open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Blog: Upgrading and Upkeep of Sovereign Solar Systems in Dominion
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 106 107 108 109 [110] 111 112 113 114 ... : last (119)

Author Topic

centurion zulu
Phantom Squad
Atlas.
Posted - 2009.11.11 22:11:00 - [3271]
 

Originally by: Bobby Atlas
CCP, you have lost the plot, truly and utterly ******ed.

Lets rehash a few things
- Instead of actually fixing titans and assigning them a role, CCP replaces it with a poorly conceived "death ray". However, it was received mildly accepted after some player review but then CCP decides to give everyone supercaps on sisi which was a brilliant idea and garnered mountains of invaluable feedback (read: sarcasm Rolling Eyes)... Which resulted in the "death ray" getting nerfed to a useless state of 10 minute rof, making titans all but relegated to a POS ornament - contrary to CCP own stated intentions at fan fest to see titans used on grid but not have an instant "i own grid" button. The expectation that people will use them "because they do 2x the turret damage of a dread" is short sighted at best, considering most titan holding alliances can already field 50-100+ dreads.

- Instead of actually fixing highend passive income, ccp again chooses a poorly conceived solution that redistributes the passive income across more moons. This is but a temporary solution and 0.0 entities will simply start to react / hoard larger quantities of intermediate moons to generate roughly the same relative amount of passive income.

- Instead of actually fixing the long standing issue of poorly distributed and static true sec value of systems, ccp wimps out and decides to not touch the true sec values cause of coding complexities, similar notes are made regarding why belts will not be added to systems. Instead a system is created where by infrastructure must first be planted and upgraded to add an array of cosmic signatures that provide various additional resources. This system as it turns out through testing is not nearly as profitable nor as accommodating to the amount of players as CCP indicated it would be at fan fest, the tie in to sov mechanics, especially the loss of such upgrades when sov is lost in a system, will make upgrades a ******ed and convoluted concept.

- Dominion is supposed to make 0.0 access for smaller entities easier, this could not be further from the truth. To hold 0.0 is now going to be exceedingly cost prohibitive, if a smaller entity wants to break into 0.0 they need to generate large amounts of initial capital before they can even begin the conquest of space. The actual killer on the whole thing will be the critical mass point that makes it nearly impossible for most smaller entities; that is actually having to engage in a sov war to take some 0.0 space, the costs of a war +initial costs of sov claiming will make it so cost prohibitive that most entities are just not going to bother.

- Alliances that are based further out into 0.0 such as branch and omist for instance, are penalized much more than alliances sitting on the border of empire. CCP has been playing this whole "Balance everything" card for the last 2 months with ships, modules and skills but has turned a blind eye to the concept of distance between far out 0.0 regions and empire. For an alliance living in branch or omist, to run a JB network to empire you are talking 10bn+ a month, that is absolutely ******ed and exceedingly unbalanced.

.... I could keep going but i think the point has been made ... dominion is going to be a cluster * inappropriate text removed - CCP Ildoge, well done CCP.



I'll also have to agree with Bobby on this.

CCP, do any of you play this game anymore. I mean, wtf are you folks thinking about, or are you thinking at all. Comeon guys, get real here.

Kayl Breinhar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.11 22:19:00 - [3272]
 

Edited by: Kayl Breinhar on 11/11/2009 22:22:53
Originally by: SXYGeeK
I'm very concerned about how dificult it is to get the military index up, especialy in systems with low belt counts.
I had 6+ pilots running my 5 belt system and anomolies in it for most of the day yesterday after patch.
killed almost 1000 rats (1000, not a typo) and got 12% toward lvl 1.

came back today and it was back at 0%, killed another 200 rats and no movement at all, still red down arrow.
something must be wrong here.

read more here...
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1211774

This needs more attention.

~1,000 rats for 12%? Does that mean ~10,000 for 100%? Just for Level 1? Are you insane?

