These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A message everyone in HED-GP can come together about

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nooodlzs
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#301 - 2014-01-19 22:52:30 UTC
Too many goons wanting to dumb the game down in this thread though.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#302 - 2014-01-19 22:57:04 UTC
Another issue is:

Why pew pew before a timer expires when I can just wait till the timer is up and dump in everyone when it matters?

Again, yet another issue that adds to the main problem.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#303 - 2014-01-19 22:58:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Mah Boobz wrote:
I wonder, if CCP hadn't spent all that money on Dust and WOD, and instead, put it into the Eve servers (were the money was made) if we could actually have the fights CCP brag about?


No, there are absolute limits to scalability. It's better to think of scalability in a system like Eve as being more like the skill system: You can dump months and months and months and months into making it better and only wind up with a 5% improvement.

That said, sometimes the server is all kinds of ****** up and you chose the wrong algorithm to start with. In cases like that you can see some pretty impressive gains - but doing something like that is very much like changing the engines in an airplane in flight. Potentially possible, but scary as **** and you're probably going down in the not fun way.

-Liang

Ed: Also, saying that CCP should put all of their money resources into Eve is like telling them that they should just kill their company. It's not that Eve is a bad product, but true stability in a game company comes from having more than one hit.

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#304 - 2014-01-19 23:12:35 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Malcanis wrote:

To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement. I'm talking about changes on the order of a 24 hour cooldown on capital jumps, requiring consumables for gate jumps, burning jump bridges to the ground, eliminating titan bridging and so on.

Are you, the inhabitants of 0.0 ready to accept such a radical change in your 0.0 lifestyle? Most of 0.0 lives in blocs, and this would be a titanic nerf to blocs.

If not, then fine, but don't complain about what happens when 4000 people have a capital battle in a single system.

If you are then tell me so loud and clear right now, and that's the message I'll take to Iceland on Tuesday.

It seems to me your proposed changes would hurt smaller alliances living in npc null significantly.

Take for example an alliance living in stain. To my knowledge, the only way to move a JF there without going through sov is to jump from Saminer/Sagain to NRT4 or T-NN. Now that you've reached the edge of stain, you'll require at least one (and quite possibly two) jumps to hit the entirety of stain. So, for an alliance living in some random pocket of stain, we're talking about 20-30 ly of travel one way for logistics (40-60 light years for round trip).

Now, there were two proposed two changes, a 24hr jump drive cooldown and later a distance based limitation. In the above example, either one could be crippling for such an alliance. On the other hand, a large alliance/coalition could keep one JF pilot on hand for each leg of the trip. One pilot handles Saminer to NRT4, another handles the next leg, and so on and so forth. Such a large, well organized alliance or coalition will have absolutely no problems in adopting to said changes.

So, effectively, the changes have made logistics far more difficult for smaller independent entities while the logistics branch of a large alliance would be able to absorb the changes with ease.
Zircon Dasher
#305 - 2014-01-19 23:26:41 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
It seems to me your proposed changes would hurt smaller alliances living in npc null significantly.

Take for example an alliance living in stain. To my knowledge, the only way to move a JF there without going through sov is to jump from Saminer/Sagain to NRT4 or T-NN. Now that you've reached the edge of stain, you'll require at least one (and quite possibly two) jumps to hit the entirety of stain. So, for an alliance living in some random pocket of stain, we're talking about 20-30 ly of travel one way for logistics (40-60 light years for round trip).

Now, there were two proposed two changes, a 24hr jump drive cooldown and later a distance based limitation. In the above example, either one could be crippling for such an alliance. On the other hand, a large alliance/coalition could keep one JF pilot on hand for each leg of the trip. One pilot handles Saminer to NRT4, another handles the next leg, and so on and so forth. Such a large, well organized alliance or coalition will have absolutely no problems in adopting to said changes.

So, effectively, the changes have made logistics far more difficult for smaller independent entities while the logistics branch of a large alliance would be able to absorb the changes with ease.


