These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Heavypredator Singh
TEMPLAR.
The Initiative.
#281 - 2014-09-29 14:33:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Heavypredator Singh
baltec1 wrote:
Heavypredator Singh wrote:


So that is why most of Your sov is empty ?
This is why it is rented out?


Most of our space is more or less useless as you will earn a good deal more isk blitzing level 4s in high sec. Renting out our space is only a thing because we had to replace the moon goo income when they nerfed tech. What we need is bottom up income you can earn in null and that allows for an alliance to actually be able to live in the space it owns and supports all of its members. Want to kill of the rental empires? The get behind occupancy sov as that makes it impossible to hold vast areas of space to rent out.


Sorry for not feeling Your pain - my alliance can't afford double srp. Are You afraid goonswarm will break when there is no income to buy players? When they will need to buy their own ships? When they will ask where are the resources?

Welcome to the real world where players play and don't get bought. They actually login to have something and risk something so others can have fun too.

All that renting, crazy srp, massive coalitions must be nerfed so ppl start playing the game like it is designed to be played. When you bypass rules of the game it kills it.

If goons need to break for it to happen then well **** happens. Noone guarantee that You will always be able to buy players. they should want to play for fun not for someone that just buys them and commands them.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#282 - 2014-09-29 14:34:15 UTC
Shilalasar wrote:
Regatto wrote:
They felt that fire of change burning under butts and this looks like their attempt to turn it to their advantage .


Is it just me or is it fishy this "proposal" is done pretty sudden (Some sovgroups only given 24h to respond) and straight after the CSM summit where CCP showed their plans for nullchanges?

Also having all players of an alliance in a few systems next to each other sounds a lot like 100% safety and death of smallscale roaming. Unless ofc your smallscaleroam consists of more ships than the owner has members...


Occupancy sov has been getting pushed for months now by these same blocks, this letter is simply the latest call.
Innet Assumption
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#283 - 2014-09-29 14:36:32 UTC
New npc space - ok.

Quote:
Players should live in and utilize their space, and player infrastructure and activity should be reflected in an occupancy index. We believe this will significantly shrink the footprints of the current absentee empires, free up large sections of sov 0.0 for smaller entities, and remove the current need for vast coalitions.


Without a detailed plan is hard to say like or dislike.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#284 - 2014-09-29 14:38:50 UTC
Heavypredator Singh wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Heavypredator Singh wrote:


So that is why most of Your sov is empty ?
This is why it is rented out?


Most of our space is more or less useless as you will earn a good deal more isk blitzing level 4s in high sec. Renting out our space is only a thing because we had to replace the moon goo income when they nerfed tech. What we need is bottom up income you can earn in null and that allows for an alliance to actually be able to live in the space it owns and supports all of its members. Want to kill of the rental empires? The get behind occupancy sov as that makes it impossible to hold vast areas of space to rent out.


Sorry for not feeling Your pain - my alliance can't afford double srp. Are You afraid goonswarm will break when there is no income to buy players? When they will need to buy their own ships? When they will ask where are the resources?

Welcome to the real world where players play and don't get bought. They actually login to have something and risk something so others can have fun too.

All that renting, crazy srp, massive coalitions must be nerfed so ppl start playing the game like it is designed to be played. When you bypass rules of the game it kills it.

If goons need to break for it to happen then well **** happens. Noone guarantee that You will always be able to buy players. they should wan't to play for fun not for someone that just buys them and commands them.


Yea, your speaking to someone who doesn't get all of that lovely isk when they die in a fleet. If you want null to be full of targets then this is how to fix it.
Heavypredator Singh
TEMPLAR.
The Initiative.
#285 - 2014-09-29 14:43:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Heavypredator Singh
@baltec1

No. To fix it You need to slice the coalitions/aliances - not make them more powerfull in 1 place. Small alliances will not attack hundreds that are bunkered in one place.