Here's an idea, do what people have been saying and eliminate frigate/cruiser spawns from 0.0 entirely and scale the "points per kill" on the quality/type of rats killed, and if you're not going to replace the anomaly rats with basic ones, double or triple their "point worth."

Too many questions leading into this, CCP. Back off the death march and let us help *you* make this not a disaster.

Laina Delapore
Caldari
Shadowed Command
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2009.11.11 22:26:00 - [3273]
 

Upgrades to system Truesec / security class enabling better / more belts with better rats and better ore.

Most people have already stated that a few extra anomalies simply won't cut it, and that the increased income from any potential faction loot drops will be temporary before the influx created by all the extra plexes makes the market crash. Improved truesec merely allows for a greater chance of Faction rats and even with use won't spew out -so- many shinies that the market in phat lewtz dies. Plus, the increased personal / corporate income makes paying for your PVP and your sov more workable.

Cap truesec upgrades if you will, say a system cannot have its truesec lowered by more than a) a factor of 10 (i.e a -0.08 system cannot be upgraded to lower than -0.8) or b) no system in a constellation be upgraded to have a lower truesec rating than the lowest truesec in the constellation or c) fixed percentage improvement per upgrade level - but this would still have to quite effective to make it worthwhile.


SXYGeeK
Gallente
do you
Posted - 2009.11.11 22:30:00 - [3274]
 

Originally by: Kayl Breinhar
Edited by: Kayl Breinhar on 11/11/2009 22:22:53
Originally by: SXYGeeK
I'm very concerned about how dificult it is to get the military index up, especialy in systems with low belt counts.
I had 6+ pilots running my 5 belt system and anomolies in it for most of the day yesterday after patch.
killed almost 1000 rats (1000, not a typo) and got 12% toward lvl 1.

came back today and it was back at 0%, killed another 200 rats and no movement at all, still red down arrow.
something must be wrong here.

read more here...
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1211774

This needs more attention.

~1,000 rats for 12%? Does that mean ~10,000 for 100%? Just for Level 1? Are you insane?

Here's an idea, do what people have been saying and eliminate frigate/cruiser spawns from 0.0 entirely and scale the "points per kill" on the quality/type of rats killed, and if you're not going to replace the anomaly rats with basic ones, double or triple their "point worth."

Too many questions leading into this, CCP. Back off the death march and let us help *you* make this not a disaster.


Agreed, this stuff must just not be ready yet or something , cause i can't get anyone to respond on this.
I don't think anyone else is realy testing this yet, there arent any Mil index ssytems on the map (except one lvl5 up in CCP land)

centurion zulu
Phantom Squad
Atlas.
Posted - 2009.11.11 22:42:00 - [3275]
 

Originally by: Loike
While I expected you to increase sov holding costs, by this much is just stupid. You say you want to make larger alliances lower their claims, but this also completely hinders small alliance growth.

Your new method of sov warfare is now completely based on blobbing, something you have clearly said you want to get rid of :/



What do you really expect from CCP. They did the same overboard crap with the speed nerf, and just about everything else they have done. This should have been expected.

By the time CCP is done with this, is there going to be anything left worth fighting over, or are we done here. ?

Mahke
Aeon Of Strife
Discord.
Posted - 2009.11.11 23:19:00 - [3276]
 

Edited by: Mahke on 11/11/2009 23:21:36
Originally by: Arkady Sadik
For those who missed it, current SiSi prices (which can change still, of course):

TCU: 1m ISK / day
Hub: 5m ISK / day
Jump bridge: 10m ISK / day
Cyno gen: 2m ISK / day
Cyno jammer: 20m ISK / day
CSAA: 1m ISK / day


And these prices are going to discourage control of unused systems and force strategic choices about anything except cynojammers how..............?

There is a balance in not being financially backbreaking and being significant enough to even matter (and thus force people to make choices about buffers, sprawl, and cost). Except for the cyno jammer price these new numbers fail the latter.

