Player Features and Ideas Discussion

This post is not about MJDs, im fan of these modes and i love to see medium ones added. Reason why Im finally writting this, is that while CCP is doing all of this nice rebalancing there doesn't seem to be any focus on fixing thing that is broken the most...SOV mechanics.

After looking at this http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/systems it is kinda hard to not notice that there is most likely something wrong. There are more than 25k characters in renting alliances...people which will rather pay billions of isk just so they dont need to join CTAs and boring structure shoots. Whole null sec sov consists of two mega coalitions and couple of alliances that consider themselfs important and live in regions no1 gives a sh*t about. Even if we skip facts like corruption, RMT and similiar **** there is still small chance that these two coalitions would go into a war...simply because of the ammount of sov grinding and Tid. Now Im not posting this because my alliance spent last month by fighting and avoiding cfc blobs...sov mechanics have been bothering me long time before this, back in the days when i was part of the blobs. Im posting this because I believe that in their current state Sov mechanics are making part of eve die

Okey enough typing, solutions? Here are just 2 of which i was thinking about.

1. First I was thinking about putting cap on how many systems alliance can hold(100 for instance)

-- In thoery this would make maintaining big empires harder. You would need more people responsible, more alliances. This will mean more betraying, more drama, more stuff hapenning. Im not exactly fan of this method since it's kinda not "eveish"... putting caps on things.



2. Second option, which was already mentioned many times is to make sov grinding easier. Right now you need 5 timers to take one station system...like seeriously? You can even set your timers for exact time. they have millions of HP. Not to mention SBUs stuff that needs to be done around it. This is waaaaay too much.

In points
Alliance shouldn't need so many attempts to save a system.
Uncessary, too much structure shooting.
Medium sized entities have no chance of gaining sov.

-- Nerfing this, would make big organizations more vulnarable to attacks of smaller groups.
-- It would force you to have as much space as you can defend.
-- Sov would change hands more often.
-- If larger coalition is attacked on more fronts it would be forced to leave some force behind. Generating more fights with less pilots in it and more fun.

Well these are some of my recent thoughts on the stuff. I think it should be one of the priorities for CCP to fix over upcoming expansion. Sov warfare is so boring these days that it often discourages people from it. I hope some of these days ideas will be atleast a bit helpful....please feel free to share your thoughts as well
o7

If that will make you happy...sure

If you have facts relating to RMT I suggest you file a support ticket and share with CCP.

And what would that gain?
CCP putting out some press release about how they grabbed x amount of ISK from some group or individuals whose imaginary names, not real life names, are protected for "privacy concerns"?

How does ANY character, corp., or alliance name warrant ANY privacy protection, especially since the EULA clearly spells out that CCP owns all IP, chars, and char assets inside Eve?

If CCP started outing individuals and corps caught RMT'ing, then they would have a small smidgen of credibility.
Until then, my views, or anyone else's, about RMT have as much weight as CCP's views do.

Bottom line, CCP will continue to protect the operations of the cartels, because they either are terrified of them, or are all null sec cartel sympathizers, and sov mechanics won't change substantially. At least, not until a big chunk of the sub base has quit. Ironically, by then, the only large group left will be said null sec cartels.

Maybe exponential cost of sovereignty costs per system... Much like the wardec system it might reduce but not fix your problem. Probably an old idea as it is too simple so I apologize to everyone that said this before.

Well, I do have an idea or two how sov could be reworked. More about it in my signature.

You'll still be here rearranging the deck chairs, though. I like that about you.