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 : ... 70 71 72 73 [74] 75 76 77 78 ... : last (119)

Author Topic

JiMeiNi
Posted - 2009.11.09 03:54:00 - [2191]
 

Quote:
CCP Chronotis


Quote:
Sovereignty Index The sovereignty index is one you should all be familiar with which is identical to the current sovereignty level system you have now and is based on days you have held sovereignty for according to the following scheme Lvl 1 = sov held for 7 days Lvl 2 = sov held for 21 days Lvl 3 = sov held for 35 days Lvl 4 = sov held for 65 days Lvl 5 = sov held for 100 days The levels at which each strategic upgrade is unlocked is the same as the current sovereignty level limited structures.


Does this mean all 0.0 is RESET to NO sov ? Or does existing Sov holders get upgraded to LVL5 as we ALREADY own the space ? surely if its a complete reset we should be getting some sort of compensation ? and 99% of 0.0 currently has been held for more than 100days which CCP should spawn all the modules per system and upgrades... Or maybe while your at it ...

Why dont you RESET every player to 0 SP ???

Since your screwing everybody over... and for what to get more people into 0.0 because your servers cant handle the empire load - oh no wait! You want everybody get to closer to "end game" ummmm fat chance in hell you will be doing that since your nerfing 0.0 oh my! I'll rather go run lvl4's in empire, because well i'll make more isk than anything in 0.0 with upgraded systems.

Funny how BOB gets booted from Delve "Delve gets FIXED from true sec & random bugs"
Then CCP decides "Selenne" that oh wait lets reset Sov into something new and screw over 0.0 so Tinfoil hats can take back some space since u wont have Sov4 protecting 0.0 entry systems -

CCP you fail so bad!

Laendra
Universalis Imperium
Posted - 2009.11.09 03:54:00 - [2192]
 

Do we have the ability to set an alliance tax on bounties paid in our sovereign systems?

Hratli Smirks
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.09 03:59:00 - [2193]
 

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.




This is a really good question, and I bet CCP really doesn't want to answer it

Sebastian GZ
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:05:00 - [2194]
 

Your charges will only make 0.0 harder for small corps and alliances. Currently,CVA allows anyone to use it space (except hostiles) but if suddenly we must pay billions to have SOV in exchange for the ability to upgrade so that we can pay the outrageous amounts of isk that you are requiring then we will have to exclude non alliance members because we cant have them taking the isk as we will need it to pay for tax.
Who came up with this idea (Nancy Pelosi and company)

CCP epic fail.

WhiteSavage
Gallente
Ever Flow
Systematic-Chaos
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:10:00 - [2195]
 

Quote:
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.


please ccp if you would

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:11:00 - [2196]
 

Originally by: JiMeiNi
Does this mean all 0.0 is RESET to NO sov ? (rant continues)


CCP has already answered this. Sov will carry over - if you have sov 2 now, you'll have sov 2 afterwards. Not sure how levels 4-5 work, but since nothing requires them(except the crazy outpost upgrade nobody uses because it costs a hundred billion isk), it shouldn't matter too much if you have sov 3 or sov 5. CCP deserves to be yelled at for a few things here, but this isn't one of them.

Prognosys
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:12:00 - [2197]
 

Originally by: Hratli Smirks
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.




:allears:

Capitan Tyler
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:18:00 - [2198]
 

ccp fail .

the patch would be 1/4 cost.

Frezinviper
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:21:00 - [2199]
 

Jumpbridges and CynoJamers should cost at least what was innitally suggusted 12.5 and 25 million isk per day... specially if you are lowering the SOV and HUB units to 1 and 5 million isk per day!

I suggust 20 per JB and 50 per Cyno Jammer per day that will make things interesting! Also Perhaps give the JB/CYNOJAMMERS a boost in HP as well to makup for the cost?

Sethur Blackcoat
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:24:00 - [2200]
 

welp, in a few hours people are going to start trundling into the CCP offices again, let's hope when I get up then we'll finally have a decent answer to the little overlooked question of 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.

