These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would EvE look like with no jump gates?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
feihcsiM
THE B0YS
#41 - 2012-11-06 16:51:38 UTC
It would be like Elite II, but with a buggier UI....

It's the end of the world as we know it and I feel fine.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2012-11-06 17:43:08 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Rana Ash wrote:

Yes your Sovereignty would be tougher to defend, but think of the opportunities of being able to strand your enemy cause they have no fuel. Cause you have messed up their fuel deliveries, the raids you could pull off in enemy space and they in yours.

The potential is huge, but it will most likely not happen..


Easier to defend. Far, far easier. To the point of stupidity. You know how people like to ***** about Jump Bridges?

Also, there are already ships that jump around and use fuel, and none of the things you mentioned really happen.

i think we all remember when jump-capable titans were being produced at the rate of like 32 a month

when groups like NCDOT and PL were 'space patrolling' places system by system in their supercap fleets

lol
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
#43 - 2012-11-06 17:45:12 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
travel to any held territory under attack threat instantly and effortlessly from anywhere in the universe -> leads to "combat patrols"

lol

Please see previous posts about limits on jumping.
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
#44 - 2012-11-06 17:46:00 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Silly idea that accomplishes so little.

I'd like to point out it would also make many regions too easy to defend, as their backdoor super long range jumps would cease to exist, meaning they would only be accessible from a handful of points, all near each other.

Unless your backdoor is a wormhole...

And that would make things even more interesting.
Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
#45 - 2012-11-06 17:50:08 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
I wonder when people think up these "cool ideas" (usually presented in the "what would this thing I'd like to see be like" posts like the OP. do they ever ask themselves the 2 most important question?

#1 being "why is the situation the way it is now"? (ie why does a game about SPACE/SOLAR SYSTEMS billions of kilometers wide need choke points and places where people could actually meet and shoot their 3 kilometer ranged autocannons at each other.........)

And

#2 "What will doing things this way cost/screw up"?

Critical thinking 101 really, if people applied an ounce of sense to what they post, GD would probably die in 2 days..

Ideas breed discussion. Discussion leads to consideration or non-consideration. Consideration leads to development. Development requires critical thinking.

I would point you to the definition of forum.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#46 - 2012-11-06 17:53:52 UTC
Nexus Day wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
I wonder when people think up these "cool ideas" (usually presented in the "what would this thing I'd like to see be like" posts like the OP. do they ever ask themselves the 2 most important question?

#1 being "why is the situation the way it is now"? (ie why does a game about SPACE/SOLAR SYSTEMS billions of kilometers wide need choke points and places where people could actually meet and shoot their 3 kilometer ranged autocannons at each other.........)

And

#2 "What will doing things this way cost/screw up"?

Critical thinking 101 really, if people applied an ounce of sense to what they post, GD would probably die in 2 days..

Ideas breed discussion. Discussion leads to consideration or non-consideration. Consideration leads to development. Development requires critical thinking.

I would point you to the definition of forum.



And the consensus of this "discussion" is that what you posted was a dumb idea lol, and i dea that perhaps you would have kept to yourself had you adhere to the principles I listed above (or to principle #3, which is "search the forums to see how many times in the last 10 years this has come up and been knocked down as stupid".....)..
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#47 - 2012-11-06 17:55:04 UTC
ShahFluffers wrote:
- Warfare will center more on structures (like TCUs and plexes) and stations... which might breathe new life into SOV-type PvP (maybe not).

Do you know ANYTHING about nulsec wars?

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#48 - 2012-11-06 18:20:11 UTC
The function of how gates operate is all the change you need. But they are necessary choke points so players actually meet.

But they don't have to double up on the entrance and exit
The landing zone in a system could be a capture hub, much larger than the current landing zone, making it much harder to camp and easier to enter.
The flip side is the outbound gates can require a spool-up time to exit, much like an acceleration gate requires you to align and get to speed, then you don't have to worry about weapon timers as you protect yourself as you exit. Makes exits the choke point.

This makes it easier for both groups be fully loaded on grid and together so aggressors can sort out long range from short before a camped situation. So every fight isn't really a ambush due to node load times.
ctx2007
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2012-11-06 18:56:06 UTC
Everybody would have to self cyno jump ... interesting idea

You only realise you life has been a waste of time, when you wake up dead.
Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#50 - 2012-11-06 18:56:18 UTC
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
The function of how gates operate is all the change you need. But they are necessary choke points so players actually meet.

But they don't have to double up on the entrance and exit
The landing zone in a system could be a capture hub, much larger than the current landing zone, making it much harder to camp and easier to enter.
The flip side is the outbound gates can require a spool-up time to exit, much like an acceleration gate requires you to align and get to speed, then you don't have to worry about weapon timers as you protect yourself as you exit. Makes exits the choke point.

This makes it easier for both groups be fully loaded on grid and together so aggressors can sort out long range from short before a camped situation. So every fight isn't really a ambush due to node load times.


They are only necessary chokepoints because empty space in 9 out of 10 cases is not being used. Or rather more or less cannot be used with the exception of the very roundabout bookmarking feature which creates new fixed points.

