open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New dev blog: Nullsec Development: Rules and Guidelines
 
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 (22)

Author Topic

Sister Bliss
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.08.03 21:44:00 - [211]
 

Edited by: Sister Bliss on 03/08/2011 21:48:09
I was looking forward to this blog and desperately hoping that you (CCP) would give us all a reason to look forwards positively with optimism and less cynicism for the future of the game. I'm sorry to say that all I feel is a deep sense of disappointment and disenchantment.

While these design principles are generally sound (and much enthusiastic debate can be held around the finer points and their interpretation), what is unquestionably clear is that Eve has been suffering for years from a lack of investment and a lack of sound gameplay vision.

The publication of this design principles document is evidence of that and illustrates that you have completely lost your way (many years ago) and have no sound design or strategic roadmap for Eve ('we have just started to look at it' does not count I am afraid). This design principles document is 5-6 years late and I hope that you are sufficiently open to constructive criticism to take a step back and concede that.

A year ago you published Iterative development and what's happening in 2011 to the dismay of your players and customers. You didn't listen to the feedback then, just like you have not been listening to the deafening roar of feedback over the preceeding years.

There are many of us for whom Eve is more than just a game, and while we all continue to cling on to hope, that hope continues to fade. It is not impossible to turn this situation around, but you should be under no illusion that you have a monumental task ahead (I would be so bold as to say it is make or break time).

Disappointingly the response we have seen so far from CCP does in no way seem to either acknowledge that or take positive steps towards addressing that. To take a quote from your blog "...Some of this will probably never actually happen. Some of it will take a loooong time to get done. If we finish the majority of this plan in the next five years I'd be extremely happy...";

If you actually want to safeguard the future of this game, the community which has built around it and the recurring revenue stream of your customers, you seriously need to rethink that statement. I would urge you to consider what you need to change in your organisation such that you can commit to and finish THE MAJORITY OF THAT PLAN WITHIN 2 YEARS.

Why 2 years? Asking for anything tangible within 1 year that is not a configuration change or minor tweak is foolish and anyone who has worked in delivery knows that (particularly since you have no design even at this stage). Regretably, you do not get the luxury of more that 2 years because that is realistically all you have before Eve reaches end-of-life (if not before).

Dismiss me as a bitter vet, but understand we all become bitter vets given enough time and given little enough investment into the game. I hope someone senior at CCP is reading this or getting this message to act before it is too late. I would urge you to immediately re-assign all resources to these issues as your #1 priority and de-prioritise all non-critical sub-projects which seem to be consuming all of your resources and budget (Incarna, turret/ship remodelling, NEX store items etc.).

This really is your last chance.





Vanessa Vansen
Posted - 2011.08.03 21:51:00 - [212]
 

First, I'm really impressed by the activity of CCP in this thread! Thumbs up!
And, yes, I do hope that this leads to some good ideas getting implemented

ok some ideas that came into my mind, I don't claim that they are good but they might be helpful to come up with a good idea ...

benefits for holding space
1) make ladar/radar/grav/combat sites visible via an upgrade for holding corporation or alliance a certain time after the site appeared (e.g. from 60 minutes at level one down to 0 minutes at level 5 in 15 minutes steps) ... reduces time killing scanning for holding members (something for WHs as well?)

2) upgrade to decloak ships after a certain amount of time (e.g. 150 minutes at level 1 down to 30 minutes at level 5 in 30 minutes steps) ... when should a ship decloaked in that way should be able to cloak again? ... yes, bring your cloaking ship into our system, we will catch you when your cloak fails

sov changes
you could combine the "king of the hill"-suggestion with an incursion like mechanism, say for sovereignty level 1 you get the best time factor with 100 to 200 pilots (add 100 pilots for each level)
This way it could be better not to bring 2000 pilots into a system with sovereignty level 1

ITTigerClawIK
Amarr
Galactic Rangers
Galactic-Rangers
Posted - 2011.08.03 21:53:00 - [213]
 

i had hoped to see the gate controll method of sov control come in from dominion, where you need forces to controll over 50% of the gates in a system for a certain period of time in order to take sov in order to split blobs.

another thing i though would be great would be that the first system an alliance took would be there capital and one that was established you could only take sov from the systems connected to another system that you had sovreighnty over so you didnt have alliances having controll of random bits of space in every random direction.

these probably arnt the best ways of doing null sec sov as i dont understand the complete intricasys of null sec sov but thought id throw it up there anyways

Saikoyu
Amarr
Rho Dynamics
Posted - 2011.08.03 21:53:00 - [214]
 

First, I will say that I have never lived in 0.0 space, just read about it, treat that as you will.

Second, I do hope you still listen to this.