Fitz VonHeise
Eye Bee Em
Stellar Defense Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:24:00 - [2201]
 

All I can say is... I'm glad I moved into a worm hole.

I seriously don't see this accomplishing what CCP wants.
People in 0.0 mostly play to kill stuff... not to mine or to run plexs. The leadership gets their isk t obuy ships from moon mining. There is no mechanic given in this that allows the directors and CEO's to make isk as they would from moon mining.

I see this as a way to slowly take away the advantages larger Alliances have had to make isk but it will take quite a while for all the moon mins to get sold off.

And I think you will see many of the Alliances loosing a lot of people as they quite or move on to other places that allow them to kill stuff without having to be an industrial/ratting person for 3/4's of there play time.

Future Mutant
Republic Military School
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:27:00 - [2202]
 

Originally by: Hratli Smirks
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.




This is a really good question, and I bet CCP really doesn't want to answer it


This question is ******ed and heres why-
How much can a miner in god mode make in highsec? maybe 10 mill- how much can the same miner make in null? 60 mill+

Now can any of you goons tell me which number is higher- 10 mill or 60 mill?

Do the math for other activities and null always wins- ratting- null makes more, plex sites- null makes more, missions- null makes more

Is there any activity done in null that makes less then hisec?

No because pretending to be a pirate makes the same amount no matter where you do it.

Aralis
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:31:00 - [2203]
 

Originally by: Future Mutant
Originally by: Hratli Smirks
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.




This is a really good question, and I bet CCP really doesn't want to answer it


This question is ******ed and heres why-
How much can a miner in god mode make in highsec? maybe 10 mill- how much can the same miner make in null? 60 mill+

Now can any of you goons tell me which number is higher- 10 mill or 60 mill?

Do the math for other activities and null always wins- ratting- null makes more, plex sites- null makes more, missions- null makes more

Is there any activity done in null that makes less then hisec?

No because pretending to be a pirate makes the same amount no matter where you do it.


How can you have the nerve to post when you are so ignorant?

Throughout the vast majority of 0.0 it is NOT more profitable to mine than in high sec.
Yes ratting makes more - but not compared to missions.
FOr most of nullsec - what missions!? Nobody is disputing that faction owned space is a good place to be. Indeed many posters have suggested that's where everyone in 0.0 should run to. For the real claimable 0.0 there are NO missions.

Becka Call
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:32:00 - [2204]
 

Originally by: Future Mutant

This is a really good question, and I bet CCP really doesn't want to answer it


This question is ******ed and heres why-
How much can a miner in god mode make in highsec? maybe 10 mill- how much can the same miner make in null? 60 mill+

Now can any of you goons tell me which number is higher- 10 mill or 60 mill?

Do the math for other activities and null always wins- ratting- null makes more, plex sites- null makes more, missions- null makes more

Is there any activity done in null that makes less then hisec?

No because pretending to be a pirate makes the same amount no matter where you do it.


WTB; Sov space with L4 mission agents.

Ehris Bok
United Kings
Strategic Operations Brigade
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:36:00 - [2205]
 

Edited by: Ehris Bok on 09/11/2009 04:37:22
personaly i dont have a problem with ccp's new pay for sov system.
as was quoted earlier (if correct):
Originally by: CCP Chronotis


So will we look at making upkeep costs less than stated in the blog due to reasonable feedback?

Yes!

- Sovereignty Structures

The role of the Territorial Claim Unit (TCU) changed since the original figures were generated to be only a marker for sovereignty and the last thing to be removed after a system has been taken (details on this are coming soon in Abathur's next blog). This means the cost for the TCU should be reasonable in terms of upkeep and we are looking at 1 mill per day currently for that dot on the map.

The infrastructure hub is both key to strategic defence and as the base of the solar system upgrades. Here we are looking at mirroring a large starbase in equivalent operational cost so 5 million upkeep per day is more reasonable.

