open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: CSM December Summit - Meeting minutes (Part 3of 3)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 : last (12)

Author Topic

Mortimer Civeri
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.01.18 20:39:00 - [301]
 

None of this matters if space isn't valuable, and right now a lot of 0.0 space isn't very valuable at all. Right now, the only valuable systems in 0.0 have profitable moons, stations, ABC ore, or have upgrades. Huge jump bridge networks are a symptom of the gigantic amounts of largely useless space alliances have to control to support themselves. Removing them just means alliances have to settle for smaller amounts of useless space if they want to be able to defend it, and the insular pockets of useful or upgraded space will not be fought over because the only reason to travel any distance to fight will be spite or boredom. 0.0 is big, and jump bridges shrink it. They do have other, nasty consequences, but until 0.0 is worth living in for its own sake rather than just as a driver for conflict, nerfing them will just cause massive stagnation. Right now, they make wars convenient for both parties, which is good because no one would bother with a war as inconvenient as traveling 30-60 jumps for a fight, since taking more space is not all that compelling a reason to fight, and no one is going to come fill up all the empty, worthless, space, so rather than fighting your neighbors in adorable small scale warfare, which some people think will magically happen if you nerf jump bridges, you will just simply have no neighbors.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.01.18 22:09:00 - [302]
 

But just about any sov space can now be extremely productive with upgrades, so that's a pointless objection. The worst trusec system with a rack of level 5 upgrades beats the best trusec without them.

Tiligean
Posted - 2011.01.18 22:32:00 - [303]
 

Originally by: Mortimer Civeri
None of this matters if space isn't valuable, and right now a lot of 0.0 space isn't very valuable at all. Right now, the only valuable systems in 0.0 have profitable moons, stations, ABC ore, or have upgrades. Huge jump bridge networks are a symptom of the gigantic amounts of largely useless space alliances have to control to support themselves. Removing them just means alliances have to settle for smaller amounts of useless space if they want to be able to defend it, and the insular pockets of useful or upgraded space will not be fought over because the only reason to travel any distance to fight will be spite or boredom. 0.0 is big, and jump bridges shrink it. They do have other, nasty consequences, but until 0.0 is worth living in for its own sake rather than just as a driver for conflict, nerfing them will just cause massive stagnation. Right now, they make wars convenient for both parties, which is good because no one would bother with a war as inconvenient as traveling 30-60 jumps for a fight, since taking more space is not all that compelling a reason to fight, and no one is going to come fill up all the empty, worthless, space, so rather than fighting your neighbors in adorable small scale warfare, which some people think will magically happen if you nerf jump bridges, you will just simply have no neighbors.


Most of 0.0 being useless is an outdated mentality, and that mentality is part of the problem still in the existing powerblocs (which is why they hold so much space without any upgrades). Frankly, with the addition of an iHub any crappy old system in 0.0 can become useful, one might even say valuable - as long as it's used. Ignoring the whole "buffer zone" (I know, you shouldn't) there is no reason a 1000 man alliance needs an entire region. Even if you claim an upgraded system only supports 10-20 people at a time (military upgrades) show me a 1000 man alliance where more than 50% are logged in at any one time (and most of them aren't ratting when that happens). That means 10-20 systems with upgrades could probably support that 1000 man alliance under "normal" use. 5000+ person alliances like IT and Goonswarm aren't the norm, and frankly it wouldn't surprise me to find that 33% of those members are actual players, and 66% are alts or somewhat inactive. So in reality, upgrading 20 systems to support 200 +/- folks online at any one time if every single one is ratting turns 20 systems into high quality space for ISK generation, but even in that kind of alliance upgrading the 28 station systems in Dek and a handful of the other systems would even support that alliance if 30% of their members were online and ratting simultaneously.

Wrong reference. Spend some time in Haven/Sanctum land in post Dominion EVE...


Fred Freedom
The Scope
Posted - 2011.01.18 23:06:00 - [304]
 

Originally by: Tiligean

Well Fred, I've been in 4 different 0.0 alliances, and had to live in Fethabolis. I think I get 0.0 logistics from a fairly painful experience. I've never been in Goonswarm though, so I don't know how your alliance deals with deep 0.0 logistics.

We had JF services running daily from Jita. So even deep in Fethabolis we got ships, ammo and mods quickly and easily, with a minimal (15-20%) markup. TBH, it would have been easier with an industrial corp with the right assets in place (all the way up to stations and POSses) to crank out ammo, ships and such sometimes, especially when you get assaulted and your links to empire are threatened.

