These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Changes to SOV , Power Projection & Nullsec Stagnation

First post First post First post
Author
Anthar Thebess
#1621 - 2014-09-22 08:33:19 UTC
Capitals will be killed only when they will not scout them self.
Small people usually do not move their capital fleets few times a week around the map.
Current state moving of capitals :

Undock from station -> jump to cyno on station , dock , undock -> jump to cyno on station -> (...) -> jump to engagement.

Bold part is safe , and something very very stupid have to happen in order to loose ships in this part. You are crossing regions each jump, so you usually choose shorter jump.

What i propose :
Undock from station -> jump to regional gate , jump by the gate -> jump to midpoint station in region, dock, undock -> jump to regional gate , jump the gate -> jump to midpoint station in region, dock, undock -> jump to regional gate , jump the gate -> jump to engagement.

The same route will be applied to subcapital fleets and titan bridges, just replace the jump part with the titan bridge.

Bold part this time is when something can happen. You can be tackled , bubbled to slow your movement , splited , and where capitals will have to regenerate their cap. All of this dramatically extends the time for a fleet to arrive to destination - so having 1 staging system to control 4-5 regions will not be so viable any more.

This will also decrease impact from blobs on most of the NPC space and lowsec , as moving there will not be 1-2 jumps any more , but route by 3-4 midpoints , or even more.

Fact is that blobs currently have more space they can use , and more space they can even rent. Yet because of current instant teleporting mechanic they are able to take and hold r64 moons in lowsec or any npc space - preventing the same any new group to growup.

JF , they have to be also nerfed , for some time they could be excluded from sector jump limitation , but at the end i would also see them limited by this mechanic.

No exception for BO.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1622 - 2014-09-22 10:22:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Quote:
Capitals will be killed only when they will not scout them self.
Small people usually do not move their capital fleets few times a week around the map.
Current state moving of capitals :


I move my JFs around at least 1 time a week, I use my carrier at least 1 time per week/couple of times per month, we BLOPS drop a couple of times per month, we drop dreads a couple of times per month. Across several regions, especially the JF to stock our market and carriers to deploy to different areas of interest outside of Syndicate, so there is any to begin with. With my JF, I cross at least 4 regions with 1 jump. With your suggestion, I would have to jump the JF to a region/border gate, jump through and jump again. This would render logistics for me and the rest of my alliance and a lot of small entities, especially in remote areas like Delve, Stain or Outer Ring or fiercely contested areas like Curse or Core Fountain, into a task that's nearly impossible to achieve. That can't be the goal of such a mechanic.
BLOPS dropping would be hampered as well, as BLOPs would have to jump to several border/region gates to get into the target region, rendering their already limited usefulness even less useful.
Neutrals and hostiles, moreover, don't have "mid point stations" in areas like Sov 00, rendering incursions into that territory or crossing it to get from one area to the next even less feasible and the space deep inside Sov 00 even saver.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Anthar Thebess
#1623 - 2014-09-22 10:42:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
Rivr Luzade wrote:

I move my JFs around at least 1 time a week, I use my carrier at least 1 time per week/couple of times per month, we BLOPS drop a couple of times per month, we drop dreads a couple of times per month. Across several regions, especially the JF to stock our market and carriers to deploy to different areas of interest outside of Syndicate, so there is any to begin with. With my JF, I cross at least 4 regions with 1 jump. With your suggestion, I would have to jump the JF to a region/border gate, jump through and jump again. This would render logistics for me and the rest of my alliance and a lot of small entities, especially in remote areas like Delve, Stain or Outer Ring or fiercely contested areas like Curse or Core Fountain, into a task that's nearly impossible to achieve. That can't be the goal of such a mechanic.
BLOPS dropping would be hampered as well, as BLOPs would have to jump to several border/region gates to get into the target region, rendering their already limited usefulness even less useful.
Neutrals and hostiles, moreover, don't have "mid point stations" in areas like Sov 00, rendering incursions into that territory or crossing it to get from one area to the next even less feasible and the space deep inside Sov 00 even saver.


