These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

The problems with 0.0 Sov, Alliance life and how to fix it

Author
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#1 - 2012-01-26 08:44:51 UTC
I think I should just write an entire series of manifestos entitled "How To Fix It". Lol

But seriously, what I'm really most interested in is putting forth ideas and suggestions that will truly improve Eve at its most basic and fundamental levels. Core systems like mining, industry, 0.0 sovereignty and similar. I'm a lowsec pirate by experience and play style preference, but I have extensive experience across all aspects of Eve space, be it high sec, low sec or 0.0. Regardless of my preferred play style, I have first hand experience dealing with all the considerations required of alliance leaders and the rank and file nullsec denizens trying to make their way in 0.0. Anyway, all I'm trying to say is that I'm not "pro 0.0" or "pro highsec"- I'm just pro Eve. I want to make the game better for everyone while not taking anything away from any one section of the population.

0.0 has some major design flaws that need to be fixed, and fixing them doesn't mean that we have to put lowsec or highsec at a disadvantage to do it.

Some quick thoughts:

The capacity for a single character to generate "peak ISK/hour" shouldn't be increased beyond what is traditionally accepted by running L4/L5 missions in 0.0, running anomalies and ratting etc. The peak earning rate is already plenty high and increasing it will only lead to inflation.

Right now risk in Eve is very binary: you're either radically exposed to PVP (lowsec and 0.0) or you're not (.5 and above). Some would cite suicide ganking and war decs in highsec as exceptions, but again, those are exceptions that prove the rule.

Highsec, lowsec and 0.0 are three very distinct environments with very distinct play styles and it should remain this way and in fact all future design changes should reinforce this fact. Different is good. Choice is good.

Main problem areas and solutions, in no particular order of importance:

Sovereignty, holding space and making money: Currently, alliances don't have any truly direct revenue stream. Sure, there's moon goo and tithes that are paid by member corps and renters etc., but those are all "unofficial". That is, there's no concrete in-game framework that allows any of this to happen in an automated fashion.

CCP changed the sov mechanics so that it cost alliances to hold space. The idea being that alliances wouldn't claim space just to claim it, and this would give other entities the opportunity to claim space, as growing too big would simply be too expensive to maintain. Clearly this hasn't worked out too well.

My idea is simple: allow alliances to tax anyone and everyone that generates ISK in any system where they maintain sov. The taxes go directly to the alliance, and the rate is tied to the level of sov in the system, with a maximum of 10% at level 5. The tax would be straight off the top, before any corp tax is applied. Worried about individuals complaining that they're taxed too much? Corp owners can simply reduce their corp tax by 2-3% to allow their individual members to retain earned ISK at a rate comparable to what they're used to (say, 10% corp tax for example). The point being here is that *everybody* gets taxed when operating in the system, whether they're in the alliance or not. Don't like it? Don't rat/mission/plex there. It's their space, they earned it.

Note that this isn't generating more ISK out of thin air. What this does is it encourages alliances to take space, develop space and install improvements to attract more players to their space and to ensure that it's utilized as fully as possible in order to generate as much revenue for the alliance as possible. The system only works when there are players there who are actively participating in the game to generate revenue.

Mining and reprocessing: I'll simply take the easy way out here and use the K.I.S.S. principle: outposts keep a percentage of all material reprocessed for the owning alliance. If alliances are worried about players reprocessing ore at POSes and/or Rorqs etc., that's their problem to police that. It's not that difficult.

The end goal here, balance wise, is for there to be high value in owning space and improving sov, but only if said space is occupied fully and utilized effectively by players. Empty systems should be of little or no value to alliances. Conversely, alliance held space should offer dramatic value over unimproved systems to players, whether they're in the sov holding alliance or not.

Quick thoughts on moon goo: I think that there needs to be more granularity and geographical diversity for moon material resources. Double the number of moons that produce moon goo and reduce output per location by half to net the same output. Yes, I know it means double the number of existing POSes. Spread the moons out, still maintaining the regional flavors with respect to what type of resource is located in which region, but ensure that the R64 and R32 moons are spread out over a given region to promote more complexity with respect to defending all sites instead of allowing the easy defense of just a few point targets.

