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 : ... 57 58 59 60 [61] 62 63 64 65 ... : last (119)

Author Topic

Moore cyno
Posted - 2009.11.08 11:31:00 - [1801]
 

Don't know if anyone suggested this idea, as i have to admit i didn't read all 60 pages :-)

I both agree and disagree with the concern that the upkeep cost is too high. It will be too much to draw out smaller alliances, and large volumes of space will become unused. However, claiming space shouldn't be so cheap/easy that large alliances will just keep all their space and the rest claimed by small entities.

So, the goal is to bring out more people and smaller entities to 0.0, and force people to actively use the space. But as the grind needed to make that profitable is "a lot" it wont happen with the current numbers. Decreasing the cost too much wont open up any space as the existing alliances will just keep their space. Finding a compromise cost which achieves both goals, is in my opinion more or less impossible with the current mechanics.

Solution: Link activity index to upkeep cost.

Instead of just having a fixed large upkeep cost, forcing alliances to use much grinding time before any profit is seen, decrease upkeep if activity index is high. I.e. super high activity index over a month in an upkeep system, upkeep cost is decreased by 90% (or some other significant number), low activity index alliance pays the full cost. Probably should be some scaling to systems around claimed, such that ratting, mining, plexing will still improve activity index say by a factor 0.5 at neighbouring systems and so forth. Obviously passive income such as moon mining shouldn't decrease upkeep.

This will accomplish exactly what was intended. Unused space will be left, actively claimed and used systems can become profitable.

Salsbury
Posted - 2009.11.08 11:38:00 - [1802]
 

Originally by: Da Maddness
Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal
I've seen you or someone else ask this every couple of pages. You won't get an answer that way, especially when asking it that often in the middle of the night for Icelanders.


You do realise that the forums are available when people wake up?


You do realize that they aren't made any more useful being full of repeated spam? I mean, sure, easier to skim. But much harder to find the few people actually contributing useful ideas.

Tarkina Koslix
Deep Space Supplies
Violent Entity
Posted - 2009.11.08 11:44:00 - [1803]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
about level 4 mission failures
We want the sites to scale so each site needs a group and has appropriate rewards however we face some issues as the older sites were from simpler times before lots of ship balancing and have stupid NPCs for example which turn group content into solo content in difficulty (ironically the greatest flaw in thelvl 4 missions).


There is so much wrong in it,

- farming good missions up to 1 week with up to 8 level 4 agents
- to static content
- to static npcs
- no suprises
- no adventure factor

and that's nearly the same for anomalies and plexes in 0.0 .

it should be more like:

1) i sneak into the site and check whats there
2) depending on what i see, i decide to form a fleet with
i.e. more or less logistics stealth bombers bs carriers whatevers needed.

that can be done by having npcs using jammers ( oh you see that in the fight , so be prepared )
more/less neutralizer towers , so doing it in a rr BS gang would be a good idea.
a.s.o.

3) if i did it right, i will be rewared with isk and stuff
if i did it wrong, i die or someone else brings in a better fleet.

pls get away from the "i send in the biggest tank ever and thats it"
which could be done with npcs who do get aggressive by taking damage but selecting themselfes who has to pay for it first. More like our sleeper friends :)

And a nice idea would be to send in a diplomat to negotiate a deal with the npcs about not attacking them, but get a "mission" from them instead against some other npc OR player alliance in a resonable way/distance. Addionally the KI can decide to entreate the player and fire on him after the job is done, as normal pirates may or may not do.

Conclusion, more randomness makes the game interessting instead of brainless repeating the same steps day by day in empire missions. Maybe thats the reason why i like passive income and pvp so much.

PVP is always different, you do not know all, you don't know whats waiting behind the gate(ok maybe, but whats behind the next? ) and you never knows whos coming for a visit. That makes 0.0 interessting.


