These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

My theory on a way to expand eve

Author
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#21 - 2012-10-17 19:18:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Roll Sizzle Beef
Bane Necran wrote:

If you really want more people in 0.0, take steps to reduce sov sprawl, which would allow smaller alliances to claim the systems which are currently unused and empty.


They tried that too with "high" null -0.1 etc being pointless to invest in for large blocks. Just made it sucky for everyone who lived there as they still couldn't fund themselves against the bigger powers that vastly overshadowed them. Power movement from well entrenched groups for years now have railroads to move across space in no time. This power projection making holding vast territories easy.... well, easier. The dedication bar is set super high for upstarts.
stationmonkey
Synthetic Arbitration
Job's Done.
#22 - 2012-10-17 19:20:21 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
Also, having scanned over your post now that line breaks have been added. No. I don't think that's a good way to add in more space. If anything, its the current space that should be expanded. Push new lowsec regions out right the the edge of nullsec then add a whole bunch more nullsec where those lowsec systems terminate. Plenty of space in space, no need to open up a new galaxy the access to which would be irritatingly limited. It would effectively artificially shard the server.


you cant really do that tho.. I mean how are you going to explain the sudden expansion of an already explored galaxy. "oh sorry guys we totally missed all these new stars!" Lets start linking to them. The galaxy is already here. The expansion of space would have to be through another galaxy.
Filthy Lucre
Doomheim
#23 - 2012-10-17 19:21:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Filthy Lucre
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
Also, much of current nul is still pretty damn empty. I think they need to work on nul encouragement than making even more empty space.

We do need more space. Nul is empty because CCP wants alliances to be able to control that space...and they do. There aren't any safe areas past the nulsec choke points (that are frequently bubble camped). Carebears and casual players don't go there any significant numbers because it's expected you will get blown up (don't fly anything you can't afford to lose, right?), so there is no significant economy. Business does not thrive in dangerous outback areas. Business needs safe and populated areas to thrive. That's just the way it is. The only way to get people out there is to make nul safer, or add some safe zones, or maybe add more jump gates to empire...or get rid of bubbles. Adding more stars to the map is one way to make things safer, because the chance of bumping into someone who will kill you is lessened.
Robert De'Arneth
#24 - 2012-10-17 19:26:46 UTC
stationmonkey wrote:
Robert De'Arneth wrote:
The last thing we need is more open space imnsho. We need a way where all 3 groups of people will be happy, adding more space is not going to do it. What would happen is simple, we would have 4 groups arguing over what CCP should do. There are already plenty of systems in the game. I


expanding space has more to do with bringing more players in the game than any real need for it. I agree as it sits now there isn't enough incentive to expand to the null systems available. But remember my idea is a slow growth of space. not just a new galaxy all ready to go muck about it. Its a galaxy where the actual expansion of space is completely payer based. I am not talking about seeding a whole new galaxy. I am talking about using the player base to build a new galaxy.



So how is it going to bring people in? EVE is not like other games, it takes time to be ok, not even good. Then add in you have to learn how the game world works. Let's face some serious facts here sir, in today's world, people like instant gratification, EVE as it stands will never offer that, nor should it. EVE is never going to be the most popular game, it is a niche game in a niche market. I am not really sure what you all expect, lets not even get into the fact that EVE is aging. I still do not see how adding more systems for the large allainces to rule will help, and do not even try to say that will not happen, because we both know that is what would happen.

I'm a nerd, you can check my stats!! Skilling Int/Mem at 45 sp per minute is how I mack!     I'm like a lapdog, all bark no bite. 

stationmonkey
Synthetic Arbitration
Job's Done.
#25 - 2012-10-17 19:27:00 UTC
Filthy Lucre wrote:
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
Also, much of current nul is still pretty damn empty. I think they need to work on nul encouragement than making even more empty space.