In reading though the dev blog and the comments to it, I think I see some of what is going on here, and why 0.0 space in its current form has not been good enough. CCP has said that there should be something for everyone to do, no matter how big or small their organization is. However, in practice only blobs and massive alliances seem to count. CCP has said that there should never be a reason to leave null sec, but in practice, many have left due to mechanics reasons (not enough isk, better in high sce, etc).

I believe that this is because 0.0 was meant to be a place for players to create empires of their own. In reality, CCP has created the American wild west, or other similar situations in history. Like the wild west, the only law in 0.0 space is the law of the gun, he who has the most guns wins. This encourages blobs, lag, etc. However, looking to history, we have the solution, civilization. Eventually towns in the wild west became cities, rule of law was enforced, and while conflict still existed, it was handled differently. The metaphor breaks down at the end as cities in the American Mid-West don't wage war on each other, but it still works fairly well. It needs to be possible to civilize 0.0 space so that it does not matter who has the most guns, but who can use them effectively. Please note I am not advocating the end to fighting, just the end to blobs.

Look at it this way, one needs to make 0.0 space like mini-high sec to the claiming alliance. That way, they can close the doors whenever they want. Cryojammers up so that no one can drop cap ships on them. Gate guns at every gate, at the very least, warnings when "enemies of the state" come in through the gates, maybe even NPC battleships of their own at those gates. Make it so that a straight forward blob attack might succeed, but would be so costly that no one in their right mind would try it. This is step one.

Step two, the counter. At the same time, make it so that smaller ships in limited numbers could enter the system easily. Give them some small targets, like the cryojammer, gate guns control center, etc, all easy hit and run targets if no one is there to defend them. Maybe give them a 24 hour clock to die, so that if no one replaces them for the alliance, 24 hours later that system goes off line. Maybe this becomes the new job for Black Ops gangs.

Step three, negations. On the other hand, the alliance that controls the system may open it up for development, allowing other alliances to enter and leave freely, to set up POS stations, create market hubs, all for a piece of the action. Maybe even allow the controlling alliance to create the equivalent of lvl 4 missions in their space for some fee to an NPC corp.

Step four, the grass is always greener. Not all space is equal, nor should it be. But it has to be more than sanctums and moon goo, which is all there currently is. Maybe some systems will offer you deals from NPC corporations if you let them put up a station there. Maybe some systems will offer 'roids that will never all be mined. Some systems are choke points and their very position is an advantage. No matter what system or systems you have, there should always be one more that offers something new. Say, every system in max jump range should be different.

In the end, this achieves most of what the dev blog seems to be saying. There is something for everyone, no matter how big or small you are, you should always be able to claim space. That space becomes something you want to keep and protect, but there is always the call of another better system in some way. You can fight, or talk, but the blob will never be the winning key. And it allows any player to be the ruler of all they survey, and that should be the core fantasy if it is not already.

Kirkland Langue
Posted - 2011.08.03 21:54:00 - [215]
 

Edited by: Kirkland Langue on 03/08/2011 21:56:15
Edited by: Kirkland Langue on 03/08/2011 21:55:15
Unlock This Thread please.

J Kunjeh
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.03 21:58:00 - [216]
 

Originally by: Sister Bliss

Dismiss me as a bitter vet, but understand we all become bitter vets given enough time and given little enough investment into the game. I hope someone senior at CCP is reading this or getting this message to act before it is too late. I would urge you to immediately re-assign all resources to these issues as your #1 priority and de-prioritise all non-critical sub-projects which seem to be consuming all of your resources and budget (Incarna, turret/ship remodelling, NEX store items etc.).

This really is your last chance.



"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"

You are dismissed.

Elojs
Gallente
Corp 42
Posted - 2011.08.03 21:58:00 - [217]
 

Edited by: Elojs on 03/08/2011 22:09:50
I'm against eliminating the local channel in nullsec. I'm not certain, but I think those most in favor are the ones who want to sneak up on people and blow them up without having to risk themselves while they're doing it.

It's *the* primary means to recon and monitor the system you're in. It's what tells you to duck for cover if you're mining and a bunch of reds drop in.

Keep local, or you'll kill nullsec for the industry types.

ITTigerClawIK
Amarr
Galactic Rangers
Galactic-Rangers
Posted - 2011.08.03 22:04:00 - [218]
 

Originally by: Elojs
I'm against eliminating the local channel in nullsec.

It's *the* primary means to recon and monitor the system you're in. It's what tells you to duck for cover if you're mining and a bunch of reds drop in.

Keep local, or you'll kill nullsec for the industry types.



This is why we need another intel tool that does this that does not involve local , hopefully some changes to the scanner or something, couse im pretty sure local list was never originaly intended as an intel tool.