Sorry but the same rules have to be for every one.
I fly my carrier sometimes few times a day , and i live in stain , so yes this region will be having one hell for logistics.
Quote:
I cross at least 4 regions with 1 jump.

This is base issue of current state of eve - just to fast. In 1 jump you can be regions away directly in the battle , next jump you are back , next jump and you are 3 regions away in other direction.

My base concept was :
- XL (capital size) gates between regions, but ONLY into direction of nearest NPC space.
- ALL sov regions gain S size ( max cruiser ) gates towards nearest NPC space
- ALL NPC regions that are not directly connected to lowsec gain the same S size connection to nearest lowsec.

To make space more interesting , in some regions some constellations will also gain XL sized gates if they are out of reach for dreads or super capitals.

So in order to move from Paragon soul to nearest lowsec you WILL have to move your super or capital in this manner :
1. Paragon Soul
2. Esoteria
3. Stain
4.Catch
5. Curse/Providence
6. Lowsec

6 gates to cross , 6 places that someone could , do something to you.

At the same time when you want to move using S size gates in your T2 Cloaky indy :
1. Paragon Soul
2. Stain
3. Lowsec

(Yes you have to fly in stain between systems that are exit point from Paragon Soul and entry point for lowsec connection)
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1624 - 2014-09-22 11:03:47 UTC
Anthar Thebess wrote:


[1]Sorry but the same rules have to be for every one.

[2]So in order to move from Paragon soul to nearest lowsec you WILL have to move your super or capital in this manner :
1. Paragon Soul
2. Esoteria
3. Stain
4.Catch
5. Curse/Providence
6. Lowsec

6 gates to cross , 6 places that someone could , do something to you.

At the same time when you want to move using S size gates :
1. Paragon Soul
2. Stain
3. Lowsec

(Yes you have to fly in stain between systems that are exit point from Paragon Soul and entry point for lowsec connection)


[1]
This is exactly the problem. The same rules may apply, but their consequences differ extremely for different number scenarios. A 500 people alliance cannot protect its moving assets against a 10,000 people alliance, yet a 10,000 people alliance can protect its moving assets against a 500 people as well as a 10,000 people alliance/coalition. The shield of sheer numbers protects a 10,000 people alliance's assets from hotdrops by smaller entities, but smaller entities do not have such shielding.

Same rules does not level the field at all, as consequences are not the same.

[2]
Wrong. You would move in the following way.
01. Paragon Soul
02. Esoteria
03. (Esoteria (midpoint station/system, especially in large regions like Feyth)
04. Esoteria
05. Stain
06. Stain
07. Catch
08. Catch
09. Curse/Providence
10. Curse/Providence
11. Lowsec
12. Low sec destination.

And this is probably an optimal case. You have to cross at least 6 gates, which means at least 12 places where you can be assaulted and a giant load of work for anyone who does not have enough people to form a cyno/scout army. Again completely ruling out smaller entities from space.

I can't really see any benefits here that prevent bigger players from doing what they are doing while enabling smaller groups do anything all.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Anthar Thebess
#1625 - 2014-09-22 11:22:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Anthar Thebess wrote:


[1]Sorry but the same rules have to be for every one.

[2]So in order to move from Paragon soul to nearest lowsec you WILL have to move your super or capital in this manner :
1. Paragon Soul
2. Esoteria
3. Stain
4.Catch
5. Curse/Providence
6. Lowsec

6 gates to cross , 6 places that someone could , do something to you.

At the same time when you want to move using S size gates :
1. Paragon Soul
2. Stain
3. Lowsec

(Yes you have to fly in stain between systems that are exit point from Paragon Soul and entry point for lowsec connection)


[1]
This is exactly the problem. The same rules may apply, but their consequences differ extremely for different number scenarios. A 500 people alliance cannot protect its moving assets against a 10,000 people alliance, yet a 10,000 people alliance can protect its moving assets against a 500 people as well as a 10,000 people alliance/coalition. The shield of sheer numbers protects a 10,000 people alliance's assets from hotdrops by smaller entities, but smaller entities do not have such shielding.