EVE navigation is purely about going to specifically pre-defined points which limits the game somewhat tremendously. And as a consequence, the way you find and see ships is based around this way of travelling.

If navigation was fully free-roaming without relying on specific points (including ability to change direction mid-warp flight) AND if ship detection was different (a.k.a the usual sub-marine style idea) alongside with tweaked methods of catching ships in motion, then it would be a lot easier to imagine EVE without gates.

Not to mention that size, empty space and distances would actually matter once and for all.

First and foremost though I would stick with a free entry point-fixed exit point only and see how that would work out.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2012-11-06 19:08:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Nexus Day wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
travel to any held territory under attack threat instantly and effortlessly from anywhere in the universe -> leads to "combat patrols"

lol

Please see previous posts about limits on jumping.

this already exists for current jump ships it's called 'capacitor'
yet, supercap-heavy alliances boast of their ability to traverse new eden in half an hour
in fact, one holds 25% of the tech moons in the north while it is at the moment sieging the southernmost regions in EVE like Feythabolis and Esoteria, knowing they can bring their forces back to EVE before they leave their reinforcement timers.

what about your suggestion of giving every ship in the game this ability, now with no fuel and unlimited range, encourages local 'space patrols' and large alliances 'defending their assets' exactly?
Dragon Outlaw
Rogue Fleet
#52 - 2012-11-06 19:28:25 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

And the consensus of this "discussion" is that what you posted was a dumb idea lol, and i dea that perhaps you would have kept to yourself had you adhere to the principles I listed above (or to principle #3, which is "search the forums to see how many times in the last 10 years this has come up and been knocked down as stupid".....)..


There are also a lot of people who say that colliding particles in a giant accelerator is stupid...Roll
Random Majere
Rogue Fleet
#53 - 2012-11-06 19:37:07 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

And the consensus of this "discussion" is that what you posted was a dumb idea lol,..


What is this consensus you are imagining Jenn aSide? How do you come to that conclusion that there is a consensus?
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#54 - 2012-11-06 19:56:56 UTC
Jenn aSide has a point that you don't want to splinter the userbase too much. If gates go away as a point of interaction, something has to replace them. One possible way is to put more destinations in more parts of space. But what if there were a gate-like system that was dynamic?

Imagine a cross between a cynosural field and a warp tunnel. Targeting the thing would be difficult, and creation expensive, but once it was created it opened a two-way tunnel between systems. Any such tunnel created would put up a cyno-style beacon at both ends, but instead of being on a fixed timer, every ship in the game would have the ability to keep it open longer simply by using it. Thus, there would be a strong incentive for most people to use known and established tunnels for heavily traveled routes.

Travel through the tunnel is fast, but not instantaneous (say, ship speed in m/s + some large quantity of AU/s), and modules work.

Black ops, and only black ops, could create covert tunnels in the way that they currently create covert cynos. These would not be 100% hidden, just very difficult to scan down.

No gates; no teleportation; 100% emergent transportation infrastructure; lots of opportunities to meet people and shoot at them.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Roll Sizzle Beef
Space Mutiny
#55 - 2012-11-06 20:01:29 UTC
Gillia Winddancer wrote:

They are only necessary chokepoints because empty space in 9 out of 10 cases is not being used. Or rather more or less cannot be used with the exception of the very roundabout bookmarking feature which creates new fixed points.

EVE navigation is purely about going to specifically pre-defined points which limits the game somewhat tremendously. And as a consequence, the way you find and see ships is based around this way of travelling.

If navigation was fully free-roaming without relying on specific points (including ability to change direction mid-warp flight) AND if ship detection was different (a.k.a the usual sub-marine style idea) alongside with tweaked methods of catching ships in motion, then it would be a lot easier to imagine EVE without gates.

Not to mention that size, empty space and distances would actually matter once and for all.

First and foremost though I would stick with a free entry point-fixed exit point only and see how that would work out.



While I would welcome free roam, So many parts of the game are intertwined with specific points in space what would be the point of it? It would be a crazy large overhaul. Probing, combat probing, d-scan, mission rooms, scan sites.
If finding other ships was any easier, the whole scanning profession and everything revolving around it is down the pipe. Same with wormholes. Ship ping and boom, warping to their safe point so other other ship points in a random direction and warps. Sounds like it would be a game of who has more capacitor or a cloak.
A single blind 1 AU jump for full cap cost in the direction of your choosing would open up a system more without a giant overhaul.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#56 - 2012-11-06 20:09:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Random Majere wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

And the consensus of this "discussion" is that what you posted was a dumb idea lol,..


What is this consensus you are imagining Jenn aSide? How do you come to that conclusion that there is a consensus?


Because I can count things like the number of posts hostile to the idea at the time I posted that as well as use the search function AND my memory of the last 2 dozen times the same idea has popped up on these forum in at least the last 5 years....

The point is that it will never happen because it's too complicated, doesn't sem like it would be fun and would be hell to "balance" ie figure out ways to get people close enough to shoot at each other.