- Strategic Upgrades

The key upgrades here we want to force you to make economic decisions over are naturally the jump bridges and cynosural jammer use. The presence of these two has radical effects on the 'landscape' generally.

We are looking at no upkeep cost on either of the construction arrays and cynosural field generators and then maintain significant costs the cynosural jammer and jump bridges.





^^ seeing that made me a happy camper Smile
so with these numbers we end up with.
basic no frills sov = 30mill a month
sov + The infrastructure hub = 180mill
to me that doesnt sound to bad (if i have miss understood plz correct me Wink

however i do think CCP has failed epicly with the system upgrades. anoms are crap & just coz u get more of them per level doesnt make them any less crap lol.
As many have said b4 make them worth more & upgrade the AI.

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.




gambrinous
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:38:00 - [2206]
 

Edited by: gambrinous on 09/11/2009 04:39:02
Originally by: Future Mutant

This question is ******ed and heres why-
How much can a miner in god mode make in highsec? maybe 10 mill- how much can the same miner make in null? 60 mill+

Now can any of you goons tell me which number is higher- 10 mill or 60 mill?

Do the math for other activities and null always wins- ratting- null makes more, plex sites- null makes more, missions- null makes more

Is there any activity done in null that makes less then hisec?

No because pretending to be a pirate makes the same amount no matter where you do it.


Can't speak for mining but:
Ratting - comparable, or less I'd say in my space. Unless I spend 3 hours grooming the belts, but then some num nuts will just come along and "accidentally" destroy that work

Missioning: what? there are no ****ing agents

Plexing: only the really good ones, and these are farmed completely, and even if they weren't, it's not constant, you could plex every night for a week and earn L4 ish for MORE effort, or just do one and get 2 bill

Quesa
D00M.
Northern Coalition.
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:39:00 - [2207]
 

Originally by: Future Mutant
Originally by: Hratli Smirks
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.




This is a really good question, and I bet CCP really doesn't want to answer it


This question is ******ed and heres why-
How much can a miner in god mode make in highsec? maybe 10 mill- how much can the same miner make in null? 60 mill+

Now can any of you goons tell me which number is higher- 10 mill or 60 mill?

Do the math for other activities and null always wins- ratting- null makes more, plex sites- null makes more, missions- null makes more

Is there any activity done in null that makes less then hisec?

No because pretending to be a pirate makes the same amount no matter where you do it.


You just proved you don't know what you are talking about.

And yes, missioning is actually very profitable compared to just about anything in 0.0 and it's not limited in any way unlike missions available to anyone who spends a week grinding standings.

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:42:00 - [2208]
 

Originally by: Quesa
Originally by: Future Mutant
Originally by: Hratli Smirks
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.




This is a really good question, and I bet CCP really doesn't want to answer it


This question is ******ed and heres why-
How much can a miner in god mode make in highsec? maybe 10 mill- how much can the same miner make in null? 60 mill+

Now can any of you goons tell me which number is higher- 10 mill or 60 mill?

Do the math for other activities and null always wins- ratting- null makes more, plex sites- null makes more, missions- null makes more

Is there any activity done in null that makes less then hisec?

No because pretending to be a pirate makes the same amount no matter where you do it.


You just proved you don't know what you are talking about.

And yes, missioning is actually very profitable compared to just about anything in 0.0 and it's not limited in any way unlike missions available to anyone who spends a week grinding standings.


He proved that like 40 pages ago actually.

I see that Jade woke up as I went to bed and spent his day ****ting up the thread with his HIGH SEC HAS MORE RISK nonsense.

I am glad to see CCP is looking into this and will be releasing a statement monday or tuesday. Let's hope it's more effective than stoffer's kicking of the anthill. We still <3 you stoffer but holy **** dont **** on our 0.0 :(

LightZenith
GoonWaffe
SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:44:00 - [2209]
 

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.

pretty sure this can't be quoted enough

cok cola
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2009.11.09 04:49:00 - [2210]
 

Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
Military experts are calling this a Threadnaught.


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.


