These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2008-05-11 02:10
  • First Forum Visit: 2011-09-25 13:52
  • Likes Received: 0

Verran Skarne

Security Status 4.0
  • 4 Marketeers Member since

Last 20 Posts

  • Community feedback: Better options for improving wormholes in EVE Gameplay Center

    Like many folks on this forum, I am not a fan of most of the changes announced for Hyperion. While some are really needed/helpful (fixing black holes, able to copy more bookmarks), most of the changes end up hurting small and medium sized corps more than they help. In my view, the changes currently being discussed show that CCP has a fundamental misunderstanding of what we actually do in wormholes - whether we're living in a C2 or a C6 or anything in between.

    I've posted in all the feedback threads about how I feel about each change, along with many others. Of course there are people who disagree, and plenty of trolls just looking to stir the pot too. But I wanted to start a thread about things that CCP could do that actually would make wormhole space better and more fun for everyone, instead of making controversial mechanics changes that just end up driving people away from w-space.

    So here's my ask for this thread.

    Post the things that you think CCP could do to help make wormholes better by:
    1) Enticing more players to try out wormhole living.
    2) Insuring that there's a proper balance between risk and reward.
    3) Insuring that wormhole space doesn't favor large corps over small corps (or vice versa).

    Essentially, let's tell CCP how they can actually be effective with their stated goal of increasing interaction and fun in w-space.

    ==================

    Here's my list to start things off. Not everyone may agree with my items, but that's ok. If you don't agree, post your own instead. In the end, if enough people post, the best ideas will be the ones that everyone talks about. But let's show CCP a better way than what they're currently thinking about.

    1) More uses for sleeper salvage. More T3 ships would be a good way to go, or modules that incorporate reverse-engineered components. If there's more demand for sleeper stuff, corps WILL leave high-sec and try their hands at w-space in order to get a piece of that economy. Done right, this would also help balance out the value of all the things we get in wormholes, instead of wrecked components and nanoribbons making up the majority of the value that we bring back out to markets.

    2) More sites, better sites, more types of sites. The more PvE potential in w-space, the more people there are living or simply exploring there, and that will inevitably lead to the PvP fights that everyone loves.

    3) Let us plant our flags. Let us do more than just anchor a POS on a moon. Let us claim w-space systems as our own and give us reasons to really defend them, instead of just logging out and waiting for the other guys to go away. Most of our corps are in w-space because we want to have our little slice of the galaxy, without having to join a massive alliance where we'd just be another renter or a number, and have no real control. Give us new resources to fight over, that make us want to attack each other, and give us the ability to build up our system and add defenses so that we can hold out against a larger force, at least for a while. If nullsec is the domain of massive player empires, then w-space should be the place where a smaller group can go claim a system and thrive while still maintaining their individuality. However, do this in a way that still works for the small corporation or alliance. Do it in a way that doesn't turn w-space into nullsec.

  • Bring back Gravi-Signatures and Delete the Ore Sites in EVE Gameplay Center

    +1 to bringing back having to scan these inside wormholes. It was a really dumb and lazy change in Odyssey that nobody liked.

  • [Release!]: Various Artists - New Eden Logs (Eng) in EVE Communication Center

    Very cool project! Really looking forward to seeing this continue to grow!

  • Request for a clone swap POS module for Hyperion release. in EVE Gameplay Center

    +1. Especially if you can do it with a Rorqual. Those ships need a purpose again.

  • Next steps in EVE Gameplay Center

    So, to sum up my concerns/feelings (and those of my alliance, mostly):

    - K162 change = far less potential for finding holes when scouting a chain. Timer helps that somewhat. PvE activities (mining, sleepers, etc) become far riskier - this hurts smaller corps in C1-C4 holes especially. Not really sure that it does anything to lead to more real fights. Maybe a few more hauler/miner/site runner ganks, but the truth is that a real fight only really happens with both sides are willing to make it happen, and that depends on numbers online, not on when the hole becomes visible.

    - C4 second static really adds a lot of risk for small corps living in C4s now without giving them anything in return. Will probably result in a lot of C4s becoming vacant (like there aren't enough of those already). That's actually great for us as we have a static C4 that we farm sometimes, but overall we think it's bad for the game. This change might be ok if something was done to make C4s more desirable for small/medium sized corps to live in right now. Anyone big enough just goes straight to C5, really.