Its Deja Vu all over again.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#306 - 2014-01-19 23:29:54 UTC
If you nerf ship projection (which is needed) then you also have to nerf JC's. The isk mountains would just turn into duplicated fleets in all corners of the map.

But then if you nerf jump clones then there will be numerous alt accounts - wouldn't CCP just love that?
Nooodlzs
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#307 - 2014-01-19 23:35:37 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:


Its Deja Vu all over again.



Yep, Malcanis is proposing to 'get more friends' it doesn't solve anything but as he is part of the largest coalition the game has ever seen and having more friends is the problem.
Royaldo
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.
Clever Use of Neutral Toons
#308 - 2014-01-19 23:36:26 UTC
Space honoure and premade fights. Lawyers making deals for 40% of the 0.0 map.

Full cringe mode is on, thats for sure.

PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#309 - 2014-01-19 23:37:32 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Honestly, the more i think about it, the more i think it's a bad idea.

Consider alts. Each account has 3 character slots. Just train a carrier/dread on another slot on your main. A year after this change hits everyone in null will have a forward deploy alt and a home defense alt. So yeah, none of those power projection changes will matter. Sure the forward deployed capitals can't get back to their home region in a day, but why would they need to?

At best you're pushing back the power projection problem by a year, maybe two. Probably far less, given that anyone that has a super/titan probably does so on a dedicated character anyway, separate from their briefcase carrier/main. So entities like PL/NC. may well retain most of their power projection capabilities despite the change.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#310 - 2014-01-19 23:40:14 UTC
KIller Wabbit wrote:
If you nerf ship projection (which is needed) then you also have to nerf JC's. The isk mountains would just turn into duplicated fleets in all corners of the map.

But then if you nerf jump clones then there will be numerous alt accounts - wouldn't CCP just love that?

Which is why all forms of 'teleportation' need to pull from the same pool of light years with a cap, like I described earlier:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Instead of the once per day deal for jump drives, it should be more functional in light years with a cap.

So everything that makes you go from one system to another without taking gates eats away at this pool of power projection. That includes jump drives, jump bridges, titan bridges, jump clones and even pod deaths. We already have these new skills in regards to having more clones and lower time to clone jump. So re-tasking them to enhance the power projection pool can be done without introducing new skills players have to train.

This would mean players would need to actually be strategic how they wanted to spend this pool. Could be all at once with jumping a carrier a time or two exhausting it or moving several different clones to a staging system so they can be more flexible on hardworking to give them an edge in flying a variety of ships. Also it would have more meaning to podding someone who is far away from their medical clone station. Because you know they will not be jumping a Slowcat carrier on your face 30 seconds later. Podding some brought a cheap damp Celestis would not mean they would be right back via titan bridge with yet another Celestis moments later.

The only remaining matter is figuring out a balanced cap on the power projection pool.
Zircon Dasher
#311 - 2014-01-19 23:43:41 UTC
Nooodlzs wrote:
Zircon Dasher wrote:


Its Deja Vu all over again.



Yep, Malcanis is proposing to 'get more friends' it doesn't solve anything but as he is part of the largest coalition the game has ever seen and having more friends is the problem.




Actually it was in reference to the most common complaint that was leveled at the "Nerf Caps/JB/JF!" crowd about, oh, 3.5 years ago.

The next argument will be how it will take more CharacterHours to do X.....and nobody likes to do X.... so it will ruin fun and make EVE die.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#312 - 2014-01-19 23:49:02 UTC
I made a thread about this last year:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=193738

glad to see one year later the CSM see it as a problem
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Ke'lera
Doomheim
#313 - 2014-01-19 23:50:34 UTC
No suggestion will work, because no null sec entity will accept a radical change to their way of life or give up their hold, either way the state of null has been and will remain set for years now. Unless CCP drops a bomb on null and scatters them all there is no way to get rid of these two power blocs, it's just one giant big blue consensual pvp doughnut.

and by bomb that is to get rid/drastically reduce timers, force all out war, then any and every corp/alliance can/will make claim to sov, capsuleers will "gods" how they are depicted.. that is if you want null to be a constant everlasting warfare, because any other solution will keep the power blocs forever dominant, if not then don't complain about lag fest because all you want is organized fights where the outcome is set before it even begun.

