open All Channels
seplocked Corporation, Alliance and Organization Discussions
blankseplocked Does anyone see a problem the way Eve is headed?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 : last (10)

Author Topic

Revolution Rising
Minmatar
Serenity Engineering and Transport Company
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2008.12.10 05:21:00 - [241]
 

Nerf Sov - hardcap limit on sov systems (perhaps a skill?), make 0.0 twice as big.

Manfred Sideous
Amarr
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2008.12.10 05:42:00 - [242]
 

Moons
Drastically increase the power/cpu & fuel usage of moon harvester add modifier that drastically reduces a pos's fuel storage capability. So by employing the use of it lowers the defense increases fuel cost and maintnence of tower. Make moon materials mineable by players in a new class of mining ship. Thereby increasing income potential of players in 0.0. Add known moon materials to loot tables of npc spawns. Also to help negate market need. The general premise is to put the isk back in the players hand for measurable effort versus litte effort of current status quo.

Jumpbridges & DD's. Cannot jumpbridge within 5au of npc/empire space. Cannot DD in a cyno jammed system. 100% alignment time increase for 60 seconds after DD. Jumpbridges can only be placed in station systems or a adjacent side system.

The cap blob

Introduce new ship classes. Field artillary - super high dmg terrible tracking little tank and maneuvering capabilities.No jump engine. Cannot move while in fire mode (think short duration siege) Design to kill unsupported capitals. Able to engage upto 5au from target Cannot target independantly requires on grid friendly to laze target (new roll for cov ops)
Sub - cloaking platform able to dish out massive volley dmg to dread carriers with a very very high refire rate 60 second or more. Slow maneuvering can warp while cloaked.

General game mechanics

Local chat - charecters do not appear in local unless they speak or a war dec is in place. On board scanner reports all boarded ships in local but can only lock on to signature within 14.3 au for directional purposes.
Ded mails- only in station systems in non-npc regions
Standings - cost on a escalating scale same as war decs. In regards to blue standings a cost modifier based on entity size being blued.
Alliance size - the bigger the higher the monthly maintnence fee. This will help to negate napblocs from merging to avoid standings fees. Will also create more teamwork and space usage since coupled with my moon mining idea income won't stream without effort. Neither should safety in numbers or standings.
Sov mechanics - sov can be lost or maintained by the number of npc's killed in a constellation.
Empire missions - nerf payout
0.0 missions - boost payout
Npc space - increase/add

Ccp ill be willing to entertain a job offer... Kthnx

Felix Dzerzhinsky
Caldari
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
Posted - 2008.12.10 07:24:00 - [243]
 

I don't think the solution lies in new ship classes and more firepower - because anti-capital blob options in warfare will be available to everyone. . .and fleets will just have those ships added into the frey - giving more power to larger alliances.

What needs to change is the way POSs work. They take too much time to put up and take down, and the whole fuel mechanism is off as is the pos mail that warns of low fuel (it should be very spacific about how much time is left and such). Anchoring and Onlining, offlining and unanchoring should be per person, not per pos - this alone means that multiple people can work together to put up and take down a pos. Sov. PoSs should be on planets and not on moons and so on.

POSs have ruined the game imo. . .and it needs to get back to ships popping, not POSs

Aristrat
Amarr
WEPRA CORP
Posted - 2008.12.10 07:29:00 - [244]
 

Originally by: harry beanbag
1. Removale of the local window
2. jump bridges
3. High end moons are the real problem with eve
4. Introduction of more NPC 00 space
5. New ships or new tech ...
6. A fee to set corporations/alliances standings
7. The most important thing is to get the newer players out into 00



1. Did you tried to roam around? Did you get some fight? These days no one wants to fight if numbers are equal or even worse, higher but still similar. We are usually roaming through 3 or 4 regions for night and sad fact is that all those gangs are out there to get easy kills, not to confront each other. You may say this is chestbeating but I can assure you...90% of gangs trying to run away from us at first sight of our scout. They usually get into fight only with drastically superior numbers, and funny thing is that most of them disengage even then. So remove local as it is today and you will get lot of fun.

2. Why JBs are such a problem?! Does everyone think that people jumping around all the time and no one using gates anymore? Do you think that your PVP experience will improve because of few easy hauler kills? I can explain this only by fact that too few people know what is the true meaning of logistic's hell. Considering PVP, jump bridges add new dimension, complexity and dynamics into battlefield. Thus it's good.