Lan Staz
Posted - 2011.08.03 22:04:00 - [219]
 

Originally by: Elojs
I'm against eliminating the local channel in nullsec.

It's *the* primary means to recon and monitor the system you're in. It's what tells you to duck for cover if you're mining and a bunch of reds drop in.

Keep local, or you'll kill nullsec for the industry types.


The idea would be to remove local as an intelligence gathering tool and replace it with a set of real intelligence gathering tools.

Widemouth Deepthroat
Posted - 2011.08.03 22:27:00 - [220]
 

One problem with this game atm is balance.

40 vs 400...40 should never be able to win.
Nerf super caps.
Nerf hacs.
Nerf logistics.
Boost lower tier noob ships like black bird.
Give us sentry guns in 0.0.
Give us more powerful pos defenses.
Fix pos management so spies and metagaming is no longer an issue.
Make it so we can disable services at npc 0.0 stations so griefers like PL can't just use those station to base out of and ruin the game for other paying customers.

Elojs
Gallente
Corp 42
Posted - 2011.08.03 22:43:00 - [221]
 

Edited by: Elojs on 03/08/2011 22:45:40
Originally by: ITTigerClawIK
Originally by: Elojs
I'm against eliminating the local channel in nullsec.

It's *the* primary means to recon and monitor the system you're in. It's what tells you to duck for cover if you're mining and a bunch of reds drop in.

Keep local, or you'll kill nullsec for the industry types.



This is why we need another intel tool that does this that does not involve local , hopefully some changes to the scanner or something, couse im pretty sure local list was never originaly intended as an intel tool.


I'm sure it wasn't designed to be an intel tool, however, it became one because there was and remains (atm) no other intel tool to cover the job.

If CCP wants to spend some man months developing a 'new' set of tools, imo another example of feeping creatureism, when there are other issues more in need of and deserving of those man months, well, that's up to them.

Nullsec isn't the wild west... it's 'Sons of Anarchy' with spaceships. I actually like the notion of gradually 'civilizing' far flung systems in nullsec, raising their security level with lesser profits in the more civilized areas. After a certain level of development, an NPC empire planting an outpost would tend to stabilize a region, as well as offering a bit of incentive to industrialize as the outpost would buy the resources acquired from a fair range of systems away. These outposts could become, in effect, stable low-sec systems, that would offer some security for the nullsec pilots in an alliance as well as a ready market for materials sought for in high sec, and passing off the transport risk to the NPCs in exchange for a slightly lower price from the NPC outpost in null. It could also bring sought for items from high sec to be sold for somewhat higher prices by the same NPC outpost. Said outpost could offer courier contracts for JF pilots for transport (round trips) as well. (Another ISK faucet, as well as a mission source.)

I still like the notion of the bigger alliances (with lots of super caps) drawing fire from the NPC empires (also with lots of super caps) trying to get their piece of the pie. To that end, I'd like to see the game mechanics recognize the difference between the landlords and the renters, and these NPC's aggress accordingly, depending on the NPC's interests in the area. Some might target the renters to crimp the ISK faucet of the alliance. Some might target the alliance assets to crimp the assets possessed by the alliances. I think the larger alliances need something that kicks them in the butts from time to time, to prevent the complacency and boredom that sitting back and collecting tens of billions of ISK each month from renters they treat like dogs breeds in them.

So far, most of what I've heard and seen here is aimed toward favoring the gankers, against the mid to smaller groups they by and large prey upon; or nerfing game mechanics that the smaller groups use to their advantage. And nothing for the biggest guys in the neighborhood to worry about, in spite of the external threat their very existence offers to the four (or five?) empires that have established long-term interests in high sec.

The biggest alliances *do* need something to fear in nullsec, on a day-to-day basis. It will make their lives a bit more interesting. As well as giving them something besides their primary opposition's renters to focus their aggressive preferences towards.

Just another observation...

VaL Iscariot
Caldari
The Concilium Enterprises
Spectrum Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.03 22:48:00 - [222]
 

Edited by: VaL Iscariot on 03/08/2011 23:12:56
Edited by: VaL Iscariot on 03/08/2011 22:48:47
Originally by: CCP Soundwave
Originally by: VaL Iscariot
"Nullsec features and content should always remind players why they left safe space, and never make them think about going back"

Was this considered when you applied the Nerf-Bat to half of null sec with the whole system security thing? No Havens or Sanctums in any system with a security above -.25? A few losses in and I was broke with no real income source beyond my market toon. That only goes so far, as one needs gold to breed gold. I made decent isk running the forsaken sites because they have a high chance to spawn a faction rat, but it didn't take long for others to realize this too and my income stream was terminated. Thus I went back to high sec/low sec to grind missions, and run tasty Radar sites. That was 6 months ago, and have I've not even considered going 'back' to null sec: The Land of Boredom. Go team.