Honestly; just tie prices to non-strategic development level. The more development (aka the more the system is actually used) the lower the prices, and vice-versa (unused space extremely costly, heavily utilized space extremely cheap).

edit:
Quote:
This is correct for the current version on sisi. The only upcoming change as of today was shifting all the upkeep onto the TCU from the hub (TCU will be 6mill per day, hub will have no upkeep cost). There may well be more changes to come in the days ahead and we are writing another blog which publicises the more updated figures and hoovers up lots of other important issues like specifics on transition between old and new to ensure everyone is clear on what will happen for example and any significant changes to the conquest mechanics which we need to detail if necessary.


Is an improvement because it forces tactical choices about how many TCUs to spam. Still not ideal but much better already.

Alexander Knott
ElitistOps
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.11 23:24:00 - [3277]
 

Yeah, I'm actually a bit surprised that industrial and military levels aren't taken into account, or stations, station slots used, etc for that matter.

Adam Ridgway
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.11.11 23:40:00 - [3278]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Arkady Sadik
For those who missed it, current SiSi prices (which can change still, of course):

TCU: 1m ISK / day
Hub: 5m ISK / day
Jump bridge: 10m ISK / day
Cyno gen: 2m ISK / day
Cyno jammer: 20m ISK / day
CSAA: 1m ISK / day


This is correct for the current version on sisi. The only upcoming change as of today was shifting all the upkeep onto the TCU from the hub (TCU will be 6mill per day, hub will have no upkeep cost).


Cynojammers & JB still are TOO cheap, double them, at least.

In other news:
- A lof of the system is based on usage.
- For moar heavy usage you need PLENTY of new people in 0.0.
- Without incentives to be in 0.0, people is goign to carebear in hisec. Too much hasle for so few rewards.
- 0.0 will still be devoid of any life and 'emergent' play, status quo will remain, and still the same.


Gratz on an useless expansion, after all your effort. Until you understand that:
- people who considers to be in 0.0, does mostlly because of the pvp. EXTREME CAREBEARS ARE NOT POTENTIAL TARGETS BECAUSE THEY ARE TOTALLY RISK-AVERSE (for a number of reasons).
- they do grind to have isk to pvp.
- the potential 0.0 dweller that now is in empire is there because: too much effort, too few reward.

And you factor these facts into your gamedesign, until then, you will have a 0.0 with allways same faces, same 'elite', same status quo, same wasteland without any life.

:CCP:

Blue Harrier
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.11 23:42:00 - [3279]
 

In case anyone missed it, this was in the other 'Storming the Gates' thread.

Quote:
Originally by: Smurphy1
One question that a lot of people seem to be asking is what happens to the upgrades when you take a system from someone? I think that if you take a system you should have to put up a new infrastructure hub but the activity levels(except for time of course) are still there from the previous owner. The levels will have degraded somewhat due to the fighting but the conqueror should not have everything destroyed. Or possibly make it like looting a ship, some mods got destroyed and some are in the wreck.

Answer from CCP Chronotis;
The military and industrial indexes are preserved though will continue to decay as normal through time, only the strategic index will reset when system sovereignty changes hands. Whilst the system is contested it is highly unlikely there will not be as much resource gathering going on so you may lose a level or two depending on how long it takes to conquer the system. You could find yourself seizing a system with a high index level and good combo of base level resources or location value/gate count combo.


Makes things a tiny bit better.

Illectroculus Defined
No Bull Ships
Posted - 2009.11.11 23:57:00 - [3280]
 

Originally by: Adam Ridgway

In other news:
- A lof of the system is based on usage.
- For moar heavy usage you need PLENTY of new people in 0.0.
- Without incentives to be in 0.0, people is goign to carebear in hisec. Too much hasle for so few rewards.
- 0.0 will still be devoid of any life and 'emergent' play, status quo will remain, and still the same.



Actually, all of the core strategic upgrades (JB/CSAA/Cyno stuff) only depends on cold hard cash, so for alliances who can't make the cash from moon goo their best bet is to put together a PVE corps, which runs missions in HiSec.