    - Mass based spawn distance doesn't hurt us really all that much, although it may change our tactics slightly. But I can definitely see the problems for C5/C6 corps that are using capitals to close their big holes today. In the end, not really sure that this change adds anything that makes it worth the added frustration for corps living in large wormholes.

    - Frigate wormholes are quite simply a pain in the butt for anyone on the receiving end of them. Most pilots have too much ISK n implants in their heads right now to make frigate roams viable risk-wise, and no way to swap clones. Sure, some more aggressive corps will find a way to exploit the mechanics to put strong kill fleets in the other wormhole, but to what end? The defenders are still going to turtle up if they don't have the numbers to match. From a defender point of view, having a hole that we can't close and have to watch for 16 hours straight just means we'll all stop doing anything else in our system, log off, and go play a different game until the hole goes away. That's because even with a strong camp on the hole (which can be stupidly boring) there's still always the chance that some hostile scout has gotten in and will open a static. Then we'll come back, roll our statics, and keep an eye out for leftover scouts. End result is no real gain and more frustration for a lot of players.

    Essentially a lot of these changes feel like they're coming from people who don't understand how PvP really works in wormholes. Right now, people turtle up in their POS or log off because they don't have the numbers to contest whoever they ran into. They close their holes so that they can make some ISK without having to keep half of their folks on sentry duty all the time. This is especially true for smaller corps - closing their holes is the only way they have to insure enough safety to really do the PvE stuff. These changes aren't going to really increase fights because they don't address the real reasons why players do these things.

    If we want to increase the amount of PvP in wormholes, giving people more lucrative content to fight over would be a good first step, rather than making a bunch of mechanics changes that aren't really going to help the problem.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] Random WHs and the New Small Ship WHs in EVE Gameplay Center

    So, thinking about what will happen (for my group and others) if these holes go in.

    Note: I'm assuming based on Fozzie's posts that these would be W-W connections only. No K-W connections for now.

    1) When one shows up in our system, everything else we're doing will stop until:
    - We have a camp running on it to intercept. or at least ID anything that comes through
    - We've rolled our statics and confirmed something didn't already come through.

    Depending on the time of day, that essentially shuts down any of our PvE operations inside our home system, if we don't have enough people online to properly camp the thing and try to kill any frigates that jump in.

    2) If there's a way to close it at all, we'll do that just to get rid of the thing.

    3) If one happens to appear at a time when we have 20 or so people online (usually 1-2 hours each day), then and only then will we mount up in frigates and go looking for trouble on the other side. Because we can't leave our own system unwatched and undefended while we do this. And truthfully, if we're going to go looking for trouble, it's probably easier just to open up our static and use that - because if it's a dud system with nothing to do, we can roll it. And if we do this, we'll probably use alts with cheap implants so that we don't have to spend hundreds of millions when they get podded.

    Our corp's a small/medium corp. We do plenty of PvP through our statics when the opportunity is there, but we make our money doing the PvE stuff - PI, Mining, sleepers in our own hole and through our static. That money in turn funds the PvP ships that we lose every so often. We're not huge, and typically in order for us to run multiple combat squads in a fleet, it has to be something major happening that gets *everyone* to log in.

    So if this change goes in, it's going to basically be one more thing to interrupt us from making money (which we use to buy shiny ships to go do PvP in) and bring us very little actual benefit in terms of actual PvP content.

    This is the aspect that I'm not sure that Fozzie and his team really understand: The vast majority of groups we run into in wormholes are *smaller* than we are. They might only have 5-6 players total. The #1 rule for anyone living in a wormhole is to protect your soft targets. You get a hostile or a suspected hostile in system, you stop mining, you stop doing sleepers, and you stop doing PI (unless you're baiting). You either find and kill the hostiles, or you wait them out. This change isn't going to promote more PvP - it's just going to promote more POS turtling and stupid cat-and-mouse games. Fights happen when both sides want the fights, or when they're actually fighting over something meaningful, like control of a system. Otherwise, the smaller/weaker side will always avoid conflict. If the wormholes happen frequently, the situation may get so aggravating that the PvE minded players just give up on wormholes. And if that happens, the money that PvP folks use to fund their ships dries up. Result = less meaningful PvP.

    The way to get more PvP happening in general? Give people more meaningful things to fight over. We jump people running sites all the time (and get jumped while running sites).