3. MOONS are real mystery Shocked I simply can not believe what bunch of people are saying about high end moons. Should they be all around? Popping like mushrooms after the rain? NO! In empire, so everyone can have one dyspro moon for himself? LOL. Get out from secure space and spill some sweat and blood (yours and someone's else) and acquire one or as many as you like. It is really easy thing to do...what a hell....look all those noobs who have those and don't deserve them. I will say this in less sarcastic way: There has to be some kind of reward for such effort of holding space and being well organized corporation/alliance in 0.0. Who is not able and competent or brave enough, doesn't deserve to have all those shiny things. 70% of people in EVE have never left empire space but they are talking all the time how owning dyspro moons is injustice. Get out and get some!

4. Introduce more NPC 0.0 space, or any kind of space and you will have demographic disaster in universe of EVE. 0.0 is underpopulated right now and with more space you will get aproximately 1 man per constellation. I do not want to make 50 jumps to meet 1 man! People have to fight for resources and for space and if you introduce enough of everything for everyone we will all become one big happy family and soon die of boredom. So, space, just like dysprosium and promethium moons or any other valuable thing in EVE or RL... has high value because of low quantity and accessibility, and it has to remain scarce or there will be not any challenges anymore....only flat line...

5. INTERESTING IDEA... me like it Very Happy

6. One more bulls**t! This is social, MMORPG, strategy, economical, tactical, political game, not first person shooter. Not everyone around are monsters to kill Shocked... some of those monsters are your friends! Very Happy So please, stop the crap with standings, play as you want and let other people to play as they like. I don't mind if you want to shoot your blues. Diplomacy/politics is one of the main component of this game as it is in RL. People are playing this game on different/multiple levels/ways and there is much more then just pressing the buttons.

IDIOT = ancient greek word for man who doesn't take part or have any interest in politics. So...

7. No one is preventing all those people from empire to leave their secure space and go into big adventure that 0.0 is. No one but themselves! There are many possible ways to do so. Somehow it's strange, but I believe that huge number of empire dwellers are satisfied with their position and kind of gameplay. I went into low sec as 3 days old char and in 0.0 after 1 month...

Varrakk
Caldari
Menace ll Society
Posted - 2008.12.10 07:43:00 - [245]
 

Edited by: Varrakk on 10/12/2008 08:12:46
Root of the problem is Moon Mining.
It makes too much money, and too little effort involved.
Moon Mining should be a supplemental income, not the primary.

If you go back to pre-invention where Moon ore wasnt in such high demands, taxes in stations was a major alliance income plus industry. 0.0 economy is defective. It should be more like goverment income. Income from station services, market taxes.


I have posted it many times before.
Let moons be depletable. Once empty, it spawns again on another moon at random. Also move the Harvester outside the POS shield, so it can be raided.

Another issue is Cyno Jammers, it should be last line of defense instead of primary. Give it a quick online timer and once online the POS drains fuel like a mofo.

Han Lector
Amarr
Griefer-B-Gone
Circle-Of-Two
Posted - 2008.12.10 08:01:00 - [246]
 

Edited by: Han Lector on 10/12/2008 08:16:35



First you say this...

Originally by: Aristrat


1. Did you tried to roam around? Did you get some fight? These days no one wants to fight if numbers are equal or even worse, higher but still similar. We are usually roaming through 3 or 4 regions for night and sad fact is that all those gangs are out there to get easy kills, not to confront each other. They usually get into fight only with drastically superior numbers, and funny thing is that most of them disengage even then.




You complain you can't find anyone to shoot and you complain that people will not engage unless they can get easy ganks/kills.

Then you say this....

Originally by: Aristrat


6. One more bulls**t! This is social, MMORPG, strategy, economical, tactical, political game, not first person shooter. Not everyone around are monsters to kill Shocked... some of those monsters are your friends! Very Happy So please, stop the crap with standings, play as you want and let other people to play as they like. I don't mind if you want to shoot your blues. Diplomacy/politics is one of the main component of this game as it is in RL. People are playing this game on different/multiple levels/ways and there is much more then just pressing the buttons.




If you look at it and think about it, you will see that "diplomacy" as you call it is nothing but..

Originally by: Aristrat


They usually get into fight only with drastically superior numbers




If you (your corp, your alliance) didn't have everyone 30 jumps around the space you live in set blue, and if you did fight for your alliance only, then the pilots in the alliance next door would be someone to play with(against) and the game would be so much more fun for all. Do you see where I am going with this? Ofcourse, if you did try this,those that enjoy to play "diplomacy" game would all get together and kill you all because....

Originally by: Aristrat


They usually get into fight only with drastically superior numbers, and funny thing is that most of them disengage even then.






Why do they do this? Because as we all know, primary reason to play EVE is not to have fun, but to win at any cost (even if you don't have fun) so you can smack on CAOD.

