These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Pre-CSM Summit Nullsec and Sov Thread

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Anthar Thebess
#701 - 2014-10-01 11:44:08 UTC
Sorry but this is not about what players think and can do but how whole mechanic should work.
Let say that at some point one group take over whole nullsec.

They will have 2 thousand players and can field 1k of motherships and capitals at each timer.
They are not interested in ANY deal, they want just whole nullsec , all r64 moons.

They will be able to control any timer, take back any system, dictate every thing on field.
Under current mechanic this is possible.

You are stating "make a deal with others" what people want is a system that will negate this, something that you WILL NOT HAVE TO MAKE DEALS in order to hold space.

Something that will even force you to raid your neighbor every day.

Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#702 - 2014-10-01 11:53:36 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Did you read my post? YES I do expect. If CVA and friends did it, so could you. You guys sound like an über fat guy weightign 500 pounds that eats 5 kg per day of sugar that NEVEr ever tried to esxercise in his whoel life.. complain that their " genes"are to blame for him not being slim

And by quality of provi bloc I am not talking about combat prowes, but as PLAYERS, people that know to not kill their own game.

Do you ever blame the guy who decided to take the train this morning instead of driving through the heavy traffic? When you take the stairs and he takes the elevator to the top floor, do you believe he is at fault for not making needless sacrifices?How can you even begin to blame someone for using tools at their disposal when the whole point of the game is to gain an advantage over your opponents? Do you ever see any of the top football players tying weights to themselves whenever they play a team that isnt as good or prepared? Or when someone shows up early to a movie premier and is one of the first to get in, but you have to wait hours in the back of the line? How can you even begin to blame someone for using tools at their disposal when the whole point of the game is to gain an advantage over your opponents?

Why should anyone willingly give anyone else an advantage in a contest? Honor? Pity? Shame? Do you really want the game to be a charade of people living in space only because the biggest powers are holding back and allowing them too?
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#703 - 2014-10-01 13:08:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Schmata Bastanold
baltec1 wrote:
Choosing to not shoot at neuts does not make people good at EVE, taking over half of nullsec and being all but unbeaten for years does. Call us fat all you want but we are the people who have won EVE. The exact same thing has happened on the chinese server and will happen again on any other server under the current mechanics.


Ehm, so WTF are you still doing here? If you won put your name next to score and move to another game.

It's very funny to read all those posts where you state "we are not fighting because of sov grind". Hmm, maybe you could just fight for sake of fighting? Don't look at profits, don't look at sov structures but just drop fleets all over null and cause some trouble. Don't escalate to titans the second cyno goes up, try to take as much as you can before you get wiped out then rinse and repeat.

You treat this game like a job or something that matters in RL but it really doesn't. You are proud of your propaganda and efficiency and organization skills but you are seriously derping on fun factor. You say you play to win, well - if people know you are always winning they won't play with you. It applies to RL games and to pixel games. Nobody likes to lose but everybody hates to not even have a chance to win. And you made it clear that you won't let anybody even have chance to win, you will abuse your power to stomp on any attempts to question that power. So here you are, invincible and alone and bored.

And by that null deal thing you are basically saying "Dear CCP, force us to curb our power so people could consider taking a hit on us". But you could do it on your own right here, right now. But you won't.

Invalid signature format
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#704 - 2014-10-01 13:15:21 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Choosing to not shoot at neuts does not make people good at EVE, taking over half of nullsec and being all but unbeaten for years does. Call us fat all you want but we are the people who have won EVE. The exact same thing has happened on the chinese server and will happen again on any other server under the current mechanics.


Ehm, so WTF are you still doing here? If you won put your name next to score and move to another game.

It's very funny to read all those posts where you state "we are not fighting because of sov grind". Hmm, maybe you could just fight for sake of fighting? Don't look at profits, don't look at sov structures but just drop fleets all over null and cause some trouble. Don't escalate to titans the second cyno goes up, try to take as much as you can before you get wiped out then rinse and repeat.

You treat this game like a job or something that matters in RL but it really doesn't. You are proud of your propaganda and efficiency and organization skills but you are seriously derping on fun factor. You say you play to win, well - if people know you are always winning they won't play with you. It applies to RL games and to pixel games. Nobody likes to lose but everybody hates to not even have a chance to win. And you made it clear that you won't let anybody even have chance to win, you will abuse your power to stomp on any attempts to question that power. So here you are, invincible and alone and bored.

And by that null deal thing you are basically saying "Dear CCP, force us to curb our power so people could consider taking a hit on us". But you could do it on your own right here, right now. But you won't.