Valanan
Caldari
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.08 11:48:00 - [1804]
 

Originally by: Vadinho
Originally by: Zahorite
Table for 300,000 subscribers soon to be 100,000 please.
Right sir. You have your choice of two seating areas. The tables next to the kitchen are free and can support several hundred guests who may never talk to or even see one another as they eat. We also have seating much further from the kitchen, and those tables can only support one or two people, are much more expensive, and everyone has to fight over the same basket of bread and glass of water.

Which will your party prefer?


This is amazing.

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2009.11.08 11:50:00 - [1805]
 

Quote:

Point no 2. doesn't even make that much sense as that's how it's happening in most big space holding alliances - you have industry core which handle all the poses and reactions, who provide ship replacements to everyone else who's there for the protection of the alliance. If you want to change the balance so it's not 95% pvp members in alliance you'd have to change the whole industry side of the game, so that 10-20 people can't provide for most of the alliance.



Totally true.

In EvE every alt can toss out inhumane volumes of stuff, even T2.

Moreover, in Market Discussion the "credo" is that to earn more you must produce insane volumes at extra-reduced thin margins.
This means the markets are always flooded with enormous amounts of stuff, well above the demand.


Quote:

Now to get point 1 done what you'd need to do is make unupgraded 0.0 at least as profitable as lvl 4 missions with treusec being equivalent of agent quality



What CCP got it right in 2003 or so:

To make people fight for something, the something must

- exist (!)

- be seen as the El Dorado

- be limited and confined, in order to entice people to fight over it

- somehow cater to PvPers. They eventually attract industry (alts) to fill their needs.




The intended changes:

- homogenize moons revenue and put "standard" spawns

- are seen as crappy

- are spread all over, and their cost to conquer them is vastly above the benefit to get a new system.

- punts PvPers in the nuts. Being forced to farm, they will need less off industry, not more.


Basically, Dominion is a dramatic failure since the planning phase.





Finally, as software developer for a living:

I am embarassed to play a game where their own programmers are *scared* to touch their own product code.

Just refactor it like everyone else. I had to refactor 10 man years C++ applications (taking years myself and my team) because they were what gave us the food.
CCP should also think that their old spaghetti code gives them food.

What hopes can we have of improvement when the fundamental parts are of course the eldest ones, and are flagged as "untouchable"?

Silk75
Bad Kitty Inc.
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:02:00 - [1806]
 

Posting because we're still waiting on the answer to this:

YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.

FireFoxx80
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:06:00 - [1807]
 

Not posted here in months (see my profile), but this DevBlog has compelled me to put that self-imposed ban aside.

I seriously hope that this is the start of some CCP based roadmap that ends in 0.0 alliances becoming empires in their own right (with the risks, rewards, and responsibilities that this brings). There have been some excellent ideas on both sides of the fence, from CCP and its customers, that appear to have fallen by the wayside. What happened to planetary sov, an idea out of the Ideas forum that seemed to have some genuine support from CCP (issuing concept art); or is this something that's now been consigned to part of the DUST514 project? How does CCP hope to thread it's current direction of 0.0 into the thread of DUST514?

CCP wanted to get away from grinding, wanted to get away from large AFK empires, and wanted to get people out to 0.0; but at the moment I only see two of those aims being achieved. I've not seen anything announced that would actually want to keep me in 0.0 once the patch hits; I might as well drop back to empire for a few months, run a cookie cutter Raven setup through some level 4's each night until I can fly a carrier; then join the hundreds of other pilots playing CapShip Online.

Nordic Warrior
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:06:00 - [1808]
 

Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha

What CCP got it right in 2003 or so:

To make people fight for something, the something must

- exist (!)

- be seen as the El Dorado

- be limited and confined, in order to entice people to fight over it

- somehow cater to PvPers. They eventually attract industry (alts) to fill their needs.



This.