They need to nerf null income so no srp. No ability to create crazy number of ppl in one alliance/coalition.

Over 300 corps in goonswarm alone - this is normal for You? Do You know how much content there would be if 300 corps would fight each other?
Nostromo Fidanza
Blueprint Mania
#286 - 2014-09-29 14:44:36 UTC
NPC stations in every null sec region? Sounds good. Makes it even easier for me to rake in billions in null sec.
Dave Stark
#287 - 2014-09-29 14:45:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
I'll be honest, i don't see how occupancy sov really changes anything with respect to the size of things.

throw lots of warm bodies at an area of sov = impossible to take it.
unless you cap the amount an index can change per time period.... in which case, just stack enough people to cap it daily and you end up with a boring stalemate (which is the whole issue at the moment) or an inevitable slide of the index in one direction that you can't challenge.

i'll be honest; i don't get it. some one explain it to me.
Heavypredator Singh
TEMPLAR.
The Initiative.
#288 - 2014-09-29 14:48:25 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
i'll be honest; i don't get it. some one explain it to me.


It is about big alliances keeping their numbers.
Myravingian
Applied Anarchy
The Initiative.
#289 - 2014-09-29 14:49:08 UTC
I still rekon CCP will manage to **** up this perfectly brilliant plan
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#290 - 2014-09-29 14:49:25 UTC
Here's an area with an NPC area smack dab in the middle of it.
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Pure_Blind/7D-0SQ#kills24

Where's the kills and interaction? Still looks dead.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#291 - 2014-09-29 14:54:51 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
I'll be honest, i don't see how occupancy sov really changes anything with respect to the size of things.

throw lots of warm bodies at an area of sov = impossible to take it.
unless you the amount an index can change per time period.... in which case, just stack enough people to cap it daily and you end up with a boring stalemate (which is the whole issue at the moment) or an inevitable slide of the index in one direction that you can't challenge.

i'll be honest; i don't get it. some one explain it to me.

It is the latest in a long line of half baked ideas from the established powers that be; a desperate attempt from said powers to ~create content~ while avoiding the risk of fighting someone that might actually defeat them.

Manny's idea (for example) was to create choke points for freighters farmed by the established power houses. This one is a little more subtle, but the end result is the same: low risk "content" farm.
Sydious
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#292 - 2014-09-29 15:06:51 UTC
This is exactly what null sec needs.
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#293 - 2014-09-29 15:07:46 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
PotatoOverdose wrote:
This idea is the pinnacle of risk aversion. It is a means to a simple end: a nigh impenetrable city on a hill from which to launch sorties against smaller entities in order to farm easy kills.

...

The CFC will have their city in deklein, PL in the drone regions, N3 somewhere in the east. The unused space will empty out and some fledgling alliances may even stake a claim. But the moment they have anything scarcely worthwhile, someone will show up on the NPC doorstep looking for "content," while their own bears are safe as houses. Everyone gets their own personal providence to farm. How quaint. This isn't "conflict," this is easy mode farm for the blob.

so it is both bad for nullsec if we own all of it, but it is also bad for nullsec if we only own part of it and let other people own part of it

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#294 - 2014-09-29 15:08:24 UTC
Heavypredator Singh wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Heavypredator Singh wrote:


So that is why most of Your sov is empty ?
This is why it is rented out?


Most of our space is more or less useless as you will earn a good deal more isk blitzing level 4s in high sec. Renting out our space is only a thing because we had to replace the moon goo income when they nerfed tech. What we need is bottom up income you can earn in null and that allows for an alliance to actually be able to live in the space it owns and supports all of its members. Want to kill of the rental empires? The get behind occupancy sov as that makes it impossible to hold vast areas of space to rent out.


Sorry for not feeling Your pain - my alliance can't afford double srp. Are You afraid goonswarm will break when there is no income to buy players? When they will need to buy their own ships? When they will ask where are the resources?

Welcome to the real world where players play and don't get bought. They actually login to have something and risk something so others can have fun too.