That's one of the biggest bits of brokenness - the fact that the money has no relation to the space being claimed.

The whole system would be vastly improved if the code that tracks the military index feeds credits directly into that system's upkeep budget instead of letting alliances use hi-sec carebearing to fund their claims.

Rizan Solace
Posted - 2009.11.12 00:02:00 - [3281]
 

I see a lot of people complaining about the price for smaller corps and alliances. How about charge by a percent in a way that smaller corps can afford to be in 0.0 as well. :)

Itzena
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.12 00:34:00 - [3282]
 

Originally by: SXYGeeK
I'm very concerned about how dificult it is to get the military index up, especialy in systems with low belt counts.
I had 6+ pilots running my 5 belt system and anomolies in it for most of the day yesterday after patch.
killed almost 1000 rats (1000, not a typo) and got 12% toward lvl 1.

came back today and it was back at 0%, killed another 200 rats and no movement at all, still red down arrow.
something must be wrong here.

read more here...
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1211774

haha oh wow

Lorn Cholaxu
Gallente
Taggart Transdimensional
Virtue of Selfishness
Posted - 2009.11.12 00:44:00 - [3283]
 

Hello,

Speaking only on behalf of myself and several of the friends I currently run missions with. We want to get out of empire, because nothing we do there has any real meaning. But, with the announced changes coming in Dominion, there will be no incentive to go to 0.0.

If we're going to undertake that level of risk, it will be in w-space because there are logistical advantages to orienting ourselves around a nomadic "lifestyle" in the game. There are resources in w-space that exist nowhere else in great quantities, and those resources make the risk absolutely worthwhile in terms of ISK/hour.

I'm hoping that CCP reconsiders the comments from the many alliances in this thread (Atlas, Goonswarm, CVA, etc) and does two things. First, they need to make exploration sites more worthwhile. This needs to be done in two ways. First, increase the incentives for running exploration sites across the board, in terms of both ISK/Battleship and Battleship spawns per hour per system. If the ISK/hour of ratting belts is greater than the ISK/hour of exploration, this leaves little to no incentive to upgrade a system. Grav/LADAR/RADAR/Mag sites ought to be comparable to C5 or C6 systems, depending on the sec rating. Complexes ought to have a much higher chance of dropping faction modules and of producing escalations. And if the system is upgraded, there had better always always ALWAYS be sites to work in. If we clear one, another ought to form immediately afterward.

Second, as someone posted earlier, systems with Outposts ought to be able to either hire outright or somehow attract combat mission agents to their space for NPC corporations. Someone mentioned Sov 4 being a prerequisite to bring in an L4 agent, and I think that sounds great, or the quality of the agent could be influenced by the degree of sovereignty. If the rats in these missions payed bounties comparable to other nullsec battleship rats, it would only sweeten the deal more. Especially if these agents are for pirate corporations, the increased availability for pirate faction ships and equipment would provide another resource to nullsec that does not exist anywhere in highsec. Maybe there is only a fixed number of these agents, so alliances have to compete to keep them, providing extra incentive to stay in the area and recruit new pilots to come to your space.

If upgrades could also help mitigate some of the risk involved with nullsec, it could be a very good thing for everyone involved. Simple things like making it more difficult (due to system-wide jammers) to probe down anomalies unless you're in the alliance that holds a system would confer a significant home-field advantage to defenders of a system, and reduce the likelihood that they will lose hulls while working on sites due to a sudden attack (common and easy in belts) and give exploration sites another edge on belts.

Given the currently announced incentives, I wouldn't recommend to my friends that we head out to nullsec to stake a claim. We would definitely head to w-space instead. Thanks for everyone else's input. It was an educational read.

Nick Bete
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.11.12 00:45:00 - [3284]
 

After all the complaints I have a pretty simple question to those vehemently opposed to the changes as they currently stand; How much of a buff would you recommend CCP give to the money making activities in 0.0 to make it worthwhile? What types of buffs would you like to see?