Black Ops is a joke. 4.5AU Max jump range on a Black Ops bridge means your little bomber threat doesn't impact most deep sov systems, and most good true-sec systems (with good ores across the board) are deep in regions, not near edges.

I think Jump Bridges aren't part of the problem, but the range and capability of cyno is, when paired with the SC proliferation. And although the logistics thing is apparently impossible for you to find a viable solution to, breaking the ease of empire to nullsec logistics would certainly slow the rate of supercapital proliferation. As many others in this thread have stated, no one thing is a solution, but you can't see any of them as possibilities.

Perhaps look at it from this angle, and reapply your resources: CCP is going to screw with logistics. What needs to happen in 0.0 to keep it from wreaking complete havoc?

The other thing is, they aren't trying to make YOU a miner. They are trying to redistribute population out of HiSec. You can still gank them wherever you wish, in whatever ship you can gather the minerals to build and it. People already mine (some do, really, and I know it's impossible for you to comprehend but I know guys who do this 3-4 days a week for 3-4 hours at a time - just about the same amount of time I spend looking for fights.


Let's say CCP makes it absolutely impossible to take tritanium from Empire to 0.0 in anything other than a regular freighter. What happens to supercap production?

Jump bridge-wise: Nothing, because nobody uses bridges now.
JF-wise: Nothing; we'll use titan bridges.
What if CCP also nerfs titan bridges? Once a week, we'll require 200 people to show up to sit on their ass for two hours while the freighters get where they're going. It will be really boring, but because supercaps are required to win fights in 0.0, it will get done (nerf supercaps).
What if CCP literally makes it impossible to take tritanium through a gate? In that case, new supers will mostly not get built and existing alliances will pretty much take over the game forever, because no one else will be able to compete.

The underlying issue is that every one of your solutions for making it "harder" to construct SCs just makes it more boring and tedious. It doesn't make them stop being built and doesn't stop them being overpowered, so they'll get built while we curse CCP under our breath.

The same goes for mining in 0.0. Existing players (mostly) don't want to mine, and certainly, nobody wants to mine low ends when high ends are worth more. As I've said repeatedly, there is no way to make low ends worth a lot more isk in deep 0.0 than Empire because if that ever happened we'd just jump in/melt capitals (or freighters, or something else). So the only solutions are to make veld/trit worth roughly 10x what it is now all over the game (lol) or to make veld/trit practically untransportable. If CCP ever does the latter we will stage in Torrinos and **** in everyone's cornflakes a lot closer to home.

The answer, of course, is to address the bad behavior directly rather than to half-assedly make 0.0 life harder. Nerf supercaps, nerf tech, nerf sov structure HP. As long as you keep the current systems as they are we will find a way to keep all of these things exactly as broken as they are now.

Mortimer Civeri
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.01.19 01:54:00 - [305]
 

Originally by: Tiligean
Most of 0.0 being useless is an outdated mentality, and that mentality is part of the problem still in the existing powerblocs (which is why they hold so much space without any upgrades). Frankly, with the addition of an iHub any crappy old system in 0.0 can become useful, one might even say valuable - as long as it's used. Ignoring the whole "buffer zone" (I know, you shouldn't) there is no reason a 1000 man alliance needs an entire region. Even if you claim an upgraded system only supports 10-20 people at a time (military upgrades) show me a 1000 man alliance where more than 50% are logged in at any one time (and most of them aren't ratting when that happens). That means 10-20 systems with upgrades could probably support that 1000 man alliance under "normal" use. 5000+ person alliances like IT and Goonswarm aren't the norm, and frankly it wouldn't surprise me to find that 33% of those members are actual players, and 66% are alts or somewhat inactive. So in reality, upgrading 20 systems to support 200 +/- folks online at any one time if every single one is ratting turns 20 systems into high quality space for ISK generation, but even in that kind of alliance upgrading the 28 station systems in Dek and a handful of the other systems would even support that alliance if 30% of their members were online and ratting simultaneously.

Wrong reference. Spend some time in Haven/Sanctum land in post Dominion EVE...


How does any of that produce enough ships and modules for IT and Goonswarm to go after each other tooth and nail? Right you want them to mine the ore, to produce enough minerals, to produce enough ships and modules, in the to few factory slots they have. I'm sure shooting rats and collecting their bounties will provide enough.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2011.01.19 02:13:00 - [306]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
I said nothing about what language(s) your alliance speaks. I simply offered proof that sov timers are a failed mechanic.


No, but your "proof" was that most alliances have a focused time zone. Look at a map - of Earth, not Eve. There's only two languages with more than a few million speakers on both sides of the Atlantic, and I'm completely unfamiliar with any Spanish-speaking Eve community. There's only two with more than a few million in both "EU" and "Aus" TZ, and there's only one that hits all three TZ categories. If an alliance wants to have enough people to be bothered with in all time zones, it needs to speak English.