All that renting, crazy srp, massive coalitions must be nerfed so ppl start playing the game like it is designed to be played. When you bypass rules of the game it kills it.

If goons need to break for it to happen then well **** happens. Noone guarantee that You will always be able to buy players. they should want to play for fun not for someone that just buys them and commands them.


You ask for these things but provide no solutions. What you fail to understand is these three items suggested are the solution. You just don't like the messenger. Maybe Grath or PGL should have posted it, the reaction by the -1's and naysayers would have been different.
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#295 - 2014-09-29 15:09:25 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Heavypredator Singh wrote:
@baltec1

No. To fix it You need to slice the coalitions/aliances - not make them more powerfull in 1 place. Small alliances will not attack hundreds that are bunkered in one place.

They need to nerf null income so no srp. No ability to create crazy number of ppl in one alliance/coalition.

Over 300 corps in goonswarm alone - this is normal for You? Do You know how much content there would be if 300 corps would fight each other?

yeah i'm sure game mechanics are going to be extra super successful in blocking us from talking to the leaders of other groups out of game and agreeing to alliances

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
Heavypredator Singh
TEMPLAR.
The Initiative.
#296 - 2014-09-29 15:15:45 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
If You want to show me how You go to war with entity that has comparable numbers then be my guest. If not then I see no reason to keep such large aliances around that only atract ppl who want easy game and deny content to smaller ones.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

solution is to nerf null aliances numbers by any changes that are possible.
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#297 - 2014-09-29 15:17:12 UTC
Heavypredator Singh wrote:
@baltec1

No. To fix it You need to slice the coalitions/aliances - not make them more powerfull in 1 place. Small alliances will not attack hundreds that are bunkered in one place.

They need to nerf null income so no srp. No ability to create crazy number of ppl in one alliance/coalition.

Over 300 corps in goonswarm alone - this is normal for You? Do You know how much content there would be if 300 corps would fight each other?

like 85%-90% of our corps are one-player altcorps so they can have towers without tower role issues, they're not actual corporations

so yes that is entirely normal
Ryno Caval
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#298 - 2014-09-29 15:18:27 UTC
+1
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#299 - 2014-09-29 15:19:18 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Retar Aveymone wrote:

so it is both bad for nullsec if we own all of it, but it is also bad for nullsec if we only own part of it and let other people own part of it

have you really thought this brilliant argument all the way through


No one likes to be farm chattel. Point in case. As long as supra entities exist in their current form, they will farm lesser entities. As long as lesser entities are farmed, their members will (sooner or later) join the supra entities. It does not matter whether these supra entities span a single constellation or 12 regions.


Any nullsec change that does not give significant and immediate incentive for PL to literally sh*t down the throats of Nulli or NC. supers is destined to be a dismal failure. Any change which does not motivate Goonswarm to stomp on the face of Razor or FA repeatedly and with great prejudice will result in the same stagnation which we now enjoy.

The fault, dear Retar, is not in our npc stations, but in ourselves. We alone cannot fix ourselves, but perhaps CCP can nudge us along the proper path.
knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#300 - 2014-09-29 15:21:16 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
I'll be honest, i don't see how occupancy sov really changes anything with respect to the size of things.

throw lots of warm bodies at an area of sov = impossible to take it.
unless you cap the amount an index can change per time period.... in which case, just stack enough people to cap it daily and you end up with a boring stalemate (which is the whole issue at the moment) or an inevitable slide of the index in one direction that you can't challenge.

i'll be honest; i don't get it. some one explain it to me.


The index would be linked to activity in a system like mining, ratting, kills or some other industry metric. It could be grown over a period of time. This in turn would affect how easy it is for them to defend and how hard it would be for opponents to take. You could directly link it to structure EHP or timers for instance.

This method would mean a dead system, with no activity would be very easy to conquer and a used system, with plenty of activity across the spectrum would be difficult to take.