EVE General Discussion

This is the exact same kind of conventional thinking that led to the current stagnation. Why? because it again ignores human nature.

nerfing 'power projection' is the same as nerfing anomlaies and thinking people will fight instead of flee to high sec. It's also the same as thinking that nerfing moon goo will lead to fighting and 'bottom up income' when all it led to was more renting.

Alliances in a 'power projection nerfed' game will either just build more Titans for nerfed bridging, and/or create "prepositioning alts" flying super capitals that they can just log off in whatever sector of space will eventually need defending.

And the idea about timers and EHP simply invokes Malcanis' law, in that groups like the CfC would just attack EVERYTHING at once (because they have the numbers to), further cementing their dominance though numbers. Doing what you suggest wouldn't help 'small groups', it would encourage groups like the CfC to blue even more people who could then proxy fight for them on the other side of the map.


The problem is that you aren't thinking of how devious and cunning people are Anthar. They WILL find an easy way to negate any barrier you put in their way. CCP has learned this which is why they are now so careful about what they change (which is why the Ishtar is getting a nerf that isn't a nerf lol).

The entire point of missions in null was actually to allow null entities to condense into smaller areas. Hell, the entirety of GSF could fit into a single constellation with ease. Anoms are a barrier to this, because each system can only support a handful of dedicated ratters. Missions on the other hand, scale with whatever number of players is in a system.

I like that idea quite a bit actually.

This is where the other sov changes come in.

By making sov ownership be dictated by residency it would mean people would naturally have to clump together. This would mean GSF would go from owning a little under half the galaxy to owning just Dek (possibly only half of dek) and it would be impossible to hold onto the vast stretches of space.

Huge areas would be freed up for smaller alliances to come in and the mission mods for outposts would mean they can have their entire host in just a handful of systems.

Trolling, that eternal sign of adult hood in a poster. Had you been paying attention you'd see that I never advocate for anything that's bad for the game but good for me. Maybe opening your eyes while reading might help.

Look what you are saying.
Alliances like cfc will hold regions and have neighboring regions for renters.

CFC and NCPL are owning now whole galaxy.
After the change they will be owning at most 1/3 in total.

What will hold them from denying space to others?

The whole concept of sov (stuff that people want)
1.
More EHP, more timers in the space you use.
Less EHP , and less timers in the space you don't use.
2.
No jump bridges or less jumpbridges.
No titan bridges
3.
Super(capitals) traveling slower than battleships or/and having multiple choke points something like : capitals have to use regional gates to move between systems.
4.
Sov cost escalated for unconnected systems.
5.
Agents giving missions to all your sov space.

Tell me how often CFC or NCPL will be willing to relocate?
Because this without this they can only remove someone from sov, and they will be back as soon as CFC or NCPL leaves.

Will EVE become more boring place?
No, because gangs will be moving as fast as now.
Simply moving 255 man fleet 70 jumps will always take much more time, or someone will kill 50 or more stranglers before fleet even gets to the destination system.

From the smaller perspective - there will be always some neighbor lurking at your space or some alliance searching for its space, so fun fights you can get without making 70 jumps

Nothing.

However, with thousands of systems up for grabs it would be impossible to stop everyone.


As far as missions go, Anoms cannot support enough people and if they could then they would be inject huge amounts of isk if they got buffed to be worth doing over high sec level 4s. Null level 4s are already in game and provide better reward but would at the same time inject far less isk than anoms. They would be quick to implement, require far less work and would be far more suited when run on mass. LP rewards wont take much of a hit if any due to most of null already farms missions in FW and high sec.

I look at things along the lines of (1st) "what can I do with this" and (2nd and more importantly) what can people smarter/better at the game than i am do with this. A great example is the ESS. It didn't take 2 days for people to figure out how to use it as a wormhole early warning system, how to protect it with anomalies and bascially how to take one of the most crap ideas to come from CCP and turn it into a gold mine.

Every permutation of "SOV null mission agents" I can imagine comes up as horrible imbalanced to the point of game breaking.

For example, if you make them to have "faction warfare like beacons", you end up with a situation where alliances are indeed crowding into a few systems....and using alts with the proper standings to accept missions, go to those missions with perma capped mwd frigs (that can't be caught by npcs) and tank the npcs there while the actual mission runners run the missions they want to (and even if the missions feature web towers, all it would take is a single MJD maelstrom to go in, blap the web towers and leave so the frig can come in).

