Player Features and Ideas Discussion

First, I'd like to say I agree with a lot of what's has been said here. The "make EvE more dynamic on the LY map" seems to make a lot of sense and is a great way to strongly limit power projection without implementing arbitrary, artificially high cost that already established groups won't be affected by. I would like to further comment on how it might look:
Intra-constellation travel
Inter-constellation travel (Intra-region travel)
Inter-regional travel

To keep with the Middle Ages references, intra-constellation travel would be like traveling amongst villages and towns outlying the city of Rome. The travel would be easy as it was close and had a good road network, although there were still random villages that were further away or logistically difficult to access. The inter-constellation travel would be like traveling between Rome and Paris. The trip would take much longer even though the paths were established with multiple trade routes, some designed for time efficiency and some designed to hit more trade-stops along the way. The inter-region travel would be like traveling the Silk Road. There were dozens of trade routes but the trip took months to cover from Europe to Asia.
TL:DR make EVE bigger on the map without actually adding more systems in game.

The next issue that has been discussed is the issue of Jump Bridges and the JB networks. The proposal to remove JB's from the POS and make it a stand alone module is an excellent idea. Make the structure something monolithic (art team here's your chance to have fun) given how powerful they are and make it so they must be anchored at a planet that has no other structure already anchored like a POCO. There is now much more risk in using the jump bridges as you're not protected by POS guns and provides more chances for content to happen. The next step is to limit JB networks to be established only among intra-constellation systems with a maximum of 2 JB's per constellation; here's the kicker: it does not matter who owns the JB's inside a constellation, but only 2 can anchored and onlined at once. The final step is to limit JB access to the SOV owner's alliance or corp if there is no alliance. This is another conflict driver and also reduces allies sharing random systems in a region to make extremely long JB networks. These changes would also mean it would be more time consuming to move across regions (limiting power projection) and it also gives more chances for fleets to be intercepted as they can't move as safely across vast areas of space

TL:DR-
JB moved away from POS and are now anchored on a planet
JB networks are limited to intra-constellation only
Maximum of 2 JB per constellation regardless of who owns them
Only alliance (corp if no alliance) members can access the JB


Titan bridging is something that needs to be addressed as well. I understand the ship cost billions of ISK and has been nerfed into the ground repeatedly, but the ability to safely move a 250man fleet instantly with no risk is broken. There are several options but I'm not sure which one is really the best or if there is a single answer to fix it so I won't comment on it now.

I am liking the idea of lived-in-sov. So how about something like this:

Anyone who does (pretty much) anything in a system pushes his/her corp/alliance sov uppwards in the form of sov-points. The corp/alliance with the highest sov-points will be the sov owner after DT. Set a maximum points at say 1000 to ensure it will not take 50 months to get rid of someone who has been entrenched a while.

Examples of things to affect sov:
Kill a rat: 1 point
Sell an item on the market: 5 points per transaction (ammo, charges and shuttles excepted to minimise abuse)
"Pop" a roid: 1 point
Sov structure of some sort (few hitpoints, short reinforce timer and hackable): 200 points, lost if reinforced or hacked, lost permanently if destroyed.
Destroy a piloted ship that belongs to different alliance/corp: 5 points (shuttles and noob ships excepted)
Destroy a capsule belongs to different alliance/corp: 10 points
Successfully complete a hacking site: 10 points
PI: 1 point per 1000 units moved off planet. Owning the customs office 25 points/office, lost if CO is reinf

A few examples and the numbers may be stupid but you get my point. This means A/ Renters will be the sov owners within a week or two. B/ Taking systems require some effort apart from blowing the sov-strucure. C/ The more a system is "lived in" the more work is required to dislodge the owners even for a hugely superior force. D/ Less or not at all "lived in" systems can be taken quite easily. E/ Everyone, from the JF "import" guy to the grizzled combat pilot contributes daily.

Thoughts?