Laughing

Edmund Khan
Minmatar
Destructive Influence
IT Alliance
Posted - 2008.12.10 08:23:00 - [247]
 

I personally don't like the fact that an alliance can hold/own space while their mayor blob is 100j away. I haven't been in a core BOB region for over 6 months, same as many others (besides money making alts) and yet we still have the space. And we will have it for all times if no one attacks it, even if we never go back with our PVP chars.

Sov should be more based on living in a region instead of just planting a POS and fueling it, occasionally defending it.
Also there shouldn't be a chance of taking space with haulers. You know what I mean, like outspamming few towers and taking over the system. The only chance to own space should be by military power or diplomacy.

I hope it doesn't stay like it is now, cause like someone said before, it's getting more boring with every day.

Liranan
Gallente
Silver Snake Enterprise
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2008.12.10 08:29:00 - [248]
 

The idea that the local channel should be removed to encourage PVP is the dumbest idea offered in this thread, all it does is force people (ratters and miners) out of 0 and back to empire.

Nerfing Titans is really going to force people to 0 and it's really going to break the power of the Titan wielding powerblocks, right? And Jump Bridges are horrible things that make logistics too easy for the wannabe pirates who just want to blow up freighters.

Adding more space to EVE is also a great way of getting people to 0. 'Come to 0.0, we have loads of space where you can get podded every five minutes by the cloaking pirates, whom you can't touch because you don't know how many there are in local.'

If you people really want to force people into 0 you have to nerf high sec and force people to low sec and 0. But how many of the thousands of players in empire are trial accounts? How many are traders of pvpers, how many are research characters who never undock? Then, how many are macroers farming ore or lvl 4 missions? There're loads of people who never leave high sec and that is where war decs come into it. Nerf lvl 4 missions and nerf the ore. When ratting in 0 becomes more profitable than farming lvl 4 missions more people will flock to 0.

The other thing that has been mentioned a lot is how the Sov system should be changed. I believe CCP are already testing a new system but I do not believe the old system worked well at all. I hated the idea that someone could simply walse in and take the space without a major fight/engagement. Then we have the near defeat of BoB last year. They were nearly relegated back to empire but managed to hold on. This shows that poses aren't indestructible, that sov can be removed, that Titan defended cyno's aren't overpowered.

I like EVE as it is now and if you want change come up with something constructive because CCP aren't going to listen to the drivel posted here.

Binah 369
Minmatar
Multiverse Corporation
Cosmic Anomalies
Posted - 2008.12.10 08:33:00 - [249]
 

I am REALLY impressed with the majority of the thoughtful responses offered in this thread. Obviously it is an issue that effects all of us, and it seems as though all of us have some sort of issue with it. I don't have anything more to add that really hasn't been said, other than a blatant, "Wake up CCP and keep the game enjoyable to those who want to play at a different level than sitting in Empire".

Binah

Malachon Draco
Caldari
eXceeded
Posted - 2008.12.10 08:39:00 - [250]
 

As I see it, there are two primary causes for the current problems.

1. Easy travel. It makes every other alliance in Eve a threat, which creates a desire to build a powerblock. At the same time it also makes it more attractive to have only blues nearby. If it took 2 hours to do 30 jumps, it would be much less attractive to have only blues nearby. But with carriers, jumpportals, bridges and warp to 0, travel is near instant.

2. The only thing worthwhile in 0.0 is moons, reducing the need for actual defence of a region unless a blob comes. Which you can then easily defend against with your own blob.

Addressing the first cause is difficult, but its effects could be lessened if the need/desire to blob is reduced.


What would happen if CCP made the following changes:

1. Sovereignty becomes usage-based. Doing stuff like mining and ratting gains you soveignty points, which slowly decline over time (so if you stop ratting/mining, your sovereignty slowly declines.

The immediate effect would be that alliances would be forced to use their own space in order to maintain it as a cushy homebase. Smaller groups of raiders could actually degrade sovereignty by harassing miners and ratters. It can also reduce blobbing, would you really be willing to send a 300 man fleet halfway across the galaxy if it means your own sov starts degrading? Maybe you'd only send 100 or 150?

2. 0.0 needs to become more profitable. Level 4s in empire provide comparable income but without any of the burdens of living in 0.0. Easiest solution would be to make it possible to get level 5 agents in 0.0 conquerable stations. That way an alliance can provide a bigger source of income for members than Empire Lvl 4s, provided the space is secure of course. I think CCP should also either should do away with stront timers for moonmining POSes, or alternatively, eliminate moonmining by POS, and instead introduce 1 or 2 new capital moonmining ships that take its place. Their rate of moonmining could be 3 or 4 times higher than current POS (to account for the fact that they wont be mining 23/7).

