EVE General Discussion

Thing is I can't see what CCP can introduce that is worth fighting, that could break the blue brick that wouldn't be classed as hugely OP for the victor.

That would backfire into more blueing/cooperation.

Years ago, EVE ships had little EHP. People complained and said fights should last longer and that if you did that, more people would pvp. CCP buffed Hit points across the board.

End result: Blobbling and less solo pvp. Turns out that more EHP give people mroe time to call for and recieve help, so in order to keep the "time to kill" the same, you just bring more friends, kill the guy quick and get out before help arrives.

Unintended Consequences 1, CCP and EVE 0.

Same would happen with "finite resources". Despite the common myths, Human beings actually don't fight over things they can buy or barter for (at least since agriculture became a thing). Making resources finite means you are more likely to see an "OTEC" situation than more conflict ie HUGE cartels will form to secure access of whatever new site sprouts up with resources.

I like null sec, I've had a character in some kind of null for 6 of my 7 years in EVE. It's been fun.

But to be honest, I think I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that EVE shouldn't even have a null sec, not like it is now. It's 'lawless' space but has gates (who built the freaking gates?), local (wtf, local in null is like finding a cellphone on Pluto) and you have to pay CONCORD to hold sov in it (that's like saying you want to own land in Somalia so you pay rent in New York lol, makes no sense).

Maybe EVE would be a better game is if just had high sec, low sec and Wormhole space. Hell, it looks like Wormhole space is what null should have been in the 1st place: wild, untamed, unknown and hard to get to/from space without the comforts of Empire.

I'm just woolgathering here, it's just that i've watched CCP struggle and get it wrong about null for YEARS and I start to wonder if it's even worth it.

Weirdly enough I'm kind of the same regarding null.

I think the entire concept has to be re-thought.

No matter what they do I honestly can't see the blue brick being broken up..

God I hope I am wrong and in the next 6 months we see it broken up and lots more alliances move into null but I really don't see it.

All I do see is Provi failing to one of the existing blocks due to its location and everybody becomes even more entrenched

Actually it makes sense.

1) Gates in null were either smugglers gates, or once made by other groups. Jove for example, used to live in a section of null. So they would of built or activates left over gates. The other pirate factions would of done the same. Remember, according to lore we have been out here alone for 10k or so years, it is very possible people from the empires attepted to conolonze 0.0 at one point, and failed.

2) Local is due to the gates. As you go through them, you register with whatever communication network is linked to the gates. This is why local exist in k-space but not in wh's. I'd love to see local become optional. i.e. all null by default has no local, the empires cut off communication or something. Then the owners of a system can deploy a communication node, which would turn local back on. This node can be poped, and that would give a strategic target to kill before an invation or just to mess with the local residence.

3) Concord keeps track or the maps of the area. Taking your Somalia anology, if you were to say, conquer western Somalia and say 'from here to here is my boarder" you submit a proposal to the UN and the UN approves your new boarders and reconizes you as a state (yes this is how it actually happens now a days) Under international law, you can not just go to a place and say 'this is now Reaperland!" You have certin critera you must meet, and at least five other nations have to recognize you exist, or you don't. Once this is done, new maps are drawn up. This is why you pay concord a fee. Its so concord adds you tot eh maps and forced the other nations to recognize that yes, this system is now owned by this group.

The issue with null is human nature. Alliances were never considered part of the game, corps were going to own 0.0 eventually, but we players told ccp no, and we formed alliances among ourselves. CCP saw it and decided to give us tools to make it official. Shortly after alliances formed, you had coalitions forming. IRON, RZR, Phenox, etc made the Nothern Coalition. BoB, Fix, and I forget who was in fountain, was the GBC. ASCN, Axiom, IAC, ISS Formed the Southern Coalition. UK/CVA had the providence groups. When ccp was doing constalation sov (imo the WORST implemented idea ever) they were going to give us tools to make coalitions real. But changed there minds. A lot of stuff you see in game now was because the earily players demanded it, cause we were doing it anyway. We owned null without any sov or stations or pos'. CCP sedded stations in null earily cause we demanded they do.

Adding more to my above..

This is why a lot of ideas will not work or are stupid.

"limit alliance size!" why? players made alliances when none existed.

"limit standings!" why? players had standings when none for alliances existed and it was a pita to check, but we still did it

"remove sov!" why? players still owned 0.0 when there was no stations, no pos', no sov.

"limit corp size!" why? before goonswarm player corps maxed out at 500 members.

I honestly think eve needs a damn history book, newer members who were not here in the beginning (hell I started a year after eve was out) have zero clue as to how it was, and things they think will fix the game, will do nothing. As we did it fine before, we will do it fine again.

The more people say it the more I like the idea of completely removing sov

It wont fix the issues with null.

So how come mining and hauling without permits isnt a Concordable offense yet?

He turned it into a kind of sport fishing for the overlords.