federation, the Greater BoB Community or the Drone Russians, the names change but the pattern has remained.

Random example: Look at dem fuggen NAPfests

Unless of course you meant 'once upon a time' in the same context as a parent would use to introduce a fairy tale to their child.


wow, you have no clue what you're talking about
you do know some of us actually played this game then, right?

"honestly guys, it's always been like this"

you're either part of the problem or part of the solution.
take a stab at which one you might be. Roll

Tell me more about the Good Old Days, 3 day old NPC corp character :allears:

The historical maps with the gigantic coalitions and NAPs stretching across the regions are available on the internet for the whole world to see but feel free to claim that they never existed.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#218 - 2013-12-02 23:48:01 UTC
mynnna wrote:

I'd love to believe you played then but you're hiding behind a three day old alt so I don't really have any evidence.


You learn to troll before or after you joined the CSM?

I came to discuss the topic, what did you come here to do?

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#219 - 2013-12-02 23:48:03 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:

but you'd just get the regular **** posters from the same old stale alliances telling you how it just wouldn't work

if not even you believe your idea could stand up to even slight scrutiny why should anyone else

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#220 - 2013-12-02 23:50:33 UTC
Maybe I could pay $15 to have goonswarm under my name

maybe then I'd know what I was talking about

you guys should pile in more.

Don't look now, the thread just became a metaphor for what is wrong with 0.0

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."