In the past R64's, high truesec etc was the biggest incentives in 0.0 for major conflicts. Major conflicts bring "reason" to play EVE, having a goal thats larger than individual or corp self-interrests is what makes 0.0 interresting. If all riches in 0.0 are transferred from alliance owned values (moons, territory) to players (ratting, belts, CAs), there will be no big goal to fight over.

Atleast make upgrades transferrable if sov is lost in a fully upgraded system, the new owner wins the prize and keeps the lvl5 upgrades. That'll make a good reason to fight (as long as it just doesnt mean you win a big new upkeep bill). Oh and tie the upgrades to an isk investment rather than # of days holding sov (that way the prize has a big value to fight over).

Hypan
Amarr
Imperial Shipment
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:10:00 - [1809]
 

they could add a race specific infra hub for agents. not based in a outpost, in the actual structure interface
so not only adding agents lv1-5 but also giving people a chance to restore there faction standinsg with what ever race they have ruined while bearing it up running lvl 4's.

that adds 1 hard reason for a lvl 4 bear to leave empire and go to 0.0, they might even like 0.0 while improving there faction standings and stay..

intise people to 0.0 dont put them off befoe you even put this terrbad system in place

Tiger Kior
Minmatar
Pator Tech School
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:21:00 - [1810]
 

Edited by: Tiger Kior on 08/11/2009 12:22:08
We could do with the infrastructure hub being reduced in m3 to something reasonable so it at least fits in a JF (i.e: 200k m3).

Salsbury
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:25:00 - [1811]
 

Originally by: gambrinous
Originally by: Anahid Brutus
First off, you need objectives that people want to fight over.


The more I think about it, the less I think this is true. Just set someone red, your ally grunts will already change mindset and start the hate.

If you need some more motivation, throw in some sound logical reasoning to why the enemy should be shot to ****. e.g.

FC: they have a period in their ally name!
Troop: A what? MOTHER OF GOD
Troop: those ****ers
Troop: cheating ***got ****ers, I will not rest until they blow up
Troop: a period killed my alt THEY ALL MUST DIE!!!!
TROOP: WHAT? X? OK



HAHAHAHAHAH! Brilliant, Gambrinous! Thanks for the laugh. Laughing

It occurs to me that perhaps we've been diagnosing this thing wrong so far. We've covered all the things that fail to draw people to 0.0, and talked about LVL 4 missions to death. But we've forgotten about the ass-holes...

From many of the posts just in this thread, and certainly, through general experience living in 0.0, I think many of us can safely agree that there are an abundance of ass-holes in 0.0, and perhaps THAT is what keeps so many people in Empire space, where the ass-hattery is kept to a dull-roar, compared to 0.0 space.

And here's the brilliance of CCP's plan! All these new changes have prompted a bunch of these same folks to loudly proclaim that they're going to move back to Empire, start grinding LVL 4's, start ganking more people in Empire, etc.

Voila! More people move out to 0.0 space, to avoid the ass-holes swarming back to Empire! Simple, yet elegant... Very Happy

(Warning for the humor-impared: This may be slightly trollish. Don't take it personally.)

Bobby Atlas
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:27:00 - [1812]
 

Edited by: Bobby Atlas on 08/11/2009 12:27:44
Originally by: Pointfive
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.


As CCP Chronitus pointed out, the amount of reward to offset a small amount of risk is allot but I also think that is a matter of perception, in either case it is not in of itself the argument being made. The actual argument being made by allot of people is the fact that 0.0 is less profitable than running LVL4 missions in empire and these upgrades in dominion do little if anything to change that situation.

I personally have been playing eve for some 6 years now and I remember when I first came to 0.0 it was a niche idea that you came out here to make money, however that is something that quickly evaporated and has been the consensus for a long time that you do not come out to 0.0 to make money. This should not be the case, 0.0 should not be unprofitable or certainly not less profitable than empire - please do not counter about pvp risks etc.. as we all accept those risks and costs but that is not what we are talking about.

