These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Pre-CSM Summit Nullsec and Sov Thread

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#261 - 2014-09-13 23:05:37 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#262 - 2014-09-13 23:17:27 UTC
Taconia wrote:
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.


Null is already broken.

So if you're saying you'll quit if they FIX null, then I suppose my only question is...

can i have your stuff?

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."
Snot Shot
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#263 - 2014-09-14 02:51:32 UTC
Null Sec is supposed to be a "Sandbox", so why keep certain SOV mechanics that allow it to be gamed into the slab of concrete it is now? Get rid of SOV structures/mechanics like TCUs, SBUs, Station Timers, and Station/Out Post docking rights.

Leave in place the IHUBs, upgradable system options that reward your efforts, and POS Timers. If you're Corp or Alliance is strong enough to farm, police, and defend what space you chose to "control", then you keep the space you want. If not, you move to where you can.

This idea, or a form of it, would allow players new and dynamic game choices related to Null Sec play. There are hundreds of unused stations and systems all over Null Sec being rented out because the players that want to use them can't kill the SOV structures. The landlords who did, are now logged off, playing other games, and only login to collect the rent checks.

New "SOV" mechanics need to cause stress fractures within the out of game meta community that has gathered into a giant flock of sheep huddled around Alliances like GSF. Currently they hide behind massive walls of HP and timers to survive and will simply strive to make sure they have a work around established for every conceivable threat posed by most of the "Hamster Wheel" like SOV ideas people are promoting.

The "New SOV" simply needs to make is possible for so many fires to be started that the Coalitions which exist now can't be every where at once in order to put them out. It needs to be boiled down so that each Alliance, within the Coalitions that exist now, will actually need to be strong enough to live in the space they chose to occupy else they will be forcefully removed by those who are.

If TCUs, SBUs, Timers, and Docking rights go away small pvp corps and Alliances could move out to vacant 0.0 stations and start using the space around it. Many of these smaller Corps and Alliances are so good at PvP and harassment tactics that the current incompetent PvP Alliances hiding behind walls of HP, Timers, and Docking rights might crumble under the weight of this constant assault. The classic response of “adapt or die” would actually apply to Null Sec.

Under the future SOV details I describe, Alliances that hold space in Null Sec would actually have to be good at the game and micro politics would drive the narrative all over Null Sec instead of what a few decided on coms while playing Tanks. Mercs would become a thing again.

The players could influence the game on a micro level every time they log in. The "butterfly" effect would actually mean something in EVE again.

CCP needs to wipe the Null Sec slate clean. Give Null Sec an enema and let it be the wild west its always been described. Any new SOV idea that needs math to describe it is just bull ****. We shouldn't need to run on a hamster wheel to keep our space. We should want and need to log in and use/defend it to keep it. If we don't then we could log in a week or two later and find a new Alliance living there.

Once CCP can focus their attention to what makes living in Null Sec interesting, exciting, and challenging we can get a pulse back which in turn might develop into a strong heart beat again for the game.

New Null Sec Mission Agents, plexes, fluctuating/depleting resources, mechanics, structures, and what each Alliance can use to "claim" their space. Create something that defines them and allows them to plant their flag..........their "Castle Black" or "The Sphere" of sorts.

Don't bog CCP down by wasting their time developing a new "Structure bashing **** show" that will just be gamed by those who play this game from time to time. Help them develop a new Null Sec that can't be controlled by people who rarely log in or those who have the largest SC fleet.

If you want the space then live there and defend it.......nuff said.Pirate
.

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

evesnotshot.blogspot.com
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#264 - 2014-09-14 03:51:23 UTC
We can break it down into sections which, oddly enough, fits in well with CCPs new development plan.

We start off with addressing the need for empire sprawl. Right now there is a cap on how many players can actively rat in a single system, this currently stands at ten per system. This means groups like ours require vast areas of space to support our members.

"But most of your space is empty!" I hear you cry.