Originally by: Liang Nuren
As I said: there's nothing about your "epic fight" that says that all 10000 people have to be shooting at the same guy, on the same grid, or even in the same system. I would argue that getting your huge fleets together very demonstrably prevents "more guys shooting". Unfortunately, current game mechanics - failed mechanics - make 10 minute module lag and crashing the node the standard fare.


There I think we're in full agreement.

Originally by: Liang Nuren
I thought it was pretty clear that there would be no sov. No jump bridges, no cynojammers, no sanctums. But on the bright side, until sov was restored to someone else, everyone would be able to use the station - and all services thereof. No sov ping pong. No station ping pong. Just a war zone.


You not only weren't clear, you specifically made the opposite proposal. Your original proposal included "sov structures" and "sov hardeners". Getting rid of sov is simply not a serious proposal - it won't happen.

Originally by: Liang Nuren
You offered up specific sov changes when I asked you to look at power blocs. Looking at that map shows me the same power blocs exist in the same places that they have for years. But even disregarding that, the map looks mostly the same to me from an individual alliance level. Huge swaths of space haven't been challenged in YEARS.


Well yeah, not every part of space is going to change. Some alliances are very good at fortifying. But every one of those changes I listed was one where space changed hands between blocs on the scale of regions, and it added up to half the map. Just because MM and RZR have never lost their space doesn't mean that the other 32 regions don't move around all the time.

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Frankly, if you have a complaint about mineral compression from a gameplay perspective, you might try actually bringing that specific complaint up. So far, all you've done is whine that it doesn't make real life science sense - and then refused to look anything up when its suggested that maybe, just maybe there might be ways to compress things even today. I grant you that it isn't a whole hell of a lot at present.

Your mental laziness is staggering, and I'm damn sure not going to reward you by linking anything.


It wasn't laziness, it was mockery. I am well aware of the fact that what you're discussing doesn't exist. Funny story, 20:1 compression of steel would literally be more dense than the core of the Sun. Yes, steel has a bulk modulus, you can squeeze it and shrink it a bit, but not enough to matter.

As for my gameplay objections, I've already raised one problem - "And remember, no matter how good you make compression, you still have to move your raw minerals from the refinery to the factory" - but basically, I don't think that compression is a task that's really worth having players invest time and effort in. Moving minerals is scut work, I'm happy to make it as easy as it is boring.

Pasmerktas
Posted - 2011.01.19 03:37:00 - [307]
 

about the capitals and supercapitals, if CCP made them to be used and piloted by more than one pilot, it would actually be a good thing, if one titan could be piloted by five or more people, and a nyx by five/four that would actually make them more fun in combat, harder and more strategy consuming, i have heard that titans where supposed to be that way, and i think that it's a good time doing that. Also shame that there is no news on Incarna as far for the character creator, it looks good, but lacks of everything

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.01.19 07:45:00 - [308]
 

Edited by: Liang Nuren on 19/01/2011 07:46:25
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto

No, but your "proof" was that most alliances have a focused time zone. Look at a map - of Earth, not Eve. There's only two languages with more than a few million speakers on both sides of the Atlantic, and I'm completely unfamiliar with any Spanish-speaking Eve community. There's only two with more than a few million in both "EU" and "Aus" TZ, and there's only one that hits all three TZ categories. If an alliance wants to have enough people to be bothered with in all time zones, it needs to speak English.



What you're saying has absolutely no bearing on the fact that sov timers are a failed mechanic - nor on the fact that Eve is a world wide team based game. The entire goal is to create long term skirmishing to gain control of a star system instead of single massive fights. I wouldn't want you to lose sov immediately simply because you aren't on 23/7, but frankly if they have better timezone coverage than you and your space is empty 16 hours/day... you deserve to lose it.

Quote:
Originally by: Liang Nuren
I thought it was pretty clear that there would be no sov. No jump bridges, no cynojammers, no sanctums. But on the bright side, until sov was restored to someone else, everyone would be able to use the station - and all services thereof. No sov ping pong. No station ping pong. Just a war zone.

You not only weren't clear, you specifically made the opposite proposal. Your original proposal included "sov structures" and "sov hardeners". Getting rid of sov is simply not a serious proposal - it won't happen.



You are being deliberately obtuse, and putting words in my mouth. At no point did I say that sov would be removed - quite the opposite in fact. What I said was that there would be no station - or sov - ping pong because nobody had sov until things calmed down. You don't have sov, you don't have jump bridges, cyno jammers, or any other nice goodies. And neither does he. You do have access to the station and its services. And so does he.