Nullsec isn't guaranteed to make everyone happy. If you like empire better, that's life.


Well Richard, what I was trying to say was maybe before you say something dumb like what I quoted, maybe you should consider your previous actions. You've already made lots of people leave null sec with your actions, and its obvious you will do it again. In the attempt to 'fix and balance' everything, you're simply breaking everything.. then again this is CCP we're talking about, that's life.

Edit* I read you're little statement about wanting to run missions in Motsu, and all i have to say was did you look at my sec status? Let me make clear that I DO NOT want to live in high sec or low sec. I live WHERE THE MONEY IS and to be honest, I make more isk in low and high then I would make in null. Thus, why should I live there? I like my little pirate life. Why bother changing if I'd only make the same amount of isk with a higher risk? Where I live there are at least 4 static wormholes at any given time and odds are, at least one of them is empty. If I really want 0.0 I can go in, kill tons of sleepers, make 500 million, and retire for a few weeks. This is NOT my prefered game style, smart ass. YOU put me here doing this. I'd be happily chugging away in alliance warfare, mining, pvping, trolling, and running sanctums in 0.0 everyday ignoring ****ty patch after ****ty patch. Letting this pitiful excuse of Captain Quarters Staring at a Dorr slide and possibly not even commenting on this blog at all.

I'm sorry, did you expect everyone to say: 'Oh my CCP, what a excellent idea! I'll jut forget all the richard moves you made over the past two months and cheer my happy fan boy head off for you. Ignoring your previous actions, I know firmly that you will follow through 100%, with the player base in mind. I, as a paying customer, will wait patiently for these idea's (that have been common knowledge in the player base for years now and have yet to be implemented) with hope and excitement for the future!'

Opps, guess I've seen this moral boosting type of dev-blog before.

Vyktor Abyss
The Abyss Corporation
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:10:00 - [223]
 

Eeek, what a giant CCP brainfart.... Where to start?

1. You claim to need a new "grand unifying theory", well what happened to all the old ones every time you created new theories?

2. Raising the barriers to claiming Nullsec like you did with Dominion actually greatly harmed "emergent" gameplay. Paying CONCORD (I mean WTF?) for a claim is ridiculous considering they do nothing out there.

3. You should have listened much more closely to the creators of one of the greatest and certainly most unique null-sec stories (CVA vs Ushra'Khan) regarding previous changes. You kind of dumped on them from a great height every nullsec expansion even though they were providing the best populated, richest and most diverse nullsec gameplay for years. Learn from that.

4. The highest end rewards in null-sec (Moons and such) do not benefit the majority of the players in null sec. Moons should never have been the ultimate prize, rather just a component - I'd actually argue null sec mining should be much more profitable per player hour spent than per hour moon income, since mining is an actual activity that enrichens the space.

5. Industry in 0.0 needs a market. Using stations only as places to aquire new ships etc is a bottleneck for the average player entering 0.0. By this I mean 90% of player owned stations refuse public docking, meaning resupply and generaly consumption makes your 10 unit module order often sit there for 90 days. Another distribution system (perhaps using planets custom offices and delivery fees) for new gear would help support a more active nullsec population.

6. Complexity should be kept to a minimum in terms of planting a flag. Player organisation should be supported better especially with better corp/alliance tools in order to make nullsec more accessible to all levels of corporations/alliances.

7. Huge Powerblocks ruin the dynamic nature of 0.0 and you should look more at why those powerblocks formed in the first place and are virtually unchallenged rather than just attempt to smash them down with nerfs etc

8. Talk to the players more in an ongoing way. This blog is nice and all, but it feels like you CCP chaps will vanish from the discussion the moment you're satisfied you have enough to start with, since thats how you appeared to work in the past. Feedback had little effect, you'd vanish into your workshop and built what you thought was awesome, but actually not what the players wanted. Like Santa's elves not reading the children's letter, but just building what they wanted.

Some acknowledgement of reading after page 8 would be cool too. Thanks - I'll think of more as soon as I've hit post, I know it. Confused

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:13:00 - [224]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Azrael Dinn
How about if you introduce the PI to moons also in some way. This could be furter applied to the DUST things later on and would have nice opportunities. Not sure how to balance and what how the POSes will work on it. Balance would be needed definetly but it's a brainstorm ^^


MoonPI (heh) is something we're considering looking into the feasibility of. It does solve the issue in a very neat way.

How about this regarding 0.0 production?

First, introduce PI-style production chains for all ships and modules. This removes the rather boring direct minerals->ship/module production (lack of) chain.