Yes this is true but that is down to another problem which is truesec. You see, the primary form of pve in null sec for your average pilot is anoms and they are tied to truesec. Most systems in null offer worse isk generation than blitzing level 3 missions in highsec with a mach. The best systems in null are on par to slightly worse than can be earned in high sec level 4 mission blitzing.

So we have a double whammy of poor isk income from most of null and the low player cap of 10 per system. This needs to change if we are to shrink the current two blocks from half of EVE each to a single region each and it must happen before any changes to sov.

Simply adding more anoms won't work, not only would a player cap still exist but you would also flood too much isk into the system. Inflation is also why you cannot just add more isk reward to anoms. Anoms must be replaced as the primary pve content and isk generator of nullsec. By far the easiest way to fix this issue is to add mission agents to player outposts. They allow for an unlimited population and null missions provide greater reward than highsec but importantly they will inject far less isk into the system than anoms and will be far easier to implement for CCP than a whole new system.

Capitals:

We then have to deal with capitals. Right now you either have a capital force that can match the two big powers or you are an irrelevant sideshow. Capital issues are all over the place and need several big changes. Firstly, carriers are going to have to lose access to sentries and move to a fighter based platform. Secondly, supers are going to have to lose their E-war immunity however they also need something big in return. Supers and titans must be allowed to dock in outposts. We have to end the bleeding of high SP subs because they are trapped in a space coffin that doesn't see much use. Lastly we must deal with their invulnerability to subcaps, this is covered in the next and most controversial fix.

N+1:

People rightly hate the blob, but why do they hate fighting outnumbered?

Well, its because they cannot hurt it. Right now fleet meat revolves around one simple fact, you must be able to alpha past the logistics of the enemy fleet. If you cannot do this then engaging is pointless. Logistics are going to have to be nerfed if smaller alliances are to stand any chance in null. Equally, it is logistics that makes capital fleets impossible to kill with a subcap fleet. It is going to be painful, it will mean much bloodier fights and chances are I will be among the first to fall in any fleet engagement but if we want to fix null it must happen.

"But you will just farm smaller fleets!" I hear you cry.

This is already happening. We are effectively untouchable to smaller fleets as they cannot harm us. With a logi nerf in place new tactics such as cheap in your face DPS fleets can dive into the heart of a baltec fleet and inflict a large amount of damage. Sure, we might hold the grid in the end but we could very easily lose the isk war and that is exactly the sort of thing smaller alliances need to boost moral. "Yea we lost that tower but we killed three times more isk worth of stuff".

Sov:

Another need for big balls of ships is the way sov fights are handled. At the moment you fight a handful of timed fights over huge amounts of EHP. This system needs to go. Not only does it mean you need lots of ships to grind down the structures but it also means you need equally or bigger fleets to defend. Remove the ehp and you remove the need for the massive fleets.

The current sov system also lets us dominate huge areas of empty space so long as we can pay the bills. So to end this sov needs to move to residency based. At a stroke you would make at least 80% of the current sov claims drop as all of the unoccupied systems drop. This is by far the most complicated part of the null overhaul and should rightly come last.
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#265 - 2014-09-14 06:50:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Azami Nevinyrall
baltec1 wrote:
We start off with addressing the need for empire sprawl. Right now there is a cap on how many players can actively rat in a single system, this currently stands at ten per system. This means groups like ours require vast areas of space to support our members.

Yes this is true but that is down to another problem which is truesec. You see, the primary form of pve in null sec for your average pilot is anoms and they are tied to truesec. Most systems in null offer worse isk generation than blitzing level 3 missions in highsec with a mach. The best systems in null are on par to slightly worse than can be earned in high sec level 4 mission blitzing.

So we have a double whammy of poor isk income from most of null and the low player cap of 10 per system. This needs to change if we are to shrink the current two blocks from half of EVE each to a single region each and it must happen before any changes to sov.

Simply adding more anoms won't work, not only would a player cap still exist but you would also flood too much isk into the system. Inflation is also why you cannot just add more isk reward to anoms. Anoms must be replaced as the primary pve content and isk generator of nullsec. By far the easiest way to fix this issue is to add mission agents to player outposts. They allow for an unlimited population and null missions provide greater reward than highsec but importantly they will inject far less isk into the system than anoms and will be far easier to implement for CCP than a whole new system.