For example, would tripling the number of static belts, rat spawns and rat bounties along with tripling the quality of ore be enough? Quadrupling? Would you want to also see changes to plexes and if so, what?

As much as I don't trust (some of) the messengers that doesn't invalidate the message. With so many people agreeing on the major points it seems like a good idea to revisit the idea of buffing null income in a significant way.

Personal aside: I feel that upping the rewards are only part of the equation; no matter if you raised the rewards by a game-breaking amount without a lowering of the risks involved with null living there will never be large numbers of people living there. Also, the attitudes of many of the null crowd towards empire people is a huge turn-off. I know I don't want to be viewed as a "pubbie" who doesn't belong or just as a target and there seems to be a lot of animosity towards empire folks in many of the comments I've read over my time in game.

Gefex
Genco
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.12 00:50:00 - [3285]
 

Originally by: Illectroculus Defined
The whole system would be vastly improved if the code that tracks the military index feeds credits directly into that system's upkeep budget instead of letting alliances use hi-sec carebearing to fund their claims.


Quoting this for a brilliant idea.

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.12 01:21:00 - [3286]
 

Some people obviously haven't noticed the change in price for the system upgrades and holding space now. The prices right now i could easily supply between ratting a system and doing a few other activities. So to say new alliances will have issues getting a system is a laughable argument now. The issues i still see and the only reason i see it is that will the price of holding space increase based on how many systems you control. A graph, or a equation or SOMETHING to explain to people how the cost will scale with the systems you control will put to rest peoples question as to how this stops huge alliances from still holding space.

The other argument id like to highlight because i agree with it is the concern about the QUALITY of null sec isk making. anomalies, mining, those with the system upgrades should improve the QUALITY of the spawns sopeople can make more. also with that the quantity should be increased so the systems can support more people as you said you wanted.

The way this works I think should be as follows. 1st level of the upgrades say tier 1 maybe 2 should increase the quality of spawns more than quantity. say 3 to quality to 1 to quantity in terms of ratio. as you get higher levels the quality wont increase as much opposed to the quantity of spawns in a system. THUS the quality hits the system right off the bat attracting more people to it which in turn grows the system which then promotes more people in space till it reaches its full capacity.

This "Idea" obviously only works with a "you must be active to grow the levels" type mechanic which if im reading right sounds to be what you guys are implementing. So if you have similar ideas or are working along these lines kudos, if not you may want to consider at least taking a look at the idea and really tear it apart to see if it could work.

Look forward to the next Blog CCP, keep up the hard work and don't disappoint.

Kanatta Jing
Posted - 2009.11.12 01:33:00 - [3287]
 

So will Pirate Magnet will be changed to "Contraband Warehouse," "Vulnerable Merchant Quarters," "Seedy Space Bar," or simply "DED Detention area?"

Nhor Haen
Posted - 2009.11.12 01:41:00 - [3288]
 

Yeah, I don't really buy that small alliances wont be able to hold space. It costs 20b to build an outpost, and if you're looking at that level of investment even the original costs are quite affordable (alternately, if you're planning on stealing one, stop complaining about having to pay 1/20th the value in maintenance fees). If you're just planning on operating in an empty system without an outpost, you don't really need sov at all.

What I do agree is that there's nothing to motivate players into 0.0. Currently the most valuable activity in 0.0 (the low truesec parts, at least) is ratting; moon mining isn't an infinite source of cash like some people seem to think. The current upgrades don't change ratting, and they don't make anything else more profitable, so the profit from 0.0 will remain mostly the same, but with added costs; no matter how low these costs are they'll only serve to make 0.0 less desirable.

Illectroculus Defined
No Bull Ships
Posted - 2009.11.12 01:45:00 - [3289]
 

Edited by: Illectroculus Defined on 12/11/2009 01:49:03
Originally by: Gefex
Originally by: Illectroculus Defined
The whole system would be vastly improved if the code that tracks the military index feeds credits directly into that system's upkeep budget instead of letting alliances use hi-sec carebearing to fund their claims.


