Player Features and Ideas Discussion

This is the nullsec problem summed up. I can attest to the accuracy of this from both sides, since I was usually in a cloaky probing T3 spying on MOA during my time with SMA (part of the CFC to the nullnoobs) and got to see how fights unfolded from recon to salvage. CFC forces could move almost anywhere on a moments notice and counter the guerilla tactics of MOA.

The only thing they couldn't counter was the tactic of afk cloakers who did a great job demoralizing the grunts of the CFC. Can't rat or mine with a hotdropper in system, and as soon as you tried here came the covert cyno and bombers. Effective tactic, and one that caused isk flow to stop, and more than one corp to dissolve, but against the coalition juggernaut its as useless as a civilian blaster against a supercarrier.

Still, keep fighting the good fight, MOA!

My take on capital ship travel issue. Create a traffic control for the capital ships.

What that means? Every minute a SINGLE capital ship can jump into a system. From ALL the ships that had activated a cyno to jump into the system, ONE will be randomly drawn and jump, the others wait another chance on next minute. YES that would make HUGE hot drops VERY VERY hard to do.

Capitals would still be present, but bringing more than 20-30 would be a nightmare and would be better to bring subcapitals.

Aa before I forget, make titan bridges compete with the capitals for the jump slot.

Nullsec - "NERF IT NAO"?

Eve is a game of commitment and even advertised as such with possibilities of specialization or jack-of-all-trades. This can scale from someone wanting to train into a battleship taking a month to people wanting to max out a carrier for some reason spanning over 3 years in skill training alone. Other wanted to dominate the market on a commodity and others want to live permanently in wormhole space. Some want to dominate a FW war zone and work towards that (GJ GalMil).

At some point people went and decided that they want to commit themselves into nullsec and gathering as much space, resources and man power as possible. These alliances and coalitions have flared up quickly and burned down even more quickly.

All the types listed are one sort of commitment and are endorsed by CCP to be great game play and content creators. Now people want one of those commitments nullified because the current status quo is deeply entrenched due to the groups having power being extremely large and powerful in their respective areas, mainly logistics and man power. Why would one commitment need to be erased and others left alone? Clearly people who have worked for something don't deserve to keep their achievements untouched and all their work should be stripped from them.

Most of the ideas people have posted promote "1 person can capture a system but will be overrun by 3 and they will take the system". Some want to limit power projection by cutting jump distance, amount of ships passing per cyno or increasing fuel requirements. All these ideas have a base thinking that the issue is something being easily transported immediately to a battle field or that logistics to handle tower fuel is done too efficiently.

What is being missed with almost all of the suggestions is that the "new guys" wanting to take sov under a new system would still be outnumbered badly. If you cannot exceed numbers of the defenders, occupancy sov wouldn't hold much worth. Cutting jump distance would just force to use more cynos. Limitations on ships per cyno means you'd just have extra alts lighting N+1 cynos so you can drop ships fast enough. Increased fuel requirements only hurt those who cannot produce isotopes fast enough.

All the changes are seen as "yay nullsec is saved" but almost all arbitrary limitations forget that there are players who need these mechanics in day-to-day operations which are not directly related to nullsec. Are you willing to cripple the whole game just to fix nullsec?

Arbitrary limits to e.g. amount of players allowed to enter a system at one time (via a cyno, been proposed many times) could also be extended to normal means of travel. How would a station in hisec where you can only have 20 players docked at a time sound like? Stargate which only allows 100 jumps per hour? Agent which will only give out 50 missions per hour? Arbitrary limits are arbitrary because they are used to limit what is allowed in certain content. FW complexes have ship requirements on the gate and dominant faction can deny docking rights for opposing factions. Ship size restriction has been quoted as a feature which levels out the playing field and disallows shipping up to win the fight.

On the point of FW, Gallente recently dominated the field by having more numbers willing to fight at all time zones; they had superior amount of man power and committed themselves to finish the job once and for all. Current nullsec blocs had a superior amount of man power to commit into capturing all the systems they currently have. Politics was involved in both cases, but why is former allowed and cheered at and latter yelled as unfair?

If nothing else comes from this whole post; please think how the changes will affect people outside of nullsec when you are trying to think heavily-limiting arbitrary rules which will be applied to all the space in the game.

Also screw typos CBA to check for them.

What I'm seeing is that no-one likes sov the way it is.

Heh. I have a basic outline of the kind of thing I'd like to see for Sov, on my site.

Short version: People can attack your indexes, which form a cap on your main Sov index. Over time, a small group could grind down a larger, but more AFK groups indexes, to the point there they lose Sov.

Go shoot NPCs in your enemies space (but not the regular NPCs. Specific complexes relating to sov.) If people don't show up to run off the invaders, their systems get worse, their upgrades shut off, possibly their moongoo gets stolen/destroyed, etc.

Has the added benefit of making space seem somewhat more alive. As I see it, it's not just PCs out in null. They have NPC minions who can be targetted.

Sure, you might have an apex force that can take out any particular attacker. But it may not be able to take them all out. And not at specific times.

You can't be serious.

One of the biggest problems with current sov mechanics is that once the system has been claimed, there is no way to disrupt or harass it besides grinding through structures and timers. Small groups have to spend hours and hours of structure bashing, which burns people out and gives large groups plenty of time to gather a blob and drop it on top of attackers. Unless the current "ehp wall" mechanic is radically changed, there should be ways to harass sov without taking it to discourage holding vast number of barely used system.

For example, this could be cheap (spammable enough), small (to fit into a cruiser or even a frigate), not too easy to detect, anchorable low-ehp structures that add to the sov or station services cost and transfer this extra amount of isk to the owner of said structure. Or a similar structure that slowly (in a matter of week or so) captures sov without the need of sbu-s and timers or lowers sov level. Something that leeches or lowers bounty isk from ratting, and other stuff like that. And no notification for the sov owner. The idea is to make owners constantly look after their space if they want to keep it clean. If they do, any guy or two in common ships should be able to easily kill these structures. If they don't, then the guys who placed the structures should get some profit. So when they roam, and the sov owners either dock up or aren't even there, they could at least leave something nasty behind to punish them.

Changes nothing. You clearly did not read what I wrote. You cannot bring another capital . Is not PER cyno. THis is to be a per SYSTEM limit. IT still completely removes massive hotdrops.

Capital numbers on each combat would be MUCH smaller.

Be very careful CCP. If you break null, I will leave game. Burn Jita will be a tea party. Solve your problems. I remember how you fixed drone regions. You merely took things away. That was not a solution then, and will not be now.

I'm still not getting the point of "if you have more than 20 friends you shouldn't be allowed to fly with them at the same time". Blobs happen because people band together via social interaction to work towards a single goal. Could the GlaMil have taken the warzone without working together on the last constellation? Probably not as all of them had different agendas on what should be done.

Limit sandbox or MMO from a sandbox MMO and it falls apart as a game. EvE isn't a game which can be played solo or with just 2 friends at the highest level if the interaction is ships-in-space. Market PvP can be done solo easily, but people will band together to achieve goals and they will travel together.

Also I don't understand what you mean with "YOU ARE PART OF THE CANCER!", can you elaborate what this "CANCER" is? Social interaction?