Same rules does not level the field at all, as consequences are not the same.

[2]
Wrong. You would move in the following way.
01. Paragon Soul
02. Esoteria
03. (Esoteria (midpoint station/system, especially in large regions like Feyth)
04. Esoteria
05. Stain
06. Stain
07. Catch
08. Catch
09. Curse/Providence
10. Curse/Providence
11. Lowsec
12. Low sec destination.

And this is probably an optimal case. You have to cross at least 6 gates, which means at least 12 places where you can be assaulted and a giant load of work for anyone who does not have enough people to form a cyno/scout army. Again completely ruling out smaller entities from space.

I can't really see any benefits here that prevent bigger players from doing what they are doing while enabling smaller groups do anything all.


Point 2 almost right , but yes in some cases you will have big issues - and that is whole point of those changes.
Logistics also have to be impacted, as they are one of the ways you can easily project power.

Shielding will be not about numbers but a way you do some stuff.
Now you can easily hotdrop anyone as you just 2 cyno ships.
One that will hunt , and the seccond that will be sitting on a friendly station undock.
By this mechanic you can in 1 minute be 6-7 regions away.

People that will want to hotdrop your logistic op will have to be already on place , and yes logistic op - as you will escort your jump freighters.

Remember that logistics in both ways will be more difficult.
So i think that most of the stuff you are moving now out will stay and find its use locally.

Do not forget about the biggest shortcut that eve provides : Wormholes.
In nullsec region , finding one that will lead to lowsec space is not the big issue.

For a people living in some nullspace logistics will most likely be moved to :
Station -> WH -> Lowsec -> Higsec -> Lowsec -> WH -> Station.

Changes that will fix this game have to be extreme - as for any small changes big blocks will quickly adapt and in 1-2 moths after this map will be looking the same way as it is looking now.

The worst thing that CCP can do is to try do all nullsec changes at the same time.
Because this will take ages , sorry , years.

1 Limiting JB/Jump Drive/Titan Bridge projection is the first thing that must happen - and asap - this will be the thing that will generate content for every one , as this will totally shift current combat mechanic.

2. Next thing should be introducing some new faction agents to null space , so a single system can feed more people

3. Creating occupancy based sov.

This translates directly to :

1. Less space reachable fast , less possibility for hotdrops, more dedication to holding your sov in the matter of constant moving and not sitting in 1 system that have half of eve in 1-2 station midpoints.

2. Less space needed to generate income, especially from renter perspective. Why keep 4 regions full of renters when they all can generate income in 1 constellation.

3. Cementing the rule , you will keep only so much space as you really need.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1626 - 2014-09-22 12:02:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Anthar Thebess wrote:
People that will want to hotdrop your logistic op will have to be already on place , and yes logistic op - as you will escort your jump freighters.


They are already there. SC., MOROS, TISHU, CFC, PL, NC., BL, Marmite and you name it - they all have sizeable parties in exactly the areas that you want to make impassable for anyone who cannot provide the shielding with numbers.

Quote:
1. Less space reachable fast , less possibility for hotdrops, more dedication to holding your sov in the matter of constant moving and not sitting in 1 system that have half of eve in 1-2 station midpoints.


More safety for the ratters and mission runners in the least reachable areas of space.

Quote:
3. Cementing the rule , you will keep only so much space as you really need.


I really need all the space EVE has (I really like to fly around and do things in High sec, Low sec and 00 Sec). Now what? This is what many EVE players think and do.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Anthar Thebess
#1627 - 2014-09-22 12:30:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Anthar Thebess
But there is nothing wrong about someone hotdroping someone, catching him off guard.
Thats the base concept of those changes - more places that something might happen , moving fleets less secure.
Logistics that will require escort.

