These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Changes to SOV , Power Projection & Nullsec Stagnation

First post First post First post
Author
Elusive Panda
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#61 - 2014-07-04 15:53:14 UTC
GodsWork wrote:
Hey mate look at this see what you think. This will not only solve the sov problem but also eventually disolve mega alliances or coalitions


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=356422&find=unread



I really don't think putting rules on the size of alliances/corp will solve anything, these entities exist outside the game, the only thing this will create is a multiplication of assets holding "alt" alliances controlled by the same people.
Gospadin
Bastard Children of Poinen
#62 - 2014-07-04 18:35:11 UTC
Power projection is an issue for sure, and definitely something they should think about, however, to me the real problem is the lack of any real link between how many players use an area, and the ease/difficulty of defending it.

What if jumps in excess of 2LY could only be done in the pilot's own SOV, and there is a mass limit on non-SOV bridges? If you want to deploy outside your own SOV you can, it just takes extra logistics effort. This would mean assistance by coalition partners outside the SOV-holding alliance would be more difficult.

Similar to how wormholes have mass limits, I also think it'd help if there was a distance:mass ratio on bridging and/or jumping, along with a game-imposed rate throttle. Maybe ships transit a jump to a specific cyno at a rate of one per 2 seconds or something, so it takes 10 minutes for a full fleet to land. More cynos, more chance for disruption, more midpoints to defend/attack, etc.

It might also be interesting to re-think ammo sizing. To me, a battle that lasts 20 hours (granted, only 2 hours of in-game time) should require some amount of logistics, and the disruption of the logistics should be able to swing the outcome. Maybe you make a remote rep booster charge of some kind that's relatively small and cheap, but that can run out eventually.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#63 - 2014-07-04 21:41:18 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Anthar Thebess wrote:
1. Add new pockets of npc space having stations / create new gate connections that each SOV region have connection to NPC space

This isn't a half bad idea though it'd definitely need more NPC space pockets to make it work. There are a lot of areas in eve that are incredibly isolated like that. Gate connections like you're talking about though, to NPC space or even back to lowsec, could be interesting. One thing they'd do for residents in deep nullsec is open up new options for logistics. In manny's scenario any sort of commerce to and from empire, if you live in deep null like that, is either "get ****ed", "blue up everyone closer to empire than you and still have to slog freighters 30+ jumps", or "hope you can find convenient wormholes." Those gate connections would offer a fourth option - a rapid transitway that'd take you right to your doorstep, or at least a lot closer... but that very same thing makes them predictable routes and thus dangerous to use.

GodsWork wrote:
Hey mate look at this see what you think. This will not only solve the sov problem but also eventually disolve mega alliances or coalitions


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=356422&find=unread


The fact that you have to be in a massive coalition now doesn't mean that the opposite is optimal, ideal or desirable. If sov nullsec is meant as a place to carve out and build your own nation then, well, nations can be large or small and the mechanics should recognize and support this.

Elusive Panda wrote:
Maybe we could take a look at how WH corp lives and the mechanics in which they live in? I'm not saying turn all space to WH mechanics, but maybe we can learn something about it, there is no "supreme overlord" of WH space, everything happens on a much smaller scale. These corp do not have access to a JF and yet, they still manage to exist, don't they?

What they do have are usually short connections back to Empire, a population constrained by mechanics (limiting how much logistics has to happen in the first place) and the ability to influence if not outright control the ability to get into their system at all. And if player build stargates weren't already meant, from what's been said, to go to new space, maybe you'd have an idea. Anthar's suggestion would have a similar effect, though.

Speedkermit Damo wrote:

The "little guy" that everyone keeps referring to has access to NPC nullsec. The problem is that there's not a lot of npc null, not enough anyway and what there is has become quite crowded. Which is why I advocate expanding NPC nullsec space at the expense of sov-nullsec.

If CCP wants more players in nullsec, then we need more NPC nullsec space.