The simple point is that 0.0 life is less profitable than LVL4 missions when in reality it should at very least be equal to or greater than.

Allot of this boils down to lazy development work, I remember 2-3 years ago when the concept of touching the POS code or physics engine was a nightmare to CCP, you said it wouldn't happen and were forward that it was a monumental challenge. This is the very same situation we see at the moment regarding making true sec values dynamic, belt numbers, the npc spawn density/value within and asteroid types/density, all dynamic. This is something CCP needs to tackle head on, the proposed system we have in front of us now is the most indirect method possible of actually fixing the economic inadequacies of 0.0 and it is frankly very lazy way.

I personally have never run a wormhole, never run an anomaly and I know for a fact I am not the only person, there is a large player base that is just not interested in it - we rather fight NPC's in belts in a far more straight forward fashion. So please, get off your collective behindes and rethink the implementation of dominion and actually addressing the economic issues and more importantly the short comings of the code base.

Jen Ravenlock
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:35:00 - [1813]
 

Edited by: Jen Ravenlock on 08/11/2009 12:47:40
Why not forgo this idea that PVP pilots suddenly want to grind endlessly, and take the less risky road of incremental changes.

Here, off the top of my head:

Distortion bunker:

mass: 700,000m3
online time: 10 hours
defense: 10 million HP
role: when onlined disables system cyno jammers

There you go, a small change that improves what you currently have. Enemy moves this thing in via freighter under heavy cover into hostile territory and attempts to hold it long enough to drop the jammer and drop caps.

wealther
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:45:00 - [1814]
 

Originally by: CCP Soundwave

We cannot currently put level four agents into 0.0 stations owned by players. I completely agree that it would be a very good solution, as they are one of the few non-finite resources, but it's simply not possible at present. I can promie you that it is high on the list of stuff many of us would love to see, though.


Then put them in space, near beacons, like COSMOS agents.

c0rn1
Body Count Inc.
Mercenary Coalition
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:49:00 - [1815]
 

Edited by: c0rn1 on 08/11/2009 12:50:44
Before dominion the ISK sink went like this:
Ratting/missioneering/moon goo => buy ships & equipment or POSs and fuel for 0.0 => ships/POSs get blown up. Fun to be had in the players hand.
After Dominion it will be:
Ratting/Missioneering => pay upkeep costs for your systems => little to no money left to make fireworks => ppl move to empire because it's more profitable than 0.0 => 0.0 players will quit due to endgame content leaving the game.

0.0 used and should be the top edge of money making. Even in games like WoW the endgame content is hard (you need to gather a good amount of disciplined people to go for a raid successfully) but the rewards are high. In Eve the highest rewards will be in empire. LvL 4 missions / t2&t3 invention (and bpo) / market controlling are the top tier moneymakers. 0.0 will be completely useless to support the efforts of an alliance.

There's a reason people did not want to go from empire over to 0.0 before since empire was as profitable as 0.0 was. Why should people go now when it is even less profitable?
Most people supporting the current dominion state forget the fact that 0.0 gets nerfed to hell an back. Why?

=> No safe sov anymore to build your supercapital ships
=> Moon goo will be cut down in profit by 70-80%
=> Sov holding gets expensive
=> Deep space will be break-even at best
=> Supporting yourself will turn away from passive income to active grind with little profit (Some people just don't have the time to grind 40h a month to just play a GAME)
=> CCP said systems will be able to cover 100-150 people. The actual changes will cover 10-20 people at best making money


Let's say a system will provide enough profitable activities. The profit in eve-o was based on scarcity in 0.0. Not everybody had access to the goods 0.0 provided.
With additional complexes, mining grounds provided the prices for those goods will plummet in empire because everyone has the need to pay for his sovereignity and HAS to sell the goods for whatever price is half-arsed reasonable. Which makes it even harder to keep it. If CCP really wants people to pay for sov then they have to seriously increase the given ISK beforehand. There's basically only 1 way to do it and that would be increasing the bounty prices in 0.0 for rats by 100-300%. Everything else. roids, plexes, t2 invention materials will all plummet if you increase the supply significantly.