So you want to limit blobs, limit ability for hotdrops, third party instant teleportation across the map , but only if this will not affect you.

Sorry , i am aware that this changes will shakeup some of the game styles , but this is nullsec.
You cannot change this game without changing base concepts of the game.

Will some remote edges of the universe will be safe heaven for the ratters.
Yes ... like now.

Unless ccp creates those new connections (S size gates to nearest NPC space) , from those dead ends Twisted

Remember that for people living in those dead ends , logistics will be true nightmare.
But maybe this will be good, as every thing will be have to produced locally - and i think that this game should go into this direction , rather than "teleport new stuff from jita" .

As for moving between nullsec <->Lowsec <-> Higsec.
From subcapital perspective nothing will change much.

So unless you are bridging your subcapital 2-3 regions nothing will change much.

Currently ceptors are so fast that you can easily do 20-30 without any big threat.
Arsine Mayhem
Doomheim
#1628 - 2014-09-22 23:04:35 UTC
Can't imagine any game developer that took pride in their work would be happy with the present state of null sec, let alone have it go on for so long.

Bot lords "RENTING" null, really? So that leaves a big part of this game as a sad joke.

http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/some-ideas-on-eve/an-influence-sovereignty-system/

Do something.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1629 - 2014-09-23 05:51:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Arsine Mayhem wrote:
Can't imagine any game developer that took pride in their work would be happy with the present state of null sec, let alone have it go on for so long.

Bot lords "RENTING" null, really? So that leaves a big part of this game as a sad joke.

http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/some-ideas-on-eve/an-influence-sovereignty-system/

Do something.


How about you do something? CFC's PBLRD is not better at all. While B0T and NA. at least get people into 00 Sec (as seen by the numerous yellow dots on the map representing Players in Space in the last 30 Minutes), PBLRD mostly holds empty space. Infiltrate CFC and PL/N3 and spy around to spark war. Make them attack each other. Support smaller entities like TRI, MOA, Fountain Core or other insurgents (maybe even PASTA). Changes to the Sov System are the ultimate goal, but the Players of the game let it come this far after all because they are the lazy and safety-seeking activity drivers of the game.

And while PL/N3. rather play in 00 Sec and pull their shenanigans there, CFC prefers to stay in High sec and gank freighters and miners.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Anthar Thebess
#1630 - 2014-09-23 06:15:39 UTC
Well there is nothing wrong in renting itself.
Some people choose not to fight , but pay for security and space.
What is wrong is that 90 % of current nullsec space is not used by any one , but held by someone just because broken teleportation mechanic allows them to do it , no need for sov maintenance , big defensive ehp ...

You state that NA and BOT pulls people into nullsec - most of those people already lived in null space. They had space , lived in NPC space or where renting space in the past.

Nullsec population was really big before , im not stating it was perfect , but i see something opposite.

Nullsec popiulation is dropping , and is being replaced by empty accounts :
- isbox miners
- additional ratting accounts
- eyes
etc.

So accounts that will go inactive as soon as something changes in wrong direction, or when owner say "im bored"

Look what is happening in all big coalitions.
NC : merging and kicking inactive corps
PL : also having number issues
Lowsec ... downgrading
CFC still capable of putting swarms of people but i see some issues in doing this.

Now at the same time we have CCP calling for ideas about the nullsec.
This really bothers me , as CCP should do something in to direction of fixing this already.
Some of the accounts are already lost , as new games grow around eve.
Time is running out.

http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility

Year statistics show how players see game development , and how CCP address their needs.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1631 - 2014-09-23 06:53:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
This certainly is a problem; however, whatever CCP does, nothing is going to change if the same mindset, attitude and way of thinking and acting of the players continues to prevail. If no one is willing to take risks or sparks of a war (this is after all what most players seem to want and don't want at the same time) and continue farming Providence and Brave instead, any mechanics change is bound to change nothing on the state of 00 Sec itself.