THIS NEEDS ANSWERING CCP, WERE ALL ASKING, WERE ALL WAITING FOR A RESPONSE.

EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:00:00 - [2211]
 

Originally by: cok cola
Originally by: Kuar Z'thain
Military experts are calling this a Threadnaught.


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.


THIS NEEDS ANSWERING CCP, WERE ALL ASKING, WERE ALL WAITING FOR A RESPONSE.



I think the fact they haven't answer is pretty telling. For some reason they view Level 4's as some sort of hardcap for non moon goo player isk earned per hour and woe is he who suggests some aspects of the game should be reliably more income without counting on a random drop system.

Zahorite
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:05:00 - [2212]
 

There needs to be a direct way for alliances to gain from the new upgrades. Right now most of the upgrades will benefit players (even if they are below lvl 4 high sec mission running) but they won't benefit the alliances actually paying upkeep and putting the upgrades in the systems.

I'm going to suggest that there is an instant bonus paid every time that an anomaly is completed that goes straight to the alliance wallet, or whatever wallet pays the upkeep on that system. This would vary from 1-10 million isk based on the difficulty of the anomaly. Yes this is actually going to net a little bit more than the current upkeep of systems for alliances. Still alliances are going to pull back their borders and this still requires that players do the actual work. Also this would help replace moon mining for the alliance ship replacement programs. If the numbers need tweaked a bit then they can be after they are put in.

Let's say that a group of 5 players can run a top tier anomaly in an hour and net their alliance 10 million isk from it. The other anomalies should tier at about the same amount. And saying that the average players during the day stays at 5 players (the low points and peaks even eachother out) this would net the alliance around 200m isk a day, not including bounties and such since those already go to the corp before Dominion. So assuming this is a cyno jammed system, it's a core fully upgraded system, this pays roughly 165m more than upkeep a day, or enough to replace around 3 fully fit interceptors or 1 fit HAC. I don't think that is a major increase, especially since that extra isk will be used in pvp either defending the system or attacking other alliances.

Also if CCP doesn't want to do this because it will put more isk in the game rather than less you could always change it to something like loyalty points. Then those points can be exchanged for pvp ships and modules in 0.0 space. That might be more work but it would be a great change to 0.0 space. Just allow them to purchase them from a LP store in a station and the ships and modules go to an alliance hanger that they determine and will then be passed out to players. Even if you can't add that in 0.0 space you can put it in high sec and alliances will just have to sell it up there or transport it down.

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:07:00 - [2213]
 

22 days till TOTAL HELL DEATH!!! Cool

Mkiaki
Gallente
Progressive Business Solutions
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:08:00 - [2214]
 

Boy you "endgame" players really know how to spit the proverbial dummy don't you.

Shocked

Ecky X
SniggWaffe
FREE KARTTOON NOW
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:08:00 - [2215]
 

Spam.Applebabe

Stucks alt
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:11:00 - [2216]
 

how much pages have we had without a dev post?

Ryixezu
Amarr
Big Shadows
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:13:00 - [2217]
 

TLDR: moving gains from alliance to individual level must equal to an individual what an alliance gains with moons.

The expansion is trying to fix a two-fold problem with one solution actually. First, two assumptions:

1) 0.0 needs more warfare, skirmishes and conflicts on alliance level, not coalition level.
2) For the random grunt in a spaceholding alliance, living in 0.0 should at least not net him or her less income than living in empire.

If you disagree with one of the points above you might as well stop reading since the rest of the text revolves around those two statements.

Let's recap the situation as of today. We have large powerblocs whose only reasons to fight are moongoo and to a lesser extent "good fights". But let's discuss the moongoo, what does it exactly do for me, as an individual?

- I get reimbursed for losses during larger fleet fights, given certain conditions.
- We do have one or more JB-fairies refilling bridges after we move fleets.
- Titanbridge every now and then. It's still just moving me from A to B.

