These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

New 0.0 systems Needed,
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hakan MacTrew
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#21 - 2013-01-24 11:58:48 UTC
OP, how many times did you get held back a year in school? I'm guessing, from how stupid some of your ideas are, that your in you mid 30's and your still in junior school.

Fine, add more SOV space. Guess what, the big coalitions will take it and get even more wealth. Are you going to stop them? I doubt it.

And confirming SOV is mostly empty. I go on weekly roams, normally weekend evenings, (you know, the busiest time,) and 90+% of the systems I enter have no more than 2 other people in them if any at all.

Friends
seth Hendar
I love you miners
#22 - 2013-01-24 13:26:39 UTC  |  Edited by: seth Hendar
Danika Princip wrote:
seth Hendar wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
0.0 is big enough, the problem is in the conquering mechanic. Space isn't determined by how much area you can effectively occupy, its how many Ihubs you can bash before your alliance becomes 100% bored and you can't raise a fleet. If a small alliance tries to take space from a big alliance, even if their forces are stationed 20 jumps away you can guarantee you will have the hammer dropped on you, and if your hammer is of equal size to theirs they can call in blues from 60 jumps away. 0.0 needs to be more activity intensive to control and more difficult to traverse.

well, i see a possible solution to the sov issue in the current mechanic


make the NPC able to take SOV, following the current mechanic.

this would be a several stage process, that will begin based on the fact npc sig are runned or not, thus reflecting somehow the activity of the system (could include other factors too).

if the anoms are not done for a set amount of time, some new kind of anoms would then pop, some "advanced staging point", prefiguring the prepositionning of forces.

those would still be non-100% sig.

again, if thoses are not taken down for a set amount of time, then the NPC will start attacking any pos, anchor SBUs, and if not countered, finally will simply take the SOV back.


the really used system will never be challenged this way, while in the mean time, the unused one would have to see activity, or being released by the big blocks

a spread pattern could be used, making the timing between the different stage faster if the nearby systems are already controlled by the npcs.

in such a npc controlled null, any pos anchored would be attacked by the npc, making the sov holding mandatory if one want to exploit said system



Please explain how this fixes the sov mechanics? Grinding through millions of HP of immobile structures is so boring that the mere thought of it averted a bloc level war. Your idea doesn't even touch this, it just means people have to grind through guristas ihubs as well :V


this doesn't fix the boringness of the sov mechanics, but still solve the easyness of holding mass sov in never used systems

tho, the actual situation result in the fact that big alliances are not challenged often on those unused system, mainly because there are not enought ppl having the power to do so.

IF npcs start challenging the sov on unused system, big alliances will have three choices:

1- defend em on a regular basis, thus mobilizing their power and potentially leaving opportunity for other alliances to challenge them elsewhere

2- find a way to use those systems, remember only unused system would fall under this mechanic.

3- leave the npc take control of the systems since after all, they don't use em anyway.

of course, this doesn't prevent other changes need to be done around null, regarding industry for example, and might be seen as one piece among the overall rework that is needed.

the final result of just this, provided it is balanced well, would be powerblock to reduce their sov size, thus allowing opportunity for new alliances to take a foot in null, which would potentially bring movement, conflict, and last but not least, populate those empty regions.

i might be wrong, but i think this could work
Malcorian Vandsteidt
Alpha Trades
Solyaris Chtonium
#23 - 2013-01-24 14:50:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcorian Vandsteidt
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
OP, how many times did you get held back a year in school? I'm guessing, from how stupid some of your ideas are, that your in you mid 30's and your still in junior school.

Fine, add more SOV space. Guess what, the big coalitions will take it and get even more wealth. Are you going to stop them? I doubt it.

And confirming SOV is mostly empty. I go on weekly roams, normally weekend evenings, (you know, the busiest time,) and 90+% of the systems I enter have no more than 2 other people in them if any at all.


Actually I graduated Highschool when I was 16, and have an IQ of 146, So no I wasn't held back. But I also Suffer from ADHD, as well as Dyslexia and several other disorders (Most people with High IQ's do).