Quote:

Well yeah, not every part of space is going to change. Some alliances are very good at fortifying. But every one of those changes I listed was one where space changed hands between blocs on the scale of regions, and it added up to half the map. Just because MM and RZR have never lost their space doesn't mean that the other 32 regions don't move around all the time.



There's a hell of a lot more than MM and Razor that haven't moved in years. And you know it.

Quote:
As for my gameplay objections, I've already raised one problem - "And remember, no matter how good you make compression, you still have to move your raw minerals from the refinery to the factory" - but basically, I don't think that compression is a task that's really worth having players invest time and effort in. Moving minerals is scut work, I'm happy to make it as easy as it is boring.


Why would you ever have to move your minerals from the refining station to the manufacturing station? There are many manufacturing slots available at my 100% refine station. But maybe you're talking about 0.0... but that makes no sense. Afterall, you won't be compressing the high end minerals that are mined in 0.0. The mineral compression is for transporting bulk low ends to 0.0.

-Liang

Mecinia Lua
Galactic Express
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2011.01.19 08:18:00 - [309]
 

Originally by: Pasmerktas
about the capitals and supercapitals, if CCP made them to be used and piloted by more than one pilot, it would actually be a good thing, if one titan could be piloted by five or more people, and a nyx by five/four that would actually make them more fun in combat, harder and more strategy consuming, i have heard that titans where supposed to be that way, and i think that it's a good time doing that. Also shame that there is no news on Incarna as far for the character creator, it looks good, but lacks of everything


To do that they'd have to make major changes in the code something I don't think they are willing to do at this point. The problem is more than likely they will nerf them and folks will fill cheated, however if they nerf them all those spare supercap accounts go poof. Better if they came up with a supercap busting ship. Maybe make a counter to the supercarrier in a superdreadnought.

Fred Freedom
The Scope
Posted - 2011.01.19 09:03:00 - [310]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Why would you ever have to move your minerals from the refining station to the manufacturing station? There are many manufacturing slots available at my 100% refine station. But maybe you're talking about 0.0... but that makes no sense. Afterall, you won't be compressing the high end minerals that are mined in 0.0. The mineral compression is for transporting bulk low ends to 0.0.


Once you transport them, you need to uncompress them before you can build with them, and you can't build any amount of volume in a 0.0 refinery.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2011.01.19 09:12:00 - [311]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
What you're saying has absolutely no bearing on the fact that sov timers are a failed mechanic - nor on the fact that Eve is a world wide team based game. The entire goal is to create long term skirmishing to gain control of a star system instead of single massive fights. I wouldn't want you to lose sov immediately simply because you aren't on 23/7, but frankly if they have better timezone coverage than you and your space is empty 16 hours/day... you deserve to lose it.


I hear it's helpful for a team to all speak the same language. Maybe your alliance can run on Google translate, but mine has been known to have fights from time to time. If your definition of "a failed mechanic" is "it allows alliances to exist", then yeah, it's failed. Personally, I like game mechanics that let people play, even when they don't live up to your absurd and physically impossible expectations.

Originally by: Liang Nuren
You are being deliberately obtuse, and putting words in my mouth. At no point did I say that sov would be removed - quite the opposite in fact. What I said was that there would be no station - or sov - ping pong because nobody had sov until things calmed down. You don't have sov, you don't have jump bridges, cyno jammers, or any other nice goodies. And neither does he. You do have access to the station and its services. And so does he.


You specifically said "I thought it was pretty clear that there would be no sov". I'm not sure how exactly you wanted me to interpret that phrase, but I went with the obvious. A server-wide sov reset is stupid, and almost as unlikely as removing the mechanic. And why would it ever "calm down"? Your mechanics are designed to make that impossible.

Originally by: Liang Nuren
There's a hell of a lot more than MM and Razor that haven't moved in years. And you know it.


Some have been pushed around and moved back - BoB/IT, most notably. Some corps have probably jumped ship whenever theirs was sinking and been able to stay roughly in place. But looking at the oldest sov map I have access to(3 and change years old), MM and RZR are literally the only ones not to have moved, barring the possibility of a name change I might not be familiar with.

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Why would you ever have to move your minerals from the refining station to the manufacturing station? There are many manufacturing slots available at my 100% refine station. But maybe you're talking about 0.0... but that makes no sense. Afterall, you won't be compressing the high end minerals that are mined in 0.0. The mineral compression is for transporting bulk low ends to 0.0.


