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 : ... 78 79 80 81 [82] 83 84 85 86 ... : last (119)

Author Topic

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:18:00 - [2431]
 

Originally by: Niamota Olin
I've been down in 0.0 for nearly a year, I cant stand ratting or mining there boring as hell. If I have a bad month I go to empire for my isk as its low risk. I think CCP believe that we enjoy having to farm isk or something to pvp....

No wonder you found it boring, it seems you didn't do any exploration.

Hey, did you know dominion will be a huge exploration boost?

Biggi Raeubertochter
Minmatar
Apina.
United Pod Service
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:22:00 - [2432]
 

Edited by: Biggi Raeubertochter on 09/11/2009 15:26:35

This:

Getting a bill from concord for your own 0.0 space that you conquered and they do nothing to defend makes no sense and does not fit the eve sandbox player driven economy. You want to replace pos with FLAGs? Fine... make them burn FUEL then, not send a chunk of your isk to the bit bucket. You want to make cyno jammers more costly? Fine, then make them consume FUEL. Say 1 stront and 10 heavy water an hour. Jump bridges? They already require a large pos to host them, and eat massive amounts of ozone. Why do you feel they need to cost any more than they do now?

its from another forum section. My personal opinion is, that a chunk of the upkeep costs should be from structures consuming fuel, and the other part being an isk sink. But it being a 100% isk sink without any possibility to produce at least some of the stuff needed for the upkeep by yourself, is bad i think.

Maybe reduce the current initial isk upkeep costs by 50%, then implement a discount on the upkeep, that comes with inreased activity in the solar system, and also add some reasonable fuel consumption to the structures.

Sethur Blackcoat
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:23:00 - [2433]
 

look at that, past 3 p.m. in Iceland and still no answer, hmm

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.

Astal Atlar
Caldari
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:23:00 - [2434]
 

Edited by: Astal Atlar on 09/11/2009 15:27:22
Edited by: Astal Atlar on 09/11/2009 15:26:31
Quote:
All the 0.0 alliances are ****ing and moaning because they've got huge amounts of space, in some cases 5 or 6 regions. This is going to force even the largest of alliances to downsize their claims to space and focus on one region.


we do not moan,you mister pirate may stay in your low sec and have fun killing noobs,we just ask why things are being changed without further thinking.

We will abandon systems this is sure,but why and how we will put small aliances there using treaties who will take a 10 belt system at best without high end ores,and low true status.upgrade it pay for it 1 bil montly and let say 1 bil to us as his defenders. Let me tell you noone.

Why would we stay quiet,when instead of pvp-ing i am forced to grind isk to keep upgrades active and ect. Moongold is removed for good noone in the right mind argue for this,but they just cut the 0.0 and make it uselless,at best,estimations show that if you have made 70 bil with your r64 at month now you will make 7 bil and the same time,ccp are making us pay 2 bil per system,jsut because we are strong and we have conquered it wtf,where is the logic.
And this speaking for reward/risk is useless,ratting in 0.0 if you are not extremly lucky is 30-40 mil at best with highend rats,normaly it is arround 20 mil per hour,as not all bets have rats and you always have this **** cruizer and bc spawns,mining is a bit more profitable let say trained max bonused hulk is 60 mil per hour,but if you mine arkonor,let me tell you how fast arkonor disaper,right after it respawn,and gravimetric sites are uterly useless.

What ****ed me off,is when we people in o.o try to make a point all empire noobs and wannabe pvpers aka pirates start to yell were a moaning because we want our goodies,but if we have so much good things come and get them from us don't stay safe or killing noobs blobing single targets in low sec.
I want to fly my t2 maxed out hacs ect,not to use t2 fited bc because they are cheaper and not forcing me to grind like mad. You know how much cost a reasonable fit? a close range rr geddon is well arround 200 mil,but with the changes ccp want to impliment they will make it even harder for making money in o.o. Yes i don't have crap ton of alts ect I love to play the game for fun to log to go kill **** and log off, and make some isk from time to time for shiney ships,paying the game with isk is not priorty.So ccp i hope you turn attention over this thread seriously.

