These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP - Please Remove SOV - (Structures & Timers) aka "Training Wheels"

First post
Author
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#121 - 2014-07-24 15:13:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
alliance capital station ... perhaps a case of adding X-large control towers .. designed specifically too house docked capital ships ..
added modular slots . with only carriers being the base dockable capitals

-dreadnoughts
- supercarriers
- Titans
- Jump freighters
- freighters

with maintenance costs due too the ships massive size/crew etc... aswell as the towers crew/size

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

KaTie CassidY
Running with Knives
#122 - 2014-07-24 23:29:23 UTC
This is the best forum post about SOV. CCP make it happen.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#123 - 2014-07-25 13:35:17 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
alliance capital station ... perhaps a case of adding X-large control towers .. designed specifically too house docked capital ships ..
added modular slots . with only carriers being the base dockable capitals

-dreadnoughts
- supercarriers
- Titans
- Jump freighters
- freighters

with maintenance costs due too the ships massive size/crew etc... aswell as the towers crew/size

You can dock your cap ships... but only in a destructible station....

That would be interesting, as well as possibly dangerous.

I like it.
Snot Shot
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#124 - 2014-07-25 22:58:49 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
alliance capital station ... perhaps a case of adding X-large control towers .. designed specifically too house docked capital ships ..
added modular slots . with only carriers being the base dockable capitals

-dreadnoughts
- supercarriers
- Titans
- Jump freighters
- freighters

with maintenance costs due too the ships massive size/crew etc... aswell as the towers crew/size

You can dock your cap ships... but only in a destructible station....

That would be interesting, as well as possibly dangerous.

I like it.

It would be dangerous but tbh no Alliance leader would allow thier SC or Titan pilots to dock up and log off. Docking option would only be worth it for the ease of refueling/fitting/insurance/clone upgrades and then getting out to a pos. If a ACS was ever lost with SC ot Titans in it the Alliance would laugh at the pilots and kick them for being stupid.
.

Twitter = @Snot_Shot  - “If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"

evesnotshot.blogspot.com

Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#125 - 2014-07-25 23:39:46 UTC
Occam's razor: The best answers tend to be the simplest.

Not sure if the proposal is sound, but it is at the very least different than the status quo.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#126 - 2014-07-26 05:46:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Snot Shot wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
This does NOT remove sov, it is a new sov mechanic when you get right down to it. Instead of having dozens of TCUs and IHUBs you have one big fat one. Whether this is good or not I don't know yet.

Teckos - Thanks for the posts. And when you get right down to it the idea doesn't remove SOV, it removes what no one in this game has ever enjoyed about it. The down side to getting rid of all the HP, timers, and other ****, is that people who "own" space will need to actually use it, defend it, and this scares most current Null Sec players since they have never really had to do that.

[/snip]


Hey, don't get me wrong, the sov grind is boring and I'm not a fan. So the loss of that is a Good Thing™.

Quote:
You asked how Alliances would no longer be pinned under the weight of Coalitions in order to keep their space. Most Alliances fear losing their space simply because of the numbers, Super caps, and ridiculous amount of time and effort it takes to obtain space in Null Sec. Take that away and I bet many of them wouldn't put up with being the political hostages/puppets they currently are. If they want to commit and drop a Alliance Cap Station in a region then maybe they'd stick to a Coalition or simply risk it alone. Either way if they're strong enough they can simply stay in the region they're in now and farm/defend it as they normally do. If they can't, move to some where they can.

Many corps would probably decide to go nomadic and just negotiate the best deal with an Alliance that held Alliance Cap Station in region they want to reside in. That's my take on a few things that would shake out from this.

Yes, I think part of the equation would be that a Alliance can only drop 1 Alliance Cap Station. They need to pick the most strategic Region and system and commit to it. Obviously the current size of many Alliances would be too big for pilots to use just one Region so they would need to develop new "Alt" Alliances and CEOs to drop Alliance Cap Stations in more Regions and this would add stress to the power dynamic and diplomatic scene that EVE needs so much. New Alliance leaders could actually matter a little more than they do these days and when directors decide to press "the button" on a Alliance Cap Station it could be a little more interesting than just mopping up SOV structures with Super fleets. Anyways, this stacks the house of cards a lot higher which creates content.