"But most of your space is empty!" This is true, and so is the above! You already have Nullsec Space with NPC agents, limiting Agents to one particular group is wrong. Even if all sides got access to their own agents, someone will start to complain that the other groups has better Agents. Then you have the fluid borders of Nullsec and how they can move freely without a single shot being fired. So the better agents will be shifted as the powers see fit. If anything more NPC space is needed...

baltec1 wrote:
Capitals:

We then have to deal with capitals. Right now you either have a capital force that can match the two big powers or you are an irrelevant sideshow. Capital issues are all over the place and need several big changes. Firstly, carriers are going to have to lose access to sentries and move to a fighter based platform. Secondly, supers are going to have to lose their E-war immunity however they also need something big in return. Supers and titans must be allowed to dock in outposts. We have to end the bleeding of high SP subs because they are trapped in a space coffin that doesn't see much use. Lastly we must deal with their invulnerability to subcaps, this is covered in the next and most controversial fix.


I 80% absolutely agree with this.

If anything, make a new ship class (YAY MOAR SHIPS!) designed for Capital E-War purposes.

You loose all right to complain about your coffin the moment you lay in it! A new station that acts like a Ship Yard IRL would be a viable solution. You dock and it's locked to that Character/Leadership. It can be popped! Super Capitals should never be allowed to have a "Safe Option."

baltec1 wrote:
N+1:

People rightly hate the blob, but why do they hate fighting outnumbered?

Well, its because they cannot hurt it. Right now fleet meat revolves around one simple fact, you must be able to alpha past the logistics of the enemy fleet. If you cannot do this then engaging is pointless. Logistics are going to have to be nerfed if smaller alliances are to stand any chance in null. Equally, it is logistics that makes capital fleets impossible to kill with a subcap fleet. It is going to be painful, it will mean much bloodier fights and chances are I will be among the first to fall in any fleet engagement but if we want to fix null it must happen.

"But you will just farm smaller fleets!" I hear you cry.

This is already happening. We are effectively untouchable to smaller fleets as they cannot harm us. With a logi nerf in place new tactics such as cheap in your face DPS fleets can dive into the heart of a baltec fleet and inflict a large amount of damage. Sure, we might hold the grid in the end but we could very easily lose the isk war and that is exactly the sort of thing smaller alliances need to boost moral. "Yea we lost that tower but we killed three times more isk worth of stuff".


Yeah, no...

First off, this is just pushing "power Projection" off to the side and blaming something else.

I remember being on a lowsec roam, a small gang of 20 or so. Just Rifters and general ****. Bump into a T3 gang, we engage cause boredom and lolz..."CYNO UP, 9 Carriers and support jump in." We run and get called noobs and pussies.

What needs to change is your ability to drop Hundreds of Megathrons, dozens of jumps away with little to no effort.

That Titan that was just used to move that Baltec fleet, yeah, move his ass outside that POS to light that Bridge. I'll bet no Titan pilot would let any scrub near it! (Without a POS shield in the way.) We both know that any Alliance will burn a line member spy for a Titan kill.....or 2

...
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#266 - 2014-09-14 06:54:46 UTC
Snot Shot wrote:
Null Sec is supposed to be a "Sandbox", so why keep certain SOV mechanics that allow it to be gamed into the slab of concrete it is now? Get rid of SOV structures/mechanics like TCUs, SBUs, Station Timers, and Station/Out Post docking rights.

Leave in place the IHUBs, upgradable system options that reward your efforts, and POS Timers. If you're Corp or Alliance is strong enough to farm, police, and defend what space you chose to "control", then you keep the space you want. If not, you move to where you can.

This idea, or a form of it, would allow players new and dynamic game choices related to Null Sec play. There are hundreds of unused stations and systems all over Null Sec being rented out because the players that want to use them can't kill the SOV structures. The landlords who did, are now logged off, playing other games, and only login to collect the rent checks.