The problem with NPC nullsec is that it's increasingly becoming "worse lowsec but with bubbles and bombs". More of it could be interesting (see first quote in the chain) but it could do with some love as well.



e: My reaction to Manny's set of suggestions the other day was about as vitriolically over the top as I feel his power projection changes are. Ugh The real problem I've got with it isn't so much what I feel are the bad ideas (NPC trader, hubs hackable in the way he describes, over the top projection nerf) nor the good ones (I like the notion of tying the other indices into sov more though not quite so much in the way he's describing) but in what it fails to really address or even apparently think about. Some of it got touched on above - ****ing over people living in deep null with no alternatives, no thought to upsides of living there. Some just aren't touched on at all - what's the carrying capacity of a system for player income, how does that as well as value of alliance income sources drive the meta (hint: extensively, at least in my opinion), is production based entirely on locally sourced materials really that feasible (up for debate), etc. So I guess you could summarize that all as "some good, some bad, but mostly just feels half assed."

To credit, though, it's spawned some decent discussion.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#64 - 2014-07-04 23:15:42 UTC
So two points there. First, the fact that you don't care about industry doesn't mean that it's not something that a lot of other players do care about. And second, it's rather intimately tied to some of the points I was making about 'things being overlooked' with regards to (for example) locally based industry. So, it might be a couple degrees removed, but the industry revamp (in my mind, at least) is part of a step towards overhauling nullsec and sov. ;P

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#65 - 2014-07-05 01:52:25 UTC
Freighters were added with Cold War (along with Dreadnoughts). That brings them in on June 29th 2005.

Carriers came with Red Moon Rising in December of 2005. Also Supers and Titans although the first Titan was not built until until September of 2006.

The Rorqual was introduced in in the Revelations II midpoint release around August/September of 2007.

Jump freighters came in Trinity which was December of 2007.

This dev blog from Trinity 1.1 comments on cargo expanded dreadnoughts as a cargo transport.

Just to help out with the historic accuracy of rose tinted glasses.

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#66 - 2014-07-05 02:19:27 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
mynnna wrote:




e: My reaction to Manny's set of suggestions the other day was about as vitriolically over the top as I feel his power projection changes are. Ugh The real problem I've got with it isn't so much what I feel are the bad ideas (NPC trader, hubs hackable in the way he describes, over the top projection nerf) nor the good ones (I like the notion of tying the other indices into sov more though not quite so much in the way he's describing) but in what it fails to really address or even apparently think about. Some of it got touched on above - ****ing over people living in deep null with no alternatives, no thought to upsides of living there. Some just aren't touched on at all - what's the carrying capacity of a system for player income, how does that as well as value of alliance income sources drive the meta (hint: extensively, at least in my opinion), is production based entirely on locally sourced materials really that feasible (up for debate), etc. So I guess you could summarize that all as "some good, some bad, but mostly just feels half assed."

To credit, though, it's spawned some decent discussion.



Hi hello let me tell you about Eve online. Its a sandbox game with a incredibly steep learning curve. Everything in Eve is hard but then again if you wanted easy there are plethora of choices to choose from ( wow , wildstar , old republic etc etc etc etc etc infinite) . If you are here in Eve online its because you respect a challenge. You think dedicating thousands of hours of your existence as human to making spreadsheets , erecting pixel structures then spending months on end of your free time to destroy others. Perhaps you travel to one of the most remote countries on the planet or are a politician representing other players spending inordinate amounts of time on this game. It's pretty clear that by playing Eve Online you like a challenge. If you live in nullsec you are dependant on your friends to help you survive there. Therefore I would deduce you probably like the idea of teamplay.


Hmmm Teamplay and challenging.


So I am not sure how balancing nullsec industry and changing things so people aren't reliant on empire to survive is so hard. I mean if they do need to go to empire there are these things called wormholes . I have seen alliances be damn near self sufficient before like ASCN and Prime Orbital in the very bottom of nullsec. Perhaps you change ores they give more trit or whatever you need to balance it out better.


CCP has had this expansion on the books for ever called Colonization. Its the crap they have been sperging about for the last year thats coming. Well Colonization has been a thing in the backlog for many many years. I heard about it back in 07. Anyway Colonization is space cutoff from the rest of the game that you then go out and build gates and stations and pretty much everything. I mean so thats where CCP is headed anyway. So why can't nullsec become self-reliant.