That's about the only thing me and many others get out of the moongoo. Sure the alliance itself may be rich and I'm not that blue-eyed that I don't think some guys end up with a better deal than me. However, I'm sure the select few are in the positions to have earned it, as should be the case. I suspect that sentence is open for argument by many of you and it may differ between individuals but personally, if someone makes the effort of refueling whatever needs refueling, I say let him get a piece of the cake. So that is what you get as an individual living in 0.0 because of the moongoo. You do get a lot of other things making your life easier as well, like the magical freighter-fairy who magically moves your stuff, but that's on the corporation level and would still be done even if we didn't own any moons.

What the moongoo serves as is a reason for fights on the strategic level. This is important, because this reason needs to be replaced with something else if moons are to play a lesser role. The point here is rather loglcal:

- The game has a huge area without any restrictions for fights (0.0).
- For strategic warfare to occur, there must be a reason to take a part of this area.

Today the reason is, as stated, moons. It is not any of the following: truesec, mining opportunities, exploration sites, profession sites or wormhole entries. I agree all of these are nice perks to regions but I don't think I'm wrong to say that very few large conflicts have occured lately because of alliances wanting better ratting space.

(continues)

Dharh
Gallente
Ace Adventure Corp
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:13:00 - [2218]
 

Originally by: Stucks alt
how much pages have we had without a dev post?
Since they went to sleep maybe? Jesus, they have to sleep sometime. Give it a freakin rest.

Graalum
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:14:00 - [2219]
 

Edited by: Graalum on 09/11/2009 05:19:55
Edited by: Graalum on 09/11/2009 05:19:00
Originally by: Prognosys
Originally by: Hratli Smirks
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.




CCP ANSWER THIS QUIESSTION

Ryixezu
Amarr
Big Shadows
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 05:15:00 - [2220]
 

With that said, moons are not a good reason to use for fights because of reasons stated many times before, not only in this thread. However, any of the areas affected by the system upgrades could potentially be reasons for fights. Potentially meaning here that to be worth fighting for, capturing the resource(s) would involve benefits for either the alliance or yourself and you would be better off with the resource than without it. Today, alliances that own moons are clearly at an advantage versus alliances without moons. Still, the moons as a mechanic aren't working very well anymore and they don't promote the kind of gameplay in 0.0 most of us want.

This is where (2) come into the picture: "for the random grunt in a spaceholding alliance, living in 0.0 should at least not net him or her less wealth than living in empire.". You see, with the moons equaling income on alliance level those two are not really connected as I explained earlier. Moving the incentive to fight over space from alliance level (moons) to individual level (any of the upgrades) is a great idea - the catch is that you are replacing moons (which as I said, gives the alliance a huge advantage versus other alliances) with something on individual level that just doesn't compare.

If you still don't get it; the advantage you get on individual level must equal what you get today on alliance level.

This is why trying to fix the stalemate that is 0.0 and moving incentive to fight to individual level are really two different problems but come Dominion will be connected:

- Making 0.0 a vivid battleground would not necessarily require upgrading space or changing moon minerals; merely changing the mechanic to enter, get started and succeed in alliance warfare would fix this. Then you would get less of a stalemate and more wars going.
- The goal of this expansion was not to make the people living in 0.0 wealthy - that could be fixed just by increasing rat bounties.

Intertwining these two are the reasons people argue about level 4-missions since they act as a baseline. Many of the people already living in 0.0 use these as a solid source of ISK and have done so for a long time now. It's the current state of the game: you don't move to 0.0 as an individual to become rich, as simple as that. Sure the discussions about the income from mission running has gone on for a while but it has until now been separated from the discussions about a stale 0.0. This expansion is about to change that, thus it's no surprise that the two become connected.

So, with reasons for owning space on the individual level, you must give us nonames in spaceholding alliances personal reasons to fight. Most of us would be reluctant to fight if the resources we conquer equals what we already have on our alts. However, give us good reasons to fight for space and we would gladly sacrifice countless of ships for the cause.


Pages: first : previous : ... 70 71 72 73 [74] 75 76 77 78 ... : 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