Jita Park Speakers Corner

Nullsec has been divided up and effectively cut in half with the CFC controlling half and N3/PL holding the other half. It appears the Southern Russians will regain their ancestral holdings leaving the only odd man out Solar Fleet who will reconstitute themselves in Querious.

Both sides are able to sustain alliance level incomes and appear to be quite content with their current holdings. I'm curious what the CSM's thoughts are on the current state of Be a Renter or Landlord Online©

Odyssey and its moon changes appeared to shake things up for a couple months but ultimately turned out to be a fluke as R64's will never approach bottleneck status because of years and years worth of stockpile.

What must be done to generate conflict in 0.0 once again??

Nullsec grand strategic warfare follows a predictable model that would further bolster the faith of even the most confident of political realists.

The existing power arrangements become strained by changes in the underlying balances of power->political maneuvering and proxy wars begin to eat at the existing political order->sides are quickly formed in a galaxy spanning conflict->one side wins and establishes a new political order to reflect the new balance of power->return to step one.

After every big shitstorm, people start crying that there will never be conflict in nullsec again, and every time the entire cycle begins to repeat itself within two to three months.

If you dislike the inherent ebb and flow of grand strategy, then I suggest you either find a different aspect of the game to play or a different intelligent species to play in nullsec with (assuming that intelligence and cooperative behaviour aren't mutually hard-determined, making grand strategic behaviour a universal facet of intelligence).

I wish I could give this post more likes.



This one's not too bad either.



And this one, though there's probably some profound misunderstanding of moons, full stop, there as well. I've gotta assume the OP hasn't looked at Dysprosium in Jita lately, which is exhibiting every appearance of stockpile depletion. The others will follow in time.


Now, the OP is probably looking for something like a way to handwave the game into lots of smaller scale conflicts and the types of wars that we saw recently in Providence, perhaps. And that's all well and good and you can make up all kinds of handwavey bull**** and claim that it'll get the game there, and you might even be right... so long as you avoid the meta factor, the fact that coalitions are A Thing™ and no matter what you change in the game, that's not likely to change. And if that doesn't change then, well, what good will any of your handwavey changes do, really?

I'm not saying that it isn't worth more work on the sovereignty system and I'm sure that if it ever gets done it will shake things up some, but this idyllic pie in the sky vision the OP and many seem to share may nonetheless never come to pass.

So with all that said...


Get to it. We're kicked back on the couch and we need some TV to watch.

My reply is that I found Mynnna's post to be quite insightful, I will refrain from saying what i thought of yours.

As someone who has seen moon scan data pre- and post- odyssey for a very large portion of the galaxy, I can assure you that R64s, while they are everywhere, are anything but evenly distributed.

The actual problem is more like that the CFC holds most of the most moon-rich regions in the game, that the entities most able to challenge us for those moons are all in the east sitting on big fat renter empires (and some moons), and that the value added by those moons relative to the value of what they already have isn't enough to encourage them off the couch.

But then again that's still taking a very narrow economics-only view. In a more balkanized universe it might make sense as you'd have people looking to move up the ladder by taking richer and richer regions, but EVE as it is right now doesn't work that way.

Moons are still worthwhile to target generally and fight larger wars over. At their height, technetium moons were worth something like 12.5b per month each, but only a fraction of that is necessary to make a moon worth fighting over. It was their concentration in a smaller area that led to a political arrangement (OTEC) that effectively squashed conflict instead of driving it (though tech drove conflict just fine until the very end). Tech was bad because it was possible to draw a line around the vast majority of the value of the T2 market, which is no longer possible with the value spread across R64s, and likely soon their alchemical equivalents.

Not only is conflict a regular occurrence in nullsec without moons, the new moon system is a better conflict driver in general than the old system.

This.



And also this.

You want excitement? Grab a reporter's notepad, get out there, and find it! Then write about it. Hell, start your own "EVE News" corporation or something. (note to self, start my own EVE Newscorp)

[Edit: Really, though, it's a pretty open market for that. Most news we really have in this game are secondhand accounts after the fact, editorials, ALODs or just mouthpiece-ing CCP announcements. There's really a market for something like that.

Ahahaha there most certainly is.

Space that can be rented is the new Technetium.

EDIT: Also there was a much longer period of stagnation when Tech was at it's height than we have ever seen since the moon rebalance.

I am but a cog in the wheel my friend

Glad to see assigning sentry drones then ducking into a pos got declared an exploit