New "SOV" mechanics need to cause stress fractures within the out of game meta community that has gathered into a giant flock of sheep huddled around Alliances like GSF. Currently they hide behind massive walls of HP and timers to survive and will simply strive to make sure they have a work around established for every conceivable threat posed by most of the "Hamster Wheel" like SOV ideas people are promoting.

The "New SOV" simply needs to make is possible for so many fires to be started that the Coalitions which exist now can't be every where at once in order to put them out. It needs to be boiled down so that each Alliance, within the Coalitions that exist now, will actually need to be strong enough to live in the space they chose to occupy else they will be forcefully removed by those who are.

If TCUs, SBUs, Timers, and Docking rights go away small pvp corps and Alliances could move out to vacant 0.0 stations and start using the space around it. Many of these smaller Corps and Alliances are so good at PvP and harassment tactics that the current incompetent PvP Alliances hiding behind walls of HP, Timers, and Docking rights might crumble under the weight of this constant assault. The classic response of “adapt or die” would actually apply to Null Sec.

Under the future SOV details I describe, Alliances that hold space in Null Sec would actually have to be good at the game and micro politics would drive the narrative all over Null Sec instead of what a few decided on coms while playing Tanks. Mercs would become a thing again.

The players could influence the game on a micro level every time they log in. The "butterfly" effect would actually mean something in EVE again.

CCP needs to wipe the Null Sec slate clean. Give Null Sec an enema and let it be the wild west its always been described. Any new SOV idea that needs math to describe it is just bull ****. We shouldn't need to run on a hamster wheel to keep our space. We should want and need to log in and use/defend it to keep it. If we don't then we could log in a week or two later and find a new Alliance living there.

Once CCP can focus their attention to what makes living in Null Sec interesting, exciting, and challenging we can get a pulse back which in turn might develop into a strong heart beat again for the game.

New Null Sec Mission Agents, plexes, fluctuating/depleting resources, mechanics, structures, and what each Alliance can use to "claim" their space. Create something that defines them and allows them to plant their flag..........their "Castle Black" or "The Sphere" of sorts.

Don't bog CCP down by wasting their time developing a new "Structure bashing **** show" that will just be gamed by those who play this game from time to time. Help them develop a new Null Sec that can't be controlled by people who rarely log in or those who have the largest SC fleet.

If you want the space then live there and defend it.......nuff said.Pirate
.


Much of what you say makes sense.

Bottom line, the meta-game has more impact on null than the current game mechanics. The cartel leaderships will endeavour to maintain the status quo, at any cost to the subscription base, via their CSM mothpiece and a huge campaign on the forums. The ONLY way CCP can save Eve, and by extension their own company, is totally devastate the exisiting in-game mechanics and institute new mechanics robust enough to withstand he onslaught of the cartels. They will try everything they can, be it inagame or through extremely advanced meta tactics, to save their cash flows.

Does CCP have the will and technical capabilities to thwart and even over-ride the null sec cartel vested interests? We will know in the next 9-12 months.
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#267 - 2014-09-14 06:57:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

Sov:

Another need for big balls of ships is the way sov fights are handled. At the moment you fight a handful of timed fights over huge amounts of EHP. This system needs to go. Not only does it mean you need lots of ships to grind down the structures but it also means you need equally or bigger fleets to defend. Remove the ehp and you remove the need for the massive fleets.

The current sov system also lets us dominate huge areas of empty space so long as we can pay the bills. So to end this sov needs to move to residency based. At a stroke you would make at least 80% of the current sov claims drop as all of the unoccupied systems drop. This is by far the most complicated part of the null overhaul and should rightly come last.


There is a better 2 step approach to this. First one, nerf Power Projection. (See above) And reduce the amount of timers (Shield and Armor......Shield only plz) and make that function just like POSs. Use Stront for this, that way Defenders have some control instead of a guaranteed "X" hours thing. It'll make it easier for smaller groups to get a foothold/harass. At first, the landgrab would allow larger groups to push around. But the amount of smaller groups nipping at your sides would control that outflow. The players as a whole will dictate how big your Space is....not 3-4 people.