More to the point though, People in Eve have been flaming my ideas since Day one, yet most of them have Ended up in game: Just to name a Few:

The Attribute remap.
Secondary tier Destroyers
T3 Cruisers
Many of the fixes to battleships
Incursions

* Much of the Sov changes : (Although not all I actually was against the Ihubs and Paying monthly fees fro space because only Huge alliances can afford such, And I pointed out that this would make taking 0.0 very difficult for the smaller corps and alliances, In the Last minuets CCP recognized this was a bad idea and are going to change Sov in it's entirety over the next few expansions, most likely using suggestion from these forums which "Might" mean the ones in this thread, well see)

** Some things I ahve Sugested which are not in game yet but are in discussion on some level -

Skill Remap
T3 BS's
Pirate and Navy Battlecruisers (This is an old one)
T3 Customizable Capital ships
Ice in WH's

And many others.


NOTE:

I am not claimming CCP specifically chose to use my Ideas, I am simply saying that they ended up in game, whether a dev saw something and went hmm that's a great Idea, or a CSM decided to mention it and used my Idea as a base. Or hell no one may have even paid attention to my post but thought aboiut it themselves and came up with the same Idea as me.

Either way, my suggestions and Ideals have repeatedly ended up in Game in one form or another over the years. So apparently, they are not stupid nor needless.

Have yours?
Malcorian Vandsteidt
Alpha Trades
Solyaris Chtonium
#24 - 2013-01-24 14:58:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcorian Vandsteidt
Miss post
Malcorian Vandsteidt
Alpha Trades
Solyaris Chtonium
#25 - 2013-01-24 14:59:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcorian Vandsteidt
seth Hendar wrote:
Danika Princip wrote:
seth Hendar wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
0.0 is big enough, the problem is in the conquering mechanic. Space isn't determined by how much area you can effectively occupy, its how many Ihubs you can bash before your alliance becomes 100% bored and you can't raise a fleet. If a small alliance tries to take space from a big alliance, even if their forces are stationed 20 jumps away you can guarantee you will have the hammer dropped on you, and if your hammer is of equal size to theirs they can call in blues from 60 jumps away. 0.0 needs to be more activity intensive to control and more difficult to traverse.

well, i see a possible solution to the sov issue in the current mechanic


make the NPC able to take SOV, following the current mechanic.

this would be a several stage process, that will begin based on the fact npc sig are runned or not, thus reflecting somehow the activity of the system (could include other factors too).

if the anoms are not done for a set amount of time, some new kind of anoms would then pop, some "advanced staging point", prefiguring the prepositionning of forces.

those would still be non-100% sig.

again, if thoses are not taken down for a set amount of time, then the NPC will start attacking any pos, anchor SBUs, and if not countered, finally will simply take the SOV back.


the really used system will never be challenged this way, while in the mean time, the unused one would have to see activity, or being released by the big blocks

a spread pattern could be used, making the timing between the different stage faster if the nearby systems are already controlled by the npcs.

in such a npc controlled null, any pos anchored would be attacked by the npc, making the sov holding mandatory if one want to exploit said system



Please explain how this fixes the sov mechanics? Grinding through millions of HP of immobile structures is so boring that the mere thought of it averted a bloc level war. Your idea doesn't even touch this, it just means people have to grind through guristas ihubs as well :V


this doesn't fix the boringness of the sov mechanics, but still solve the easyness of holding mass sov in never used systems

tho, the actual situation result in the fact that big alliances are not challenged often on those unused system, mainly because there are not enought ppl having the power to do so.

IF npcs start challenging the sov on unused system, big alliances will have three choices:

1- defend em on a regular basis, thus mobilizing their power and potentially leaving opportunity for other alliances to challenge them elsewhere

2- find a way to use those systems, remember only unused system would fall under this mechanic.

3- leave the npc take control of the systems since after all, they don't use em anyway.

of course, this doesn't prevent other changes need to be done around null, regarding industry for example, and might be seen as one piece among the overall rework that is needed.

the final result of just this, provided it is balanced well, would be powerblock to reduce their sov size, thus allowing opportunity for new alliances to take a foot in null, which would potentially bring movement, conflict, and last but not least, populate those empty regions.