While I'm sure the above will be hugely unpopular with the current owners of the R64/R32 moons, I think that it will benefit 0.0 warfare in the long run by creating more granularity and less of an "all or nothing" proposition as far as attacking/defending resources.

As usual, let's keep it civil- I'm not here to "ruin your game". If you don't like an idea, please let me know why, not just that you hate it. I look forward to your comments and ideas! Let's make the game better for everyone.

-more to follow-
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#2 - 2012-01-26 08:45:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Mors Sanctitatis
How to fix 0.0 continued-

Logistics and warfare:

"Forget logistics, you lose." Lt. Gen. Fredrick Franks, USA, 7th Corps Commander, Desert Storm

"The line between disorder and order lies in logistics…" - Sun Tzu

“Gentlemen, the officer who doesn’t know his communications and logistics as well as his tactics is totally useless.” -- General George S. Patton, USA

“I am tempted to make a slightly exaggerated statement: that logistics is all of war-making, except shooting the guns, releasing the bombs, and firing the torpedoes.” -- ADM Lynde D. McCormick, USN

"Because of my wartime experience, I am insistent on the point that logistics know-how must be maintained, that logistics is second to nothing in importance in warfare, that logistics training must be widespread and thorough..." - VADM Robert B. Carney, USN

"Leaders win through logistics. Vision, sure. Strategy, yes. But when you go to war, you need to have both toilet paper and bullets at the right place at the right time. In other words, you must win through superior logistics." - Tom Peters - Rule #3: Leadership Is Confusing As Hell, Fast Company, March 2001

“The history of war proves that nine out of ten times an army has been destroyed because its supply lines have been cut off…. We shall land at Inchon, and I shall crush them.” -- General Douglas MacArthur

"Amateurs talk about tactics, but professionals study logistics." - Gen. Robert H. Barrow, USMC (Commandant of the Marine Corps)

"My logisticians are a humorless lot ... they know if my campaign fails, they are the first ones I will slay." - Alexander the Great

Are you beginning to see a trend here?

Just because a game change makes your life easier (Jump Freighters, Jump Bridges, Warp To Zero) doesn't always mean that it's best for the game or even good for you as a player.

War fighting is all about logistics. Eve is all about war fighting. Eve is about logistics.

When you remove the opportunity to attack supply lines and disrupt logistics, you remove the capacity to make war against the enemy. Things like Jump Freighters, Jump Bridges and Warp To Zero do exactly that: they over simplify logistics, radically decrease the time cost and associated value of materials and reduce risk to almost zero. This is bad for all sides with respect to what Eve is all about: war.

CCP claims it wants to focus on "war'? Then CCP, I challenge you to take up the issue of logistics and how it applies to Eve in general, and 0.0 in particular.

To the 0.0 entities I say this: it's a two way street. It's not like you're the only one facing a "nerf". It's the same for everybody.

Now, please understand- I'm not advocating game changes just for the sake of adding time cost and additional tedium for no good reason. Take POS fueling for example. Streamlining this process as much as possible is a good thing. I'm only asking for increased time cost where it will be beneficial to the game, war fighting in particular.

I'm not advocating removing Jump Bridges or Jump Freighters, it's too late for that. It's a waste to remove content. But let's put a more realistic value on just how valuable these implements are. both JBs and JFs should be extremely expensive to operate with respect to fuel costs, and even the simple act of providing them with enough fuel should be a logistics issue in and of itself.

Power projection is an extremely powerful tool and as such needs to incur a very heavy cost for it's use. I hear more and more the complaint "Eve is too small". This perception is due to the ability of players to traverse great distances very quickly due to WTZ, JBs, Titan bridges etc. Even slow ships like Battleships only have the cumulative difference of align time and warp speed to differentiate from interceptors when it comes to travel speed. No need to "slowboat to the gate". Things like WTZ water down differences between the various class of ships, damage entire professions such as the professional hauler or freighter pilot and generally take away from the grandeur of Eve: the feeling that the galaxy is huge, core systems like Jita and Rens are truly far away from each other and seeing the space "super highways" packed with player traffic as they fly from system to system.

Some suggested changes: radically increase JF/JB fuel use. Increase their fuel bays accordingly. Jump Bridges should be something to be used for only the most important traffic. Not just to make some ratter's life easier and convenient. Jump Freighters should be similar: they should operate like a traditional Freighter, with their jump drive as a special use case rather than their primary mode of travel. Blinking out of existence at the first sign of trouble is a handy trick. It should be expensive.