Again, I realize the idea isn't perfect but tbh some of the other ideas floating around out there which takes 50 pages of proximity, indexes, cost modifiers, and "sov structure tenacity" discussions that make me want to ******* puke. WTF, I thought this was a video game people were supposed to enjoy and not need a special EVE alarm clock, ice for blue balls, and masters in statistics, in order to be a slave for $15/month......or more.

I could be completely wrong and missing something obvious but I think its a good start/idea? Got some pretty good feedback, and if anyone has some ideas how to tweak it to work better feel free to pipe up.


Like I indicated, not sure I like the idea...kind of schizophrenic about it. Sometimes I think, "Yeah awesome, things would be in considerable flux, an invader could move into the region easily with free ports...could be great."

Then I think, "Man Goons have a good system in place to just have most CFC member alliances drop an Alliance Capital Station in their region and keep chugging right along." Of course, things wouldn't be quite as daunting in terms of attacking the CFC since instead of hundreds of TCUs and IHUBs you'd have a handful.

So I thought I'd ask the question, see what your answer is and get some discussion going. Manny's thread has good discussion and I figured the more discussion the better.

Edit: BTW, not slamming Goons either with the above. My point is that the Goons have a good network of people and they don't mind helping their allies figure **** out. I guess my concern is...could we be setting the stage to turn null sec into a collection of CFC like organizations?

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Arcelian
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#127 - 2014-07-26 12:01:53 UTC
Me gusta.
Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2014-07-26 12:17:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Snot Shot wrote:
I blogged this a year ago so I thought I would take a look at it a year later, make some tweaks to it, and vomit it back out onto the forums. 0.0 is supposed to be a sandbox, so why did CCP add SOV to it making it a slab of concrete?

Because huge battles have to be fought for something. And what SOV does is it forces (or tempts) you to have some assets which can be locked and seized by your enemy, and which you can't simply throw into your trunk and run away (well, in fact it allow for it atm, would be great if such thing would be made more hard to pull). So it's serves as content generator. The problem is its mechanics are very much flawed in so many ways.

And for totally free and outlaw space you already have NPC nulls and wormholes. They are exaclty look like what you were trying to describe.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link

Ray Kyonhe
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#129 - 2014-07-26 12:27:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Ray Kyonhe
Snot Shot wrote:

You asked how Alliances would no longer be pinned under the weight of Coalitions in order to keep their space. Most Alliances fear losing their space simply because of the numbers, Super caps, and ridiculous amount of time and effort it takes to obtain space in Null Sec. Take that away and I bet many of them wouldn't put up with being the political hostages/puppets they currently are. If they want to commit and drop a Alliance Cap Station in a region then maybe they'd stick to a Coalition or simply risk it alone. Either way if they're strong enough they can simply stay in the region they're in now and farm/defend it as they normally do. If they can't, move to some where they can.

This is actually what drives policy in Eve and in real world - competition for resources to the death. Remove this and you'll get nullsec version of FW, where meaningless, kiddish fights lasts days and weeks without any reason, and mostly without any good planing and consideration. I like what nullsec resembles now - it's like a model of real world politics and power blocks, this is what adds flavor to the game world, make it differ from other projects.

And for those who don't like it there are always wormhole and NPC null spaces. What's wrong with them, actually? Why you should destroy such very distinguishing part of the game world if they can give you all you want?

I don't think there is nothing wrong with Sov. The mechanic is outdated and flawed, many words were typed on this regard. But there is no need to remove it, it needs to be fixed and rebalanced, asap.

Survey/voting system inbuilt to the game client: link_Reforming corp and taxation system: link_New PvE content (reward collective gameplay): link

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#130 - 2014-07-26 21:31:31 UTC
the problem with the mere concept of SOV is that its about controlling people . .taxing them and using them as a resource ..

it doesn't really apply too 0.0 in its current format ... so 2 options are available
- add people as a resource in 0.0 (capsuleers don't count) there more like soldiers/partners in crime
- or remove SOV .. maybe add a system of chiefdom's or something

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Adunh Slavy
#131 - 2014-07-26 22:57:31 UTC
Smugest Sniper wrote:
I see two key issues with this,

-The Blob Rules: Who ever can function under the largest gang and hell camp hardest can claim any territory they wish.