I agree that SBU's are a horrible Idea, Since there is effectively no way for a smaller corp or alliance to destroy them. And therfore a smaller Corp or Alliance can never take Sov from anyone.

i might be wrong, but i think this could work


I agree that SOV Units 's are a horrible Idea as smaller corps and Alliances have no hope of ever killing one and taking sov from a larger Alliance.
Malcorian Vandsteidt
Alpha Trades
Solyaris Chtonium
#26 - 2013-01-24 15:07:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Malcorian Vandsteidt
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
OP, how many times did you get held back a year in school? I'm guessing, from how stupid some of your ideas are, that your in you mid 30's and your still in junior school.

Fine, add more SOV space. Guess what, the big coalitions will take it and get even more wealth. Are you going to stop them? I doubt it.

And confirming SOV is mostly empty. I go on weekly roams, normally weekend evenings, (you know, the busiest time,) and 90+% of the systems I enter have no more than 2 other people in them if any at all.


0.0 being empty isn't the point of this post. If you were more interested in comprehension then flaming you'd know this.

The point is that smaller corps and allainces have no ability to take these empty systems for the following reasons:

* The Sov Unit takes 20-30 Dreadnaughts HOURS to take down. Most small Alliances do not have these resources.

* Large Alliances Sov space not because they need it, but because they "Can" and then ensure that smaller corps and Alliances never have the opportunity to own sov. The mechanic in place should FORCE Alliances to only be able to Sov what they Use on a minuet/hourly platform. And the degradation from SOvd to Unsoved should be very quick, Forcing alliances to continuously use and maintain their systems in all ways, all the time. Or lose it.

* Since it is Impossible for a smaller corp or Alliance to ever play the 0.0 Game ( After all the point of moving to 0.0 is to eventually Own Sov (Which you currently can't if you do not have an entire capital blob fleet), None of them bother with it.

You all keep screaming you want highsecers to come to 0.0, Well Stop **** blocking / Power Blocking them and maybe they will.
Malcorian Vandsteidt
Alpha Trades
Solyaris Chtonium
#27 - 2013-01-24 15:21:16 UTC
I ahve updated the Original OP to expand on this Idea and to include a more detailed description of a system which would work,a nd work very well to solve the Current Sov issues and force 0.0 Alliances to concentrate on effectively maintaining their space.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#28 - 2013-01-24 16:12:31 UTC

Malcorian, You have a lot of priceless quotes:

1.) CCP may get ideas from this forum section, but I don't believe you can claim credit for these features:
The Attribute remap. <-- Many people had this idea... not just you...
Secondary tier Destroyers <-- Many people had this diea... not just you...
T3 Cruisers <-- Prove it... link your post
Many of the fixes to battleships <-- What fixes? Link it...
Incursions <--- Prove it... link your post


2.)
Malcorian Vandsteidt wrote:
0.0 being empty isn't the point of this post. If you were more interested in comprehension then flaming you'd know this.

The point is that smaller corps and allainces have no ability to take these empty systems for the following reasons:

* The Sov Unit takes 20-30 Dreadnaughts HOURS to take down. Most small Alliances do not have these resources.

* Large Alliances Sov space not because they need it, but because they "Can" and then ensure that smaller corps and Alliances never have the opportunity to own sov. The mechanic in place should FORCE Alliances to only be able to Sov what they Use on a minuet/hourly platform. And the degradation from SOvd to Unsoved should be very quick, Forcing alliances to continuously use and maintain their systems in all ways, all the time. Or lose it.

* Since it is Impossible for a smaller corp or Alliance to ever play the 0.0 Game ( After all the point of moving to 0.0 is to eventually Own Sov (Which you currently can't if you do not have an entire capital blob fleet), None of them bother with it.


You have several misinformation in this post:
A.) It does not take 20-30 dreadnaughts hours to take down SOV.... at least.. not for ONE system. A TCU has 25m EHP... An IHUB has 200m EHP. 10 dreads to 75,000 dps. If dreads were "able" to just shoot and shoot until the stuff was destroyed, then 10 dreads would complete the job in less than 1 hour.... FYI, 10 dreads == 75 Battleships... Even a small alliance should be able to field 30 BS's for a big Sov Taking op... Pragmatically though, RF timers split this job into several smaller jobs.