Kepakh
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:24:00 - [2435]
 

Originally by: Sethur Blackcoat
look at that, past 3 p.m. in Iceland and still no answer, hmm

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.

Search pages 25-60, it is burried somewhere there.

propotkin's alt
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:28:00 - [2436]
 

I really dont understand why "most" people are so negative. A corp with only 10 active characters can easily afford to keep a system.

72.5 mil per day for the system (that includes the cyno jammer upgrades etc) / 10 players = 7.25mil per person per day. That is a laughable amount to get. Everybody needs to stop moaning and start playing instead of sitting in their ivory towers while afk isk earning.

Sethur Blackcoat
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:32:00 - [2437]
 

Edited by: Sethur Blackcoat on 09/11/2009 15:32:44
Originally by: Kepakh
Search pages 25-60, it is burried somewhere there.

Hmm, you mean http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1210267&page=25#723 this? Because that's the only dev response to it at all, and it's not an answer but rather just a weak avoidance of the question

get out stop trolling I've read the thread and know it hasn't been answered and nobody's gonna fall for it and be dumb enough to reread 35 pages

so stop feeling so great about how you're ~the puppetmaster~ because you're not nearly as smart as you think, okay, well, bye

Suboran
Gallente
Best Path Inc.
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:37:00 - [2438]
 

Edited by: Suboran on 09/11/2009 15:44:37
The whole cost concept does seem cost-prohibitive for new smaller alliances to make it into 0.0.

I am also saddened to see that true sec values wont be dynamic as a system is upgraded or used more frequently. New alliances to 0.0 wont be able to harvest better resources as there sov claim progresses.

Also I think the fee system (paying to take control of empty and abandoned space) is rather silly and should be scrapped in favour of a more EVE-like solution.

Malena
Shiva
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:37:00 - [2439]
 

so if I am reading this right, they have basically eliminated the need for ice fields and the ice mining class of ships? Cause really cap and super caps using ice products certainly can't provide enough demand that the mackinaw, modules, implants SKILL TRAINING TIME won't be made obsolete, or near useless?

Someone PLEASE correct me, cause I would really rather not have all that time be no longer useful and all that ISK no longer getting an ROI.

Zareph
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:37:00 - [2440]
 

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.

It's a fairly straightforward question, CCP.

FourDrink Minimum
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:38:00 - [2441]
 

Originally by: propotkin's alt
I really dont understand why "most" people are so negative. A corp with only 10 active characters can easily afford to keep a system.

72.5 mil per day for the system (that includes the cyno jammer upgrades etc) / 10 players = 7.25mil per person per day. That is a laughable amount to get. Everybody needs to stop moaning and start playing instead of sitting in their ivory towers while afk isk earning.

The thing is: holding the space doesn't give you any advantage. And if you're going to grind out 72.5M a day, you're going to do it in under two hours in Irjunen and over two hours in your ****ty little corner of 0.0. So why do it?

Destrim
Koshaku
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:38:00 - [2442]
 

Originally by: ThreadnaughtTroll

Originally by: Threadnaught

WTF is up with these "upgrades???"


LOL what r you complaining 'bout? They're bootiful!



LaughingLaughingLaughing

zelalot
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:41:00 - [2443]
 

Originally by: Zareph
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.

It's a fairly straightforward question, CCP.



for my linking living in 0.0 should be more profitable for the pure reason we play the game against other players and need the isk to pay for ships. Mission running is boring and produces nothing worthy of the RISK/REWARD.

Kepakh
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:44:00 - [2444]
 

Originally by: Sethur Blackcoat
Edited by: Sethur Blackcoat on 09/11/2009 15:32:44
Originally by: Kepakh
Search pages 25-60, it is burried somewhere there.