And as soon as they move their blob back home, they don't control it any more. Sooner or later they'd be so spread out, trying to control everything, that they'd loose it all.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Snot Shot
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#132 - 2014-07-27 01:18:09 UTC
Ray Kyonhe wrote:
Snot Shot wrote:
I blogged this a year ago so I thought I would take a look at it a year later, make some tweaks to it, and vomit it back out onto the forums. 0.0 is supposed to be a sandbox, so why did CCP add SOV to it making it a slab of concrete?

Because huge battles have to be fought for something. And what SOV does is it forces (or tempts) you to have some assets which can be locked and seized by your enemy, and which you can't simply throw into your trunk and run away (well, in fact it allow for it atm, would be great if such thing would be made more hard to pull). So it's serves as content generator. The problem is its mechanics are very much flawed in so many ways.

And for totally free and outlaw space you already have NPC nulls and wormholes. They are exaclty look like what you were trying to describe.

I see what you are trying to say but with the three cycle timers to the stations etc. you can actually get your stuff out with little problem. Flip side of it is the timer creates "the blob" to form like what CFC did to Nulli in 0-W for a week where The Martini ordered his monkeys to camp the station so they could "Dead Zone" it, and Nulli not only evac'ed most of their stuff before the station flipped, but they got it back a month later so risking your assets under current SOV mechanics isn't much of a risk unless your on vacation.

Not sure that the driver of "content" and fighting over something should be to save the **** in your hanger. I think it should be to defend the space your living in and that should be enough tbh. If you can't then you should move to another place you can. Maybe that's why NPC and WH space works so well and SOV Null Sec is a slab of concrete.

Twitter = @Snot_Shot  - “If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"

evesnotshot.blogspot.com

Snot Shot
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#133 - 2014-07-27 01:54:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Snot Shot
Ray Kyonhe wrote:
This is actually what drives policy in Eve and in real world - competition for resources to the death. Remove this and you'll get nullsec version of FW, where meaningless, kiddish fights lasts days and weeks without any reason, and mostly without any good planing and consideration. I like what nullsec resembles now - it's like a model of real world politics and power blocks, this is what adds flavor to the game world, make it differ from other projects.

And for those who don't like it there are always wormhole and NPC null spaces. What's wrong with them, actually? Why you should destroy such very distinguishing part of the game world if they can give you all you want?

I don't think there is nothing wrong with Sov. The mechanic is outdated and flawed, many words were typed on this regard. But there is no need to remove it, it needs to be fixed and rebalanced, asap.

I'm not seeing how removing the need to grind through millions of structure HP and weeks of timers correlates to the "competition for the resources to the death" your describing. If a force moves to your space to take it why cant the competition for your resources be decided directly on the field of battle down to the last ship of sorts? Kinda like the way it would be in "the real world" if you want to go there.

If you remove the HP and timers then you get a fight to the death, not some kiddish fights that last days and weeks, you get toe to toe brawls and the development of fighting forces that can actually defend their space and know how to fight. Instead todays SOV mechanics have bread an incredibly large number of incompetent Alliances which have relied solely on millions of HP, timers, and 10 other Alliances to show up to defend their space by blobbing the opponent.

You mentioned defending something at all cost, well I agree, that's why I think the Alliance Capital Station (ACS) could be the reason a Alliance could rally around to defend their space. I agree that simply getting rid of the SOV HP and Timers is only half the solution because you need something measurable and tangible to defend so that's where the ACS comes into play. If you cant defend it then you shouldn't be there.

Holding, taking, defending space should be fluid and dynamic, not a boring and utterly horrific.
.

Twitter = @Snot_Shot  - “If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"

evesnotshot.blogspot.com

Snot Shot
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#134 - 2014-07-27 02:26:29 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Like I indicated, not sure I like the idea...kind of schizophrenic about it. Sometimes I think, "Yeah awesome, things would be in considerable flux, an invader could move into the region easily with free ports...could be great."