Though, I also don't really fancy playing a game where I am "allowed" to "own" something by the munificence of the big players. And exactly this feeling is what I have been having for a couple of months now as the big players seemingly concentrate their entire force on the small entities and quell them instead of the big opponents.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Anthar Thebess
#1632 - 2014-09-23 07:08:35 UTC
This is not about who will shoot the first, as there is no point of gaining more space.
NC have enough like PL and CFC.
Nothing else matters.
Look at all space kept by NA. if any of N3 alliance was worth something to NC , it could get more space Roll

Now tell me why someone should start War, space is not the issue, income also.
Because eve is boring ... yes.
So we got recent : Delve War

Fight for nothing: N3 VS CFC ( and some third parties )
How much players did not noticed this war?
Because after few TIDI 5%, blue balls engagements , players proved again.
If the fight is for nothing. No one really have real objective , then more fun you can get in WOT.
This war ended this way.
More and more NC players played WOT rather go to fleets , at some time also cfc was doing the same , as ~ why go to fleets when enemy don't bother to login~

The only side that lost in this fight where third party groups on N3 side and Brave.

They proved to be more passionating farming grounds for NC than CFC (as they shoot back).
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1633 - 2014-09-23 12:26:14 UTC
Aryndel Vyst wrote:
You could have summed this post up by just saying "Hey here's how I want to fix nullsec: Remove jump drives"

Because that's pretty much what you are saying.

That's been suggested already in another thread, to a deluge of howling and butthurt whining. Not sure if the commenter was a troll but it was very entertaining.
Ceawlin Cobon-Han
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1634 - 2014-09-23 12:36:24 UTC
In nulsec there is a split between the PvP and the PvE elements of the game, PvE being the mining and manufacturing. PvP is in nulsec, whereas the PvE is in the "safe" area of hisec. This is obviously what the nulsec megablobs want: to fight without having danger to the resupply interfering with their fun.

Removing jump drives would solve the problem, in time. Certainly removing jump freighters from the game would have the same effect, while allowing the other capitals to function as now. Or maybe just disable jump drives in hisec? I'm sure with some joined-up thinking the stranglehold on nulsec can be loosened, in a simple and easy-to-manage way, software-wise.
Felix Judge
Regnum Ludorum
#1635 - 2014-09-23 12:47:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Felix Judge
Anthar Thebess wrote:
[...]
1 Limiting JB/Jump Drive/Titan Bridge projection is the first thing that must happen - and asap - this will be the thing that will generate content for every one , as this will totally shift current combat mechanic.

How will this change the current state of sov affairs, which is: sov is decided in fights at predetermined points of time, which leads to huge amounts of pilots all piled in one system at the same time (one word: TiDi!), and to the n+1 group practically always winning?


Anthar Thebess wrote:
3. Creating occupancy based sov.

Yay for that.
Dream Five
Renegade Pleasure Androids
#1636 - 2014-09-23 14:07:41 UTC
Wouldn't this make logistics super difficult and nobody will basically want to live in NULL? Plus the fights will be stagnated on a single key system (region entries). With current jump range you can atleast spread out and scatter an attack on sov. Tbh I think this these changes will lock down the sov even more but then i'm a nub in 0.0 :)
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#1637 - 2014-09-25 22:35:12 UTC
New discussion today from CCP.

Power Projection nerf inbound.

I hope its so monumental we will all be Shocked.

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny

Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1638 - 2014-09-26 07:44:46 UTC
I've heard that the CSM is happy with the changes, so it can't be all that monumental. Ugh

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Anthar Thebess
#1639 - 2014-09-26 07:55:06 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
I've heard that the CSM is happy with the changes, so it can't be all that monumental. Ugh

This sounds very bad Sad
Manfred Sideous
H A V O C
Fraternity.
#1640 - 2014-10-01 19:01:59 UTC
SMUG

@EveManny

https://twitter.com/EveManny