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] K162 Signatures Appearing on First Jump in EVE Gameplay Center

    epicurus ataraxia wrote:
    Two step wrote:
    I agree with the above posters, though I think 4 hours is far, far too long. I would love to see the K162 spawn after 30 minutes or so.

    There is a balance between those wishing to do activities such as PI, Mining, running sites, etc etc, 30 minutes means they never have the opportunity to do any of these jobs. They need to earn isk to Pew Pew too. Small corps may only have very few on at different times of day, they simply do not have the resources to deal with that short a timer.

    4 hours gives a reasonable time and a reasonable balance but prevents them from just never opening it. It keeps the balance of K162 and It preserves the balance that CCP have tried to maintain.

    If their home Static can never be isolated even for a short time, they will just move out, and consider they now have wandering frigate holes and C4's now have a second hole to contend with.

    They still need to be alert and aware to contend with these. If people are always in the POS there is no content.

    The desirability or lack of, with Making holes instaspawn is another argument for another day. 30 minutes is effectively that.


    I think smaller groups lose that sense of security regardless of how long the timer is. Even if it's just five minutes, that means that at any time, you could have a hostile scout enter your system and have no idea about it. Since that ore site you're mining doesn't need to be scannable, he could be warping up on you in his cloaky proteus right now, looking for a fat mining barge to kill.

    Prior to Odyssey, during wormhole mining we had probes out all the time, constantly watching for new sigs. After Odyssey, we had the overlay up all the time, constantly watching for new sigs. When we spotted them, they gave us the chance to warp the miners back to a POS and gear up for a fight. It wasn't very much of a chance. Sometimes someone was too slow warping out, and they'd get jumped. But it was a chance.

    Now, that chance is even smaller.

    Larger groups (that do things like mining) can adapt to this by deploying ewar-based sentries or logistics in support of their mining fleet. Please warp your cloaky proteus in on my mining fleet while I have a couple of cloaked Arazu's orbiting on sentry duty. It'll be fun as all our miners go grab their combat ships and then come back to kill you. Smaller groups don't have that luxury.

    In reality, no one will do that though, no matter how big their group is. Because it'd be tedious. Running sentry duty on mining ops is boring. EVE Players don't like boring. When things get boring, we log off and go find other things to do.

  • Questions for new wormholers (is that even a real term?) in EVE Gameplay Center

    A lot of good advice in this thread. My two cents :)

    1) Our corp uses a combination of a personal hangar array (50k of personal storage for an unlimited number of players) and a corporate hangar array (shared storage for people to trade things or pool things. Depending on how many people you have, you may be able to get by with just the CHA however. As others have said, when using *any* shared storage, roles and access are super important.

    2) The right answer really depends on two things: The number of pilots you have, and their relative skill levels.

    If you have very few pilots or your pilots are very new, then a C1 makes a really good training ground. It is actually harder to live in a C1 than C2/C3 wormholes, because of the mass restrictions on the wormhole. But a C1 will teach you very quickly how to do wormholes in general, with a minimal investment in terms of ISK. It's really good if you have only a handful of pilots or if your pilots are very new and are flying T1 fits.

    Otherwise, a C2 or C3 is the best choice. You'll still have a k-space static, but you'll have tougher sites that will give your pilots more of a challenge.

    Even though you might settle down in a system for a while, eventually you will outgrow the system that you're in. My corp has moved twice now, simply because we needed a bigger challenge for our members than what we were getting. So regardless of where you choose to move to, you'll want to make sure you're preparing for your next steps, too. Sometimes those next steps come quicker than you might think.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] Second Static for C4s in EVE Gameplay Center

    J0HN SHEPPARD wrote:
    I must say,
    Like I Said in my other reply, EVE is already a numbers game, Some players arent looking to fly with 100's of other pilots, but instead all they want is their small portion of space that they can share with a few people to do as they wish!


    I think the vast majority of players operating in wormholes share this viewpoint. We like wormholes because they give us the ability to claim, exploit, and defend territory without having to be part of ridiculously huge alliances or pay rent to our feudal overlords.