Then make it so that production of these components are very expensive within stations due to place requirements and regulations. Thus all production of intermediate components happens in deployable structures out in space, and if you don't protect them they'll not be operating at full efficiency and/or allow for limited forms of raiding.

Best part is; to produce these components in high-sec would require renting public in-space production facilities at high cost, essentially giving 0.0 a competitive advantage.

Ntrails
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:21:00 - [225]
 


It is nice to see you decide that you think null sec should be good, and profitable, and fun. You should do it.

Elojs
Gallente
Corp 42
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:22:00 - [226]
 

Edited by: Elojs on 03/08/2011 23:24:25
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Azrael Dinn
How about if you introduce the PI to moons also in some way. This could be furter applied to the DUST things later on and would have nice opportunities. Not sure how to balance and what how the POSes will work on it. Balance would be needed definetly but it's a brainstorm ^^


MoonPI (heh) is something we're considering looking into the feasibility of. It does solve the issue in a very neat way.

How about this regarding 0.0 production?

First, introduce PI-style production chains for all ships and modules. This removes the rather boring direct minerals->ship/module production (lack of) chain.

Then make it so that production of these components are very expensive within stations due to place requirements and regulations. Thus all production of intermediate components happens in deployable structures out in space, and if you don't protect them they'll not be operating at full efficiency and/or allow for limited forms of raiding.

Best part is; to produce these components in high-sec would require renting public in-space production facilities at high cost, essentially giving 0.0 a competitive advantage.


Rather than introduce entire production chains, how about allowing factories accepting the current mineral resources and producing on-planet instead? Same advantages, lots and lots less work to develop.

This would offer some risk to the BP's used in the production process, meaning copying BPO's somewhere safer would be in order, e.g. BPC's becoming used planetside being at risk in the event of combat at the production center in DUST.


Helothane
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:31:00 - [227]
 

Quote:
Nullsec moneymaking activities should be generally competitive with one another, and therefore pay out more than equivalent activities elsewhere


This is where things get sticky. You can look at individual categories of activities (e.g. mining, anoms, belt ratting) and see that in general nullsec versions of the activities pay out more than the equivalent activities elsewhere, until you look at mission running. Mission running is a major source of income in high sec and to a lesser degree low sec with level 5 missions. Running missions in nullsec is perilous at best. Sure, some manage to do it enough to provide a trickle of faction items to the markets, but I would bet that few are able to run missions for the Sisters of EVE while PL/Ev0ke/NC. are using those NPC systems as their supercap staging systems, or Serpentis when Godfathers camp stations with carriers, or when Blood Raiders' home systems have been the staging area for the invaders du jour in Delve. For essentially the same missions and mission payouts that you can get in high sec. High sec mission running is so profitable that some 'take vacations' to run missions in high sec to fund their PvP in null.

Perhaps there could be a system upgrade that will put a mission agent in a player outpost in that system? That would also reduce the need to run to Jita every time you need implants. Some BPO seeding or NPC schools with skillbooks (not necessarily a full selection) would also go towards reducing the need to run to Jita all the time.

Orakkus
Minmatar
m3 Corp
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:40:00 - [228]
 

Edited by: Orakkus on 03/08/2011 23:41:30
I dunno.. but this may sound like a stupid idea and I'm not sure if this idea was already covered.. but..

Each Region is officially "owned" by a pirate faction, be they Guristas, or Drones, or whatever. Why not have CCP setup an incursion style mechanic that increases the rate of pirate incursions in a particular alliance's SOV based on the number of systems that Alliance has SOV in.

For Example, let's say Alliance "A" has Sov in four systems. The incursion mechanic would be set up so that an incursion would happen once a month in one of those four systems. However, Alliance "B" has eight systems in a particular region, so the mechanic would then bump up the number of incursions so that at least three of those systems would be hit in a month. The more systems you get, the more incursions that happen in more systems in less time. If they fail to defeat an Incursion then the system reverts back to the NPC owners.. with taxation penalties to all items being sold in the markets and higher docking fees.

Controlling Sov then could be adjusted so that you aren't only battling the current sov holders, BUT the NPC owners as well. If the invading alliance wishes to control a system, they have to have to achieve a certain kill to loss ratio AND defeat so many incursions instead.

Nirnaeth Ornoediad
Caldari
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:41:00 - [229]
 

The only item I disagree with is this:

"The interests of players and their leaders should align
Nullsec features should thoroughly consider the interests of players at all levels of corp/alliance heirarchies, and ensure that their interests all align"

I think some of the most interesting conflicts come when alliance leadership and alliance membership are not aligned. For example, the DRF recently waged an excellent PR campaign against the NC accusing--probably correctly--that NC leadership was keeping ISK from moon minerals and reactions for themselves.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the bullet point, though.