Hmm, you mean http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1210267&page=25#723 this? Because that's the only dev response to it at all, and it's not an answer but rather just a weak avoidance of the question

get out stop trolling I've read the thread and know it hasn't been answered and nobody's gonna fall for it and be dumb enough to reread 35 pages

so stop feeling so great about how you're ~the puppetmaster~ because you're not nearly as smart as you think, okay, well, bye


Yep, that's it. Perfect answer for stupid question of such type.
Even further in the thread Chronotis(?) admits that CCP is aware of high profitability of L4.

0.0 PVE is more profitable than doing the same thing in high sec.

- better belt rats
- better ore to mine
- better mission rewards
- better exploration sites


Risk vs reward is a myth.

Qlanth
Caldari
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:45:00 - [2445]
 

Originally by: FourDrink Minimum
Originally by: propotkin's alt
I really dont understand why "most" people are so negative. A corp with only 10 active characters can easily afford to keep a system.

72.5 mil per day for the system (that includes the cyno jammer upgrades etc) / 10 players = 7.25mil per person per day. That is a laughable amount to get. Everybody needs to stop moaning and start playing instead of sitting in their ivory towers while afk isk earning.

The thing is: holding the space doesn't give you any advantage. And if you're going to grind out 72.5M a day, you're going to do it in under two hours in Irjunen and over two hours in your ****ty little corner of 0.0. So why do it?


Especially considering how easy it would be to start controlling only lowsec moons and have roaming gangs leaving from empire every day to go to 0.0 instead of leaving from an outpost to another region of 0.0

Sethur Blackcoat
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:50:00 - [2446]
 

Originally by: Kepakh
Yep, that's it. Perfect answer for stupid question of such type.
Even further in the thread Chronotis(?) admits that CCP is aware of high profitability of L4.

I think you don't understand what 'answer' means. Also I hope next time you call the police, they're just gonna go "We are aware that your house has been broken into and you're probably going to get ****d." and do nothing else.

Also in case you haven't been paying attention to the thread or Eve itself at all, conquerable 0.0 has no agents, completely invalidating your profitability arguement.

Qlanth
Caldari
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:54:00 - [2447]
 

Originally by: Kepakh
Originally by: Sethur Blackcoat
Edited by: Sethur Blackcoat on 09/11/2009 15:32:44
Originally by: Kepakh
Search pages 25-60, it is burried somewhere there.

Hmm, you mean http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1210267&page=25#723 this? Because that's the only dev response to it at all, and it's not an answer but rather just a weak avoidance of the question

get out stop trolling I've read the thread and know it hasn't been answered and nobody's gonna fall for it and be dumb enough to reread 35 pages

so stop feeling so great about how you're ~the puppetmaster~ because you're not nearly as smart as you think, okay, well, bye


Yep, that's it. Perfect answer for stupid question of such type.
Even further in the thread Chronotis(?) admits that CCP is aware of high profitability of L4.

0.0 PVE is more profitable than doing the same thing in high sec.

- better belt rats
- better ore to mine
- better mission rewards
- better exploration sites


Risk vs reward is a myth.


You are wrong on a number of points.

Rats: To start making decent amounts of ISK ratting you need to grind out any chain of rats that is worth under 3 million ISK combined. In some areas of space (Feythabolis, Providence) this is almost impossible because of truesec limitations. In places where it is possible (Delve) this can still take sometimes over an hour. Meanwhile in this time you are killing cruiser/frigate groups with the occaisional battleship. In bounties and loot you can expect to be making 15m/h your first hour and probably 30 mil/hr every hour after that. If you can only play one hour a day, we;lp!

Mining: The Drone regions have made mining high-end ores completely worthless. The price of minerals has crashed so hard that right now the 4th most profitable rock to mine is Veldspar. If you want to mine, say, Arkanor (the most profitable) in 0.0 space you find a group, your lasers cycle twice and you must find a new group. You will spend most of your time finding a new group of rocks to shoot. You can expect to make 15-20mil/hr mining Arkanor, assuming your region even has it.

Missions only exist in (I believe) 4 or 5 different regions. My alliance once controlled 8 regions all connected and not one had an agent.