    We would take our corps to nullsec in a heartbeat if there was actually a level playing field that allowed smaller groups to compete and have a chance of success. But since we don't have thousands of pilots who can fleet up and deploy at will, we choose w-space instead.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] Random WHs and the New Small Ship WHs in EVE Gameplay Center

    myjitaalts wrote:


    2) (biggest issue ) currently EXTREMELY disproportionately Random worm hole generation. currently other than our static, 9 out of 10 holes tend to spawn at down time. So where is the random. Who benefit's from this.. not USA time zones. WHO benefit's from this... eastern Europe prime time,and What benefit's are there.. makes seeding hostile capitals in systems easier for some time zones.



    This is actually due to the way players behave rather than the game. Basically, a lot of scanners like to go out just before downtime and open every hole they find, to see if they can land in a juicy system to get their friends in later. If you look, those connections you see after downtime are mostly K162s coming from other wormholes (or k-space). So the other end was sitting there for hours and hours, potentially, and just hadn't been activated.

    Anecdotally we do see a LOT more hostile roams during EUTZ most days instead of USTZ. No idea why this is though, since there's plenty of USTZ pilots operating in wormholes too.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] Random WHs and the New Small Ship WHs in EVE Gameplay Center

    Phoenix Jones wrote:
    I finally see the issue with this.

    There is no actual flood control with this wormhole (at least not yet). Meaning that as many can come in as wanted (its basically a gate for frigates, destroyers and heavy dictors).

    You potentially have no control at all regarding how many people enter unless you have a sensor boosted alpha fleet or a smart bombing fleet on the hole 24/7.

    It is not a issue now, but I see this becoming an issue later.

    Have to see how the hole mechanics work.


    How about this?

    The wormhole loses stability as more jumps are performed, resulting in longer and longer polarization timers for ships passing through it. At high levels of instability, ships passing through the wormhole could even take structural damage, or the wormhole could become impassable until enough time has passed.

    So, you still get a wormhole that can't be easily closed, but that only frigates can jump through.
    However, there's a throttle that prevents someone from using it to move large fleets quickly (at least, not without taking on additional risk).

    PS: This in no way changes my original thoughts posted earlier in the thread. Just throwing this out as an example of how flood control could work.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] Second Static for C4s in EVE Gameplay Center

    Phoenix Jones wrote:


    Verran Skarne wrote:

    - C3 sites vs. C4 sites is a big area of concern. For PvE purposes, if you can live in a C4 effectively enough to warrant choosing them over a C3, then you can do a C5. Otherwise you're better off living in a C3.


    There is a pretty large group of people that come to wormhole space specifically to not deal with capitals. There are others who don't want to bother with capital evictions and seeding. With the dual static, the C4 groups now have two Wormholes to farm (aka Both their statics which goes to other wormholes).



    I'm not sure I really understand what you mean with the comment about capitals. I get that people do w-space so that they don't have to deal with the ridiculousness of getting hot-dropped by a capital fleet any time they get a fleet together. But there's plenty of people building and maintaining capitals in wormholes. Heck, some days it seems like every other C4 we roll into has a carrier or dread sitting out at a POS somewhere in system.

    What this change is going to do is turn C4s into a "junction" system. We already get that effect today to some extent, since a lot of other wormholes have C4 statics. That's great for increasing the connectedness of w-space, but it also means that even fewer people will want to live in a C4 unless they're just rabid PvPers with tons of ships to lose. Everyone wants some downtime now and again to run PI, or mine, or even just spin their ship in their POS. If the goal is to increase overall activity in C4s, then it seems to me the better approach would be to do something to make them more desireable for a smaller corp than a C3 (with greater risk). Otherwise, I don't think you'll really get more activity than you get now in them, since the activity will all come form people living elsewhere, rather than people living in the C4s themselves.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] K162 Signatures Appearing on First Jump in EVE Gameplay Center

    Ang Min wrote:


    In fact, I've just read all of the planned W-space changes for the Hyperion release, and as a continuous w-space dweller for the past 5 years (since Apoc), I have to say there's nothing at all in the list that excites me or makes me want to stay in w-space. Where's the new content, such as more challenging Sleepers which can attack anywhere in system? More varied and interesting radar/mag (sorry - "relic/data") sites? Or game changing additions such as ice belts and moon mining in w-space? Or new modules that let you influence the mass limits or lifetime of a wormhole? There are just a ton of things that could be done to spruce up w-space, without wrecking what has worked very well for the past 5 years, as the current proposals will certainly do.

