Jita Park Speakers Corner

First you say that it discourages conquest. Then you say people are going to get conquered. What I see there is a 100 dread superblock committing themselves to a location. Surely someone in a rival alliance would find that information valuable, especially if the reward is a shiny new Tech moon with no fortifications. A smaller entity could bank nicely by selling the information that their moon is suddenly producing Tech.... and not a soul would need to launch a scan probe.

POS logistics is (hopefully) about to get a lot simpler with Modular POSes. A "Save Fit" (or in this case, "Save Starbase Layout") button for example would work wonders for moving posses and getting your structures just the way you like them (or however they're going to work). A "transfer ownership" button might also be nice.

As for moon scanning.... that's an area of of the game that needs to be removed or improved anyway. If minerals are static then what's the point of moon scanning at all once everyone knows where everything is already?

The problem isn't resource scarcity: the problem is that alliances have no reason to commit their assets to fight over them. The overall availability of the minerals doesn't have to change. Heck, with this system, the bottleneck could change with some other material replacing Tech as the most-sought-after-mineral in various months.



I agree... planets are too static, they should actually turn and follow their orbits rather than sit there. As for changing their types, your analogy doesn't quite apply, because more than one entity can harvest a planet at a time. When they do, they interfere with each others' harvesting via the depletion layer. Again, this encourages movement and conflict which is precisely why moon minerals should move and/or deplete also.

If you're trying to make a plausibility argument as to why the minerals weren't found the first time. Tectonics can bring new minerals to the surface. Meteor storms/asteroid strikes can deposit foreign minerals. Nuclear decay can produce new elements. And finally, the notion that an entire moon could be scanned in an hour or less is fairly implausible in the first place: the initial scans could simply have missed it.

I do see the point that static resources promote "king of the hill" conflicts, the problem is when the king builds the 20 foot wall with razor wire around the top of the hill that conflict tends to cease. Remember that we're trying to make more spaceships explode especially the big ones. So fortresses that people avoid attacking are bad. In real fortress warfare, you can exhaust your opponent through siege and burning the farms. If he's got the holy grail inside the fortress with him producing banquet after banquet, siege is just another word for "wasting your time": again, discouraging conflict.

With depletion, I'm not calling for a complete stop to production of rare minerals from the moons in question. Rather, the "premium" moons would eventually tapper off to lower levels while various others moons would fade in and out as the new "hot" spots.

This encourages folks to come out of their fortresses and put themselves at risk as they contend for the good moons. It also makes holding nearby strategic points even more important. Historically, forts weren't built on mines; they were built on the choke points and the overlooks that command the terrain. So holding terrain would still be critical.

Overall, this shifts the benefits of moons from being potentially passive (in the case where no-one attacks your fortifications) to being primarily active (as alliances must commit themselves to risk in order to profit).


I'm not sure why you think a mineral shortage is a problem. Assuming all the moons that can produce Tech are doing so and that it's going straight on the market, then there simply isn't enough Tech to combine all the minerals available on the market to complete all the production jobs in the tech 2 market. That means the "shortage" is by design. Any way you slice it, unless mineral distribution in the cluster is perfectly balanced against production demands, something is going to be the most rare mineral. If this really is a problem and the devs want to fix it, a dynamic system allows distribution of minerals to be tuned by devs through a depletion layer if they so desire. For the players, however, shifting minerals means shifting priorities, new opportunities, and new players in control of the mineral supplies. All of this translates into fluctuations in availability for all minerals which might result in some other mineral occasionally being the most expensive.

Exactly. Owning space should essentially require a presence in that space; leave and lose it.

It doesn't matter that "big alliances will kick out small independent corps" from Sov space, first becase there really aren't any independents, and secondly, "big alliances" can do this already with the greatest of ease. What matters is making it practical for the "small independents" to be able to take that space back when the big boys get bored and move on.

CCP said they "might" put "small amounts" of moon minerals in the rings. This sounds more like an incentive for ring mining than a change in the major tech 2 mineral supply.

The idea behind changing moons was to create more places and opportunities for conflict for resources and, thus, make more ships blow up.

Just thinking aloud here, but:

Make customs offices into sov structures, and make sov a planet-by-planet, moon-by-moon affair. Remove the dedicated sov structures.

Since system sovereignty wouldn't be binary, you could have all kinds of in-system conflict; or, conversely, coalitions of small alliances could band together to hold sov in a single system. Once an alliance has every planet, they are granted a small, additional boon for system sov--perhaps, the ability to set a fee on the inbound gates, or gather intel on who's used them.

Since the biggest systems are more likely to have the most and the best resources, all else being equal, the potential locations for conflict increase with the potential gains.

As sov structures would be customs offices, get rid of the artificial restriction on non-alliance PI and instead offer the alternative of skimming profit from other, smaller alliances' efforts--or not, or the smaller alliance could try to bypass the poco and fire their cargo into space, and risk the wrath of the host alliance. The point being that there would be far more options than on/off, yes/no.