This entire discussion was about nullsec industry, of course I'm referring to nullsec. Nobody has any problems building in empire other than terminal boredom. And speaking of being deliberately obtuse, who in God's green earth was referring to compressing high-ends? The reason for compression, 99 times out of 100, is that tritanium is huge and nobody wants to haul it through insecure space. Also, the primary source of it is people mining highsec ore, which naturally happens mostly in highsec. Thus, compression. When it comes to empire, nobody cares, but for all the (super)capital construction it matters, and if people want to ever see serious nullsec industry, then it had better get a lot easier. And no, compression items like 425s won't do the trick especially well, because you're still left with the problem of uncompressing eleventy billion cubic metres of ore into a station with precisely two manufacturing lines.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.01.19 11:10:00 - [312]
 

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto

I hear it's helpful for a team to all speak the same language. Maybe your alliance can run on Google translate, but mine has been known to have fights from time to time. If your definition of "a failed mechanic" is "it allows alliances to exist", then yeah, it's failed. Personally, I like game mechanics that let people play, even when they don't live up to your absurd and physically impossible expectations.



I find it incredibly amusing that you defend sov timers as being necessary to letting people play the game when they vary between strongly encouraging people not to play and actively enforcing that they do not. Sov timers mean that you can utterly ignore any gang that comes through your system - afterall you can't lose it until the sov timer strikes zero. Sov timers mean that you must gather as many people as you can... in order to "get more people shooting". In reality? It means nobody shoots because the node crashes a few dozen times.

The barriers you keep throwing up are trivial to overcome - by hiring mercs, by renting, or by attaining your own off timezone corps. It is no excuse for keeping failed mechanics.

Quote:
You specifically said "I thought it was pretty clear that there would be no sov". I'm not sure how exactly you wanted me to interpret that phrase, but I went with the obvious. A server-wide sov reset is stupid, and almost as unlikely as removing the mechanic. And why would it ever "calm down"? Your mechanics are designed to make that impossible.


You could start by interpreting it in context - though I realize that it might be a bit difficult for you. It's very obvious from my posts that I am not talking about a server wide sov reset. What I am saying is that you must control your systems MOST OF THE TIME... and that if you cannot do that then you don't really own the space you have claim to have sov over.

As to why things would calm down given the "impossible" mechanics? Well, they would calm down because you're defending your space more than they're attacking it. Maybe you're simply killing them every time they roam... or maybe you're just spamming sov hardeners faster than they find time to kill them. Ultimately, the fact that it would be harder to "calm down" is exactly the point. It encourages "more guys to go shooting".

But you wouldn't understand more guys shooting would you? You're too used to mechanics which reward docking up and node crashing.

Quote:
Some have been pushed around and moved back - BoB/IT, most notably. Some corps have probably jumped ship whenever theirs was sinking and been able to stay roughly in place. But looking at the oldest sov map I have access to(3 and change years old), MM and RZR are literally the only ones not to have moved, barring the possibility of a name change I might not be familiar with.


Ah, what a good map. I find it amusing that most of the alliances of note which have lost their space between then and now have done so of their own "free will".

Quote:
And no, compression items like 425s won't do the trick especially well, because you're still left with the problem of uncompressing eleventy billion cubic metres of ore into a station with precisely two manufacturing lines.


You don't have to have 100% refine stations to make mineral compression worthwhile - certainly not if mineral compression were deliberately buffed to create player markets (as opposed to the previous enormous mineral faucets).

-Liang

Cyaxares II
Posted - 2011.01.19 11:46:00 - [313]
 

Edited by: Cyaxares II on 19/01/2011 11:46:36
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Originally by: Liang Nuren
I said nothing about what language(s) your alliance speaks. I simply offered proof that sov timers are a failed mechanic.


No, but your "proof" was that most alliances have a focused time zone. Look at a map - of Earth, not Eve. There's only two languages with more than a few million speakers on both sides of the Atlantic, and I'm completely unfamiliar with any Spanish-speaking Eve community.

List of languages by total number of speakers

1. Mandarin Chinese (1.12 billion)
2. English (450 million)
3. Spanish (350 million)
4. Hindi/Urdu (350 million)
5. Russian (285 million)
6. French (265 million)

Linkage

Mortimer Civeri
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.01.19 16:39:00 - [314]
 

Originally by: Cyaxares II
Edited by: Cyaxares II on 19/01/2011 11:46:36
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Originally by: Liang Nuren
I said nothing about what language(s) your alliance speaks. I simply offered proof that sov timers are a failed mechanic.


No, but your "proof" was that most alliances have a focused time zone. Look at a map - of Earth, not Eve. There's only two languages with more than a few million speakers on both sides of the Atlantic, and I'm completely unfamiliar with any Spanish-speaking Eve community.