B.) The mechanics should not FORCE alliances to NOT hold sov on systems they don't use... You're just wrong there. The mechanics should make it difficult to hold sov on systems they don't use, and it should make it harder to take sov from systems that ARE being used.

C.) The reason Small Alliances can't play in the "Sov Game" is because there is no small gang tactical/strategical objectives in Sov Warfare. All Sov Objectives center around shooting Huge EHP structures on RF timers... A small group just can't defend a structure from a big group when it's vulnerability is completely alarm clock based... Sov Mechanics need smaller scale objectives that are randomly available...

Malcorian Vandsteidt wrote:

The Sov mechanic in place should FORCE Alliances to only be able to Sov what they Use on a minuet/hourly platform. And the degradation from SOvd to Unsoved should be very quick, Forcing alliances to continuously use and maintain their systems in all ways, all the time. Or lose it.

* Remove SU's, and All Sov Units.
* Replace with Degridation / Claim system based on system Use. (IE the more you use it the higher your SOv level gets, the less the lower it drops).

This is realistic, and solves MANY of the 0.0 Issues we are facing today.

1. Individuals from an Alliance must do the following actives in a system in order to maintain said system every Minuet/Hour/ and day:

* Mine
* Rat
* Plex

2. This not only ensures that 0.0 Alliances and Corps will desire to recruit highsec Industrialists, as well as Pveers (simply to maintain their systems) But it will also encourage them to protect their Carebear Maintainers, rather then let them Rot, as it is these carebears who are now responsible for maintaining their Sovereignty.

3. This ensures that an Alliance can not maintain more space then it actually Uses.


Again.... please try to vet your own ideas before you post them....
1.) Very few alliances have 24/7 activity. Most alliances have peak times in a preferred time zone, and some alliances have peak activities in US, EU, and AU Tz's... but not continuous activity. Your new sov system just eliminated almost every alliance that is TZ centric from participating in Sov.... I'm sorry... but that doesn't work... Additionally, I could cause most alliances to lose their sov just by afk'ing my arazu in their system...

2.) I totally agree that system activity should work hand in hand with Sov Taking/Defending... I wonder if you are familiar with system upgrades, as they work similar to your proposal.... If you don't maintain a certain NPC's destroyed index, your IHUB Military upgrades decay and you lose system benefits until you get that index back up and maintain it until DT... If you don't mine enough your Industrial Index falls.... Unfortunately, the Strategic index is 100% based on how long you've held the system... and doesn't "decay". IMO, it should be based on system activity, and should decay. Realize the decay rates are a lot slower than you suggest, and the Indexes have no influence on keeping or taking sov (if they did, it might help).

3.) You shouldn't care about alliances grabbing more than they can use... If a large alliance over-extends itself, it should make it more vulnerable, cost it more isk, and ulitmately hurt the alliance. If you aren't using a system, it should be easy to take... If you are using a system, it should be harder to take...
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#29 - 2013-01-24 16:43:52 UTC
One of the best thing they could do is get rid of the free intel associated with UI map. Jumps/24hrs, Kills/24hrs (make them go to eve-kill), etc... The population of Eve is now big enough so that you don't need them to get fights.

1. Bored 0.0 alliances would actually have to undock and actively patrol their empires,
2. The little guy needs time to build up his hidden empire before getting roflstomped into the ground.



Malcorian Vandsteidt
Alpha Trades
Solyaris Chtonium
#30 - 2013-01-24 17:02:32 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
One of the best thing they could do is get rid of the free intel associated with UI map. Jumps/24hrs, Kills/24hrs (make them go to eve-kill), etc... The population of Eve is now big enough so that you don't need them to get fights.

1. Bored 0.0 alliances would actually have to undock and actively patrol their empires,
2. The little guy needs time to build up his hidden empire before getting roflstomped into the ground.



I can agree to this, also removeing Notification that one of your Systems is under attack would be a useful deterent to give smaller Alliances more time to attack larger ones in empty systems.

It would also force LArger Alliance to constantly patrol and watch their teritory for Attacks instead of Donut eatingin an office chair and going Oh snap, just got a Mial, Gy-y1O is under attack, Is the Blob fleet ready.. Good, 5 minuets to Titan bridge Cynos get your asses over there pronto!.
Previous page12