One thing remains true, the first company to make an efficient warfare system/ conquest claim system should sweep a large number of players, so we'll just have to wait.

Discouraging null sec blob warfare

KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#314 - 2014-01-19 23:50:36 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Is there perhaps another mechanic that may be implemented to get players back out of system, ideally before the server goes bonkers?

Off the cuff example:
A new AOE mechanic that teleports everyone on grid randomly into other systems within the constellation. This could from a player driven device that causes it, or it could be a "feature" of space destabilizing because (insert lore) and the server automatically implements this anytime server load exceeds some threshhold from some time period.



Workable or not - the idea of this made me ROFLMAO! LolLol

"Oh noes! Half of our logi just bounced 3 jumps away!" Twisted
ZynnLee Akkori
Perkone
Caldari State
#315 - 2014-01-20 00:21:53 UTC
The idea of 'renting' a system is perverse, IMO. If the Alliance/Corp does not use it or actually actively occupy it, they shouldn't be there except to fight or pass through. Why do they 'need' so many systems?! I know the Alliance leaders will resist losing their free ISK generator, but the game is limping along. Break up the Alliances by eliminating several jump routes to make it harder to move through Null, limit jump drives and bridges significantly, reduce timers to a few days, increase fuel costs across the board, and modify sov mechanics to a single massive fight isn't going to win you anything. Spread out sov objectives between several systems so there isn't a single huge blob moving around, instead there are several small ones simultaneously.
Bob FromMarketing
Space Marketing Department
#316 - 2014-01-20 00:25:22 UTC
Zircon Dasher
#317 - 2014-01-20 00:25:32 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:

Which is why all forms of 'teleportation' need to pull from the same pool of light years with a cap, like I described earlier:


If the pool is player/corp/alliance based why does this keep duplicate fleets from happening? Did you have a universal 'teleportation' pool in mind?

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#318 - 2014-01-20 00:42:04 UTC
Nooodlzs wrote:
Work needs to be done on the standings system of coalitions, all this talk of cooldowns on capital jumps is absolute garbage, as is the talk of aurum/fuel cost of using gates, why should I have to fork out real money/in game money to go on a 60 system roam looking for targets?

The more blues a coalition has the less HP it's member alliance sov structures has in a ratio that expands as the numbers increase, and as they force project the numbers reduce as well according to how many coalition members have extended from their own space into enemy territory, that means they have to split forces to defend their space.

The information is already available in game due to the standing system, yes there will be ways to 'fool' the calculations but with a little effort from CCP it could be made viable.


And people definitely won't use out of game system to be un-trackable by CCP? The whole coalition thing is out of game anyway.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#319 - 2014-01-20 00:44:56 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:

Which is why all forms of 'teleportation' need to pull from the same pool of light years with a cap, like I described earlier:


If the pool is player/corp/alliance based why does this keep duplicate fleets from happening? Did you have a universal 'teleportation' pool in mind?


And let's be honest... You can move a 4000 players from one end of the universe to the other within an hour simply utilizing interceptors. Groups like CFC would simply need an offensive fleet to move about to whatever "combat zone" existed, and a defensive fleet for home. Moving the pilots is trivial, although potentially tedious (but when has that ever stopped alliance warfare).

To stop force projection, you litterally need to inhibit Jump clones, gate travel, and jump travel to the extent it is impossible for you to buy stuff in Jita today, and make it out to Deklein before Wednesday.

The reality of the situation is, that players will congregate and amass for the action, and that fundamentally, the only solution is to implement a mechanic that moves players out of the system if the system becomes overburdened. Doing this fairly, in a manner that structure timers and stuff don't end up being abused, is non-trivial. But without it, you will always be able to move more and more and more pilots into a system until the node crashes.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#320 - 2014-01-20 00:45:54 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
The whole coalition thing is out of game anyway.

It is and it isn't.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)