I tell you what you or anyone give me some *) talk on how we fix power projection *) and fix sov so its more inclusive as in ( Its not the major blocks holding 90% of it) then. *)



*) This where a intervention needs to happen and say "Hey I know you are hooked on being able to jingle up a jumpfreighter and have anything you want from Jita in 30 minutes or less and unlimited power projection on top of it,. However you are killing yourself its time to stop". Things don't have to get hard they just need to be different because as innocent as it is to be able to go get what you need when you need it scaling is bad because groups of players abuse that to such a point that it is sucking the life out of nullsec. So much that you are either with party A or party B or you are a renter.

*) = *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#67 - 2014-07-05 02:41:42 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
I am watching this thread with great interest and am very happy to see the discussion it's spawning.

It's very interesting to compare the ideas being discussed here with concepts we're discussing internally.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#68 - 2014-07-05 03:36:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Athena
"Projecting power" requires having three assets in position:
1) The ships
2) The pilots
3) The players

Lets see how the players would respond if we start limiting the ability to move any of these assets.

If we nerf moving ships, by making bridging or jumping harder, then large alliances will preposition ships about their territory. This will require more ships, which means the average ship size will take a down tick. Many may think this is a move in the right direction; having supercarriers instead of Titans, carriers in place of supers, etc. But when null was battlecruiser blobs, people still said it was a problem that people blobbed.

Power would now be projected by players using jump clones to access their ships at the remote location.

Result: We still have huge blobs. We still have the ability for large alliances to project power over vast distances.

So we got to make it harder for the pilots to be projected by nerfing jump clones. But if we do that, players will get themselves into position by logging into a character that has been prepositioned.

So to stop power projection we need to:
1) Stop the ability for ships to be moved rapidly by getting rid of bridges and jump drives,
2) Stop the ability for pilots to be moved rapidly by getting rid of jump clones,
3) Stop the ability for players to be moved rapidly by limiting all players to one character and one account.

Anything less, and power can still be projected. Maybe with a little less convenience than now, but still quite effectively.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Arronicus
United Caldari Navy
United Caldari Space Command.
#69 - 2014-07-05 04:28:59 UTC
Elusive Panda wrote:
GodsWork wrote:
Hey mate look at this see what you think. This will not only solve the sov problem but also eventually disolve mega alliances or coalitions


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=356422&find=unread



I really don't think putting rules on the size of alliances/corp will solve anything, these entities exist outside the game, the only thing this will create is a multiplication of assets holding "alt" alliances controlled by the same people.



GodsWork is pretty thoroughly convinced that the large alliances like PL/BOT, Gewns/PRBLD, and NC./NA. would rather split apart and give up most of their sov, than to use alts to create a pile of compartment alliances, and hold just as much sov as before, but with new added bonuses to counterbalance the increased effort.
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#70 - 2014-07-05 04:30:19 UTC
Yeah you can't put arbitrary limits on social paradigms and not expect players to game it.

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

Mashka Cybertrona
Imperial Dawn.
#71 - 2014-07-05 05:17:07 UTC
So it boils back down to variables, throw us some dam curve balls CCP!

How about cosmic storms that sometimes accelerate a jump drives range putting them randomly on the other side of the map (or even in unknown space!), make electrical interference screw up your ability to plot a jump correctly so you land in random areas of space, even fail to jump occasionally so you end up with 2-3 capitals that are stranded on the field.

Lets have Star gates malfunction from time to time and leave it up to the players to fix them. Have them fluctuate in destination as a glitch sometimes making travel easier other times making it harder. Turn jump bridges into more reliable gates, sepeate them from POS and have them as an anchorable structure that can be hacked to gain access, how about hacking a jumpbridge to land pilots that jump through it at a different destination? used for a dirty trap or a cunning get away plan.

What about restricting what is visible to you in a system to your ships scanner? change certain ships default scan ranges based on class, suddenly scanning/max scanner range ships become more useful to fleet movement (via fleet warp mechanics), lets get rid of local chat as a broken intel tool in favor of the for-mentioned. Build up more specialist roles within fleets so 1 person can't just login 12 accounts and do it all (like most large scale FC these days).

How about adding bigger critical strike bonuses so you randomly get that sweet shot that actually "wrecks" and enemy vessel? or have ships malfunction so sometimes the MWD will not shutdown, the guns jam, the drones turn on each other, the smartbomb hits your hull, reps and remote reps overload shield (or armor counterparts respectively) causing them to shut down for a cycle due to an error.