Most exploration sites have been completely devalued by CCP. The most obvious one is Hacking where CCP invented a new kind of infinite use datacore that makes old datacores completely useless. The only point to running a hacking site is hoping for a War Stratagem which is worth around 14 million ISK last I found one. In one hacking site you can expect to make around 5 million ISK total.

The closest you might come to making more than a Level 4 mission is with ratting, if you spend the time to do so, or with finding a 6/10 complex and hoping for a good drop.

Kepakh
Posted - 2009.11.09 15:55:00 - [2448]
 

Originally by: Sethur Blackcoat
conquerable 0.0 has no agents, completely invalidating your profitability arguement.


When there is no L4 in claimed 0.0, there is nothing to compare, nothing to answer. Simple, isn't it? It is only invalidtaing the stupid question...

Uphill Gardner
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:00:00 - [2449]
 

Originally by: Kepakh
Yep, that's it. Perfect answer for stupid question of such type.
Even further in the thread Chronotis(?) admits that CCP is aware of high profitability of L4.

0.0 PVE is more profitable than doing the same thing in high sec.

- better belt rats
- better ore to mine
- better mission rewards
- better exploration sites

Risk vs reward is a myth.


You have not been to 0.0 to make ISK ever, have you? It is true that
1. IF you're in good true sec
2. IF you've groomed belts to have triple BS rats with highest bounties
3. If you don't have competition so you can just warp to belt and shoot
4. IF you get lucky enough not to run across empty belt and
5. IF you're not disturbed by pirates/reds
you can make more than with lvl4 missions.

But then again you can't sell loot in 0.0 (at least most of it), so you have to get it to empire (-time, -ISK). You will loose ships (-time (for getting new ships to 0.0), -ISK). You will need to defend your space from other people (-time). There will be cloaker in your system if you use it too much (-ISK).

Now how much do you recon will be left of that "more profitable PVE"?

And I can tell you from my own experience: -0.6 true sec, about 20 belts, 1.5 hours grooming, about 7 hours ratting. Only one red visited for a while and then got out, no ships lost. Total bounties were around 200mil ISK, obviously no faction spawns if you chain rats. Loot is still in 0.0 (because it's not worth taking it to empire ATM). Please note that this was not a bad true sec and I was the only one in the system. Was using nighthawk (can GTFO quick) and was too fast for some respawns.

Do you wanna see my AE farming ISK balance?

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:06:00 - [2450]
 

CCP, i was excited to hear about dominion coming in to change the Null sec space issues many of players have complained about for the past few years or months that i have actually concerned myself with that space. That is to say i was excited up until this blog. The way i understand this blog has only made me worried and concerned about how you are planning on implementing changes.

First off i would like to point out that when you first highlighted that changes would be made in your speeches at fan fest i came away with the notion that you were going to make it so we could upgrade our systems in null sec space with higher quality sites and rats to kill which would net more isk in those regions. I had visions of finding a few more sites than already present in system but also that we would find more quality items worth more. For example, a few more ore sites with rarer ores to mine, or hacking sites with a greater chance of more valuable loot.

After reading the blog i understand it now as if you are just adding a few more sites per upgrade level. this i thought was fine up until i read about the reality of the current sites from the pilots out in null sec space. Now i can't collaborate their claims as to think that most sites are worthless as i haven't spent too much time in null sec but their claims are rather disturbing and undermines your idea of quantity of sites overt he quality of them. After all if the miners in my corporation want to mine our system more they would want to find not only the typical menial ore like tritanium and pyrite but also some more rare stuff like zydrine to make it more profitable for them.

Another thing i noticed was the cost you have posted to maintain sovereignty of a system. I could understand the way you got the price for the territorial claim unit being 20 million a day. that being the price of fuel for 5 POS's a day. Does this mean we no longer need fuel for the 5 POS we have in a system with a TCU in place? Because not only were the POS profitable because they not only served to claim sovereignty but also allowed you to run other jobs like research, or building ships that turned out much of our profit to begin with.