A last question to ask the devs from my side so I can decide if I move to empire or quit the game:

Due to the increased risk and logistics and additional financial (in Dominion) effort required, will 0.0 be more - not the same as - profitable (in raw isk/time/effort) than highsec L4 mission running?

[ ] yes
[ ] no

cheers

c0rn1

Jomanda
Useful Implements Inc
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:51:00 - [1816]
 

Since CCP hasn't spoken in over 10 pages, I very much doubt my questions will be read, let alone answered, but hey, it wont be the first pointless thing for me to do, nor the last...

1. Since JB's are vital for alliances and going to be very expensive to setup, has there been any thought to charging travelers for the use of the JB? Not much, but either a fixed fee, or a fee based on mass and jumprange or something similar. This would generate income for the alliance from the people that actually use the JB upgrade. (And no pop up warnings either, when you enter the password you agree to pay the fee).

2. How long will we have to wait for treaties? Will it be the summer patch of 2010 or will it be one of the Diminion 1.x patches? Treaties will at least offer alliances to deflect some of the extra costs to other alliances/corps(/individuals?). And therefore should be part of the planning for the alliances' sovereign space and their timeline.

3. What will be done to encourage refining in outposts and/or conquerable stations? Most of the ore mined in 0.0 is being compressed and shipped to empire to be refined there, against 0% tax and 0% loss. Alliance refineries cannot realistically compete with NPC stations in empire, without setting the tax pointlessly low (and in case of outposts, investing heavily in refining equipment). Evading refining taxes by compressing ore and jumping it to empire is too easy and too cheap.

In fact there is no incentive for alliances to install Ore Prospecting Array upgrades, since it cannot be properly taxed by corporations (alliances), like NPC bounties can.

Ordais
Posted - 2009.11.08 12:57:00 - [1817]
 

i'm terribly dissapointed, i expected much more. I see no reason to switch from lvl4 missions to 0.0 for money-making to get me my pvp-ships, as none of these upgrades will help with that. I soo looked forward to that, i really did.

I used to live in 0.0 and didn't set foot in empire for 1,5 years (playing every day), but that was ages ago. Right now there is just no reason to, except going to fleets/pvp. I really hoped you wanted to change that.


Pohbis
Neo T.E.C.H.
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:01:00 - [1818]
 

CCP.

Get your Economist to run the numbers and show you a nice chart on what the effects of people running all these anomalies, are going to be on prices.

If he doesn't know where to start, tell him to look at the "butterfly effect" (see what I did there?) the drone regions had on mineral prices. That should be a good starting point.

Then please come back here and tell us how these anomalies, that you have to scan down, will support 10-15 people and equate to LVL 4 agents in Empire... with a straight face mind you.

Slobodanka
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:15:00 - [1819]
 

Empire dwellers posting in this thread keep forgetting that while an agent is really good scalable ISK source for alliance members (and I'm all for moving from alliance moon goo to individual 0.0 resident ISK making, within reason of course), it also presents a very obvious choke point (just like any system upgrade that requires you to risk ships to run it). I know it is hard for you to comprehend, but recent ship changes have made 23/7 perma-cloak camping a child play. Ships with sufficient DPS to kill PvE fitted ships fast, able to fit cov ops cloak are impossible to counter. Unless of course you plan to devote your time to actually baiting and killing said cloaker, thus reducing your ISK income significantly (ratters and miners have to switch for pvp ships and wait and wait if cloaker is stupid enough to take the bait; most of them aren't).