So we fix EVE by getting the 80k people in null who won to quit and move on to another game? Great plan.
Falin Whalen
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#705 - 2014-10-01 13:25:35 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Choosing to not shoot at neuts does not make people good at EVE, taking over half of nullsec and being all but unbeaten for years does. Call us fat all you want but we are the people who have won EVE. The exact same thing has happened on the chinese server and will happen again on any other server under the current mechanics.


Ehm, so WTF are you still doing here? If you won put your name next to score and move to another game.

It's very funny to read all those posts where you state "we are not fighting because of sov grind". Hmm, maybe you could just fight for sake of fighting? Don't look at profits, don't look at sov structures but just drop fleets all over null and cause some trouble. Don't escalate to titans the second cyno goes up, try to take as much as you can before you get wiped out then rinse and repeat.

You treat this game like a job or something that matters in RL but it really doesn't. You are proud of your propaganda and efficiency and organization skills but you are seriously derping on fun factor. You say you play to win, well - if people know you are always winning they won't play with you. It applies to RL games and to pixel games. Nobody likes to lose but everybody hates to not even have a chance to win. And you made it clear that you won't let anybody even have chance to win, you will abuse your power to stomp on any attempts to question that power. So here you are, invincible and alone and bored.

And by that null deal thing you are basically saying "Dear CCP, force us to curb our power so people could consider taking a hit on us". But you could do it on your own right here, right now. But you won't.


So we fix EVE by getting the 80k people in null who won to quit and move on to another game? Great plan.
I love this plan! I'm excited to be a part of it! LET'S DO IT! - Dr. Peter Venkman

"it's only because of their stupidity that they're able to be so sure of themselves." The Trial - Franz Kafka 
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#706 - 2014-10-01 13:26:33 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:

You treat this game like a job or something that matters in RL but it really doesn't.


I imagine you don't have much experience with Goons? They are about as casual as it's possible to be without living in highsec.

Quote:

And by that null deal thing you are basically saying "Dear CCP, force us to curb our power so people could consider taking a hit on us". But you could do it on your own right here, right now. But you won't.


What?

The mechanics are broken. It does not matter one bit which null bloc entity is the face of it, BoB, Goons, or whoever. Yes, they want CCP to fix the problem because it's CCP's game. They are not going to play kid gloves for the sake of abating a broken mechanic, that just covers it up and gives CCP an excuse to ignore the problem, nevermind invites their own destruction at the hands of anyone who chooses to ignore it.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#707 - 2014-10-01 13:30:00 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
So we fix EVE by getting the 80k people in null who won to quit and move on to another game? Great plan.


But you won, what else is here for you to do except loudly crying that nobody wants to play with you anymore? And no offense but I don't believe all 80k null people (nice number, btw) feel the same as you do. With you gone they will find their own fun.

Invalid signature format
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#708 - 2014-10-01 13:34:14 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:

Sorry but here I must disagree. Mechanics to not make anything, they allow or disallow, they make it effective or non effective. But that is NOT an excuse. Look at provi bloc for PROOF, they kept themselves above pitiful efficiency reasoning and kept a NRDS for years.


No.

NRDS is, to put it bluntly, ****ing stupid. It is a strategy doomed to failure from the beginning. Provi exists solely at the tolerance of the large groups, they would be dead by the end of the month if anyone looked at them with anything besides pity.

Quote:

Sorry but you are wrong YOU (as in both super blocs) are to blame because you both sides combined are not half the quality of Provi bloc for the game.


Ah, so CVAs corruption, favoritism, and unequally applied rules are more appealing than a coalition that is actually friendly to it's own members?



Quote:

You were greedy and dumb on a internet spaceship game, that is made to have fun. You dealt with it like a real time job, and now you LOST because you do not have fun anymore. No one is to blame other than the power blocs. The mechanics made it hard to remove such a stalemate after it emerged, but it emerged because of YOU, and your incompetence on dealing with eve as a GAME.


The mechanics of the game made such an end inevitable. If it hadn't been Goons, it would have been BoB, Nulli, or someone else. Stop acting like they should be expected to handcuff themselves for the sake of someone else, NRDS is the WRONG decision, always, and making it to forestall the inevitable just gives CCP more time to avoid actually nutting up and addressing the issue.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#709 - 2014-10-01 13:34:29 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
So we fix EVE by getting the 80k people in null who won to quit and move on to another game? Great plan.


But you won, what else is here for you to do except loudly crying that nobody wants to play with you anymore? And no offense but I don't believe all 80k null people (nice number, btw) feel the same as you do. With you gone they will find their own fun.

So will I expect to find you back in this thread when the next null overlord takes over?
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#710 - 2014-10-01 13:43:53 UTC
Rowells wrote:
So will I expect to find you back in this thread when the next null overlord takes over?


If they will cry about the same things as you do, yes.