Now here is what your current system is doing to operations in null sec and why there is such an outrage at the cost. Not only do you have the operational cost of POS's still to deal with, but you are taking away a feature that made POS's affordable and why people spent that much for fuel, but your adding on the same price of fuel to hold systems now. Your doubling the price of holding space for people... which as i know wont make it more accessible for other corporations or alliances to access.

Another thing is the price of the addons. as i stated with the previous paragraph your charging us twice for holding a system currently and now with the cynosoral field jammer and jump bridges in particular your taking more things a POS was good for and charging us AGAIN for those things. Only increasing the price and further alienating new corps from seeking null sec space. I can understand why you priced them so high however to prohibit people from making every system have every upgrade.

So what im trying to say is with the current numbers you are only marginally increasing the net profitability of systems while exponentially increasing the price of holding space, because as i remember you also said about slowly increasing the price as people held more space on top of the base price.

Please i implore you to reconsider the numbers you have posted and lower them significantly. I could understand the current prices if you were going to hold say 2 plus CONSTELLATIONS worth of systems, but for starters i propose these numbers.

TCU - 7 mil per day
INFS Hub - 3 mil per day
supercapital construction - 1 mil per day
cynosoral navigation - 3 mil per day
ADV logistics network - N/A
Cynosural suppression - 4 mil per day

Now i say no logistics network because...

Junkie Beverage
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:11:00 - [2451]
 

@CCP

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.

circle one please

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:12:00 - [2452]
 

to only hold one system you can't have a jump bridge network and i dont know how you would work that into the mechanics but im sure you could figure it out somehow.

The price for everything i have listed is 18 million a day. For a new corporation in null sec i would think this would be reasonable considering that for say operating 4 POS's they can hold a system and have access to plus allow them to anchor the addons like the jammer or nav beacon at 1 or 2 ACTUAL POS's in the system. All in all still cost quite a bit to hold space but is more in line with as i see a reasonable cost for a new corp to null sec space.

Now i can't know what you are thinking or planning behind your closed doors with this update so i suggest these numbers on the basis that this would be for holding one system. All in all if they want to upgrade the system then for the price of operating 5 POS's they can have everything you have listed. I believe this would enable people who at know how to operate in null sec to at least hold some space and would make it easier for more people to claim space as their own.

Now for those who are already in null sec, or have the desire to hold more space you should adjust the prices accordingly to reflect creating networks. for example you could for every system held after the first increase the price by 10% So the next system you hold in your list of systems under your control would look like this...

TCU - 7.7 mil per day
INFS Hub - 3.3 mil per day
supercapital construction - 1 mil per day
cynosoral navigation - 3.3 mil per day
ADV logistics network - 3.3 mil per day
Cynosural suppression - 4.4 mil per day

(i didnt tax the construction addon for the sake of keeping the numbers even.)
So now you own 2 systems and have the combined cost not only of the 18 mil to operate both at full addons but an additional tax of 2 million isk per day PER system. So total cost to run 2 systems is now 40 million isk per day. Now i dont know the numbers at all your looking at. I could be dead wrong in my prices and i wont kid myself to think i have the answer but i think what im suggesting could work.

Now an idea i had would be for controlling constellations. I believe that if you have the power and industry to hold an entire constellation there should be some semblance of a discount that locks in the price of that network of stars. As in if you go and claim a few other systems outside of your main constellation you wont be charged more on the constellations stars. The price to claim other stars however would cost more and be close to the model that you originally posted. like this perhaps

Cost of solar system PLUS 1 constellations already controlled

TCU - 15 mil per day
INFS Hub - 5 mil per day
supercapital construction - 2 mil per day
cynosoral navigation - 4 mil per day
ADV logistics network - 6.25 mil per day
Cynosural suppression - 12.5 mil per day

Basically i think half of your currently posted prices. This of course would face a 10% tax per system held. but say you claim another constellation. Well this is where i think it could get complicated or interesting... which ever choice of words you like to use...lol. A tax on holding constellations and the subsequent price of the services in those systems would then increase again. im going to throw out a number say 20% ON TOP of the 10% per system. This may seem ludicrous and i believe it should be because this would then limit peoples conquistadorian nature and stop people from expanding too much and holding space for sake and still allow people with ridiculous amounts of isk to hold their desired space.