So then instead of the prospective hunter coming into a system and warping to a haven, sanctum or forsaken hub, they'd have to decide which of the 50 beacons in space contains a real mission ship and which ones are camouflage/decoys.

Even spawning missions several jumps away from the agent (like the FW missions do) doesn't work, eventually the alliances will decipher the pattern of mission locations and drop POSes/jump bridges on them and the mission runners can just travel their in a cheap inty and reship for the mission on arrival (the same way that is now done with pro level 5 missions). Hell, I know a few groups who titan bridge around doing lvl 5s, that would be magnified greatly in null.

We'd figure out how to make the most of these things, the same way people figured out "hey, scimitar + Titan + forsaken hub = half a bil + an hour" .

Null is the harshest environment in EVE after wormhole space and is thus populated with THE most creative and devious PVErs the game has. You do NOT want to give people like me SOV null missions to exploit, if you think what those guys did with the faction warfare LP rewards scheme was bad, this would be worse. Faction Battleships would cost like 4 isk after a week if the main reward in null became LP. If it wasn't LP, but isk, that would be worse because unless you made new missions that were unblitzable, null PVErs would stuff so much isk into the game in a short time it would be funny. Even non-blitzable missions would do this as they'd get dogpiled in corp ops OR isboxered to death.

NPC null and low sec have mechanics (both natural from CCP and player made) that prevent some of this from occurring with agents there, and even then you end up with 600 mil Machariels like we have now (a mach costing less than some navy faction battleships is a Blasphemy, nerf Curse/Angel Cartel missions NOW lol), null doesn't. Wormhole space can have super lucrative pve because it's hard to get to and has no local. Null has those things.



What I would do is fix anoms and include wormhole like escalation mechanics (ie the more ships you bring, the more rewards you get but also the more dangerous it gets) so if you wanted to do a Sanctum in a machariel solo (as I do0, you get a regular sanctum, but if you bring 8 machariels you get more npcs to spawn (= more bounties) but also more scramming frigs and neut towers and such. A carrier in that ame sanctum could prehaps spawn even more ships and perhaps a 'commander cap' (i'd love to see a "Domination Carrier" lol).

Wormhole like escalation mechancis for anoms accomplish several things.

-it reduces the "cooperation penalty" anoms have (sharing an anom is a great way to make less isk as it is now)
- if done right (like random spawns and such) it can discourage multi-boxing (nothing wrong with multi-boxing, I do it myself, but too much of that pups mucho isk into the economy)
-it rasies the amount of people a system can support
-it makes things more interesting for people hunting PVErs
-it could allow people to 'set traps' for people trying to hunt them the same way smart wormhole folks learned to lure people to their deaths in cap escalated sites
-it could even encourage people to fit pvp capable set ups (with logi and such). As it is now, people fit for pve not just because it's more efficient, but because that is easier to do with PVEing solo.

---

I really didn't intended to write a book here. So TL;DR, CCP should reform the anomalies system (with an eye towar before considering npc agents in sov null.

I don't know, there are plenty of bored people flying around looking for things to kill right now.

and yea there are thousands of systems, but not all are station systems. At best we end up with alliances holding the stations and saying screw it to everything else.



The problem here is that if you have null missions, people would stop the FW and high sec farming and go get the more valuable null agent LPs. this sounds good at 1st till you realize how much LP we are talking about.

If i could do in sov null with missions what I can do right now in curse with angel cartel missions, we would not be talking 650 mil machs like we have now, we'd be talking 100 mil machs lol. Those missions in npc null are ok because you can't (totally) control the stations and you can't use JBs at POSes to circumvent gates. SOV null would have no such limits.

As i said in my previous post, I think modified wormhole 'escalation' mechanics for anoms (to increase the numbers of people a single system can support without using infinitely scaling npc agents) are a better fit. IMO You don't take NPC space mechanics (agents) and put them in payer run space and expect them to work well. Wormholes, like null, is player run space with mechanics that reward players while not being infinitely abuse-able.

And again what you are missing is that you can't engineer such outcomes. People won't respond the way you think they will.