Coco Caine
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:49:00 - [230]
 

Oh dear, what a waste of time to read this blog.

'Nullsec is the land of opportunity and adventure'

/o\

Please don't get more specific!

Team BFF are thinking about nullsec again, with an eye to making some improvements over the next year or so.

Don't overcommit either! Or so.


MechaMouse
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:51:00 - [231]
 

At first I was quite skeptical. After reading the list I am encouraged.

Just don't get too ****y over-engineering things

LTcyberT1000
Caldari
Free Space Tech
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.03 23:54:00 - [232]
 

Hello everyone! :)

So here's nullsec vision in another pod flying from 2004:

When it all began for me, the nullsec was gigantic area to explore, 3500 0.0 systems for 6000 players online. That was HUGE empty space comparing to overcrowding today. So, on early days, players had risky 0.0 expeditions for pillage of high valued resources and that was good aventure to them. Today we have up to 40 000 players online with same 3500 nullsec systems and it was not expanded when comparing to old days. That's one of points what needs to be talked about.

Secondary, there was always trouble to do anything alone in 0.0 (except solo PvP) and the second(or more) account seemed to hit high counts as workaround (good for CCP as money value, bad for players) - most of them are army of almost inactive clones for single purposes: cyno/mining barge(or Rorqual)/super carrier(or titan) pilot and so on. The legacy of having secondary account as temporary solution is still not solved over 6 years and that's frustrating at least to me when I see many characters in corporation/alliance chat and only few actual active people.

The POS infrastructure - well, it is daunting task to keep fuelled/track of moon reactions on 5 or more towers if you are in small corporation (not talking about how you get fuel/moon minerals in the first place). The R64 moon mining was always been primary target for all alliances to control and that's where smaller groups of players are having hands cut off. There was promise about comets for same resources mining few years ago but.. that did not happen. This part needs general overhaul.

The SOV system - It is better than was claim on POS spamming but still.. Larger alliances feel pretty safe not loosing their territories against others because of SOV mechanics and amounts people defending it. If 0.0 space would be expanded to same level as it was on 2004.. Those issues may disappear very quickly because of how many people would be spread over amount of 0.0s

The industry - On 2004 and some years later the Arkonor and Bistot was most valuable ore bringing wealth to whose who had good mining fleet. Today it is just another boring profession what lost its pride because of minerals prices drop in market and even dumb rats farming in top anomalies are much more profitable. So we have lots of farmers just flying over and shooting those X-es instead of old good industry guys making 0.0s markets. This needs overhaul too.

The fleet fight - The main rule: Bigger blob always win was always here. In beginning it was just up to battleships, today it gone to super carriers blobs level. Nothing much is changed really, still same stuff just with higher lag level as much more pilots are engaged for same single point in space. Needs to be talked about with new ideas.

The Exploration and mini professions - When it all began, it was really enjoyable player experience as it did bring good time and wealth in game. Today it is not so much interesting because of the time spent does not reward with good fun and does not bring wealth any more. That needs total overhaul.

The Incarna Sansha invasions - was expected to bring new history and challenges but in reallity it is not because of number people needed to shoot another X-s faction with much higher risk to fail if someone makes mistake. That needs some rework to make it able fight systems back in smaller groups of people while keeping good time for those who go for it.

And finally W-Space - I used play there when it all began, the Tech 3 was a mystery and it was old good time making it to appear in market with really good wealth followed it. Today it is just another farming place and nothing much interesting going on except PvP what's crippled for capital ships due limitations of wormholes. Even if that wasn't good though about capitals fight in w-space, it still happens. People are spending up to few days until small capital fleet gets into and puts local POS-es down. The another point to think about is - what about capitals jumping from one w-space system to another? In k-space it is not a problem so why not in w-space?

So that's it, hopefully CCP enjoyed reading my thoughs
from my personal player experience! Smile

Elojs
Gallente
Corp 42
Posted - 2011.08.04 00:09:00 - [233]
 

Edited by: Elojs on 04/08/2011 00:11:01
Originally by: LTcyberT1000
Hello everyone! :)

So here's nullsec vision in another pod flying from 2004:




Sorry for the radical edit. Smile Fine article; I appreciated the historical perspective.


Spy 21
Caldari
Lonetrek Exploration and Salvage
Posted - 2011.08.04 00:13:00 - [234]
 

Very large amount of excellent ideas put forth in this thread.

The feature of Null Sec today is that it favors larger and larger groups of pilots to the detriment of smaller groups. This is the inevitable result of current rules of engagement and ship design. IE the bigger fleets have the advantage over the smaller fleets.