    :-(


    We'd build a station in our home wormhole if the game would let us. Just because it would be awesome. And yes, that means accepting *all* the risk that that comes with doing that :)

    So while I don't mind some of these changes, I really would love to see either more content, or more ability for wormhole dwellers to really "own" their systems, just like nullsec.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] Second Static for C4s in EVE Gameplay Center

    I like giving C4s an additional static in concept, but agree with other posters:

    - A static to a C1 is just going to suck, due to mass limitations on C1 connections. Ever spent 3 hours rolling a hole in battlecruisers? Yeah, that's a C1 :(

    - C3 sites vs. C4 sites is a big area of concern. For PvE purposes, if you can live in a C4 effectively enough to warrant choosing them over a C3, then you can do a C5. Otherwise you're better off living in a C3.

    I might have my numbers off (it's early), but if I remember right you can't jump a capital through a C4 connection (you can with a C5/C6). That being the case, does it make sense to allow the second C4 static to be a k-space static to low/null (but not to hi-sec?)

    Doing that might open up an interesting opportunity for corps that have really outgrown hi-sec and low-class wormhole content but aren't able to deploy the capital ships or numbers needed to defend a C5/C6 system. Live and stage in a C4, and then go a-roaming on both sides of the fence. It would also make logistics a bit easier for folks in C4s, without giving them instant access to hi-sec.




  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] Wormhole Effect Rebalance in EVE Gameplay Center

    Black Hole = Mordu ship doctrine :)

    Overall I like the changes. Right now w-space fleets seem to skew heavily toward armor-based brawling. I like that we're giving skirmish fleets a place where they'll really excel. It means that WH corps will want to have their pilots cross-trained, but that's not really a bad thing.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] Mass-Based Spawn Distance After WH Jumps in EVE Gameplay Center

    We routinely roll our static looking for content (both PvE and PvP) to do. This change is definitely going to slow us down in that regard as well, and that's bad. As others have pointed out, there's a maximum to the number of people you can have in a w-space system simply because of available content.

    I don't mind the PvP effects of this change - players will adapt. We'll use battleships instead of Orcas, we'll change tactics and doctrines to protect our ships better during the burn back to the hole, and so on. It's the knock-on effect of the change where it takes longer and becomes riskier to roll a hole or collapse a chain though that's the problem.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] K162 Signatures Appearing on First Jump in EVE Gameplay Center

    Better than the original idea by far, but as others have said, this will result in a lot of K162s just never showing up at all, especially nullsec connections.

    So, +1 to the idea of having the K162 spawn after a delay is met, or at first jump (whichever comes first). I think 4 hours is too long. 30 minutes seems more reasonable. That's enough time for someone who finds a new wormhole to reship if needed and jump through to go take a look without having a fleet waiting for them on the other sie, but not so much that it means w-space residents will take a big hit on finding connections.

  • [Hyperion Feedback Thread] Random WHs and the New Small Ship WHs in EVE Gameplay Center

    Stacy Lone wrote:
    I'm not really sure that this change is healthy for the game over all.

    Right now, WH space is the only space were new players can actually life in and have some kind of their "own" system. I came to eve early this year, after having played some hours a year before. But this time I stuck with it.

    As a new player, you quickly realize that you have not many options when you want to create your own space empire or jus get your own home. You can either join a big coalition and be meaningless with your subpar skills. HERO didn't exist back then, so getting your own piece of the universe (getting sov) simply wasn't an option, even if you started with some friends. And renting isn't an option, either. New players simply can not afford rent. We don#t have carriers to rat or else. So, my friends and I (5 players using more then 10 accounts by now) decided to give W-space a try.

    We are now happily living an a C2 with static high sec and C3. By now, most of us fly their t3s very well and we use our C3 static regularly to kill sleepers. We even used our last c4 connection to go into the c4 and killed sleepers there. That went smoooth, and now we are giving it a thought to try to move into a c4 with static c4. We like that c4s are more quiet then other w-space systems.

    Beign new players means we don't have much money. We already lost some t3s to roams due to inexperience and failure in getting the proper intel, but we get by.

    If you can not longer close your home system, then w-space will be dead for newbies. And with it EVE, excpet for high sec. Sure, you can go roaming in low sec, but you can not have a "home" there. And you will probably need to make money in high sec. Getting into null and actually occupying some space is already impossible, so w-space is the last space were even noobs can plant a flag (or a pos ar two) and have their very own space home.