Look, the fact is if people know you are always flying with links they won't engage you. If they know you are always baiting they won't engage you. So you don't always fly with links and you are not always baiting and sometimes you win sometimes you lose. And people know that sometimes you really are alone and they will take chances on you. And everybody has fun.

It's not bad to use tools at your disposal but if you will abuse them people won't play with you because you always win.

And you did the same but on greater scale with power/sov/meta. You abused mechanics to the point where there's nobody left to play with you. And now you say: we broke it, you fix it.

Yes I know, it's human nature to blob and seek least line of resistance to get to honeypot but sometimes journey is much more enjoyable than destination.

Invalid signature format
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#711 - 2014-10-01 13:46:58 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:
Rowells wrote:
So will I expect to find you back in this thread when the next null overlord takes over?


If they will cry about the same things as you do, yes.

Look, the fact is if people know you are always flying with links they won't engage you. If they know you are always baiting they won't engage you. So you don't always fly with links and you are not always baiting and sometimes you win sometimes you lose. And people know that sometimes you really are alone and they will take chances on you. And everybody has fun.

It's not bad to use tools at your disposal but if you will abuse them people won't play with you because you always win.

And you did the same but on greater scale with power/sov/meta. You abused mechanics to the point where there's nobody left to play with you. And now you say: we broke it, you fix it.

Yes I know, it's human nature to blob and seek least line of resistance to get to honeypot but sometimes journey is much more enjoyable than destination.


So in that case you wont be at all upset if we bring back the tech moons we had a monopoly with and bring back insurance payouts to suicide ganking. After all, if mechanics break the game we should just tell people to not abuse them!
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#712 - 2014-10-01 13:49:49 UTC
Schmata Bastanold wrote:

Look, the fact is if people know you are always flying with links they won't engage you.


And that means that links are a problem that should be addressed. You cannot ask people to handcuff themselves for the sake of others.



Quote:

And you did the same but on greater scale with power/sov/meta. You abused mechanics to the point where there's nobody left to play with you. And now you say: we broke it, you fix it.


No one "abused" capital ships, they are brokenly overpowered. No one "abused" remote reps, they are blatantly overpowered.

Those things need nerfed, no matter who is using them.



Quote:

Yes I know, it's human nature to blob and seek least line of resistance to get to honeypot but sometimes journey is much more enjoyable than destination.


**** the journey. Fix the mechanics, that way no one can do it. Asking people to handicap themselves only works until the next person comes along and figures out that he will win more often if he doesn't handicap himself.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#713 - 2014-10-01 13:55:22 UTC
Shock and alarm, most people like to win.

Gasp and befuddlement, most people don't give a flying rat's ass whether the other guy has fun or not.

It's a competitive game. You can't just claim that people should not use what is obviously the most powerful option. The problem of that broken option still remains, you're just putting on blinders and trying to pretend like if you ignore it that it will go away.

It won't go away if you ignore it. Someone else will discover it.

Fix the damn game, so we don't have to have these discussions in the first place.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Schmata Bastanold
In Boobiez We Trust
#714 - 2014-10-01 14:09:43 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
So in that case you wont be at all upset if we bring back the tech moons we had a monopoly with and bring back insurance payouts to suicide ganking. After all, if mechanics break the game we should just tell people to not abuse them!


If you worry about my opinion on that you can stop now because I have nothing against those things. I simply don't care about how much ISK you get out of pixels because it doesn't matter for amount of fun I get out of my pixels.

You won't find me among those who want to take your shinies away just because they cannot have them. And that applies to wallets and politics and ships and everything else. You won, you produced, you took - it's yours to keep or trash or explode.

But you are saying "we broke it and now it doesn't work". Well, why did you do it? "Because we could". Hmm...

I am not against null deal thingy or any other changes. Game needs tweaks and fixes, especially 11 year old game. What I find "funny" is that note of "we broke it on purpose". Maybe it's just vocabulary that irks me.

Anyway I'm sorry I dared to post on subject I have no idea about. I should know better after Mittens wrote his "your opinion doesn't matter" piece on TMC some time ago. I won't do it again.

Invalid signature format
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#715 - 2014-10-01 14:17:18 UTC
Adrie Atticus wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
They bulk of null players earn their isk outside of their empires in more lucrative highsec. Again you are doing the mistake of thinking alliance level income is what the line members get, its not.
I think you are under the mistaken impression that I differentiate between alliance level income and line member income. The alliances are making a massive levels of isk. If their line members aren't getting their fair share of it then that's a YOU problem - not a null sec wealth generation problem.


SRP is technically income to line members, but you forget the amount of money sunk into sov bills each month alone. Also, why would you start paying dividends every month to every irrelevant idiot and spy who don't even manufacture a single cap booster or have the decency to undock before farting.