Then I think, "Man Goons have a good system in place to just have most CFC member alliances drop an Alliance Capital Station in their region and keep chugging right along." Of course, things wouldn't be quite as daunting in terms of attacking the CFC since instead of hundreds of TCUs and IHUBs you'd have a handful.

So I thought I'd ask the question, see what your answer is and get some discussion going. Manny's thread has good discussion and I figured the more discussion the better.

My point is that the Goons have a good network of people and they don't mind helping their allies figure **** out. I guess my concern is...could we be setting the stage to turn null sec into a collection of CFC like organizations?

I think dropping ACS's in Region after Region if the CFC wants to do it would be fine. If they have the isk to do it and the man power to defend it then god bless. The exposure to that tactic is that the space surrounding it and its stations are accessible to anyone and so the Alliance "owning" the Region actually needs to farm/police/and defend the space to get the maximum use out of it or anyone can farm their fields while they are logged off for weeks playing Tanks or Dota and other **** that these AFK Alliances do with all this empty space they control behind locked and abandoned stations, millions of HP, and weeks of timers.

While you aren't playing EVE others could be and they could be making isk because you're to lazy to log in and form a defense fleet, BLOPs fleet, or hot drop of any kind.

I'll post some of my ideas that I had while discussing options in Mannys thread so you can see where I think this could go in relation to what it would take to control a region with a ACS and the associated commitments:

But where is my Alliance name on the EVE map!!! Alliance Capital Stations (ACS) - Each Alliance can launch only one “Capital Station”. When you anchor the ACS you have to name it and the name can never be changed unless Alliance is disbanded (ownership drops) or it’s destroyed and a new one put up. I see these as the “Castle Blacks” or PL’s “The Sphere” stronghold of EVE driving the narrative and actual history for the future books and stories of EVE to come.

Obviously the current size of some Alliances could be too big for pilots to use just one Region or they want to “own” two or more Regions. Welp they’d need to develop new Alliances and CEOs to drop Alliance Cap Stations in more Regions and this would add stress to the power dynamic and diplomatic scene that EVE needs so much. New Alliance leaders would actually matter a lot more than they do these days and when directors decide to press the "button" on an Alliance Cap Station it could be a little more interesting than just mopping up SOV structures with Super fleets. Anyways, this stacks the house of cards a lot higher which creates content.

It takes an Alliance to up keep it….they take fuel, ammo, food, dancers, janitors, cows, booze, drugs, etc. to operate/maintain…or it goes off line. It takes the ACS Construction Skill book, ACS Station Management Skill Book, BPO, and construction costs which could rival that of what it currently costs to build a Titan. ACS Upgrade Mod Construction Skill Books and BPOs, ACS Regional Embassy Upgrade Mod Construction Skill Books and BPOs, Upgrade Mod Construction costs, and the cost to up keep the ACS would provide the significant isk sinks and industrial activity needed, just like current sov bills do. It might take a little while to actually see many of these out there in null sec but talk about an Alliance goal to be achieved and the pride pilots would have once they got one up.

ACS Regional Embassy Station Upgrade Mods could be fitted to provide bonuses to all open stations in your Region selected as Embassy’s and POS’s anchored in the Region for specific things which would draw players to your Region because others don’t have that Mod fitted to their ACS. Bonuses are based on your standings with the ACS owner. Your ACS has a SC construction Upgrade fitted? Well guess where all the SC builders could headed with their CSAAs and POS’s…. Maybe you can only fit 4 on your ACS so your Region could be pretty well known for select bonuses.

Embassy’s – (Its already going on so why not make it official) An Alliance holding a Region with a ACS, can secure an “Embassy” in a Regional station or outpost in each of the Constellations within the Region held. The additional benefits aside from what the ACS supplies an Embassy can be decided as this mechanics are hammered out. Maybe some sort of benefits to anyone using the station for trade, industry, or whatever which in turn allows the Alliance to tax the goings on in that station etc.