We do need more space. Nul is empty because CCP wants alliances to be able to control that space...and they do. There aren't any safe areas past the nulsec choke points (that are frequently bubble camped). Carebears and casual players don't go there any significant numbers because it's expected you will get blown up (don't fly anything you can't afford to lose, right?), so there is no significant economy. Business does not thrive in dangerous outback areas. Business needs safe and populated areas to thrive. That's just the way it is. The only way to get people out there is to make nul safer, or add some safe zones, or maybe add more jump gates to empire...or get rid of bubbles. Adding more stars to the map is one way to make things safer, because the chance of bumping into someone who will kill you is lessened.


well for me its less about making it safer for the "carebears" and more about giving them something else to employ their skills with. They would have a new ship, a new module for caps, and even gates to build for the seeding of a new galaxy. And the larger blocks would be at the forefront of the new push. Which would open up swaths of space for people to move into while the new galaxy expanded. So while the older players and newer players who are interested would be able to explore a new galaxy and help build this new territory. The smaller groups would be able to muck about in the current galaxy, claiming the space that has been left behind for the "greener pastures" people who push the expansion.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#26 - 2012-10-17 19:29:00 UTC
Eve needs to be deeper, not wider.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#27 - 2012-10-17 19:29:05 UTC
So basically you want static w-space.
Jim Era
#28 - 2012-10-17 19:32:25 UTC
I can easily make a few hundred mil a day in hi, why does there need to be more space, most systems are empty but it doesn't matter because the resources are unlimited

Wat™

stationmonkey
Synthetic Arbitration
Job's Done.
#29 - 2012-10-17 19:33:05 UTC
Robert De'Arneth wrote:
stationmonkey wrote:
Robert De'Arneth wrote:
The last thing we need is more open space imnsho. We need a way where all 3 groups of people will be happy, adding more space is not going to do it. What would happen is simple, we would have 4 groups arguing over what CCP should do. There are already plenty of systems in the game. I


expanding space has more to do with bringing more players in the game than any real need for it. I agree as it sits now there isn't enough incentive to expand to the null systems available. But remember my idea is a slow growth of space. not just a new galaxy all ready to go muck about it. Its a galaxy where the actual expansion of space is completely payer based. I am not talking about seeding a whole new galaxy. I am talking about using the player base to build a new galaxy.



So how is it going to bring people in? EVE is not like other games, it takes time to be ok, not even good. Then add in you have to learn how the game world works. Let's face some serious facts here sir, in today's world, people like instant gratification, EVE as it stands will never offer that, nor should it. EVE is never going to be the most popular game, it is a niche game in a niche market. I am not really sure what you all expect, lets not even get into the fact that EVE is aging. I still do not see how adding more systems for the large alliances to rule will help, and do not even try to say that will not happen, because we both know that is what would happen.


these larger groups would obviously expand. And eventually end up in a BOB situation where they are too big for their britches if you will. And as they move on more opens up here for those who are just starting to thrive. And again I will bring up the think about how useful your spies would become when you could decimate whole alliances with the right Intel on their asset movements to and from the new galaxy! This would definitely not be an instant gratification thing. I agree EVE should never go down that road. (we already have PLEX that's close enough) But the younger players would still have plenty to do. As it sits most new players go down the missioning and mining road. Those who mine would be in high demand as gates would need to be something that is complex and require a lot of different things to build. And again the power blocks would be forced to stretch their assets making them easier targets for coalitions or medium alliances to threaten.
Bane Necran
Appono Astos
#30 - 2012-10-17 19:38:21 UTC
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
They tried that too with "high" null being pointless to invest in for large blocks.


And they still happily invest in it just to have a bigger blob on the sov map. Predicted that from the start. Big smile

I wish 0.0 entities were more benevolent, and didn't just grab everything for the sake of grabbing it, when it could be better used by other people, but it really seems CCP is going to have to limit the amount of systems they can claim, or make it easier to challenge sov in unused systems, if they truly want to open 0.0 up to more people.

But they'll more likely just ignore all that and continue to throw money at 0.0 dwellers, thinking even though the 20 previous times failed to inspire any change, next time will work for sure.