Quoting this for a brilliant idea.


Why thank you :)

Let me run with it a little more: We're really claiming 0.0 from the pirates who would otherwise roam free through the unclaimed 0.0. By killing those pirates you're taming the system and gaining control. But the deeper you get into negative truesec the more effort is needed, so you need to kill more pirates per day to stop them chipping away at your infrastructure. i.e. the stronger the rats, the more you have to kill to claim the space. This would mean that claiming 'poor' regions like Providence requires less work than the deepest darkest drone regions. This is the reverse of the current proposed fees where the systems with the best rats need less work to maintain.

(oh yes, and because it's only based on kills then drone regions don't need to rely on selling stuff in empire to pay for sov maintenance)

Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.11.12 03:06:00 - [3290]
 

Originally by: Gefex
Originally by: Illectroculus Defined
The whole system would be vastly improved if the code that tracks the military index feeds credits directly into that system's upkeep budget instead of letting alliances use hi-sec carebearing to fund their claims.


Quoting this for a brilliant idea.


Why stop there? It only makes sense if the holding corp building up infrastructure in the system gets an additional bounty for each rat killed in that system. It would make perfect sense to help strangers come to your space, or at least parts of your space, to make money and earn you a nice profit too.
That would help populate 0.0. And people who get sucked into 0.0 are likely to stay there and fight. For their own space, for the space they lived in, or whatever people like to fight for.

Apollyon Qrr
Posted - 2009.11.12 03:17:00 - [3291]
 

I see the new costs as a money making scheme. This way ppl that enjoy sovereignty will have to buy plex cards to be able to afford the costs. This is outrageous and shouldnt be done. I think that if ccp implements this, everyone that wrote here should cancel their accounts and go to Jumpgate Evolution. I for one like Eve but we cant sit around and let a company take advantage of our addiction to online games!

Zahorite
Posted - 2009.11.12 03:33:00 - [3292]
 

Well I hope that CCP or somebody actually reads this.

I'm going to assume that CCP is going to have a tough time programming in changes in order to get anything fixed with these issues before Dominion is actually scheduled to release. Right now I think the only things they are really thinking about is increasing the number of anomalies or decreasing the upkeep costs. I want to propose a couple other things that they could easily implement in order of the easier ones to the harder ones.

1. Give an instant bounty to the holding alliance for completed anomalies. However you do it, either from respawn time, or when the boss is killed, this will be a major boost to 0.0 and gives a direct incentive for alliances to upgrade their systems and have players run those anomalies. It should be relativly easy since you won't have to bother with old code, instead you are putting in new code.

2. Make it so that an afk ship in an anomaly will not keep it from respawning. This is vital in order to prevent a major exloit that is going to happen in the game. A way to find cloaked ships would be better, even if you could only scan anomaly rooms, but that would require more programming than simply making it so that an anomaly respawns after all npc ships have been destroyed or something like that.

3. Add an upgrade that increases the bounty gained from all npc ships. This will increase both player income and the tax income corporations get. I'd start with somewhere between a 25-50% bounty boost for now depending on how much incentive you want for people to head to 0.0 space, later if it's to much or to little it can be easily changed. This may be harder to program in, but it may be possible to use part of the code from the skill that would do the same, I know it's on evemon but it's not in the game. If the code is there you might be able to modify it and save some time. In fact just releasing that skill would be a boost since 0.0 space individual income is more bounty based than high sec income.

4. Base upkeep prices on use of a system. A system with higher levels should be cheaper to upkeep than a system that is rarely used. This would be difficult to program but would be useful for the game.

5. Base Upkeep prices on the distance of the 0.0 region from the nearest high sec system. This will help offset the disadvantage that alliances that are further from high sec would have under the new changes. Plus it makes logical sense because a system further out probably isn't going to have to pay as much to claim things like TCU or the rights to put up a cyno jammer. In fact you might just remove upkeep almost completly for some upgrades in systems that are far enough away from high sec.