Belt rats are (currently) the only type of PvE that are at least a bit dispersed within a system. Anomalies stick out like sore thumb (and scanning them is piece of cake if you have probe launcher fitted), plexes are even more rare and if you see people in local and signature in there, all you have to do is spend 1 min scanning and then block that plex with your cloaker).
I don't understand why belt rats have not been buffed yet... missions got LPs which have now become better part of ISK income for quite some mission runners. There are threads on this forums devoted only to maximizing LP/hour ratio. Belt rats got nothing.
At this point I should probably mention that faction loot was nerfed in empire lvl4 mission, but then again what was faction loot doing in empire mission in the first place?

The simple fact is that in today's system every major 0.0 space holder has few cloakers in their main systems 23/7. 0.0 individuals are already forced to disperse and try to rotate their "NPC hunting grounds" as much as possible to avoid drawing that big fat "pirate/police ships killed in last hour" spot on the map, attracting even more cloakers/pirates/roaming gangs. So while most of 0.0 seems wasteland, the reasons for being so are:
1. A lot of systems really suck. They have few belts (not enough to keep one drake running them in timely fashion), their true sec is crappy, and occasional spawn of an anomaly/mini site/DED does not make up for it being ****e.
2. Some systems would provide satisfactory (but still below empire lvl4) income, but big guys usually hold better systems to farm 23/7 and these "acceptable" systems are rotated between more nomadicaly inclined 0.0 dwellers.

When dominion hits:
1. the top systems (best ore, rats, true sec, belt #, ...) will still be held by the big guys (whether we'll see their dot on map is not relevant; if you're not blue and you go in there, you die or get chased out). Do not even try to dream of being able to live in 40 belt, -1.0 ark/bis heaven because noone will. Big guys will hold them and their enemies will grief them.
2. The really ****ty systems will still be empty. They have been vacant for many years now, and this patch does not give any reason this will change. Some might try ti make a living in them, but they will leave because their big-guy neighbor will raid them too often (0.0 carebears need fun too) or they will not be able to pay for their living costs.
3. The acceptable systems will still be there, no sov in there (because you don't gain anything from it). Big guys will keep them under their control through out-of-game mechanics (I'm still shocked CCP seems to totally ignore that players have the ability to communicate and organize around their hardcoded "behavior patterns" they intended) and any red/neut thinking of using them will be killed/chased away. People will use them to make money from time to time, but most will remain the same.
4. Those colored spots on sov maps will shrink (hooray for CCP!!!)

wealther
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:20:00 - [1820]
 

So, ask for "Enforced Decloaker" or "Cloak Prohibitor" strategic upgrade then

Slobodanka
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:27:00 - [1821]
 

Originally by: wealther
So, ask for "Enforced Decloaker" or "Cloak Prohibitor" strategic upgrade then


I know that you think this would be a really simple and straightforward solution, but apart from "that code is untouchable" and "we are looking into that" we haven't had a constructive response from CCP _in_years_ (yes, I was not the first one to point this out as a problem, and you sir are not the first one to suggest making "uncloaking" thingy ingame).

Instead of fixing symptoms of several (seemingly unrelated) problems, couldn't we just at least start to think about how to get rid of the problem? You know... cutting away your own foot because you have fungus is not really the way to go, much better to start with removing fungus only and then prevent it from ever developing again.
Don't kill cloaking tactics, make a reasonable counter for them. Every other ewar in eve has counter to it (some better than others), but cloaking is "I win" button.

And remember it's a game, not a second job (for most people, 0.0 alliance leaders and some empire carebears excluded).

RuleoftheBone
Minmatar
Black Viper Nomads
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:28:00 - [1822]
 

I really don't care what happens except:

**** off and die with the sentry guns in 0.0 idea.

and....

**** off and die with stupid decloaking devices and magical ship boosting.

Silly **** spackers Rolling Eyes

wealther
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:32:00 - [1823]
 

I was joking.
The problem of cloak, imo, should be addressed throught special probing cores with 10-15 minutes scan cycle, so the cloakers can be caught only then AFK.

