Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I think the bigger problem is that people are just abusing jump portals, jump drives, and jump bridges.
It is very hard to something to enemy fleet if they need just 1-2 midpoints to cross a region.
Kill a carrier in this nano gang , or mothership.

Fix capitals, remove titan bridges, jump brides and every thing will be slowly moving into the better.

Exactly - the more people on local the easier to catch someone.
You can also make those mission sites visible on scanner - just add another tick like 'show anomalies'

Well remember that people want missions.
Missions that will be located in a agent site, outside of the station.
Let say that in one constellation you can have only 1 agent site in your sov.

This mean that people in this constellation will go in and out of this system - so many targets for small gangs.

What more - this site can be "disabled" by small gang if undefended by destroying some structure , so if you will not defend this site - it will cost you , and it will block all missions for large group of players for let say 30 minutes.

People don't want JB , or JB in totally different form - not abused like now. So more moving targets, and more space to cover.

I see that 50 % missions you have in the same system , 30% in the constellation , 20% anywhere in alliance sov.

Back to the Logi argument, what woud putting an optimal/falloff do to the Logi system? Especially if its a steep fallof (like 5/45 at max Logi level). This could fit well with the upcoming "meta-cide" so that some modules could be skewed to favor total range at the cost of rep-power and the other way, rep-power at the cost of range, and to that end have one module with high optimal/low falloff and one with low optimal/high falloff.

More fitting choices means more fleet options and more tactical decisions.

Also, I'm still totally in favor of residence based sov, however, agent missions is not the way to go. It needs to be a structure based mechanism that allows increased PvE opportunities with increased structure placement. This allows attackers targets of opportunity that have real worth and will affect a system in real time.

It takes a week to take a station system, we only need to show up once in that week to defend it.

You have to remember you dont just slow us down you also slow down any attacker just as much. Under the current mechanics simply nerfing power projections would mean everything just takes longer to do. We would still show up for the timers because we would just set off a bit sooner. You could remove jump bridges, remove titan bridges and force a 24 hour cooldown on capital jump drives and we would still be able to dump baltec fleets on your head that no small alliance can hurt.

If anything you make it even harder to remove us from our sprawling empires and all of the real problems with null go untouched.

Well id still just like the ability to reinforce a system before the doomfleet lands on me, thatd be more than enough to get people to try. After all, wed also be able to run a regular pvp roam through your space without a titan bridging 300 onto us. Wed have our own scouts and a couple jumps notice of your blob. Right now, any ship can be the blob

Also i stated the removal of jumping, none of this 24 hr wait time stuff. All youd have to do is reship. And a 24 hour wait wouldnt fix my lack of ability to use dreads or carriers as an asset.

Thirdly the logi issue is more a problem with carriers being too powerful outside of triage. Simply a dread out of seige is about 1bses damage, and siege makes it 7x. A carrier only gets a 4x rep/sec bonus (half cycle time, double rep amnt) when triaged. But a 3rep carrier can almost match a dreads dps in terms of damage repped (before considering resists) basically triage should be switched to a 7x total rep bonus, and its untriage rep speed adjusted to match.

But that could be happening in the upcoming capital balance pass so well see. Much easier more effective change than diminishing returns.

Again, (AGAIN) a nerf to damage mitigation will only mean a larger entity will steamroll over the smaller even more quickly than now.



All that's going to do is lead to more renters. You aren't changing anything. In fact most your suggestions would probably worse then situation, not improve it.

Sov based residency, which is nice in theory. But without addressing the ability to hotdrop everywhere and anywhere all day long the larger entities will always be able to bully all of null,

The real issue isn't how many systems are stamped with your name on the sov map. That doesn't really matter all that much. It's the degree of direct influence via spaceship violence that really matters. This is why your "travel shouldn't be nerfed because it won't change anything" is critically flawwed.

Because as it is both nothing will ever be out of reach of a bloc's influence and they will never be vulnerable to counter attack. (they never actually have to "commit" to a campaign).

You want to talk about making it so smaller groups have a chance?
Next time a bloc group goes to put someone in line or defend an interest on one side of the galaxy, give the ability of a smaller group (in a nose-to-nose fight) to counter attack your interests without you being able to respond immediately.

THAT is how you give small guys a chance. By not letting big guys be everywhere at once.

You keep saying that "well it will slow the attackers too" but you completely (willfully?) ignore that fact that the comparison to be made here isn't one large group vs one small group, but in reality (and how null should be) it's one large group vs many small groups.

And until you can address why this is so allegedly fundamentally flawed, I have trouble taking your ideas into consideration as unbiased.

And don't give us that same tired "well this alliance will cover this, and that one that" because it doesn't actually mean anything. The point isn't who can commit to where, the point is being able to hit those people at home WHEN they commit.

Again, nerf power projection and you get both attackers AND defenders. I will continue to give you our sigs will cover this and that because that is exactly what we will do. Under the current mechanics we can defend our space without jumpbridges, hell, they nefed them a few years ago and it made no difference.

We used to take fleets from one side of EVE to the other before we had bridges and titans to get in on fights. You will never stop large alliances from being able to reach anywhere in EVE.

As for your logi comment, we already alpha smaller fleets into oblivion and take no damage in return. You are literally arguing for small alliances to stand zero chance of even hurting us let alone having any chance to win. The CFC is untouchable and you are arguing to keep it that way.