Anyway those are some of the things I would suggest looking into before Dominion is released. They may not be perfect but they will make the difference between a below average update and an update that most people are happy with, although getting an ecstatic response may be impossible at this point.

Manfred Sideous
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.12 03:47:00 - [3293]
 

CCP Please I ask you please push back the launch of Dominion. A very good majority of players are unhappy with what you have showed us so far. The Sov system needs alot of work. Supercaps deffinately need to be re re thinked. I really think its in the best interest for everyone to delay and do a better job. Your whole campaign of Excellence that you promoted during fanfest suggest that this course is the logical one. Excellence > Expedience . Just a few weeks ago everyone was pumped about dominion. The supercap changes were cool the sov system was sounding cool and the idea was it would make alliances scale back there space and open up 0.0 to upstart alliances. Well the nerfbat has stung the titan twice and now the supercarrier relegating them to trophy ornament status at best.



I can tell you I am part of the discussion in my alliance for our plans for our space in Dominion. I can tell you we dont plan on giving up space we already found a work around as im sure most have. Only difference is were shooting different type of structures , we dont have to fuel as many pos and we will have to deal with squatters. Im pretty bummed as im sure alot of the 0.0 population is.



Dominion has the potential to be a game changer that would relight the spark in 0.0 for many and attract many anew pilot/corp/alliance to nullsec. With the changes as they are as of now. Its more of the same just a different facade . So Please do the right thing push this expansion back and make it excellent the first time.

Mcon99
Posted - 2009.11.12 04:37:00 - [3294]
 

Originally by: Manfred Sideous
CCP Please I ask you please push back the launch of Dominion. A very good majority of players are unhappy with what you have showed us so far. The Sov system needs alot of work. Supercaps deffinately need to be re re thinked. I really think its in the best interest for everyone to delay and do a better job. Your whole campaign of Excellence that you promoted during fanfest suggest that this course is the logical one. Excellence > Expedience . Just a few weeks ago everyone was pumped about dominion. The supercap changes were cool the sov system was sounding cool and the idea was it would make alliances scale back there space and open up 0.0 to upstart alliances. Well the nerfbat has stung the titan twice and now the supercarrier relegating them to trophy ornament status at best.



I can tell you I am part of the discussion in my alliance for our plans for our space in Dominion. I can tell you we dont plan on giving up space we already found a work around as im sure most have. Only difference is were shooting different type of structures , we dont have to fuel as many pos and we will have to deal with squatters. Im pretty bummed as im sure alot of the 0.0 population is.



Dominion has the potential to be a game changer that would relight the spark in 0.0 for many and attract many anew pilot/corp/alliance to nullsec. With the changes as they are as of now. Its more of the same just a different facade . So Please do the right thing push this expansion back and make it excellent the first time.



CCP,

I please ask you to ignore the ramblings of the large 0.0 alliances who in one breath say they want much more settlement and diversity in 0.0 yet at the same time do not want their space shrunk, legacy profits wiped out or super capitals nerfed.

Welcome to the new landscape, where sov is more contestable, moon goo income is distributed, and alliances have to been all around pvp, pve and mining, and actually LIVING in their space!


Bobby Random
Posted - 2009.11.12 04:45:00 - [3295]
 

Thats the new cost?

1 person can do that in a little over an hour per day. That isnt any increase in cost and no real reason to stop all the bufferzone practice of the major stake holders now.

There should be a multiplier, the more system one owns, the more the price goes up per system. A fixed cost that low I have to laugh at.

To be honest here, I really see no change other than mixing the mechanics of the game around.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.11.12 06:43:00 - [3296]
 

Originally by: Bobby Random
There should be a multiplier, the more system one owns, the more the price goes up per system. A fixed cost that low I have to laugh at.


The Sov marker should have a cost based on a power function: as you deploy more sov markers or disruptors, the cost of maintaining each one rises geometrically (eg: 1.007^x in millions of ISK a day, x being the total number of markers and disruptors).