RuleoftheBone
Minmatar
Black Viper Nomads
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:39:00 - [1824]
 

Originally by: wealther
I was joking.
The problem of cloak, imo, should be addressed throught special probing cores with 10-15 minutes scan cycle, so the cloakers can be caught only then AFK.


Spacker.

Go away.

Please return to large alliance cringing please.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:42:00 - [1825]
 

Originally by: wealther
I was joking.
The problem of cloak, imo, should be addressed throught special probing cores with 10-15 minutes scan cycle, so the cloakers can be caught only then AFK.

This, flying cloaking ships is fine, but afk cloaking should be addressed.

Bobby Atlas
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:43:00 - [1826]
 

Edited by: Bobby Atlas on 08/11/2009 13:44:03
Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: wealther
I was joking.
The problem of cloak, imo, should be addressed throught special probing cores with 10-15 minutes scan cycle, so the cloakers can be caught only then AFK.

This, flying cloaking ships is fine, but afk cloaking should be addressed.


Go **** up another thread about cloaking, stay on topic please.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:58:00 - [1827]
 

Originally by: Bobby Atlas
Edited by: Bobby Atlas on 08/11/2009 13:44:03
Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: wealther
I was joking.
The problem of cloak, imo, should be addressed throught special probing cores with 10-15 minutes scan cycle, so the cloakers can be caught only then AFK.

This, flying cloaking ships is fine, but afk cloaking should be addressed.


Go **** up another thread about cloaking, stay on topic please.

Actually, considering they want isk to be made by ratting (doesnt really matter if it is in belts or anomalies, you still dont need probe launcher to find them), it is relevant. But to make you feel warm and fuzzy:

YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.

Gregor Lavode
Posted - 2009.11.08 13:58:00 - [1828]
 

you should be giving us more reasons to fight not less

you should be giving a reason to keep our blue lists short,not cause a us(current 0.0 residents) vs. them(empire corps/alliances who **** themselves looking at a 0.0 gate but wanna hold space there and finally whined enough that ccp heard) cause short of concord being in o.o.empire will lose.Twisted Evil

you haven't said where money taken will go how bout any system holding sov gains a bounty for taking it equal to 75% of the costs put into the system
makes for nice juicy targets all over the mapShocked

we offset costs of towers by ice mining and such you havent addressed corp/alliance ops to help reduce fuel costs for towers into your costs ie:there needs to be things corp/alliances should be able to do other then grinding isk to pay the bills tieing all this to pure isk cost isn't realistic by any means there should be a goods exchange possible as well(say turning in 40 blocks of racial ice lowers the bill by .01%)could do it with mining stuff and could take alot of ore out of the players hands raising mineral prices and doing good things to the eve markets

you talk about a individuals ability to make isk but seem to be completly blank on how corps/alliances will be able to raise funds to compete against each other ship reimbursements/cap replacement/supercap building are all part of todays enviroment and need to be addressed turning the nul sec expierience into one where a player feels like a slave is one that will soon die out

i feel like i am being double billed i pay rl money to play a game i enjoy and now i am gonna have to grind isk to help pay a sov tax a ratting tax a exploration tax and a tax for sovShocked

you wanna address the sprawl of large alliances but have not adressed the cause and that is bad space when 1 system cant even generate enough spawns to satisfy 1 pilot what are alliances to do but expand and take more space till everyone has enough space to carebear and cover new ship/skillbook/module cost.Hate to say it but you,CCP are resposible for alliance sprawl and the amount of territory we need in order to satisfy the nul sec player base.

In summary;
give us more reasons to fight each other not less.

we all ready live a life of risk all we ask is for a reasonable reward.

no matter what you wanna charge until you fix true sec,rats and exploration till it is inline or better then empire mission running you wont see a change to alliance sprawl our name might not be on the map but we will be there defending as if it was.

giving us no reason to fight each other,after all who wants to add to there bills,will end 0.0 conflict and that will spell the end of eve.nul sec drives the economy which keeps people mining building inventing if the fights over no matter how cheap stuff becomes no one will want it.

you want people moving into 0.0 fine you have to make it worth fighting over which means there has to be benefits to 0.0 you cant get in empire.

as of this time politics drives the fights in 0.0 not territory change that and people will tear into 0.0 like never before.