Station services are not killable by a small fleet. Timers are irrelevant. You are trying to niptick on a part of the setnece irrelevant for the argument and the subject in question.. that is not goign to win you any points.

generally that is the thread feeling. Although some specifics might need to be analyzed to avoid some pitfalls. For example titan bridges ... might just need a rework. Force the titan to jump trough along the fleet. That by itself would make its usage much more... tactical...

The adjustment of the capitals needing to use gates into .. can work as of now inside same region but need to cross regional gates would be a reasonable compromise.

We can also think on new things to be added (that are simple) and can be used as soft targets that when left undefende d woudl hurt your economy. The deployable thing that collects the percentage of the rattign in system was clearly an attempt of CCP to do that. But 0.0 powers whined like children.... and they were nerfed to a point that combined to how they are hidden, made the whole work f ccp useless. We need to find solutions and acccept that to have a more interestign game there will be a COST for everyone. No one can expect changes to bring a better gam e that will hurt only OTHERS....

Want to break up large coalitions in nulsec?

Remove stations from 0.0.

A system's capacity to house players goes from infinite (station) to limited via POSes. This forces large coalitions to spread out, occupy otherwise empty systems for simple real estate. You would see a lot of movement between these systems. A sprawling coalition spread out over multiple systems would have peripheral regions vulnerable to small gang attacks.

We already have a simple method of activity tracked upgrades in the form of sovereignty. Remember Military 5, Industrial 5 and Sovereignty 5? All I'm asking for is an extension on existing mechanics.

Final note on Draahkness's idea, your giving a lot more influence to market trading than to combat which I wouldn't do. Market transactions would be an ease thing to manipulate, the cost of just buying and reselling for example limited to the minimal transaction/brokers fees.

An influence system would need to be a fair balance of things that can be done to influence sov, with incentives to doing a range of other activities so it doesn't boil down to grinding the hell out of a single "most effective" method. Lack of industrial activity in a region for example could trigger a bonus to sov generation via that method to promote and make that activity more useful to alliances.

To be truly effective sov holding entities you would nee to utilize the space in all aspects of eve, opening the door to a setup which is more inclusive and less directed by a single action (like it currently is with structure grinds). This would lead to alliance structures more like an entity actually living in its space rather than an entity that apears out of the blue occasionally to shoot structures then disappear into the night xD

Why are you worried about death cloning.
This is so simple to solve.

For all lowsec/nullsec systems:
You can only change your main cloning bay to the station you are actually docked, no remote changes.

For safe reasons , don't change this mechanic for higsec stations.

So there will be no issue about people death cloning for some timer , and then going instantly back.

my idea is simple it wont solve power projection though it will hinder it

a new battle cruiser designed to light cyno's (1 for each race). cynos changed to a true/false fitting like a siege module ( can only be fitted to ships that have cyno true) while cyno is lit tank is buffed in the same way a siege module does with the same draw backs such as not getting help via reps,ect

covert cynos can only be fitting to force recon ships such as the pilgrim (they will be unable to fit standard cyno)

i believe this will at least help with power projection as it will be a lot harder to get a slow uncloaked battle cruiser to the desto obviously the closer the desto is the more likely it is to get there in 1 piece. i would also make it that these specially designed ships can not be bridged/carried in a carrier in a attempt to get round the leap frog effect. not sure how that would work with the game canon idk maybe they could make some BS that the unstable nature of a cyno prevents them from being moved on a fitted ship.

It will also make the cyno ship have value once more and actuly worth defending

this is only a basic outline of a idea

Pretty new to the game but the way nullsec sounded back then sounds like great fun

as a rule i would agree with you as a game design it would suck bad 10% tidi sucks as it is nobody likes it traveling x lightyears to the fight in your carrier wats it gonna say on your screen jump active will land on grid in 35 mins so feel free to go take a shower/mow your lawn ect.

my point is sitting looking at what is basicly a loading screen while your in your jump i dont think is the way to go