This idea would more likely be "EVE II" or something. While the OP has every right to throw out ideas, I'd advise not wasting too much time thinking about something so implausible it won't happen.
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#57 - 2012-11-06 20:15:36 UTC
These types of ideas are pointless even from a discussion standpoint. The amount of change that would be required would be too risky and complicated for CCP to do in regards to Eve. So no.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden
Gillia Winddancer
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#58 - 2012-11-06 20:16:10 UTC
Roll Sizzle Beef wrote:
Gillia Winddancer wrote:

They are only necessary chokepoints because empty space in 9 out of 10 cases is not being used. Or rather more or less cannot be used with the exception of the very roundabout bookmarking feature which creates new fixed points.

EVE navigation is purely about going to specifically pre-defined points which limits the game somewhat tremendously. And as a consequence, the way you find and see ships is based around this way of travelling.

If navigation was fully free-roaming without relying on specific points (including ability to change direction mid-warp flight) AND if ship detection was different (a.k.a the usual sub-marine style idea) alongside with tweaked methods of catching ships in motion, then it would be a lot easier to imagine EVE without gates.

Not to mention that size, empty space and distances would actually matter once and for all.

First and foremost though I would stick with a free entry point-fixed exit point only and see how that would work out.



While I would welcome free roam, So many parts of the game are intertwined with specific points in space what would be the point of it? It would be a crazy large overhaul. Probing, combat probing, d-scan, mission rooms, scan sites.
If finding other ships was any easier, the whole scanning profession and everything revolving around it is down the pipe. Same with wormholes. Ship ping and boom, warping to their safe point so other other ship points in a random direction and warps. Sounds like it would be a game of who has more capacitor or a cloak.
A single blind 1 AU jump for full cap cost in the direction of your choosing would open up a system more without a giant overhaul.


I never said that the changes required would be small. Quite the opposite, which is rather troublesome. But frankly I think that this is what EVE really needs in order to solve so many problems that are indirectly related to travelling and detecting ships such as the unwillingness to visit low/nullsec, blobs, (static) mining and so on.

Maybe it's just me but I don't think many people realize at all just how much these things affect the rest of the game. Then again, it's been a long hobby of mine to tear apart game mechanics, analyse them and their relationships to everything else as well as thinking of new mechanics and what effects they will have so it's a bit like a second nature to me. Which is also why I get rather annoyed when people come with silly suggestions like "increase rewards in low- and nullsec to attract players".
Random Majere
Rogue Fleet
#59 - 2012-11-06 20:44:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Random Majere
Jenn aSide wrote:
Random Majere wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

And the consensus of this "discussion" is that what you posted was a dumb idea lol,..


What is this consensus you are imagining Jenn aSide? How do you come to that conclusion that there is a consensus?


Because I can count things like the number of posts hostile to the idea at the time I posted that as well as use the search function AND my memory of the last 2 dozen times the same idea has popped up on these forum in at least the last 5 years....

The point is that it will never happen because it's too complicated, doesn't sem like it would be fun and would be hell to "balance" ie figure out ways to get people close enough to shoot at each other.

This idea would more likely be "EVE II" or something. While the OP has every right to throw out ideas, I'd advise not wasting too much time thinking about something so implausible it won't happen.


All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. — Arthur Schopenhauer

Dont you find this interesting? Cool
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#60 - 2012-11-06 20:54:01 UTC
Random Majere wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Random Majere wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

And the consensus of this "discussion" is that what you posted was a dumb idea lol,..


What is this consensus you are imagining Jenn aSide? How do you come to that conclusion that there is a consensus?


Because I can count things like the number of posts hostile to the idea at the time I posted that as well as use the search function AND my memory of the last 2 dozen times the same idea has popped up on these forum in at least the last 5 years....

The point is that it will never happen because it's too complicated, doesn't sem like it would be fun and would be hell to "balance" ie figure out ways to get people close enough to shoot at each other.

This idea would more likely be "EVE II" or something. While the OP has every right to throw out ideas, I'd advise not wasting too much time thinking about something so implausible it won't happen.


All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. — Arthur Schopenhauer

Dont you find this interesting?


No, because it has nothing to do with anything we're talking about at all.

What deep meaningful "truth" are talking about again? The "truth" that a game that has "gates" as central to the way it works would be so much better without gates?

By that "reasoning", EVE onlien's main problem is space ships, it would be so much better if we all jsut fly space surf boards on hyperspace waves to get from place to place lol.

Are you people so arrogant that you think your magical ideas are so great that no one ever thought of this before (except the other 700 people who posted the same idea on this forum over the last 10 years)? Do you really think that CCP is going to collectively , today, look in General Discussion and go "oh crap, it's the damn gate, why didn't we think of that, call in everyone from home so we can get rid of gates by December"!

Seriously, theory crafting is great, can't hurt nothin putting undoable, totally implausible thoughts on a forum. BUT don't get mad when people explain to you why what you think is a good idea is actually pretty dumb and already well discussed.