    But if you can not close your home anymore, then you can not do mining anymore, which is an important base income. And if you can not find wormhole connections to wormholes that have only 1 or two additional connections so that you can watch (and maybe bubble) them, then we can not go kill sleepers anymore. Because well fit destroyer/frigate gang can still hurt inexperienced players in t3s with relatively small ISK risk.


    What problem does this change try to solve anyways? Wspace is already full of very healthy fights, there's no need to make it even more uncontrollable. At last not in c1-c4. Maybe c5/c6 needs to be more spiced in order to kill capital escalation fleets easier, but there is certainly no need for frigate pvp in wspace in general.


    I'm very concerned that some of these changes will hurt new, low-sp player with relatively small ISK very badly, while providing no real content to the already estabished, powerful wspace residents. I can't imagine the established, rich alliances getting fun out of trashing frigs.


    Well said. This was how our wormhole efforts got started as well. When you have a smaller number of people trying to live in a lower-class wormhole, even a small ship just passing through is a significant threat. Not because it's going to gank you (usually), but because it'll open up your statics, which in turn means a constant stream of people poking their nose in to see where that wormhole goes to. In our C2, we actually spent more time contending with roams coming in our hi-sec static and then sitting on the wormhole and ducking back out whenever they were losing, than we did our w-space static. On the other hand, when we did get a fight on the w-space static, usually it was a lot more fun, because the hostile fleet was down for a real fight and not just interested in killing whatever they could get with no risk.

    I think it's important to remember that there are a lot of small corps in wormholes that may only be able to get 4-5 people online at the same time. These folks are not just doing PvP and killing sleepers, but they're making a living out of C1-C3s. These new small/unkillable holes will really hurt the ability for those corps to operate.

  • [Missions] [NPE] Group mission content in high sec in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Thanks! I think everyone agrees that more new blood = good for all of us (more targets, more customers, more future allies, etc). So I hope this concept gets some discussion.

  • Huge expanding of amount of systems in EVE Technology and Research Center

    Wrayeth wrote:
    TBH, I've been wanting them to add many new systems in nullsec and even lowsec for some time. IMO, space is supposed to be vast, but you can't travel 3 jumps without tripping over a group of players these days. Moreover, the current mechanics make it too easy to control wide swathes of territory and pushes the smaller entities out completely.

    I'd personally like to see a number of changes to address this:


    • First, add a lot more systems, possibly even doubling the amount of nullsec available..
    • Second, drastically reduce the jump range of capital ships. Make it take a lot more jumps to cover a given distance, thus making it harder to use them to control massive amounts of territory. This will also require a rework or removal of the POS jump bridge module and an adjustment to titan jump portal range.
    • Third, give jump freighters a hard cap on the number of jumps they can do per hour; this will be in addition to reducing their jump range along with the other capital ships. The intent here is to force them to use gates for part of their trip, thus creating a more vulnerable supply chain that can be attacked. This should, in turn, make it harder to hold vast areas of space.
    • Fourth (and this will probably be the most controversial), limit jump clones. Currently, it's possible to have jump clones in many different regions. If you also have ships in station for each jump clone, it's a trivial matter to jump over there, ship up, and defend your space. This ability makes it easier to control multiple regions of territory. While removing jump clones outright would be the most effective limitation, that would also provide unnecessary hardship for some players. As such, I would suggest limiting the total number of jump clones to only one.


    The combined effect of these changes should be a reduction in the amount of territory controlled by any single entity, and hopefully create more and smaller internet space nations.

    These suggestions are coming from the point of view of someone who played EVE and fought for sov in 0.0 prior to capital ships being introduced and the massive influx of new players. Back then, it was very difficult to control more than one region since you had to use gates to fly out to any system you wished to attack. Moreover, the supply chains were very vulnerable; supplies had to be slowboated from point A to point B in industrial ships that were vulnerable to destruction, requiring players to fly escort missions for their haulers (and also offering the opportunity to attack said haulers in enjoyable, smaller scale combat). IMO, the game was a lot more fun back then and, hopefully, these proposed changes could bring back some of the game's lost appeal.


    +1 to this as well. One of the biggest reasons why nullsec has such a high barrier to entry is that force projection is so easy. I'd love to see changes that enabled more smaller corporations and alliances to go out to null and stake a claim in a system or two, and increase content for everyone.