Add a (modest) bonus to the quality of a system based on the quality of adjacent systems, so that there's an incentive to bunch sov systems together, but not an active prohibition against holding a remote system if you're willing to take the time and effort to hold it.

OUT POSTS
I would like to see out posts destroyable, in fact make outposts apart of the new POS system, where after a certain size certain Outpost Attributes become available and certain invulnerability come into play till a obligation is met.
This way building an out post will be a fight to slowly add to it, as the enemy destroys portions or delays construction of it. At a certain size it becomes not destroyable but conquerable and then can be dismantled.

Allow more than 1 outpost per system.

INFRATRUCTURE UPGRADES
I would like to see side grades to the Current Upgrades like a mining prospecting array that upgrade that only has empire based ore so that Miners can mine this ore in the safety of a hidden belt and mine in large quantities per asteroid so less cycle time is wasted from poping asteroids vs the easy to find.
Also allows miners to flip the belt to keep mining these common ores

NPC AI UPGRADE
Can we start seeing some advanced AI start appearing in Null sec anomolies and belts. Also Vary the AI a bit so we can see some newb mistakes being made by the odd AI. This would also help train players in PVP. This would make ambushing a little better as the fight becomes a 3 way unlike the typical NPC + Ambusher vs PVE player
Would be interesting to see a Hot dropping NPC Gang.
Life is meant to be interesting in Null sec. Not Mining Red X's Eve is Unfair. The NPC's need to be playing by the same rule book as the players. What would a Player think if an NPC lite a CYNO?
--> Or atleast start making some NPC encounters out side of incursions involving Smart AI..

ADD TRAVEL TIME TO JUMP, TITAN and BLACK OPS BRIDGES.
Instead of a Spool up timer for the cyno beacon have a flight distance through the Jump portal (1Light year =10 AU. So that Frigates and interceptors would arrive first and the Battle ships would arrive later and Freighter would arrive much later. Destroying the Cyno or titan would make a ship travelling though the jump bridge drop randomly at a system close to the route or randomly in the system its self.
This way a typical hot drop could close at hand if the jump distance is not far, but allow firgate to play an important role in a hot drop as they will be the first to arrive.
This may also be an option for cyno Jump Bridges. Allowing Smaller ships to be more useful. And time for small gangs to get distance from a larger blob.
This would also provide intel on how far away the titan is depending on the time the cyno get put up and the first ships land.

PASSIVE LOCALthat can be pinged.
Players in local do not appear unless a player Pings Local. Sorta like an Active Radar. A person entering system can target and right click to ping the gate at which moment he appears on everyone's local list and everyone in the system appears on his local. A Person not near a Gate can activate a module to Ping the Gate Remotely. Cycle Time 15 seconds if run continuously. Each time this module is activated the owner of the module appears on everyone's local and everyone in system appears in his local. Skill can be trained to reduce the cycle time of this module (10% per level) and more than 1 module can be fitted to a ship to lessen the time in between up updates.

This way people in system can ping the gates for Local via giving up an upper slot or visitor can ping the gates manually via right clicking them.
This system can not work in WH space as there are no gates to transmit Local the ping request to.

This will allow a scout to scan down the system with the hope of not being detected using probes or on board scanner while people in the system may can auto detect entry via auto repeat of Ping device. Which if max skilled may only give the visitor up to 7.5 seconds of un detection or less if the module is boosted by ship scanning rigs, Tech 2 Module or more than one module is alternating scan times.

At a latter time this system can be played with making ships that are specialized and may have a % chance of not showing up on a ping or show up as unidentified. Or modules that may increase or decrease the chance of identification. System upgrades can be put in place to increase or decrease the chances. Etc.

I guess goonswarm's perfectly safe, then.


So lowsec and npc null moons are unmineable? Or lowsec moons are mineable only by FW people?

That's going to have interesting repercussions on moongoo prices etc.


Yes. Make it much, much easier to take and lose a system, and you might even see wars being fought in multiple systems at the same time, instead of everything pouring into one system, ownzoning everything in that system in 10% tidi because we're looking at 1000+ in system, and effectively ceasing hostilities for another 24 hours as everyone stands down.


Depends on what you mean by "safe".

Look at the indices. They tell more of a story than you running through a region at the wrong timezone and looking at the number of people logged in.


You're going to have to explain that properly.


So make someone lose SOV by blueballing them?


So I can undock and chill at any planet for half a day in any ship and expect to come back to it intact in nullsec, whereas I can't in hisec?

What would you define as "activity"?


I've had chars popped in nullsec in velators while sitting at a planet for fun, and I've let a freighter full of PI goo sit at a planet overnight multiple times because I couldn't be arsed to log off. I've yet to lose one. vOv