Null Sec today is one great big WW2 battlefield... this will always favor the larger and more organized group of players. Large fleets slug it out on predetermined battlefields in a manner that favors the side with the biggest amount of the biggest ships. With no change on the horizon, it's conceivable that one large power block may one day control the whole of Null Sec.

If we want to give purchase to the smaller groups of players to have any type of interest and success in this huge part of New Eden then we need to offer more opportunities for Asymmetrical Warfare... Eve style. Perhaps areas of Null Sec that capital ships simply cannot enter... areas where battleships might not fit either. A place for people to hide. A way to snipe at a larger fleet from a distance and not be instantly scanned down and warped to. An analog to a civilian population that limits the types of weapons that could be used in certain areas. This might give opportunities for the smaller corporations/alliance to participate in Null Sec life. Maybe areas where a smaller group might successfully be "squatters" in an area that is overall controlled by a huge power block.

Any changes of this nature would need to be measured as to not rule out the large fleet fights that take place for the upper level sovereignty that exists now. There is no need to screw the tens of thousands of players that have settled and claimed null sec currently. Some changes that allow smaller players to participate and engage in guerrilla type warfare and banditry in certain areas would bring more people to null sec and actually create small scale fleet fights.

This probably would not change the overall sov map, but within that map there would be areas that the large alliances don't control completely. Backwater areas that might be full of insurgents... Indian Country.

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.08.04 00:16:00 - [235]
 

Originally by: Elojs
Edited by: Elojs on 03/08/2011 23:24:25
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
How about this regarding 0.0 production?

First, introduce PI-style production chains for all ships and modules. This removes the rather boring direct minerals->ship/module production (lack of) chain.

Then make it so that production of these components are very expensive within stations due to place requirements and regulations. Thus all production of intermediate components happens in deployable structures out in space, and if you don't protect them they'll not be operating at full efficiency and/or allow for limited forms of raiding.

Best part is; to produce these components in high-sec would require renting public in-space production facilities at high cost, essentially giving 0.0 a competitive advantage.


Rather than introduce entire production chains, how about allowing factories accepting the current mineral resources and producing on-planet instead? Same advantages, lots and lots less work to develop.

This would offer some risk to the BP's used in the production process, meaning copying BPO's somewhere safer would be in order, e.g. BPC's becoming used planetside being at risk in the event of combat at the production center in DUST.

There would be no need for BPO's to be copied, as the production would be for components not the finished product.

And the point of doing this a bit more extensive than just using PI facilities is that it would be a solution to several different issues.

Vio Geraci
Amarr
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.04 00:29:00 - [236]
 

Just chiming in that I don't think that adding industrial slots to planets will solve anything. It will make life in null-sec more bearable, but it will not solve any underlying issues.

Elojs
Gallente
Corp 42
Posted - 2011.08.04 00:32:00 - [237]
 

Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
Originally by: Elojs
Edited by: Elojs on 03/08/2011 23:24:25
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab
How about this regarding 0.0 production?

First, introduce PI-style production chains for all ships and modules. This removes the rather boring direct minerals->ship/module production (lack of) chain.

Then make it so that production of these components are very expensive within stations due to place requirements and regulations. Thus all production of intermediate components happens in deployable structures out in space, and if you don't protect them they'll not be operating at full efficiency and/or allow for limited forms of raiding.

Best part is; to produce these components in high-sec would require renting public in-space production facilities at high cost, essentially giving 0.0 a competitive advantage.


Rather than introduce entire production chains, how about allowing factories accepting the current mineral resources and producing on-planet instead? Same advantages, lots and lots less work to develop.

This would offer some risk to the BP's used in the production process, meaning copying BPO's somewhere safer would be in order, e.g. BPC's becoming used planetside being at risk in the event of combat at the production center in DUST.

There would be no need for BPO's to be copied, as the production would be for components not the finished product.

And the point of doing this a bit more extensive than just using PI facilities is that it would be a solution to several different issues.


Ok, I was just thinking that this could be a quick fix and yield a massive benefit. Basically, just enabling a manufacturing plant on planet with varying production capabilities. Modules and ammo only, no component manufacture, or ships above, say a shuttle. Storage space alone would impose a significant limit on capacity in any event. In effect, a mini-POS that could be individually owned, and largely manage itself, just taking resources delivered and transported to the planet. Given the relative volumes of the materials, the factories couldn't produce a max run of many BPC's, as sufficient supplies would require many silos of storage, removing other PI facilities from the mix due to lack of power. It might not be a perfect fit as is, but it's a lot closer to completion than starting from scratch.