...
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#268 - 2014-09-14 07:00:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Azami Nevinyrall
If CCP is to listen to anything I have to say it should be these 2 ideas...

ArrowLocal chat and SCUs...

Make the SCU a Celestial Object in orbit around the local Star. a Really big stick if you will. When you shoot at it, you're really shooting a "Core." The cores dictate who "own" the system.

Just as I said before, Shield only timer, and any reinforcement should work exactly like POSs........with lower EHP!

When it's reinforced or not claimed, local chat is disabled...


Arrow Destructible Stations...

I agree, they should be able to go *POP*...but not fully destroyed. Lets be honest, if there's a major SOV war going on and one side gets backed to their staging system. You pop that station, you pissed off alot of people, and just lost a number of Subs.

Most of the ideas are stupid.

"blow everything up inside"... See above!

"It drops cans!"... POP cans or have a fleet parked ontop of said cans and pick off people that tries to salvage their lives.

"Everything to moved to your local NPC station"... I can only imagine the fart the server would produce. Moving all the items...contracts...market...from the past how ever long that Station has been there.

A better option to be...have to go *POP* and generate a killmail...with only Station Services on it! Allow anyone to dock afterwards, but nothing will be available to them. No services at all. No Trading, no Contracts, no Fitting, the Market for that station is completely disabled...nothing!

...
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#269 - 2014-09-14 07:58:08 UTC
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:


"But most of your space is empty!" This is true, and so is the above! You already have Nullsec Space with NPC agents, limiting Agents to one particular group is wrong. Even if all sides got access to their own agents, someone will start to complain that the other groups has better Agents. Then you have the fluid borders of Nullsec and how they can move freely without a single shot being fired. So the better agents will be shifted as the powers see fit. If anything more NPC space is needed...


LP would be in the form of Concord LP. There would not be "goon lp" that nobody else could access.


Azami Nevinyrall wrote:

I 80% absolutely agree with this.

If anything, make a new ship class (YAY MOAR SHIPS!) designed for Capital E-War purposes.

You loose all right to complain about your coffin the moment you lay in it! A new station that acts like a Ship Yard IRL would be a viable solution. You dock and it's locked to that Character/Leadership. It can be popped! Super Capitals should never be allowed to have a "Safe Option."


There is no logical reason to stop supers and titans from docking. Forcing people to keep a high SP character to sit in them all the time does not limit their numbers and they are no longer something special.


Azami Nevinyrall wrote:

Yeah, no...

First off, this is just pushing "power Projection" off to the side and blaming something else.

I remember being on a lowsec roam, a small gang of 20 or so. Just Rifters and general ****. Bump into a T3 gang, we engage cause boredom and lolz..."CYNO UP, 9 Carriers and support jump in." We run and get called noobs and pussies.

What needs to change is your ability to drop Hundreds of Megathrons, dozens of jumps away with little to no effort.

That Titan that was just used to move that Baltec fleet, yeah, move his ass outside that POS to light that Bridge. I'll bet no Titan pilot would let any scrub near it! (Without a POS shield in the way.) We both know that any Alliance will burn a line member spy for a Titan kill.....or 2


It is impossible to stop power projection and this fix has nothing to do with that. It is to end the situation where it is impossible for smaller groups to even score kills against a larger power. Fights today are entirely one sided in favor of the group with the largest amount of logi. If you cannot alpha past the logi you might as well stay docked because all you will manage is to feed the enemy kills. Logi is also the reason why carrier/super fleets are impossible to kill with subcaps no matter how many you bring.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#270 - 2014-09-14 07:59:59 UTC
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

Sov:

Another need for big balls of ships is the way sov fights are handled. At the moment you fight a handful of timed fights over huge amounts of EHP. This system needs to go. Not only does it mean you need lots of ships to grind down the structures but it also means you need equally or bigger fleets to defend. Remove the ehp and you remove the need for the massive fleets.

