Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Imposing arbitrary limits has never worked with Eve, and won't work on this now. Placing a cap on corps or alliances just means there will be more alliances in each coalition. Trying to impose something as easily gameable as gate mass limits will only result in people playing them like wormholes get played to try and trap people in.


Same goes for cost limits. Unless they are hard limits like only 'X' number of ships of this sort allowed in game, things like that just don't work, because Eve players either use whatever work around is at hand or look CCP dead in the eye and say 'challenge accepted.'


No, something like this would need to be a massive shift from what we've grown well accustomed to, resulting in there not being a billion reasons to be in the big group and 2 reasons to not be. What exactly that would be..... difficult to say.

Could go into speculation about try this or try that or do this.... but it's really all bark and no bite at this point, because any change of this magnitude is without doubt going to make alot of poeple angry.

Because there is a point where even the the most hard working your ass off for it mentality simply can't do anything next to the numbers game.


EDIT: misread your post.


It's also not a something wrong with numbers providing advantage, thing, it's a 'there are very few reasons to NOT be part of the numbers' thing, except your personal preference. So that's where most people end up. Now we have what 10, MAYBE, major entities in the game, and half of those there is definite argument on whether they should be included in the list? That's not healthy for the game.

but why is that bad? how is it not healthy?

and those few large entities are all made up of smaller ones working together. Even when the CFC owned half of null and every one just lumped everyone together in the CFC as a goon it was still full of smaller groups with their own goals and objectives. They are not just super blobs of people all after the same thing.


it is not that the game forces you to be a part of a large group the game simply heavily rewards groups of any size working with each other.


I have worked with and been a part of many different alliances and coalitions and for the most part people only identified with their coalition in settings where coalitions were what mattered even at the alliance level many corps keep their own identities except in the case where the alliance is serving as a corp with sub groups.

but why is that bad? how is it not healthy?



why should the game bend itself around to give advantages to NOT working with other groups of players

well yeah but he is talking about being a part of large groups not being a part of large fleets. I have loved all the changes they have made that force your to be more organized in larger fleets from MJFD to relatively small burst ranges for links. however this is a separate issue then a bigger group having better logistics and economy than a small one or a bigger group able to provide more content than a small one.



but it could be that i'm not actually talking about what you two are and am misunderstanding




would also like to add that large groups are far from untouchable. if anything that is one of the few advantages that goes to a small group if they are smart. its relatively easy to disrupt day to day operations of a large group if you want to but if you try to target a small group they can easily evade you and hit you when you turn around. me and about 6 other guys used to do this harassing groups around scalding and the drone regions.






EDIT:


and if you really want to play EvE in an environment that has soft caps on group sizes where very small groups can hold their own against ones several times larger join a WH corp. WH even c5/c6 holes can generally only support groups of around 200 members and in c1,c2,c3 and c4 small groups can fight of large ones extremely well with the home field advantage, citadels have made this even easier. even C5 and C6 WH small groups have massive advantages in their own holes

Your point was that there is very little reason not to be part of a large entity beyond personal preference.

Lugh's point was "yes, but why is this a problem?" and you've pretty much failed to deliver an adequate answer.

It's not like we're particularly at risk of a blue doughnut happening here. We've already seen what Null is like when one of those starts the form and it seems to take less than 2 months for someone to get bored and go "fight be bro!" just for something entertaining to do.

The only reason I can think for you to be claiming that this isn't healthy is if you, personally, don't want to be part of a large group but still want all of the advantages that come from that level of power and cooperation. Basically you want CCP to balance in some hard counter to larger groups so that you can play Delta-force or whatever like it's 2007 and no one's realized how good AHACs are yet.

Why not fix that by making large amounts of ISK decay? E.G. Decay rate is 1%. You have a billion. Every restart, you only have 99% of what you had, until you hit a 'poverty cap'. Like income tax today.

That way you only can get rich to the point your income will just barely mitigate that decay.

Your hyperbole is noted and appreciated.

But yeah, you can't compete with that, but unless CCP goes in and pretty much physically breaks up the big blocks it's always going to be better to have more friends.

The alternative is pretty much to make Null so volatile and so dangerous that everyone pretty much does their mining and ratting and farming in High Sec because you can't do anything profitably in Null.

On top of that I think the only way you could do that would be to drop the saturation point of players per system to the point that you're back to a few big and powerful entities controlling lots of space and basically keeping pets who live off the scraps. That only works though if the scraps are better than High Sec, and if they aren't then we're kinda back around to what I said above where no one actually 'lives' in Null, they just own space there, pretty much how half of Null operated back in 2008-ish where almost everyone had a High Sec L4 alt.



As soon as you implemented something like this players would move their assets to non-decaying money and ISK would quickly become all but worthless for player transactions. That's without even getting into what this kind of liquid ISK hemorrhage in the economy would do to the markets.