These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Jita Park Speakers Corner

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Jump Bridges and Titan Bridges to alliance use only.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Phun Phan
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2014-02-20 20:43:00 UTC
I have been wondering for quite long time why not to make JB's and titan bridges alliance use only?
The game is allready suffering because of the current way to play it is to get more and more players to fight on eatch side.
But why not make it harder to gather those large groups together, whitch might in the make the engagements smaler thusd making it more fun for everyone.

The changes i have in mind would be as followed:
Limit alliance size to 2.5k-5k players
Make JB's alliance use only
Make titan bridges alliance use only

People could still have theyr huge collection of blues, but it would attleast make it a bit harder to move the masses around, whitch might lead to smaler (just 500k-1k) engagements that would be more enjoyable for everyone.

I know its not perfect solution, but i see virtually no bad sides about it, and it might just make the game more enjoyable.
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2014-02-20 21:03:15 UTC
So what you are saying is to experience that portion of the game you must join an alliance? No more fun Black Ops roams for small gangs of friends?

In cutting the population of those who can you start to make something more exclusive and the rich get richer, the poor left dangling in the wind

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Phun Phan
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2014-02-20 21:05:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Phun Phan
Mike Azariah wrote:
So what you are saying is to experience that portion of the game you must join an alliance? No more fun Black Ops roams for small gangs of friends?

In cutting the population of those who can you start to make something more exclusive and the rich get richer, the poor left dangling in the wind

m


No cause there was 0 mention of touching black ops bridges.
Small entities could still enjoy all the Blops fun they can get theyr hands on, it just would make it harder for big coalitions to move massive amounts of players around.
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2014-02-20 21:32:44 UTC
Phun Phan wrote:
Small entities could still enjoy all the Blops fun they can get theyr hands on, it just would make it harder for big coalitions to move massive amounts of players around.


You replaced "harder" with "slightly more irritating", assuming they don't just consolidate into one large alliance to instantly nullify this stupid, stupid idea.

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
Phun Phan
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2014-02-20 21:36:14 UTC
Snow Axe wrote:
Phun Phan wrote:
Small entities could still enjoy all the Blops fun they can get theyr hands on, it just would make it harder for big coalitions to move massive amounts of players around.


You replaced "harder" with "slightly more irritating", assuming they don't just consolidate into one large alliance to instantly nullify this stupid, stupid idea.


If you read the plan there was a planned hard cap on alliance size too, tho im still bit on fence about it.

I would really like to know why is the idea so stupid, since i really dont see allmost any downsides to it.
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#6 - 2014-02-21 08:49:02 UTC
Phun Phan wrote:

The changes i have in mind would be as followed:
Limit alliance size to 2.5k-5k players
Make JB's alliance use only
Make titan bridges alliance use only


There is no point for the ally limit, but i like lmiting those bridging options only to ally memebrs.

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
corebloodbrothers
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#7 - 2014-02-21 12:04:52 UTC
In order to make people act different in a game, punishing or limiting hardy ever works.

Just for argumente sake:

I put all my pvp toons in 1 allaince. 2500 is lot of fleets, all mining ,cyno, production , and other toons in secondary alliances.
For travel torugh the region we put up a few extra bridges. Titans arent a issue, we have tons, so we brdige and form a fleet.

If u want to nerve something, people will find a way around it to do what they like best. I asume u re looking at power projection as a issue for null sec, but what if people like to be in a30k man blue donut. If thats what atracts them? Fighting with thousands lag free, now thtas a dream to work towards too.

Tons of solutions for power projection, cooling down on caps aftehr a jump, or drcreaed ehp aftehr more then 1, 15% decrease in ehp per jump.

So many options, but first u got to identify the issue u like to adress, and assure its actually a issue for eve as a whole and not a personal stand or urge to nerve something u find anyoing.
Phun Phan
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#8 - 2014-02-21 12:33:12 UTC
corebloodbrothers wrote:
In order to make people act different in a game, punishing or limiting hardy ever works.


Are you saying, nerfing AEO DD or Tracking nerfs did not change how Titans have been used in battle?

I believe allmost everyone wants to have massive fights in this game, but at the current state it is too easy to get so many people in one place the game gets virtually unplayable. So i definately think there should be some measures taken to make it attleast a little bit harder to get that many players in one place. People tend to forget that fights of 500-1k players are allready really massive, still really playable so why not try to push the battles to be just a little bit smaler.