"In the void is virtue, and no evil. Wisdom has existence, principle has existence, the Way has existence, spirit is nothingness." ~Miyamoto Musashi

Tobiaz
Spacerats
#31 - 2012-10-17 19:39:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
TL;DR

But thinking the size of the galaxy in EVE should be increased is a mistake. There are simply still too many empty systems to warrant such a suggestion. Rather CCP should focus on fixing what actually causes of players to clump together in only a minority of the systems.

Problems like very high travel speed, negligible fuel costs for offensive use of capitals, minimal cost&effort&risk for JF logistics, insignificant differences between NPC factions and corporations, no good scarcity-mechanics for ores and other resources, FW being the only profession with sufficient rewards&benefits to balance the extreme risk of trying to make money in low-sec, etc.

EVE is feeling a lot smaller over the years. And not so much because there are that many more players, but because CCP implemented and changed features and mechanics, causing unforeseen problems (and then ignoring them mostly).

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!

Te'bral
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#32 - 2012-10-17 19:42:34 UTC
Please excuse my ignorance, but I am having trouble understanding why people want or care if players enter low or null space. For all the players saying others need to be encouraged to enter low of null space, i ask why? what does it matter?
is it just cause there are more people to shoot?

I personally go into Low sec sometimes, but dont hang out there, and have never been to null. I dont go there becuase I am opposed to it or anything, I just dont feel ready.

I read all these posts about "encouraging" players to go there, but I am not exactly sure why. Maybe if others explained the reasoning behind it instead of how to encourage it, it would make more sense to players that dont go.

I am sure I am just overlooking the reasons.
Tobiaz
Spacerats
#33 - 2012-10-17 19:48:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Tobiaz
Te'bral wrote:
Please excuse my ignorance, but I am having trouble understanding why people want or care if players enter low or null space. For all the players saying others need to be encouraged to enter low of null space, i ask why? what does it matter?
is it just cause there are more people to shoot?

I personally go into Low sec sometimes, but dont hang out there, and have never been to null. I dont go there becuase I am opposed to it or anything, I just dont feel ready.

I read all these posts about "encouraging" players to go there, but I am not exactly sure why. Maybe if others explained the reasoning behind it instead of how to encourage it, it would make more sense to players that dont go.

I am sure I am just overlooking the reasons.


Not only is every game driven by challenge, EVE is also driven by consumption. For it to function properly, stuff needs to blow up. Simple as that.

And to facilitate this, people should be encouraged by the game to take risks by sufficient rewards.

There isn't enough risk in empire, while at the same time the reward of low-sec doesn't come close to cover the risk.

(edit: also NAP-trains are stagnating null and their pilots spent too much of their time in empire simply because they can)

Operation WRITE DOWN ALL THE THINGS!!!  Check out the list at http://bit.ly/wdatt Collecting and compiling all fixes and ideas for EVE. Looking for more editors!

stationmonkey
Synthetic Arbitration
Job's Done.
#34 - 2012-10-17 19:49:31 UTC
Te'bral wrote:
Please excuse my ignorance, but I am having trouble understanding why people want or care if players enter low or null space. For all the players saying others need to be encouraged to enter low of null space, i ask why? what does it matter?
is it just cause there are more people to shoot?

I personally go into Low sec sometimes, but dont hang out there, and have never been to null. I dont go there becuase I am opposed to it or anything, I just dont feel ready.

I read all these posts about "encouraging" players to go there, but I am not exactly sure why. Maybe if others explained the reasoning behind it instead of how to encourage it, it would make more sense to players that dont go.

I am sure I am just overlooking the reasons.


For some getting more players out there is to get more targets. That's totally true. But its also because if your in a secure location in nullsec you can build things so much faster than you can in high sec that if your lucky enough to be an industrialist in a powerblock your in like Flynn! Unfortunately this is not an easy thing to do. And requires you to join corps and alliances in order to make it happen. Eve is a game of patience and planning. If you don't have both of those your likely to have a bad go at this game. Expanding in the manner I suggest would give new players a little more leeway to explore the scarier parts of space without so much fear. Its not going to stop the camps on the bottlenecks into null or anything. (nor should it) but it would change the landscape and change the way the powerblocks influence the game. Giving a chance for new members to understand the advantages of life outside of Concord patrolled areas.
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#35 - 2012-10-17 19:50:05 UTC
Bane Necran wrote:

But they'll more likely just ignore all that and continue to throw money at 0.0 dwellers, thinking even though the 20 previous times failed to inspire any change, next time will work for sure.