The ACS is destructible. Mechanics of how it’s destructible, timers…..yes I said “timers”, and what drops is something CCP/Players can toy with. If we’re going to have timers we should probably have them on **** that matters like POS’s and these things. These could be your B-R situations of the future. Hire PL to attack of defend one of these things.

If the Region has an Alliance Cap Station, new comers to the area could negotiate special "SOV" standings with the owner which would allow them to anchor specific system upgrades the ACS doesn’t provide or they can simply ninja live without the standings and upgrades if they don't want to be under the rental "thumb" of any Alliance and are willing to take the risk living there. Maybe the levels of “SOV” standings do things like expand the docking radius of the Regions open stations and outposts to those with them adding a layer of protection.

BTW - Updated OP Title based on our discussion

Twitter = @Snot_Shot  - “If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"

evesnotshot.blogspot.com

Xing Sh'an
Survivors Corporation
#135 - 2014-07-28 00:39:47 UTC
As soon as any mechanism be it physical or digital on nature, becomes too complex, it loses the ability to adapt to an ever changing environment. For EVE that environment is the player base, when people get bored or annoyed with the overly complicated game mechanics they start to play less and less. Please free null sec and give the entire EVE player base a chance to see where the real game is played!
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#136 - 2014-07-28 06:01:10 UTC
Snot Shot wrote:


[Snipped to save space, links refer back the posts in questions....]

I pretty much agree. I like the idea of people having to use and defend their space. People using their space have another name, "targets". And people going after such targets also become targets as well. So the idea of getting people out of stations, and doing stuff to draw in hostiles and in turn provide something for a "defense fleet" to do is all good.

Just not sure changing sov can do it all. After all, Manny's thread is about power projection and how it enervates Eve. I think there is some truth to that.

At the same time having dozens if not hundreds of TCUs, IHUBs and stations to grind through may very well also be part of the problem.

Not to mention the fact that doing stuff in null is not all that appealing. The current patch/update goes some ways towards addressing that, but will it go far enough? TBH, IDK. Seems like a multi-pronged approach is needed here. Make sov less of a huge freaking monster task, address the issue of certain ships bouncing around the known galaxy obliterating everything other than a similar fleet, and make doing stuff in null worth while.

From your OP:

Quote:
• Grass roots market HUBs and industry in Null Sec would grow to amazing size and use all over null sec….Jita size HUBs policed by Mercs etc………. Mos Isley Space Station etc…


Can you go into why you think this might result? After all, one thing your change is intending to bring about is greater uncertainty to null. But most business people don't like uncertainty.

BTW, love the discussions, lets keep it civil and constructing please (which it has been so far, I'd just like CCP to watch this thread and read it and maybe...seriously consider some of the ideas brought up here).

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#137 - 2014-07-28 13:22:15 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Snot Shot wrote:
• Grass roots market HUBs and industry in Null Sec would grow to amazing size and use all over null sec….Jita size HUBs policed by Mercs etc………. Mos Isley Space Station etc…


Can you go into why you think this might result? After all, one thing your change is intending to bring about is greater uncertainty to null. But most business people don't like uncertainty.

BTW, love the discussions, lets keep it civil and constructing please (which it has been so far, I'd just like CCP to watch this thread and read it and maybe...seriously consider some of the ideas brought up here).

I can think of one way.

An income can be made off of taxes, in this case.

An alliance needs to maintain access to a central point trading station, police it to keep customers feeling safe enough to show up, and have it's location make the taxes a practical alternative to other hubs.

Like Las Vegas in the otherwise inhospitable desert, people will go to the oasis of trading safety that they can manage to round trip in a single session... as opposed to the often multi-day trips needed to reach hubs like Jita.
(For those not in freight and logistics, pilots often want limited purchases they can either fly directly or pack in a simple hauler, and be home the same session they left in)
Phaade
Proioxis Assault Force
Rogue Caldari Union
#138 - 2014-07-28 15:14:20 UTC
Ray Kyonhe wrote:
Snot Shot wrote:

You asked how Alliances would no longer be pinned under the weight of Coalitions in order to keep their space. Most Alliances fear losing their space simply because of the numbers, Super caps, and ridiculous amount of time and effort it takes to obtain space in Null Sec. Take that away and I bet many of them wouldn't put up with being the political hostages/puppets they currently are. If they want to commit and drop a Alliance Cap Station in a region then maybe they'd stick to a Coalition or simply risk it alone. Either way if they're strong enough they can simply stay in the region they're in now and farm/defend it as they normally do. If they can't, move to some where they can.