Ceirah
SniggWaffe
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:14:00 - [1829]
 

Originally by: Gregor Lavode
you should be giving us more reasons to fight not less

you should be giving a reason to keep our blue lists short,not cause a us(current 0.0 residents) vs. them(empire corps/alliances who **** themselves looking at a 0.0 gate but wanna hold space there and finally whined enough that ccp heard) cause short of concord being in o.o.empire will lose.Twisted Evil

you haven't said where money taken will go how bout any system holding sov gains a bounty for taking it equal to 75% of the costs put into the system
makes for nice juicy targets all over the mapShocked

we offset costs of towers by ice mining and such you havent addressed corp/alliance ops to help reduce fuel costs for towers into your costs ie:there needs to be things corp/alliances should be able to do other then grinding isk to pay the bills tieing all this to pure isk cost isn't realistic by any means there should be a goods exchange possible as well(say turning in 40 blocks of racial ice lowers the bill by .01%)could do it with mining stuff and could take alot of ore out of the players hands raising mineral prices and doing good things to the eve markets

you talk about a individuals ability to make isk but seem to be completly blank on how corps/alliances will be able to raise funds to compete against each other ship reimbursements/cap replacement/supercap building are all part of todays enviroment and need to be addressed turning the nul sec expierience into one where a player feels like a slave is one that will soon die out

i feel like i am being double billed i pay rl money to play a game i enjoy and now i am gonna have to grind isk to help pay a sov tax a ratting tax a exploration tax and a tax for sovShocked

you wanna address the sprawl of large alliances but have not adressed the cause and that is bad space when 1 system cant even generate enough spawns to satisfy 1 pilot what are alliances to do but expand and take more space till everyone has enough space to carebear and cover new ship/skillbook/module cost.Hate to say it but you,CCP are resposible for alliance sprawl and the amount of territory we need in order to satisfy the nul sec player base.

In summary;
give us more reasons to fight each other not less.

we all ready live a life of risk all we ask is for a reasonable reward.

no matter what you wanna charge until you fix true sec,rats and exploration till it is inline or better then empire mission running you wont see a change to alliance sprawl our name might not be on the map but we will be there defending as if it was.

giving us no reason to fight each other,after all who wants to add to there bills,will end 0.0 conflict and that will spell the end of eve.nul sec drives the economy which keeps people mining building inventing if the fights over no matter how cheap stuff becomes no one will want it.

you want people moving into 0.0 fine you have to make it worth fighting over which means there has to be benefits to 0.0 you cant get in empire.

as of this time politics drives the fights in 0.0 not territory change that and people will tear into 0.0 like never before.


True that, if all systems were -1.0 in region we might fit into 1 region Razz

Hertford
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:16:00 - [1830]
 

I get the distinct impression that at no point during CCPs design process did anyone sit down and write a proper Requirements Specification. A document that, literally, specifies the requirements. For example, it might have contained the following:

"Dominion shall encourage players who do not live in 0.0 to consider moving to 0.0"

"Dominion shall encourage alliances to hold less space"

"Dominion shall discourage alliance dependency on R64 moons"

"Dominion shall rebalance all R64s to be of roughly equal value"

"Dominion shall provide means for individual players and alliances to generate wealth that is not a second job"

And so on. Simple statements and goals, expressed clearly and concisely. Then you start the actual design process, and while throwing around wonderful ideas there's this Requirements Specification that acts as a sanity check. Because out of those five examples above, you managed to stick to two of them so far and failed on the other three.


Pages: first : previous : ... 57 58 59 60 [61] 62 63 64 65 ... : 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