Remove WTZ and replace it with a hybrid of the old and new: gates should act like warp bubbles- it doesn't matter where you place "insta" bookmarks: you always drop out of warp 10km away from the gate, whether you place your insta BM at 100km or 10km behind the gate. Distance from the gate is just an example. It used to be 15km. I'm open to discussing what a new distance should be. Most players are horrified at the thought of no more WTZ. Players did just find without it before it was implemented and they'll do just fine without it in the future. It's just a matter of adapting. Insta BMs were and always have been a cheat and a work around designed to specifically break game play as originally intended by CCP. CCP implemented WTZ for the technical reason that BMs were crushing the database performance. The original gameplay needs to be reintroduced. Just because it's easier doesn't mean it's better.
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#3 - 2012-01-26 08:45:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Mors Sanctitatis
SUPERCAPS. (see what I did there?) Lol

I own a few. I consider the Aeon to be a "Golden Coffin". Can't use the character for anything else other than to maintain the Aeon. What a waste. But, it's as it should be. The only thing that will inhibit players from using something is TIME COST. ISK and scarcity simply won't work. Players will overcome ANY level of scaling to get what they want. Witness the hundreds of Titans (are we into the thousands now?), and thousands of Supercarriers.

It makes me sad that Titans and SCs are no longer something that creates awe and wonder when a player sees one for the first time. They're common. They're mundane. They're old hat.

That sucks.

Titans and SCs keep getting nerfed because CCP has to do something to them due to their insane level of proliferation. That sucks too.

I think that Titans (and SCs) should be regal, epic and inspiring to see one on the battlefield. Being blobbed by 50 of them is just silly.

How do we fix this?

The U.S. Navy has 11 Carrier Battle Groups. Why 11? Why not over 9000? Because of cost. Both in money and in manpower. Supercaps need to have something similar. If Supercaps had to be constantly fueled similar to POSes in order to simply keep running, the simple logistics of keeping them fueled will reduce their use overnight. The mechanics already exist: build a hybrid of POS and jump fuel mechanics. Add a dedicated "superfuel" cargo hold to all Supercaps. Let them use fuel blocks, just like POSes, and the fuel blocks will be consumed at a rate of 1x while logged off, and 2x while logged on. Just simply owning a Supercap will be hugely expensive and time consuming to maintain. Actually using them will be even more costly, both in time and money.

You'll see more precise and strategic use of the ships once the players get the hang of dealing with the increased costs and logistics of owning a Supercap. Alliances will own and use just enough to get the job done instead of bringing everything they have "just because we can".

If everything is always essentially "free" to use then players will always bring everything they have. This is how we've arrived at our current state of being.

Note that all of my concepts are simply rough ideas. I'm brainstorming; thinking out loud if you will. Don't jump down my throat if something I'm suggesting sounds awful. I'm totally open to hearing your ideas and suggestions to refine my concepts, or accept your ideas if you have something in mind that would be more elegant and simple.
Meridith Akesia
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4 - 2012-01-26 08:49:24 UTC
-Reserved-
Lord Mandelor
Oruze Cruise
White Stag Exit Bag
#5 - 2012-01-26 08:53:24 UTC
OP is one of the few people on the forums that I can count to bring up good ideas , with all aspects and issues with it considered.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#6 - 2012-01-26 09:01:42 UTC
-Reserved for future trolling-
Danny John-Peter
Blue Canary
Watch This
#7 - 2012-01-26 09:32:01 UTC
Came expecting "NURF 00 INCURSIONS ARE JUST AS DANGEROUS AND SHOULD MAKE MORE ISK" etc etc

Left pleasantly surprised, good over all ideas, well considered, and logical, +1
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2012-01-26 09:59:16 UTC
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:

Note that this isn't generating more ISK out of thin air. What this does is it encourages alliances to take space, develop space and install improvements to attract more players to their space and to ensure that it's utilized as fully as possible in order to generate as much revenue for the alliance as possible. The system only works when there are players there who are actively participating in the game to generate revenue.

just fast note: putting improvements into system only allowed when system has high-enough strategic/military/industry levels already. So this is not an easy procedure "claim system -> improve system -> welcome guests".
However it is solveable anyway.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Serge Bastana
GWA Corp
#9 - 2012-01-26 10:02:55 UTC
Interesting read, will wait for more to be filled in.