This is actually what drives policy in Eve and in real world - competition for resources to the death. Remove this and you'll get nullsec version of FW, where meaningless, kiddish fights lasts days and weeks without any reason, and mostly without any good planing and consideration. I like what nullsec resembles now - it's like a model of real world politics and power blocks, this is what adds flavor to the game world, make it differ from other projects.

And for those who don't like it there are always wormhole and NPC null spaces. What's wrong with them, actually? Why you should destroy such very distinguishing part of the game world if they can give you all you want?

I don't think there is nothing wrong with Sov. The mechanic is outdated and flawed, many words were typed on this regard. But there is no need to remove it, it needs to be fixed and rebalanced, asap.


What is this nonsense?

1) Because it ******* sucks.

2) It reflects nothing in the real world. I'm pretty sure a city doesn't just go into "reinforce mode" and become invulnerable after a couple buildings have been destroyed.

3) Small forces in the real world (like spec ops guys) are capable of impacting a nation / battlefield just as much as a large conventional force. This is not the case in Eve.

4) No, there is a complete lack of competition for resources because small forces can not impact the massive coalitions. So, carebears simply join the coalition and pay ISK for access to said resources. Which is ****. These guys arguably face less risk than hi sec miners.

5) FW fights are probably more important than the crap that happens in null sec most of the time.... which lately has been nothing. Your lack of knowledge regarding FW tactics is, well, hilarious. A lot of fights and campaigns well thought out. Some are not. Just because they are fast paced does not make them "kiddish."

Everything about Sov other than sovereignty per se is ****.
Anna Toftdal
Anna Productions.
#139 - 2014-07-28 17:49:51 UTC
tey will win all my "lost" accounts since dominion or however it was called , the stupidest patch of new eden off all. yeah folks even worst as the station walk patch.

+1 op
Snot Shot
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#140 - 2014-07-28 20:51:46 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
From your OP:

Quote:
• Grass roots market HUBs and industry in Null Sec would grow to amazing size and use all over null sec….Jita size HUBs policed by Mercs etc………. Mos Isley Space Station etc…


Can you go into why you think this might result? After all, one thing your change is intending to bring about is greater uncertainty to null. But most business people don't like uncertainty.

If stations are open to anyone who wants to dock and, assuming jump drives don't get "Manny’d", then you would have traders jumping goods out to these stations to sell from Empire, Low Sec, and other Allainces next door to the one thats there. You would have players, corps, Alliances who are ninja living out there where they can, selling/manufacturing stuff they get or mine out in the space they find to use.

Most stations don’t have anything of worth for sale because it’s not the designated Alliance/Corp station for the Alliance/Corps holding that Region. So there are hundreds of stations out there collecting space dust. Open them up and you will not only see Empire Traders and even 0.0 manufactures spreading there goods around, but you will see the Alts of many players in the Alliance holding the region bringing stuff out to sell at these stations if its beneficial and their Alliance m8's don’t know etc.

Big Alliances typically have a group of people who “protect their turf” and will bully players that try to sell items that they make most of their isk on. The groups are very “clicky” and don’t allow anyone to get into them as they feed off the players that are their “friends” especially in times of war. Well it would be tough for them to control the Regional market their Alliance m8’s depend on if there were a few other stations out there selling their strategic goods through alts of the players they won’t let sell in their main station etc.

The other side of that is you could end up with trade wars going on where Alts from one CFC Alliance trys selling goods in a station close to another CFC Allainces trade hub and gets caught sparkign conflict etc.

Opening up the stations is one thing, developing the area with new Mission Agents, Cosmos Complexes, and other isk making opportunities that will draw players in is the other half of the equation.

Twitter = @Snot_Shot  - “If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"

evesnotshot.blogspot.com