The current sov system also lets us dominate huge areas of empty space so long as we can pay the bills. So to end this sov needs to move to residency based. At a stroke you would make at least 80% of the current sov claims drop as all of the unoccupied systems drop. This is by far the most complicated part of the null overhaul and should rightly come last.


There is a better 2 step approach to this. First one, nerf Power Projection. (See above) And reduce the amount of timers (Shield and Armor......Shield only plz) and make that function just like POSs. Use Stront for this, that way Defenders have some control instead of a guaranteed "X" hours thing. It'll make it easier for smaller groups to get a foothold/harass. At first, the landgrab would allow larger groups to push around. But the amount of smaller groups nipping at your sides would control that outflow. The players as a whole will dictate how big your Space is....not 3-4 people.


This would change nothing. We are more than able to move our fleets around in time to stomp on anyone trying to take our sov even if you force us to only use gates.
Speedkermit Damo
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#271 - 2014-09-14 08:25:02 UTC
Taconia wrote:
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.


The fact that renters like you exist. Is why nullsec is already broken. Imagine being able to control a system without having to bend the knee to PL.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#272 - 2014-09-14 08:38:41 UTC
Speedkermit Damo wrote:
Taconia wrote:
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.


The fact that renters like you exist. Is why nullsec is already broken. Imagine being able to control a system without having to bend the knee to PL.



And then you get dropped by a swarm of capitals, get camped until you lose the system.
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#273 - 2014-09-14 09:49:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Inquisitor Kitchner
Here are my thoughts on the subject:

The big driver, in my opinion, to attract people to Eve is the idea of 'empire building'. Everyone sees the cool adverts and news stories of these huge space wars or financial/industrial empires and that's what attracts them. No one plays Eve because they want to be one of many industrialists. They play because they want to be the he ad (or at least close to the head) of a huge industrial powerhouse.

With sov I believe the ability to build an empire is important to retain. The existence of the CFC and to a less extent, N3 is something that always interests non-eve players. So the solution isn't to simply stop these things from happening.

Instead I feel the objectives of the sov system should be to naturally mimic the rise and fall of empires as seen in the real world.

If we look at famous empires only a handful were defeated by a coalition of enemies. The majority were defeated by small, niggling attacks which increased in frequency the larger they became. The slow, ponderous empires couldn't defend all their subjects at once, found themselves unable to decisively beat small guerilla forces, and found their empires increasingly expensive to run as a result.

I do not think a 1,000 man alliance should be able to bring down a 36,000 man coalition ever. What they should be able to do though is attack structures and players in such a way that the only response that works is by a rapid form up by the actual owners/tenants.

Being able to steal moongoo and ratting rewards via the siphon and the ESS were good starts, but poorly implemented.

When a small alliance is able to meaningfully hurt, but not actually kill, bigger alliances there will always be a problem.

I don't think that larger alliances should actually lose control of systems easily. Afterall, if you look at any RL civil wars and rebellions, rebels or terrorists may de facto control territory but they won't be recognised on the map.

Instead I feel more benefit needs to be derived from owning and improving infrastructure in systems (which in turn can be attacked) rather than inherent bonuses (e.g. I get a fuel bonus because I own the system is bad, but I get a fuel bonus because either own the system which has a fuel processing plant structure is good).

In this way there is an incentive for small groups of players to attack big groups of players, even if it wont directly result in a sov loss. There is an incentive for more small gang quick form defence gangs from the sov owners. Eventually if a sov owner can't defend themselves their members will start to question the point in owning the space. Why pay for space that provides no benefit as all the benefits keep being stolen or destroyed? It becomes a net cost rather than a benefit and at that point why bother holding or defending it. Sure a coalition could then move forces to defend the territory, "the Empire strikes back" if you will, but that's the point. Coalitions that are able to organise themselves to defend against attackers on multiple fronts over a sustained period of time deserve to have the space. Coalitions that don't deserve to crumble under the weight of a thousand papercuts.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#274 - 2014-09-14 10:11:11 UTC
Bah, the quotes the quotes!

