Player Features and Ideas Discussion

So the leaders of Null Sec SOV holding Alliances are tired of playing naked diplomacy Twister? Have you decided who's going to pull out of whos bum first?

CCP can change null SOV to this but at the end of the day its the diplomatic meta circle jerk thats the real issue with Null. CCP needs to go bigger and get rid of SOV structures and timers like SBUs, TCUs, Station Timers and docking rights. Then diplomacy can happen on a granular/local level and will be much more fluid.

If you occupy the system etc then with the IHUB upgrades you get more and more benefits from the station like Agents, Services, etc and your docking radius gets bigger as you use the system etc. Tip of the iceberg stuff but you get the point.

Anywhoo.....great idea with the NPC space......but please make sure the new SOV system you promote can also be gamed into another diplomatic pretzel. It would be a shame if we didn't see The Martini pretending year after year the its not his fault for Null Sec being a stagnant puppet show...
.

Git 'er done CCP!

I support this motion.

o7

+1 OP
This needs to happen sooner, rather than later.

Do you think that people makes coalitions of 40k dudes because they love friendship?

Blue donuts are a consequence of a horrible gameplay and lack of solutions. You cannot have a good income to support your activities and shoot at everyone at the same time on the current sov iteration. If you want the big guys to risk their big guns give them a good reason to do that because crashing nodes after a tidifest is not a very convincing reason.

+1

+1

Fully support this.

"Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational battle station."

+1 for this thread by the way

good show gents

*Snip* Please refrain from discussing forum moderation. ISD Ezwal.

Many (myself included) are unhappy with the state of 0.0, but in a sandbox game how can you stop major groups from making Non-Aggression Pacts with each other without ground level changes to Sov.

I just have zero faith in the proposed changes

"More NPC stations"

- ok cool fine... It would help smaller gangs have a place to hide, and it would also help provide a convenient staging ground for the 500 man coalition rolling into your back yard.

"Occ. based sov"

- so renters will fill the void and if your not blue or renting, your sov structures you just paid 20b for are gonna die... sorry pay up or GTFO.

"Increased Player Density"

- means groups will have to join larger groups to hold their sov and cause further hegemony around EVE.

This will do absolutely zero to break up EVE into smaller groups and encourage more fighting (which I assume was the point )*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.. I can only think that CCP has something else in the pipeline to break up Nullsec and the larger rental empires are trying to get ahead of it with a popularity contest.

If you base 0.0 Sov holding off the number of members (so that smaller groups can have sov)what stops a larger group from walking in and nuking the Sov structures you just paid for?

I'm not even sure what the popular opinion states is the problem?

Is it a lack of fighting? Entities got creative, decided it was better to keep their space then possibly lose it. They needed the income to keep building supers, buy plexes etc.

What incentive is there to fight? The income from renters is a major motivator to do nothing, R64's never "run dry" nor change location and holding region x is pretty much the same as holding region y. The only groups to stay relatively neutral is Stainwagon (sovless), Black Legion (sovless) and Providence (soon to be sovless if N3/PL cared enough to take it).

I can get behind the NPC stations to a point, but thats about it. If you want to shake up 0.0, you need to go to the root of the problem and that is one word.

Income.