Throw some more tactical choices our way so ships are not all one cookie cutter fitting and doesn't have a counter cookie cutter fitting. Hell lets do something crazy like throw out the idea of racial guns that are slowly becoming practically the same weapon systems and give turret ships a generic turret bonus and switch it up with the weapon systems, make laser beams actual beams that slowly increase in damage over time so hitting larger/tankier ships makes them the choice weapon but against fast hard hitting ships less desirable, Artillery actually artillery hitting way out there but having 0 close range ability.

Lets have dreads that can shoot broadcasted targets from across a system, like an actual dread would. Lets enable carriers/supers to have multiple pilots that can take control and warp fighter wings around system.

Why not have deployable Titans which can become a kind of private defended star gate, connect two up to establish a link to a warzone from your deployment zone that can extend their shields similar to a POS with the same reinforcement mechanics in place.

Why not allow super-capitals to refuel themselves on energy harvested from stars? make it a finite resources so multiple super-capitals would have to travel to different systems to recharge their fuel bay. Maybe depleating a systems star could cause system wide effects, everything becomes colder as an example. If this refueling system was implemented it would put supers more at risk to gain their benefits, refueling a titan so you can use it to jump a fleet would mean babysitting the titan at the sun prior to the op, putting said titan at risk.

Lets have Ewar back, force multipliers were nerfed because they were "OP" just like speed was "OP" now power projection is "OP". I miss force multipliers, I miss having an ewar wing, you know what if 10 falcon pilots want to jam 4 people from the hostile fleet each essentially tieing up 40 pilots with 10 I guess removing that threat becomes priority rather than an all out turkey shoot of blob a shoots blob b in the kneecaps until one of the blobs can remember what they were fighting over in the first place and goes home.

While we are at it, lets remove Cyno. Instead let everyone use the capital navigation tab to find out were they can jump to and allow them to jump blindly into systems, jumping to the largest celestial in the system (usually the sun). Lets see Star Harvesting combined with Star Camping. Combined with all the variables mentioned ealier in the thread, you could accidentally find yourself in the middle of a hostile zone, your alliance could send a fleet to defend you but although 90% would make it, 10% would end up slightly off course and they too could fall prey to awaiting hostile entities.

Oh how eve would be so much more fun I I owned it :D
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#72 - 2014-07-05 06:45:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Galphii
Looking at just the removal of jump drives in their current form, it brings about some interesting changes. Consider sovereign space to be represented by the pacific and Atlantic oceans, and the entity is the US. They maintain naval bases on both coasts and in strategic locations to respond to threats from the surrounding area. If their ships had jump drives, they'd have one base and simply jump their entire fleet where it's needed as required. You could look on them holding the entire pacific as 'buffer' space against hostile fleets doing the same thing.

But as this is reality, navies have to escort cargo ships through hostile waters and patrol shipping lanes. They have to do surveillance on neighbours to predict possible threats. Jump drives, especially jump freighters, remove the need for all of that. Captains and crews simply sit around and wait for something to happen so they can be bridged into action. Hardly makes for compelling gameplay. Jump drives make nullsec easier, and while there is a concern about too much drudgery with logistics, quick and safe access to all of eve was not the right solution.

There are other factors to consider when fixing so in general, such as reasons to fight, but the OP has the right idea.

Edit: One last thought. Nullsec shouldn't be considered 'end-game'. It should be thought of as eve in 'hardcore' mode. More time required to achieve greater goals than other parts of eve. Different, not better or worse than, depending on one's style of gameplay.

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.

mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#73 - 2014-07-05 07:16:11 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
*Snip* Removed quote of a deleted post. ISD Ezwal.

Not so much when it comes to power projection. Criticism could have been more constructive but I certainly don't need an idea of my own to deliver it, no more than a doctor has to catch something to recognize and diagnose it. Far as I'm concerned virtually everything about power projection is wrapped tightly around other mechanics that extensively dictate how and why and to what extent power is projected and I'd rather work from the perspective of revamping those to inform power projection changes, instead of blindly swinging for a 2006 era that never actually existed the way you remember and definitely never will again.

Call it a difference in philosophy.