List of languages by total number of speakers

1. Mandarin Chinese (1.12 billion)
2. English (450 million)
3. Spanish (350 million)
4. Hindi/Urdu (350 million)
5. Russian (285 million)
6. French (265 million)

Linkage
Wow I didn't know EVE had so many players. Way to miss the point numb nuts.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2011.01.19 19:56:00 - [315]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren
I find it incredibly amusing that you defend sov timers as being necessary to letting people play the game when they vary between strongly encouraging people not to play and actively enforcing that they do not. Sov timers mean that you can utterly ignore any gang that comes through your system - afterall you can't lose it until the sov timer strikes zero. Sov timers mean that you must gather as many people as you can... in order to "get more people shooting". In reality? It means nobody shoots because the node crashes a few dozen times.

The barriers you keep throwing up are trivial to overcome - by hiring mercs, by renting, or by attaining your own off timezone corps. It is no excuse for keeping failed mechanics.


As I said, reinforce timers in particular aren't strictly necessary, but you need some TZ-balancing mechanic. Without that, no alliance in the game could ever have any security, because there's never been a TZ-balanced alliance(and even if there was, a TZ-focused alliance could overwhelm them). As for your proposals to balance yourself out, did you notice that all of them require your people to speak English in order to achieve useful fleet coordination?

Originally by: Liang Nuren
You could start by interpreting it in context - though I realize that it might be a bit difficult for you. It's very obvious from my posts that I am not talking about a server wide sov reset. What I am saying is that you must control your systems MOST OF THE TIME... and that if you cannot do that then you don't really own the space you have claim to have sov over.

As to why things would calm down given the "impossible" mechanics? Well, they would calm down because you're defending your space more than they're attacking it. Maybe you're simply killing them every time they roam... or maybe you're just spamming sov hardeners faster than they find time to kill them. Ultimately, the fact that it would be harder to "calm down" is exactly the point. It encourages "more guys to go shooting".

But you wouldn't understand more guys shooting would you? You're too used to mechanics which reward docking up and node crashing.


I think you're mostly just assuming that your vision would work as intended, which would make it the best content in Eve, since it'd be the first ever to manage that feat. You're assuming a whole lot of things about a system that you can't possibly be sure of, and that I don't think you're particularly close to correct about.

Originally by: Liang Nuren
Ah, what a good map. I find it amusing that most of the alliances of note which have lost their space between then and now have done so of their own "free will".


Ah, so you're the person they're trying to convince with the "We didn't want that space anyway!" shtick.

Snark aside, you found a third alliance that hasn't lost their space yet?

Originally by: Liang Nuren
You don't have to have 100% refine stations to make mineral compression worthwhile - certainly not if mineral compression were deliberately buffed to create player markets (as opposed to the previous enormous mineral faucets).


You should look up outpost mechanics sometime. Either you use a Minnie outpost to get 100% and haul to the production site, you spend about a Titan worth of isk to get your Amarr up to about a 75% refinery, or you just say "**** this!" and build in empire. Yeah, in theory, if there was some station with a 95% refinery and 50 lines, people might take the hit and deal with it, but there isn't such a beast.

Herschel Yamamoto
Agent-Orange
Nabaal Syndicate
Posted - 2011.01.19 21:12:00 - [316]
 

Originally by: Cyaxares II
List of languages by total number of speakers

1. Mandarin Chinese (1.12 billion)
2. English (450 million)
3. Spanish (350 million)
4. Hindi/Urdu (350 million)
5. Russian (285 million)
6. French (265 million)


Those Chinese-speakers are almost entirely in China, where they're not legally permitted to access TQ. There's maybe 30 or 40 million in the rest of the world, half of whom are in Taiwan and don't play, and half of whom are in the US/Canada and speak English. Spanish and Hindi have next to no representation in Eve - I'm genuinely unsure as to why Spanish doesn't(Latin America is wealthier than Eastern Europe for the most part, and there's no shortage of Eastern Europeans in Eve), but the demographics of Hindi are pretty obvious. Russian is almost entirely concentrated in the former Soviet-bloc countries, which leaves them pretty bereft of a NA TZ presence. French is mostly France and a bunch of desperately poor countries - Quebec isn't really enough to give them NA presence - so again, single-TZ language for Eve purposes. There is exactly one language with useful global coverage, and that's this one. If you want to find useful numbers, look up the numbers on how many people use which client localization settings.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.01.19 21:56:00 - [317]
 

Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto

As I said, reinforce timers in particular aren't strictly necessary, but you need some TZ-balancing mechanic. Without that, no alliance in the game could ever have any security, because there's never been a TZ-balanced alliance(and even if there was, a TZ-focused alliance could overwhelm them). As for your proposals to balance yourself out, did you notice that all of them require your people to speak English in order to achieve useful fleet coordination?