Print more money!
stationmonkey
Synthetic Arbitration
Job's Done.
#36 - 2012-10-17 19:52:26 UTC
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
Bane Necran wrote:

But they'll more likely just ignore all that and continue to throw money at 0.0 dwellers, thinking even though the 20 previous times failed to inspire any change, next time will work for sure.


Print more money!


hehe ya!! cause that has worked so well in the real world!
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#37 - 2012-10-17 21:14:22 UTC
stationmonkey wrote:
Saede Riordan wrote:
stationmonkey wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Please edit and put some paragraphs/line breaks in.


oh if only the posting system allowed enough room to do that.. but unfortunately your relegated to 6000 characters...


If you can't summarize an idea and pitch it in less than 6000 words than its far too complicated a pitch.


this is a far to complex and convoluted game for any 6000 characters to ever encompass... And a reasonable way to generate expansion requires far more than anyone is willing to read in a single sitting. you can moan all you want about how the idea should fit in 6000 characters. But the reality is you cant even explain the game its self in so few words. Let alone the impact that changes like this would make.


Eve is a sandbox game about spaceships, treachery , and space assholes.
stationmonkey
Synthetic Arbitration
Job's Done.
#38 - 2012-10-17 22:46:32 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
stationmonkey wrote:
Saede Riordan wrote:
stationmonkey wrote:
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
Please edit and put some paragraphs/line breaks in.


oh if only the posting system allowed enough room to do that.. but unfortunately your relegated to 6000 characters...


If you can't summarize an idea and pitch it in less than 6000 words than its far too complicated a pitch.


this is a far to complex and convoluted game for any 6000 characters to ever encompass... And a reasonable way to generate expansion requires far more than anyone is willing to read in a single sitting. you can moan all you want about how the idea should fit in 6000 characters. But the reality is you cant even explain the game its self in so few words. Let alone the impact that changes like this would make.


Eve is a sandbox game about spaceships, treachery , and space assholes.


I totally stand corrected!! =-)
Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#39 - 2012-10-17 23:47:39 UTC
ugh well anyway, it won't draw more accounts, this is just too overcomplicated and too demanding for development and in some cases one-time-off features (gate build race or whatever. This is too whimsical. Not to mention poorly written for the size of it on a forum board, but..

Even if it was a good idea while remaining complicated:
1. Right now we have iteration for another probably few expansions.
2. Then comes the devils due, and we let them get back to WiS development. Pff next 10 expansions just to get anywhere with it.
3. Most of us are old and indigent by the time they finish WiS, only the next generation of players will be effected by such ideas as yours.
4. Between 2 & 3 we will be lucky to see fast easy new things added to the game as far as the space game is concerned.
--a. I could see a case for low/high expansion a little, but nothing over complicated.
--b. I would hope for some added professions and/or skills at some point.
--c. There will always be a need for maintenance to the things that are in the game rather than allowing things to break as they have done in the past.
5. I wrote all this without needing multiple posts so chances are I won't get flamed ...not to bad at least.


I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12

Tarvos Telesto
Blood Fanatics
#40 - 2012-10-18 00:28:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Tarvos Telesto
EvE space is to big, in fact in most cases people siting years long, in one solar system max two solar systems and grinding misssion, camping jita, farming rats in null space, campig some low sec month long ...

Meny players are lazy, because jumping is not excited just boring stuf, for meny people traveling across space is more big pain than fun.

EvE space is low populated, we need things that (force us) to visit and travel across EvE universe... Traveling betwen few boring agents who replay 100000000x same briefing message just suck, however good profit for them

Flying should got more aracade - tourism aspects than warp to 0, in fact in EvE you dont flying! you give orders and command to your ship, its more strategy than space ships simulator.

EvE isn't game, its style of living.

Previous page123Next page