But hey - it's a starting point, and to be fair here, I do see one tiny, almost insignificant aspect about it that I like, so who can say where that leads.

Manfred Sideous wrote:
Yeah you can't put arbitrary limits on social paradigms and not expect players to game it.

Least we can unequivocally and reasonably agree on something.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Smugest Sniper
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#74 - 2014-07-05 08:01:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Smugest Sniper
Actually I'll tell you pretty much entirely why you can not ever have local null production outscale highsec in production levels needed for even some small corporations.

-Tritanium Pyrite and Mexalon shortage Holes
-Volume output differences
-"chinese labor syndrome"

I've been a miner in null for 6 years, I've operated in almost every ******* space in the game, and I can tell you bar none why you can't get most of what you need out of null operations entirely.

Tritanium requirements of Stations, Capitals, and anything really done en mass are so staggeringly huge, that given the lack of veldspar in null belts, it takes you far too long to even reasonably aquire the trit you need efficiently.

Even when you do, you can run into regional holes for Pyrite and Mex,

To quote for scale on a Niddahoger you need 57,938,273 trit (me 3) compared to 13,991,433 pyrite(also me3)

To mine the trit alone, you need to spend almost 65% of your mining hours on Spud or cherry picking veld which is godawful to do.

If you wanted to make local production better, give us a bigger Tritanium haul on top of the other changes to ABC's so it's actually practical to mine them.

Also a better spread and refresh time on industrial upgraded belts would be a major help on it too.

As it stands the Bloodtear industial report from back in 2012 is still the holy bible of null mining.

As to force projection issues, all it would take is making it so a cyno jammed system would stop all cyno's Black-ops or not, and make the system uncyclable, if it's jammed you can't turn it off except blowing up the expensive IHUB upgrade inside it.

Since blops fleets are almost worse than capitals for basic infrastructure and just trying to fly around and have fun making isk in null.

Capitals are fine, so are all that other ****, the problem is in the extent at which it becomes harder and harder to obtain, build, and use them for anything.

As it stands in 3 days of 16 hour operation times(or more) I could build a carrier by mining with 1 character. Prints etc not withstanding.

Double that or so for a freighter or a dread.

There is a discrepancy in that fact, I can build a carrier the omni-tool of power, for less than a giant cargo ship, or a combat exclusive power house.

Then of course, it would take a month or so to build a super given the same parameters, and maybe 2-3 for a titan.

Divide this time over more toons (N+1) and you can crap out any ship you want in days.

That is the fundamental disadvantage of null over high-sec. Because noobs will sell hours of labor at chinese sweatshop prices compared to what it's actually worth for work done.

Highsec has a higher N+ and generally always will than null unless you can make it reasonably safer, and more freindly for someone who's running mining operations to do so.

In short, if null alliances could get past the culture of abhoring rock touching filth wizards and Hulkageddons, null could see a proliferation of massive scaled industrial improvements and make high-sec a ghost town of noobs and stubborn cowards.

Culturally we've done more to harm this game than help, and if we don't stop ******* **** up for logistical and support structures.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#75 - 2014-07-05 08:28:15 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Smugest Sniper wrote:
words


tl;dr: Importing from highsec means drawing on the mining power of "every miner in highsec", and (based on old diagoras numbers) there are something like three times as many of them as there are miners in all of nullsec, but any given corp or alliance obviously only gets a tiny fraction of that and trit production in nullsec is (from the best trit/m3 ratio ore) about 6-7 times what you get in highsec, with the end result being that local production means having a miniscule fraction of the output that you have available to you by importing.

Is that about the gist of what you're saying?

To be fair, the fact that CCP buffed compressed ore so as to leave compression/importation mechanisms available despite the refining nerf means they realize and acknowledge this. I think.

I don't think there's anything to be concerned with around your point about looking down on miners and so forth. If it's worth the time and effort people in nullsec will mine and do industry and so forth and just look down on those doing the same in empire. It's not exactly a large culture shift for the common "Industrial players are a bunch of whiny entitled carebears who contribute nothing and expect everything" attitude to become "Most industrial players are a bunch of whiny entitled carebears who contribute nothing and expect everything but I'm a valued member overcoming the challenges for the betterment of my alliance"

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#76 - 2014-07-05 09:27:28 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
7 minutes across the universe sure is kind of stupid for a ship like an archon when an interceptor need an hour.