What I will agree to is that we don't want people going from full sov to no sov overnight - the entire point is to create long term skirmishing over an area. However, my point remains: if your space is empty 16 hours/day, you DESERVE to lose it to someone that has better timezone coverage.

So we get back to what I originally said - you or your allies need to be in control of your space MOST OF THE TIME. What language you, or your allies, speak is simply not relevant.

Quote:
I think you're mostly just assuming that your vision would work as intended, which would make it the best content in Eve, since it'd be the first ever to manage that feat. You're assuming a whole lot of things about a system that you can't possibly be sure of, and that I don't think you're particularly close to correct about.


I am not trying to build a bullet proof system off - and frankly CCP isn't looking for fully fleshed out systems. I'm trying to illustrate that current 0.0 mechanics are horribly failed mechanics - and that there are plenty of ways (this would be one) in which to force smaller amounts of power and lower amounts of power projection.

Quote:
Snark aside, you found a third alliance that hasn't lost their space yet?


Again, you are focusing entirely too much on single alliances. FWIW, I think it's more than just "single corps" that occupy the same regions year after year. It's entire masses of people with extremely static and expansive blue lists. When your blue list extends around the map from Syndicate to GW, you know something is seriously wrong.

Quote:
You should look up outpost mechanics sometime.


I have, actually. I simply think that adding to existing processes for extreme mineral compression/decompression is better than simply shrinking the minerals to start with. The net effect is smaller, and it creates player markets.

-Liang

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2011.01.20 01:18:00 - [318]
 

Originally by: Liang Nuren

I have, actually. I simply think that adding to existing processes for extreme mineral compression/decompression is better than simply shrinking the minerals to start with. The net effect is smaller, and it creates player markets.

-Liang


You fail at EVE history. Extreme mineral compression was possible and was squashed as game inbalancing at the end of 2007.

You can read the relevant dev blog here..

So the whole solution to the JB, JF and assorted means of transportation is to delete them and return to the exploits used in the past with frigates with fitted dread guns moved by carriers?


Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.01.20 06:49:00 - [319]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul

You fail at EVE history. Extreme mineral compression was possible and was squashed as game inbalancing at the end of 2007.

You can read the relevant dev blog here..



I was well aware of that dev blog when I made the post. I think that that particular dev blog outlines only a part of the overal problem they were trying to solve. But, it also seems obvious that it dovetails nicely with my position in that it is intended to be reasonable to transport compressed ores/minerals, and that transport is intended to be player driven.

I like to point out these things:
- I was well aware of this dev blog when I made my post.
- Just because an ancient dev blog says people should mine trit in 0.0 doesn't make it true today.
- There have been many subsequent dev blogs about this issue (and others like it) - like the one where they nerfed mineral faucets and the one where they addressed your frigates moving capital modules.
- It is meant to be possible to transport compressed minerals.
- The Rorqual was obviously meant to see more use than it does today. I would be happy with the idea of it being boosted to address mineral compression and decompression.

-Liang

littlet15
Amarr
Anquietas Protectorate
Bang Bang You're Dead
Posted - 2011.01.20 14:46:00 - [320]
 

Edited by: littlet15 on 20/01/2011 14:46:50
i'm seriously disapointed with the proposed changes to supercarriers. thats 2000 pilots who will lose billions of isk in value. thats enough to start them on their way to quitting, if you then make the billions of isk they invested in logistics routes completely valueless, you will be losing ALOT of your older players.
I'm sorry that your sad that you can't compete with the coalitions, i'm sorry you don't like the unpredictability and ability to be hit with a huge force with absolutely no warning. but thats what i, and ALOT of others love about EVE. i like the fact that i need to be careful at anytime, that 1 neutral could turn into 80. you can't change our force projection abilities because your scared your carrier ratting might get hotdropped.

tl;dr i'm raging against the 0.0 changes. you can't fix what isn't broken.

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2011.01.20 16:42:00 - [321]
 

Originally by: littlet15
tl;dr i'm raging against the 0.0 changes. you can't fix what isn't broken.


Maybe you missed the thousands of threads in the last year from 0.0 residents about what is broken in 0.0. Rolling Eyes

-Liang

littlet15
Amarr
Anquietas Protectorate
Bang Bang You're Dead
Posted - 2011.01.20 21:53:00 - [322]
 

i disagree with what they claim is broken. I, and alot of 0.0 residents that don't usually post, that i've made aware of these changes are expressing serious worries. i like my supercarrier as it stands. i think for the price, they're exactly what they should be.