WoW holds your hand until end game, and gives you a cookie whether you win or lose. EVE not only takes your cookie, but laughs at you for bringing one in the first place...

Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#10 - 2012-01-26 10:04:57 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:

Note that this isn't generating more ISK out of thin air. What this does is it encourages alliances to take space, develop space and install improvements to attract more players to their space and to ensure that it's utilized as fully as possible in order to generate as much revenue for the alliance as possible. The system only works when there are players there who are actively participating in the game to generate revenue.

just fast note: putting improvements into system only allowed when system has high-enough strategic/military/industry levels already. So this is not an easy procedure "claim system -> improve system -> welcome guests".
However it is solveable anyway.


Understood. Blink

What I'm saying is- toss the existing system and make it like you suggest: it *should* be as simple as you describe it. Otherwise we end up in a chicken/egg scenario and you can't get players to rat in your system because it's not that profitable (relatively), and it's not profitable because nobody is ratting in the system.

Now, I'm not suggesting that it be super simple and clunky. There should be high levels of granularity to allow for specific customization as the sov owners see fit to tailor the system capabilities to their intended uses and "customers".
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#11 - 2012-01-26 10:05:10 UTC
Nerf titan tracking and you will fix a lot of 0.0
Lyrka Bloodberry
Spybeaver
#12 - 2012-01-26 10:19:33 UTC
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:
Just because it's easier doesn't mean it's better.


Especially like that sentence. Along whith almost the whole part on logistics.

Spybeaver

Tore Vest
#13 - 2012-01-26 10:25:03 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Nerf titan tracking and you will fix a lot of 0.0


Goon alt ?

No troll.

Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#14 - 2012-01-26 10:28:09 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Nerf titan tracking and you will fix a lot of 0.0


While I agree, I think that the tracking issue is only a problem because of a more fundamental issue: the proliferation of Supercaps. I filled in my 3rd reserved post with info on Supercaps. Take a look at it and let me know what you think. I'm very interested to get your feedback on the subject.
Orion Guardian
#15 - 2012-01-26 10:34:11 UTC
There are some good ideas in it, but some very bad as well, in my opinion.
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#16 - 2012-01-26 10:36:33 UTC
Orion GUardian wrote:
There are some good ideas in it, but some very bad as well, in my opinion.


Care to explain? I'm open to critique and your suggestions. What do you like, dislike? What would you suggest that would still solve the problems that we face but in a way that you prefer over my ideas?
Rendaw
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2012-01-26 11:23:29 UTC
I really like your point about Sov money making, your right, and I dont like how the rank and file cant really keep track of all the isk made by alliances. I mean were the grunts who turn up and fight and die for it, but only ever a select few ever really know how much money the alliance is making.

I also think the opinion on logistics is spot on. There is a hunger from non cap pilots to make runs and supply null, but, the gap between what a blockade runner and JF can carry is massive, making it almost impossible for the wiley little guy to ever hope to compete against Cap Pilots mass seeding markets. my view is there is a definate space for a ship thats capable of carrying good amount of stuff, that maybe has the characteristics of a battleship in terms of handling, able to carry 2/3 times more than a crane but less than half of what a JF can handle.

They need to work out a way of making holding sov harder, its stupid to have alliances able to hold space they never use, and all they do is then charge some poor renters who never really get the protection they are promised. I would much prefer seeing smaller way more active pockets of sov space, with no mans lands being ideal for the small guys to erk out a living.

Overall OP, I hope they have a close look at what u have said here today.
Darling Sheep
CoonQuest
#18 - 2012-01-26 11:29:56 UTC
Why not make holding sov exponentially more expensive the more sov you hold?
In that way there is a limit to what you can support as an alliance.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#19 - 2012-01-26 11:50:56 UTC
EVE Online is a lot like WW2 because

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#20 - 2012-01-26 11:54:38 UTC
Tore Vest wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Nerf titan tracking and you will fix a lot of 0.0


Goon alt ?


Lets put it this way. If goons get wiped out by titans how are small aliances going to mange to any kind of foothold in 0.0 or low sec?

Titans hurt everyone.
123Next page