I'm supposed to determine how 0.0 alliances are supposed to distribute their wealth? The fact is the income is there to build multiple titans each month. What the leaders of these alliances do with the isk is up to them. They could, for example, not purchase as many titans and instead pay their members to patrol their space.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#716 - 2014-10-01 14:23:32 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
X Gallentius wrote:

I'm supposed to determine how 0.0 alliances are supposed to distribute their wealth? The fact is the income is there to build multiple titans each month. What the leaders of these alliances do with the isk is up to them. They could, for example, not purchase as many titans and instead pay their members to patrol their space.


Just to point out, we only buy titans to replace those lost in start ops, near all of our titans are privately funded by the pilot themselves as it is their ship. I also only get token SRP on my losses due to the ship I chose to fly. CFC SRP is also not the norm for alliances, we have it better than anyone else.

Line member income is important because that is the isk that the pilot has to spend on his own activities. We want to change alliance income from top down to bottom up so that it is the line members who make the isk for the alliance not the other way as that system is much more fair for the individual pilots and is how we will deal with removing rental empires from EVE.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#717 - 2014-10-01 14:49:48 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
baltec1 wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:

I'm supposed to determine how 0.0 alliances are supposed to distribute their wealth? The fact is the income is there to build multiple titans each month. What the leaders of these alliances do with the isk is up to them. They could, for example, not purchase as many titans and instead pay their members to patrol their space.


Just to point out, we only buy titans to replace those lost in start ops, near all of our titans are privately funded by the pilot themselves as it is their ship. I also only get token SRP on my losses due to the ship I chose to fly. CFC SRP is also not the norm for alliances, we have it better than anyone else.

Line member income is important because that is the isk that the pilot has to spend on his own activities. We want to change alliance income from top down to bottom up so that it is the line members who make the isk for the alliance not the other way as that system is much more fair for the individual pilots and is how we will deal with removing rental empires from EVE.

Fun, in game, is important. If done right then occupancy based warfare will generate lots of death and destruction. Your guys will be less well off but happier. AND, you won't be less well off than your current 0.0 rivals who will also not get as much isk as high sec level four missions.

Also, all other things being equal, if one side gets pushed out of null sec, they'll be able to replace their losses more quickly than you - leading to more pew in the future.

If your line members are able to make more isk than guys trying to regenerate their capabilities, then you'll win Eve again pretty easily.

So, do you want a challenge, or do you want a system that favors the incumbant?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#718 - 2014-10-01 15:46:56 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Shock and alarm, most people like to win.

Gasp and befuddlement, most people don't give a flying rat's ass whether the other guy has fun or not.

It's a competitive game. You can't just claim that people should not use what is obviously the most powerful option. The problem of that broken option still remains, you're just putting on blinders and trying to pretend like if you ignore it that it will go away.

It won't go away if you ignore it. Someone else will discover it.

Fix the damn game, so we don't have to have these discussions in the first place.

This.

Human nature is a demonstrated pattern of behaviors, and we cannot expect it to change here.

Think of trigonometry.
We know human nature is going to react a certain way.
We know, effectively, what type of game environment we want to have here.
Those two factors form enough information to give us a better idea of what the mechanics should be, than any other foundation we have at our disposal.

We want competition, and interesting conflicts?
Then stop supporting stabilizing mechanics, like timers and access denial which keeps opposing forces separated or unable to act.

But without timers, some groups will take advantage and attack exposed structures during a defending groups off hours!
Precisely.

The ability of defenders to use a timer, creates a stabilizing leverage that allows a smaller group to hold territory that would normally require a larger group, which was including players spread across more playing time periods.

Sure, a few smaller groups would suffer, but the pain goes uphill equally.
Larger groups would also lose leverage, and be forced to consolidate holdings.

Stability is what seems to be the major issue here.
The mechanics support it. Change them.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Capt Starfox
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#719 - 2014-10-01 17:12:57 UTC
Please don't take away suiciding! It's a long standing festivity that everybody loves.

Leave Med Clones alone, m'kay?

Abandon all hope ye who x up in fleet
Arik Alabel
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#720 - 2014-10-01 17:18:54 UTC
Capt Starfox wrote:
Please don't take away suiciding! It's a long standing festivity that everybody loves.

Leave Med Clones alone, m'kay?



I came here to say this. I don't see the value in this, and it makes logistics impossible. You want to more than halve the LY range on Jump Freighters (BECAUSE I HATE WHEN THEY HOT DROP ME) ....AND make it logistically challenging to move said jump freighters?

The idea of a cool down I can live with. But this feels half baked. You already made it 1.25-1.5x more expensive with topes, adding the no med clones feels either half baked or an attempt to force users to buy more accounts.