@baltec1

I didn't even mention Concorde LP, or Goon LP™.
I said that limiting Agents to one group is wrong...and it is! Every agent is available to every player (Standings permitting!) This would prevent Players from accessing Agents in...yes...Goon space. And all SOV space too..........unless they were "Blue" or in said Alliance.
So, there most of the playerbase....excluded.
Then you'd have to even it out so no one Group gets more or better Agents then the rest. Which involves looking at the map and hand picking them and placing them. Oh, and borders change. Just like moon-goo! It'll be gamed too all ****!



Actions have consequences buddy...
Super Capital and Titan pilots knew what they were getting themselves into before they bought the Skillbooks....deal with the consequences of your actions.



It is possible to stop power projection, make doing it risky to the Titan pilot. Alliances would have a choice to either risk loosing that Titan or move your fleet gate by gate.....there and back! If your space got invaded on 2 different fronts, are you going to expect all your pilots to be willing to burn 20 odd jumps in high TiDi only to fight one battle, then burn another 30 jumps to fight another? Or split your resources and fight on both sides at once and risk loosing a defeat on 2 sides?

But, I will agree that a stacking penalty to remote reps would be a good idea. Not a nerf to the logi themselves...

...
kidkoma
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#275 - 2014-09-14 10:32:29 UTC
ArrowNo structure grinding. Seriously, Shooting ANY high EHP structure is bad. No structure shoots ever.

ArrowIf this happens, give super pilots a chance to reprocess their supers. Without structures, supers are dumb.

Reward baller small groups.

I honestly don't care how you do it, as long as

1)No structuresAttention

2) Badass small groups can take sov.Cool

3)#1 ad nauseam

I want to see 'off the book' type missions, high paying frig/dessi missions in the vein of pirate epic arc's. No LP, no standings required/gained/lost. Agents show up and offer missions that pay cash and prizes.
Laminar Septimar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#276 - 2014-09-14 10:40:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Laminar Septimar
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:


First off, this is just pushing "power Projection" off to the side and blaming something else.

I remember being on a lowsec roam, a small gang of 20 or so. Just Rifters and general ****. Bump into a T3 gang, we engage cause boredom and lolz..."CYNO UP, 9 Carriers and support jump in." We run and get called noobs and pussies.

What needs to change is your ability to drop Hundreds of Megathrons, dozens of jumps away with little to no effort.


How about Billions of ISK in the Titan itself and the Skillbook? How about years of skilltime? That "little to no effort" is the base of most of our Nullbears existence. If you can't field enough Power to beat another, you just lose. That's not a brainfart, that's a real fact.
Nerriana
Avanto
Hole Control
#277 - 2014-09-14 10:53:48 UTC
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:
If CCP is to listen to anything I have to say it should be these 2 ideas...


Arrow Destructible Stations...

"Everything to moved to your local NPC station"... I can only imagine the fart the server would produce. Moving all the items...contracts...market...from the past how ever long that Station has been there.


There is no reason why this transfer should be "instantaneous" or relevant to local lag. A Low-priority background job taking couple hours... so what? No reason to rush,

If you want to be nice, you could even offer "CONCORD Transportation" to move your items to NPC station of your choice (high sec, lowsec, npc null, whatever)... For a "small" fee, of course.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#278 - 2014-09-14 10:57:41 UTC
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:
Bah, the quotes the quotes!

@baltec1

I didn't even mention Concorde LP, or Goon LP™.
I said that limiting Agents to one group is wrong...and it is! Every agent is available to every player (Standings permitting!) This would prevent Players from accessing Agents in...yes...Goon space. And all SOV space too..........unless they were "Blue" or in said Alliance.
So, there most of the playerbase....excluded.
Then you'd have to even it out so no one Group gets more or better Agents then the rest. Which involves looking at the map and hand picking them and placing them. Oh, and borders change. Just like moon-goo! It'll be gamed too all ****!