Diomedes Calypso
Aetolian Armada
Posted - 2011.08.04 00:39:00 - [238]
 

Edited by: Diomedes Calypso on 04/08/2011 00:52:39
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Jekyl Eraser
Some thoughts about what i think 0.0 should be:

Moon and planet income should be dynamic. If there is static content players will behave static after the first war. It is incorrect to think 'rarity of resources crete conflict'. Rarity only limits how many afford to live in 0.0. All systems should be good places for individuals in 0.0 with some golden eggs(moons and planets) moving around galaxy for corps and alliances to fight for.

Your income should not be destructable (havens, sanctums).

It shouldn't be possible(nor smart)(bridges and jumps) to bring half galaxy to one fight. If you bring the fleet to the other side of galaxy, your home should be vulnerable for many hours. Currently those huge cooldowns make sure you are safe.

Hotdropping is too fast.... jumping shouldn't be instant.

Your implants shouldn't be destroyed so easily by bubbles. Bubbles slows every 0.0 resident skilltraining.




I'm still yet to be convinced about dynamic resources. We generally want players to claim space, settle down, develop it etc, and if doing so means their space becomes worthless, what's the point? Specifically with the "random moon movement" thing, I'd also be concerned that some little corp will have claimed a dead-end constellation in the middle of nowhere and developed it, only to have a major moon appear, followed by a big alliance who turfs them out to get at the moon.

I'm not dead-set against the idea, I've just not seen a really good argument as to why it's sensible.

Most of the rest of this I agree with, and the bubbles/implants thing is an interesting point.


Deserves repeating.... glad the eye is on the ball here.

I'll also put a "me too" on the vital importance of people being able to improve space.

Being able to improve space and build defenses really is a founding element of the Aspirations for many players. Just keep that in mind the jump bridges were really a change in fabric made by players.

Maybe reducing the number of ships that could go through per minute could be a good middle ground, allowing a lot of help for a few people but little help for large fleets...

... I'm not sure that making people insecure about every-move is really the way to make for more pvp.. sounds like it will stop movement and keep people from coming together.

***** I'd like to see this guiding principle put on your list:

Where possible develope carrots, not sticks, to lure people into situations where ideal fights will develope.

(Things similar to the wormhole system, limmiting access with things like factions spawns in them could be cool.. have the faction spawn wormhole show up on the overview. 15 minutes before the event with a incursion like announcment on the top left visible from nearby systems, that some system in the constellation (specifics left out) will has such a spawn pending. ---- probably something a bit less than a standard faction spawn everytime.. dont want to glut those items ... also.. I got no idea how, but somehow they gotta only spawn in a less farmable way -- maybe with more than one entrance each from vastly different parts of the map...some few people could chose to jump through both and camp the exit with the small group of ships that squeezed through the crowd control gate)

Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari
Sane Industries Inc.
Posted - 2011.08.04 00:42:00 - [239]
 

Originally by: Vio Geraci
Just chiming in that I don't think that adding industrial slots to planets will solve anything. It will make life in null-sec more bearable, but it will not solve any underlying issues.

It's not industrial slots on planets (or space) I'm talking about... This would be the introduction of a whole new industry similar to PI commodities, and 0.0 would have a clear economic advantage.

This would result in a shift in the way the trade flows between high-sec and null-sec, in essence turning 0.0 into a manufacturing space while high-sec does the final assembly for sale on market.

Nova Fox
Gallente
Novafox Shipyards
Posted - 2011.08.04 00:44:00 - [240]
 

Breakable Automation

Marginally cheap (as far as allainces are concenred) to encourage deployment under the defacto 'just because' instead of
'Should I deploy one if the enemy is going to blow it up?'
Makes life that much easier (but should never net in 'free money/resources')
Easily disabled and Easily destroyed with a bit more effort
Lootable by Raiders if destroyed.

One example.
Have players create and build conviences (ie Ice Harvester Node in Ice belts that will keep a tower fueled in the same system but wont generate excess fuel, node can be easily disabled and with no POS shields can be destroyed)

Other ideas
Belt Refineries (miners can dump ore there and the minerals are processed and then sent to a pos for pickup)

Securty Starbase that controls system automated drones and defenses that would protect remote buildings but are utterly useless agasint cunning gangs. This will be like a pos but for security only. If destroyed all system defense are offlined.

Automated Defense Drone Hangers - Feed it minerals and it procure system defense drones that can possibly discourage solo raiders, help defend remote buildings (but not star bases) and give some small patrol a better chance against a small raid.

Sentry Guns - Deployable Immobile guns that fire on any positivly hostile players in thier range. Can be disabled or ignored if at a gate or outpost. Can be deployed near belts, remote buildings, gates and outposts.

Forward Bases - Offensive building that provides shields stores ammo and supplies and automatically heals units near it but has no offensive ability and doesnt have the stamina of a starbase.


Pages: first : previous : ... 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 ... : last (22)

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