All in all this is just an idea im throwing out there as an alternative idea to what you have proposed and i hope people tear this apart so we can CONSTRUCTIVELY come to a better model than people just *****ing and saying its too high instead of giving ideas to fix it. i dont know if im the first to do this but kudos to people who may have done this before me.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:12:00 - [2453]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 09/11/2009 16:13:47
Originally by: Kepakh
Yep, that's it. Perfect answer for stupid question of such type.
Incorrect. It's not an answer, nor is it a stupid question: it's a very fundamental question about the reason to have 0.0 at all. If they can't answer it — and by the looks of it, they can't — then 0.0 serves no purpose.
Quote:
Even further in the thread Chronotis(?) admits that CCP is aware of high profitability of L4.
Yes, and? It doesn't answer the question, but rather says that they should have had an answer to it a loo-o-ong time ago, and yet they can't/won't answer.
Quote:
0.0 PVE is more profitable than doing the same thing in high sec.

- better belt rats
- better ore to mine
- better mission rewards
- better exploration sites
…and infinitely less capable of sustaining a population. This makes it less profitable than highsec, and less attractive to highsec-dwellers, which was one of the problems Dominion was intended to solve.
Quote:
Risk vs reward is a myth.
Apparently so, since they've only said so far that 0.0 in Dominion will be, at best, as good as highsec, except with the risks ramped up. Therefore, the aim of getting more people into 0.0 will fail, because highsec is always a better choice. Getting the 0.0-alliances to hire PvE:ers will fail because highsec is a better choice. Getting more alliances out into 0.0 will fail because there's no room for them, because the much-hyped alliance compression won't happen.

That said, in a sense you're absolutely right. Yes, the question is stupid, because the answer is an obligatory "yes". If CCP can't live up that obligation, they might as well skip the sov revamp part of Dominion, write off the assets and code done so far as a complete waste of time and immediately reassign the teams that did it to fix some bugs instead, because none of the stated goals with the revamp will be fulfilled. The problem, I suspect, is that they don't dare give the correct answer, because then they will have to immediately revamp some of the key elements of the economy (again, and thus also trash all the work that went into the moonjuice rebalancing), which will delay the patch for a year or two…

edit: Oh and…
Quote:
When there is no L4 in claimed 0.0, there is nothing to compare, nothing to answer. Simple, isn't it? It is only invalidtaing the stupid question...
This is incorrect. It's actually very easy to compare — they did it themselves, which prompted the very clever question that they so far have failed to answer.

Kalisti
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:16:00 - [2454]
 

If EVE wants alliances to maintain infrastructure in nullsec, let's take that sandbox all the way and fix nullsec once and for all.

They say that the upkeep costs are to maintain the jump gates? Let's get rid of nullsec NPC jump gates entirely and replace it with an entirely player-driven mechanic.

Nullsec PvP'ers don't want to farm for income? Let's get a realistic passive income option into play for nullsec alliances.

CCP is unhappy with the dominance of point-source moon mining driving all nullsec strategy into identical cookie-cutter behaviors? Let's broaden the spectrum of income options WITHOUT forcing nullsec pilots to farm, let alone to farm at a rate that doesn't even match empire farm income.

Add an entirely new passive income mechanic; planetary taxation and growth. Let's turn alliances into real empires within the scope of the game.

Despite the fact that the much-vaunted player driven economy is an important part of EVE, the reality is that the economy in question is the CAPSULEER economy; the economy of ships and modules. We know that in reality, the capsuleer is an elite of EVE society, and the average empire's income comes from the everyday taxation of normal citizens living on all those pretty light-filled planets we never get to visit.