Falin Whalen
Gallente
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.01.22 03:03:00 - [323]
 

Edited by: Falin Whalen on 22/01/2011 15:34:25
Originally by: Liang Nuren
Originally by: littlet15
tl;dr i'm raging against the 0.0 changes. you can't fix what isn't broken.


Maybe you missed the thousands of threads in the last year from 0.0 residents about what is broken in 0.0. Rolling Eyes

-Liang
The Dominion sov system, from what I read, despite what uninformed Empire/Losec lunkheads spew all over the forums.

Jump bridges are NOT killing small scale fights/ganks. Knoledge of the mechanics of the game, is what is drying up small scale fights/ganks. Not to hard to; safe up and cloak, warp into POS shields, or dock, untill the bad guys get bored and go somwhere else.

All jump bridges do is make logistics not a PITA, and make general 0.0 movement, not so much a boring chore. The "blob" existed before JBs were in game. They didn't magically make them happen, and removing them will not make them magically go away, as some people here think.

Pac SubCom
True Creation
The 0rphanage
Posted - 2011.01.22 05:23:00 - [324]
 

Edited by: Pac SubCom on 22/01/2011 05:23:29
To get people to mine in 0.0.

Thin out roids in hi sec, so that they are only useful for newbies in mining frigs. Put moongoo and some PI raw materials into the roids in lo sec and 0.0.

Can also help to "make t2 the new t1".

Mortimer Civeri
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2011.01.22 06:42:00 - [325]
 

To those who think removing Jump bridges will; fracture large coalitions, open up vast areas of 0.0 space to small alliances, bring small gangs back into vogue, cure the common cold, etc...etc... None of that is ever going to happen. Stop using your brain as a support for the "If you just __________, the game will be better." FOTM diarrhea, and use it to actually think about what needs to change to make 0.0 less stable, and fun. Right now, moon minerals, and the local rats, are the only thing that differentiate one region from another. System upgrades have homogenized zero sec to the point where anywhere can be as good as anywhere else. There is nothing differentiating "good" space from "bad" space at all, which means there is nothing driving conflict except grudges and shear habit.

Cailais
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.01.22 14:22:00 - [326]
 

The problem currently is that the logistic short cuts to fuel null sec are also the self same short cuts that reduce the volume of space between protagonists.

Jump bridges shorten the battlefield for both the ammo truck and the tank - which means null sec is actually considerably smaller than you might think looking at pure system count.

C.


Cailais
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.01.22 15:00:00 - [327]
 

Originally by: Falin Whalen


Jump bridges are NOT killing small scale fights/ganks...

All jump bridges do is ....help defenders get in front of/trap a small roaming gangs,


er sorry?

C.

Falin Whalen
Gallente
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.01.22 16:12:00 - [328]
 

Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: Falin Whalen


Jump bridges are NOT killing small scale fights/ganks...

All jump bridges do is ....help defenders get in front of/trap a small roaming gangs,


er sorry?

C.

Game mechanics, at present, make the small gang roam an exercise in Darwinism. The only thing they will catch is the stupid, the unwary, and just plain unlucky. Since there is nothing a small gang could harm, there is, most of the time, no reason to form a defence gang, except out of boredom. How is removing JBs going to change that?

Falin Whalen
Gallente
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.01.22 16:43:00 - [329]
 

Originally by: Cailais
The problem currently is that the logistic short cuts to fuel null sec are also the self same short cuts that reduce the volume of space between protagonists.
And this is bad how?

Quote:
Jump bridges shorten the battlefield for both the ammo truck and the tank - which means null sec is actually considerably smaller than you might think looking at pure system count.
Again, this is bad how? JBs, don't shorten the battlefield, it shortens the space BEHIND the battlefield. To conquer the space you have to "march" through it, you can't magically plop down a bridge at your staging POS when you don't have sov yet. When you do take sov, it is still three weeks before you can.

Ntrails
Posted - 2011.01.23 00:05:00 - [330]
 

I find it hilarious that every single solution put forward here is almost instantly broken, because no one has any intention of changing the way they play the game and so will find a way around it.

I look forward to staging all our subcaps out of torrinos, and I also look forward to the much needed supercap nerf.

As long as anything 100 dudes can do, 700 does better - the blues will be what matters. It is a universal truth unrelated to skill. There are things that could be done to make the game more fun, and in doing so change the playstyles of people who end up enjoying the other options available.

Also, you may not like the napfests, but it is politically naive to think that they would simply dissolve after all the history involved between the higher ups.




Pages: first : previous : ... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 : last (12)

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