It would operate just like any other station upgrade and come in 4 levels. At level 1 it would provide a level 1 agent, at level 2 it would provide a level 1 and 2 agent and so on to level 4. LP would come in the form of Concord LP and could be used in any LP store aside from the pirate factions.

The reason why missions make the most sense for null is because they allow for an infinite number of people to live in a single system which is what is needed if you want to fix empire sprawl.

Azami Nevinyrall wrote:

Actions have consequences buddy...
Super Capital and Titan pilots knew what they were getting themselves into before they bought the Skillbooks....deal with the consequences of your actions.


This is a poor argument for keeping a mechanic in place that causes more harm than good.


Azami Nevinyrall wrote:

It is possible to stop power projection, make doing it risky to the Titan pilot. Alliances would have a choice to either risk loosing that Titan or move your fleet gate by gate.....there and back! If your space got invaded on 2 different fronts, are you going to expect all your pilots to be willing to burn 20 odd jumps in high TiDi only to fight one battle, then burn another 30 jumps to fight another? Or split your resources and fight on both sides at once and risk loosing a defeat on 2 sides?

You can attack us on five fronts and force use to only use gates to travel and force us to base out of YA0 and we would still be able to defend our assets. You cannot nerf power projection, what you nerf is the need to project power.

Azami Nevinyrall
172.0.0.1
#279 - 2014-09-14 11:06:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Azami Nevinyrall
Laminar Septimar wrote:
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:


First off, this is just pushing "power Projection" off to the side and blaming something else.

I remember being on a lowsec roam, a small gang of 20 or so. Just Rifters and general ****. Bump into a T3 gang, we engage cause boredom and lolz..."CYNO UP, 9 Carriers and support jump in." We run and get called noobs and pussies.

What needs to change is your ability to drop Hundreds of Megathrons, dozens of jumps away with little to no effort.


How about Billions of ISK in the Titan itself and the Skillbook? How about years of skilltime? That "little to no effort" is the base of most of us Nullbears existence. If you can't field enough Power to beat another, you just lose. That's not a brainfart, that's a real fact.

I'm not talking about Nerfing the Titan directly. My argument has always been the relative ease to hide behind a POS shield in complete safety. Stick your ass out the shield and let X amount to grunts press a button.

And lets be honest, the effort to use your Titan as a portable and completely safe stargate is a little OP. If you use something, it should be at risk!

Nerriana wrote:
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:
If CCP is to listen to anything I have to say it should be these 2 ideas...


Arrow Destructible Stations...

"Everything to moved to your local NPC station"... I can only imagine the fart the server would produce. Moving all the items...contracts...market...from the past how ever long that Station has been there.


There is no reason why this transfer should be "instantaneous" or relevant to local lag. A Low-priority background job taking couple hours... so what? No reason to rush,

If you want to be nice, you could even offer "CONCORD Transportation" to move your items to NPC station of your choice (high sec, lowsec, npc null, whatever)... For a "small" fee, of course.


Well, to retrieve all that data of all the players who has even 1 Trit in said station would put considerable strain on the server. Especially if it's under heavy TiDi! And, if it was a staging system and timers need to be met, it kinda is a rush...

Now for your "Movement options" You'd need to place a time limit on it....Someone logging in a year or two down the road and the station is a could of dust with notifications buzzing everywhere with a bill attached. Isn't a friendly "Welcome Back!" Then pricing, and if a player doesn't have the ISK available then and there, then what? They loose their **** and CCP looses a sub.

...
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#280 - 2014-09-14 11:12:34 UTC
Azami Nevinyrall wrote:

I'm not talking about Nerfing the Titan directly. My argument has always been the relative ease to hide behind a POS shield in complete safety. Stick your ass out the shield and let X amount to grunts press a button.

And lets be honest, the effort to use your Titan as a portable and completely safe stargate is a little OP. If you use something, it should be at risk!



They are. You may not be aware of this but it is ver possible to bump said titan out of a POS while it is bridging. Lets not also forget the ever present jump rather than bridge mistake.

In any event, there are ways to get around forcing a titan to jump with a fleet.