Thus not only will big alliance have their coffers drained faster, but more militant alliances wil have their coffers drained faster too.

Allowing alliances to start small, with money left over from a few days worth of level 4 missioning, will encourage people to try staking their own claims. More numerous alliances, with smaller holdings, will make for a much more dynamic nullsec environment - even if half of them are "GoonSwarm Alpha", "GoonSwarm Beta" etc.

Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
Posted - 2009.11.12 07:27:00 - [3297]
 

Originally by: Mcon99
CCP,

I please ask you to ignore the ramblings of the large 0.0 alliances who in one breath say they want much more settlement and diversity in 0.0 yet at the same time do not want their space shrunk, legacy profits wiped out or super capitals nerfed.

Welcome to the new landscape, where sov is more contestable, moon goo income is distributed, and alliances have to been all around pvp, pve and mining, and actually LIVING in their space!




Really? CCP are nerfing Fountain, Delve and Esoteria? No, didn't think so. Which way were lvl 4 missions again, you obviously got lost on your way and ended up on these forums spouting nonsense.

Peryner
University of Caille
Posted - 2009.11.12 07:55:00 - [3298]
 

Originally by: Mcon99
Originally by: Manfred Sideous
CCP Please I ask you please push back the launch of Dominion. A very good majority of players are unhappy with what you have showed us so far. The Sov system needs alot of work. Supercaps deffinately need to be re re thinked. I really think its in the best interest for everyone to delay and do a better job. Your whole campaign of Excellence that you promoted during fanfest suggest that this course is the logical one. Excellence > Expedience . Just a few weeks ago everyone was pumped about dominion. The supercap changes were cool the sov system was sounding cool and the idea was it would make alliances scale back there space and open up 0.0 to upstart alliances. Well the nerfbat has stung the titan twice and now the supercarrier relegating them to trophy ornament status at best.

Dominion has the potential to be a game changer that would relight the spark in 0.0 for many and attract many anew pilot/corp/alliance to nullsec. With the changes as they are as of now. Its more of the same just a different facade . So Please do the right thing push this expansion back and make it excellent the first time.



CCP,

I please ask you to ignore the ramblings of the large 0.0 alliances who in one breath say they want much more settlement and diversity in 0.0 yet at the same time do not want their space shrunk, legacy profits wiped out or super capitals nerfed.

Welcome to the new landscape, where sov is more contestable, moon goo income is distributed, and alliances have to been all around pvp, pve and mining, and actually LIVING in their space!




your such a tool
the sov system was sounding cool and the idea was it would make alliances scale back there space and open up 0.0 to upstart alliances
I can tell you we dont plan on giving up space we already found a work around as im sure most have.
he doesn't WANT alliances holding large areas of space, that's his POINT, you didn't read his post at all. he is disappointed because they won't be giving up any of their space because the costs are too low and not dynamic. He is saying they won't be living in their space at all and nothing will change.

TOOL

Hrodgar Ortal
Minmatar
Ma'adim Logistics
Posted - 2009.11.12 08:00:00 - [3299]
 

Originally by: Manfred Sideous
CCP Please I ask you please push back the launch of Dominion. A very good majority of players are unhappy with what you have showed us so far.


A majority of vocal forum goers seem unhappy. That isn't the same as a majority of players. (in general forums are visited by a minority to start with)

Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
Posted - 2009.11.12 08:53:00 - [3300]
 

Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal
Originally by: Manfred Sideous
CCP Please I ask you please push back the launch of Dominion. A very good majority of players are unhappy with what you have showed us so far.


A majority of vocal forum goers seem unhappy. That isn't the same as a majority of players. (in general forums are visited by a minority to start with)



Very few in AAA, Atlas and Goons are unhappy. Evem the NC are very unhappy about this... oops... that's the majority.


Pages: first : previous : ... 106 107 108 109 [110] 111 112 113 114 ... : last (119)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only