There has been loads of nerfs and buffs to different tactics and features to the game, but i personally cant remember when was the last time blobs got nefd. I thik thease small changes would help smaler entityes, while making it just a little bit more difficult for larger ones.
Snow Axe
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2014-02-21 14:26:53 UTC
Phun Phan wrote:
If you read the plan there was a planned hard cap on alliance size too, tho im still bit on fence about it.

I would really like to know why is the idea so stupid, since i really dont see allmost any downsides to it.


Even if a large alliance doesn't consolidate, all you've really done is annoy them. They've got the titans already in place to work around it, plus the capital resources to produce more if needed. Smaller groups, on the other hand, ones that don't have an X year advantage in building up their Titan fleets, they're the ones going to be hurt by this, since they'll either be forced to consolidate (which sucks and removes a lot of potential individuality from the game), or if your cap is too small for them, be forced to acquire that many more titans. Makes the barrier for even hoping to gain something that much higher, all the while only annoying larger blocs.

It also ignores the actual issues with force projection - namely that the ranges are high, the fuel costs aren't all that high, and the entire game can be transversed in minutes (Dek to Delve Trail of Tears notwithstanding). This doesn't actually alter that fact, it just adds an organizational aspect that large powers already have the resources to work around easily.

tl;dr it sucks because it doesn't actually change things, it just annoys people

"Look any reason why you need to talk like that? I have now reported you. I dont need to listen to your bad tone. If you cant have a grown up conversation then leave the thread["
corebloodbrothers
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#10 - 2014-02-21 14:56:01 UTC
Phun Phan wrote:
corebloodbrothers wrote:
In order to make people act different in a game, punishing or limiting hardy ever works.


Are you saying, nerfing AEO DD or Tracking nerfs did not change how Titans have been used in battle?

I believe allmost everyone wants to have massive fights in this game, but at the current state it is too easy to get so many people in one place the game gets virtually unplayable. So i definately think there should be some measures taken to make it attleast a little bit harder to get that many players in one place. People tend to forget that fights of 500-1k players are allready really massive, still really playable so why not try to push the battles to be just a little bit smaler.

There has been loads of nerfs and buffs to different tactics and features to the game, but i personally cant remember when was the last time blobs got nefd. I thik thease small changes would help smaler entityes, while making it just a little bit more difficult for larger ones.



Yes cause they moved to wrecking ball, sentry asigning and now that gets nerved. U asked for feed back on your idea, and i explained in full how poeple will mitigate. Blue donuts will organise in skill cap by allance, so for example goons fall into cqp allaince, bs allaince and so on. Each with their own titan.

U want smaller fights, smaller allainces , make it atractive to be in one, liek i said , tons of other ideas, first make sure u nail the thung u want to fix, is it numbers, is it how caps move across eve quick? I for one think that if u field 4000 people u have a bigger change then the enemy if he field 1k . Widen the sandbox instead of nerving it might be more fun, i am no big block, i live in provi and any of those blue donuts can kick our ass, its life
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#11 - 2014-02-21 15:14:32 UTC
It has been demonstrated repeatedly that making a winning strategy more annoying will only make players more annoyed as they do it.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
Angry Mustache
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2014-02-22 21:31:13 UTC
It might surprise you, but titans are not rare assets anymore. Never mind that alliances like Pandemic Legion have a hundred of them, but even "poor/scrub" in your eyes can have over a dozen titans, more than enough for bridging use.

Any arbitrary mechanics to cap alliance size/membership can be easily worked around, for example, in the case of your proposal.

-Alliance sends a decree that PvP mains are to consolidate in one corp/alliance, Logistics alts, scout alts, and ratting/PvE/Industry /Trading alts remain in own corps.

-that main PvP corp is then consolidated across the coalition into one alliance, for example, FA pilots would put their PvP mains in a corp called "Fatal Ascension GruntS", then that corp would be let into Goonswarm Federation so that they can make use of all Jump Bridges and Titans.

-GSF would organize a space trade, and have allies hand over more strategic Jump Bridge/Staging systems over to GSF proper in exchange for other systems or rental isk. This ensures all combat pilots can use all important Jump Bridges.

In essence, all your proposed change would do is cause even greater integration across coalitions to circumvent these mechanics, and further loss of independence to alliances.

An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#13 - 2014-02-22 23:21:26 UTC
kaboom

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal
El Space Mariachi
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#14 - 2014-02-23 00:30:35 UTC
dumb arbitrary limits on things like alliance size are not the way to counter force projection and blobbing

gay gamers for jesus