So let's take that realistic approach and apply it to nullsec. Alliance control of nullsec should not be just about point source resources being exploited and shipped back to empire. As long as that is the case, only a select few are ever going to choose to (or even be able to) live exclusively in nullsec.

Let's add in planetary economies and NPC expansion into nullsec space, based on how player alliances manage their nullsec regions and how attractive and safe they make it for settlement. In short, turn alliances into empires and nullsec capsuleers into their militaries. The goal of an alliance should be to beef up their controlled territories to the point that they LOOK LIKE empire space. They should be required to BUILD the jump gates and establish safe trade routes, after first securing the region with their jump-capable fleets. Then prepare the planets for colonization, so that they can be filled with NPC populations and economies, whose tax base makes up the majority income source for the alliance. Who in turn build NPC stations filled with high quality agents for alliance players to use (and, oh yeah, let the alliance tax the agent rewards).

The primary difference is that it is still nullsec; anyone can come in and blow up anyone else, but instead of getting CONCORDed, it is now the job of the alliance military (i.e. pvp players) to decide how to respond. Security is poor? People (real and NPC) will move out, your tax base shrinks, your alliance is unhappy.

The final necessary mechanic is that taking over an alliance's territory should not be about blowing everything up and replacing it with your own stuff. It should be about capturing valuable economic assets; planets that alliances have invested in to increase the tax base should switch hands, not be wiped out to reset at 0. Jump gates, NPC stations, planetary populations, should be valuable strategic assets that an invading alliance will think very hard about blowing up, because replacing it may take them months of effort and billions of ISK. Rather than regions of nullsec space being more or less valuable as an intrinsic property, nullsec space should ALL START EQUAL, and the primary value should come from the investments made by alliances in creating jump gates, establishing trade routes, and promoting planetary economies.

That is how you will get people to move to 0.0 space, and produce compelling pvp at every scale. Let alliances become empires.

Frankly, anything short of this will never accomplish the goal of moving people into 0.0 space. It will always be populated by those devoted to 0.0 pvp for the sake of 0.0 pvp, and they will simply work around whatever broken mechanics CCP continues to introduce.

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:19:00 - [2455]
 

I was looking forward to Dominion.

I wanted to see all the large alliances (including us) compressed into smaller areas of space, because a few sprawling mega-empires holding 90% of 0.0 is boring. I wanted to see new groups form up from Empire to try their luck, because it means new people to shoot at and/or form alliances with. I wanted to see turmoil and upheaval and a dozen brushwars springing up at once across the galaxy, because drama is what EVE players feed on. I wanted to see 0.0 full of all varieties of players, because who wants to live in a deserted wasteland? I wanted to see new lucrative resources, because the risk vs reward principle has been much neglected.

What are we looking to get? The same old stagnation under a different system, the smaller alliances priced out of contention, larger alliances pulling down the sovereignty claims but retaining de facto control, the consolidation of highsec L4s, aspiring 0.0 alliances told that fighting for space will (if they're skilled and dedicated and lucky and willing to wait 3 months) gain them the same sort of rewards (for a limited number of their players at a time) as they could have got (in infinitely scalable form) by just relocating to Motsu in the first place.

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?


At this point I'm just going to hope that the reason CCP haven't answered yet is because they're too busy fixing this gigantic balls-up of an expansion, although I guess the other possibility is that the dev team have been tempbanned for trolling their own feedback thread.

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:21:00 - [2456]
 

Edited by: Lolion Reglo on 09/11/2009 16:23:22
Originally by: Kalisti
If EVE wants alliances to maintain infrastructure in nullsec, let's take that sandbox all the way and fix nullsec once and for all.

They say that the upkeep costs are to maintain the jump gates? Let's get rid of nullsec NPC jump gates entirely and replace it with an entirely player-driven mechanic.

Nullsec PvP'ers don't want to farm for income? Let's get a realistic passive income option into play for nullsec alliances.

... ... ... ...

Frankly, anything short of this will never accomplish the goal of moving people into 0.0 space. It will always be populated by those devoted to 0.0 pvp for the sake of 0.0 pvp, and they will simply work around whatever broken mechanics CCP continues to introduce.