Yeah, pretty much this. New Eden is far too small with the current mechanics.

More broadly, I WANT to want to go to null. But the current options of join the blob, bow the knee or rent have zero appeal for me. And no, I don't know how to fix it :)

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2014-07-05 09:32:30 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
7 minutes across the universe sure is kind of stupid for a ship like an archon when an interceptor need an hour.

Yeah, pretty much this. New Eden is far too small with the current mechanics.

More broadly, I WANT to want to go to null. But the current options of join the blob, bow the knee or rent have zero appeal for me. And no, I don't know how to fix it :)


Completely agree with this, the current options are very unpalatable to many I think hence the 80/20 split between other areas and null. WH space has much more appeal to me as it limits the blob/renting mechanics.
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#78 - 2014-07-05 10:10:53 UTC
Let us not also forget the nerfs to Capital industry that have occurred multiple times to make mineral moving more cumbersome.. Drone alloys vanished which we were able to move massive amounts of minerals with to build Capitals.. and as of the 22nd Module compression gets Burned. While they are adding POS compressing to everything and turning the rorqual to an overpriced Booster. Instant Refining, Instant Compression. In order for PL, CFC, N3 to maintain Capital superiority it needs logistical supplies to maintain building Capitals. By nerfing down the Logistical aspect of EVE, you are killing Null Industry that CCP has been working so hard to get established.

I love combat as much as the next guy.. Hate Tidi, but love super battles. But If Industry gets Nerfed all the way down, so does replacement lines for Titans, Carriers, dreads, supercaps. While we all Scream Thank F'n god.. Death to all Supers.. you are also now slaughtering all the Capsuleers spent years on creating the perfect titan or supercap pilots. Why keep that titan alt Subbed.. his titan Died and since Supply trains got nerfed.. there isnt even a supercap available to put him in. While power projection does need a fix, I won't argue that. This would not be a good way to do it.

Many players have mentioned forcing Alliances to actually use all that empty space. I think that Idea tends to work out best. If alliances actually have to remain in their space and keep it farmed, that forces them to stay at home more often and to hold less space. If suddenly your Ihub itself or TCU had requirements to meet then having forces in that system to use it would be more of a requirement. Renters are one way to look at it now. But say if there is space not being used.. It might degrade and the longer it's left alone.. start degrading quicker to the point the System Drops as the Populace revolts from the Sov holder. Things like EVE LEGION/Dust 514 could be used to throw further monkey wrenches in unused systems to cause them to revolt from the Sov holder, forcing them to return to the system to grab it back. I would say drop the Sov Costs of holding the aspect since now you actually have to tend to the system. This makes All that massive space suddenly have to be used, it's not easily handleable to keep all areas of Null farmed. Just make it to the point that it's doable to maintain decent Sov systems, But also a hassle if you want to own the world. That lets small and large blocs hold space Or fight over it etc.

With the amount of Nullbears out there, this type of a system wouldn't be that hard to maintain while not also owning everything due to having to move to those empty systems more often to maintain them. Systems drop to low services can be effected, instead of just... I owned X system deep behind the blue wall.. havent visited it for months.. but its still sov 5..

Just my 30 cents.
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#79 - 2014-07-05 10:18:58 UTC
Zappity wrote:
More broadly, I WANT to want to go to null. But the current options of join the blob, bow the knee or rent have zero appeal for me. And no, I don't know how to fix it :)

you don't want to go to sov null, then. what's to fix?
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#80 - 2014-07-05 11:08:03 UTC
Benny Ohu wrote:
Zappity wrote:
More broadly, I WANT to want to go to null. But the current options of join the blob, bow the knee or rent have zero appeal for me. And no, I don't know how to fix it :)

you don't want to go to sov null, then. what's to fix?


What's to fix is the current system where there is no point going to null without joining one of the existing coalitions. People want to be able to try to carve out their own chunk of space but it is currently in a choke hold of the existing groups so there is no point. It's fair enough that the greatest power can exert the greatest control but when this impacts the game by putting people off even bothering with null (about 80% of the players I think?) then it is an issue. CCP want more people in null so there needs to be incentives to do so.