Kudos to this idea as well. i like it. And the goon post above me. I want to see another dev blog addressing the concerns we have posted here so we know they are watching what we are saying and making the changes necessary to fix this gigantic train wreck i am foreseeing.

Ker HarSol
Minmatar
Zip - I
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:21:00 - [2457]
 

How should people start wars and capture enemy territory if they can't even afford their own space?

Ridiculous

Kane Turner
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:24:00 - [2458]
 

I think CCP want to just remove 0.0 from game...
How to start a wars ? Move to empire to not pay anything for system and grind lvl4's :)

Kepakh
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:28:00 - [2459]
 

Edited by: Kepakh on 09/11/2009 16:55:04
Originally by: Qlanth

You are wrong on a number of points.

Rats: To start making decent amounts of ISK ratting you need to grind out any chain of rats that is worth under 3 million ISK combined. In some areas of space (Feythabolis, Providence) this is almost impossible because of truesec limitations. In places where it is possible (Delve) this can still take sometimes over an hour. Meanwhile in this time you are killing cruiser/frigate groups with the occaisional battleship. In bounties and loot you can expect to be making 15m/h your first hour and probably 30 mil/hr every hour after that. If you can only play one hour a day, we;lp!

Mining: The Drone regions have made mining high-end ores completely worthless. The price of minerals has crashed so hard that right now the 4th most profitable rock to mine is Veldspar. If you want to mine, say, Arkanor (the most profitable) in 0.0 space you find a group, your lasers cycle twice and you must find a new group. You will spend most of your time finding a new group of rocks to shoot. You can expect to make 15-20mil/hr mining Arkanor, assuming your region even has it.

Missions only exist in (I believe) 4 or 5 different regions. My alliance once controlled 8 regions all connected and not one had an agent.

Most exploration sites have been completely devalued by CCP. The most obvious one is Hacking where CCP invented a new kind of infinite use datacore that makes old datacores completely useless. The only point to running a hacking site is hoping for a War Stratagem which is worth around 14 million ISK last I found one. In one hacking site you can expect to make around 5 million ISK total.

The closest you might come to making more than a Level 4 mission is with ratting, if you spend the time to do so, or with finding a 6/10 complex and hoping for a good drop.


You are comparing and mixing numerous things together.

1) As I hinted out, if you do the same thing in high sec and then you do it in 0.0, you get better rewards in 0.0. This works fine.
2) Availability of 0.0 PVE resources is unrelated.

In a matter of fact, 0.0 is more rewarding for the same activity. The issue is that you compare L4 to ratting which might be closest in procedure but completely different in mechanics.

I understand very well what you and all posters demanding the answer are asking but that does not make the question less stupid. If you want an answer, ask properly.


Why is risk vs reward a myth.

People ask for dangerous space yielding more rewards basing on simple fact that it is more dangerous. This logic as well as motivation is invalid.

I am in a system with cyno jammer and bubbled gates are perma camped by 200+ man blobs. I undock and warp to first belt. Should rats have higher bounties there just because I am in 0.0? Where is the risk? None, nada.

The only reason why you should get ever more rewarded is because of team work. Your alliance making an effort to claim a space, run a cyno jammer and perma camp gates. This is the only reason you ever get rewarded in compulsory PVP areas - not because of risk, but because of teamplay benefits.

Rising rewards and transfering exact same activities you can do in high sec space will only turn 0.0 into high sec with no Concord. That's just pointless.

0.0 needs another layer of benefits for 0.0 citizens. Introduce more alliance/corp level income like moon mining, taxes bound to sovereignty and tons of new tools how distribute those resources. This is what will actualy make 0.0 interesting and diverse.

mcnuggetlol
Amarr
Via Crucis Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.09 16:28:00 - [2460]
 

Where have the blue bars gone?


Pages: first : previous : ... 78 79 80 81 [82] 83 84 85 86 ... : 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