Both changes would mean that 0.0 becomes more populated outside of the big gangs running around. Fast travel would in this scenario still be available, but the attraction of it might be reduced since there would be some incentives not to blob up and invade another region 50 jumps away because it would imperil the moneymaking aspect of the alliance.

Zackalwe
Gallente
Rodents of Unusual Size
Posted - 2008.12.10 08:45:00 - [251]
 

Edited by: Zackalwe on 10/12/2008 09:07:22

I think it would be beneficial to wait for the next expansion, to see how that impacts the big alliances.
The next expansion "T3" should relieve some of the problems we are seeing. The big alliances are going to be fighting over "wormhole space" to try to control T3. Which will leave oppertunity for smaller alliances to get a foothold in 0.

Also, of all the suggestions so far, I think "more space" is the most reasonable one. There should be "grades" of 0.0 space with some areas more lucrative than others. That way the stronger alliances will hold the better space, thus rewarding their strength. While smaller alliances will hold the less lucrative space, but space thats still a good enough return to provide incentive for an alliance to hold it.

You have to remember that subs have been increasing constantly year on year, while available 0.0 space has not.
Something like double the 0.0 space that we have now? And maybe split up regions by small areas of NPC space? That way you dont have massive jumpbridge networks going from one side of EVE to the other.

Malachon Draco
Caldari
eXceeded
Posted - 2008.12.10 09:21:00 - [252]
 

I don't know if more 0.0 space is an answer. Scarcity is a good driver of conflict, and with a greater abundance of space, that would be reduced.

If they are going to introduce more space, I would suggest designing it carefully. Two things in particular.
1. Make it deep 0.0. And far away for capitals, so there are few places from where you can jump to it. Making it logistically harder to get to might discourage big alliances from immediately taking the space, and give smaller determined alliances a chance to set up shop.

2. Design the regions so that they have defensible pockets. If you want people to rat and mine in space, or to build outposts, it would be ideal if each region has 2-4 pockets of 6-8 systems, with each only 1 or 2 entrance systems. For a smaller alliance, I think its less daunting to try and take a single, more easily defended pocket than have to mine and rat in more vulnerable pipe systems.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.12.10 09:26:00 - [253]
 

Originally by: Malachon Draco
I don't know if more 0.0 space is an answer. Scarcity is a good driver of conflict, and with a greater abundance of space, that would be reduced.

If they are going to introduce more space, I would suggest designing it carefully. Two things in particular.
1. Make it deep 0.0. And far away for capitals, so there are few places from where you can jump to it. Making it logistically harder to get to might discourage big alliances from immediately taking the space, and give smaller determined alliances a chance to set up shop.

2. Design the regions so that they have defensible pockets. If you want people to rat and mine in space, or to build outposts, it would be ideal if each region has 2-4 pockets of 6-8 systems, with each only 1 or 2 entrance systems. For a smaller alliance, I think its less daunting to try and take a single, more easily defended pocket than have to mine and rat in more vulnerable pipe systems.


More sov space for alliances to play POS games? No. You're right, that won't solve anything.

More Curse/Stain style NPC space for people to play a different 0.0 game? Well... maybe. It's worth a try.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2008.12.10 09:28:00 - [254]
 

Originally by: Zackalwe
Edited by: Zackalwe on 10/12/2008 09:07:22

I think it would be beneficial to wait for the next expansion, to see how that impacts the big alliances.
The next expansion "T3" should relieve some of the problems we are seeing. The big alliances are going to be fighting over "wormhole space" to try to control T3. Which will leave oppertunity for smaller alliances to get a foothold in 0.0


Strategically speaking, how will these wormholes be any different from r64 moons? Large alliances hold moons in nearly empty regions already, via jump-bridge networks.

Zackalwe
Gallente
Rodents of Unusual Size
Posted - 2008.12.10 09:46:00 - [255]
 

Edited by: Zackalwe on 10/12/2008 09:52:51
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Zackalwe
Edited by: Zackalwe on 10/12/2008 09:07:22

I think it would be beneficial to wait for the next expansion, to see how that impacts the big alliances.
The next expansion "T3" should relieve some of the problems we are seeing. The big alliances are going to be fighting over "wormhole space" to try to control T3. Which will leave oppertunity for smaller alliances to get a foothold in 0.0


Strategically speaking, how will these wormholes be any different from r64 moons? Large alliances hold moons in nearly empty regions already, via jump-bridge networks.


As far as I understood, wormhole space cant be soved up like normal space, it has to be defended. Also multiple wormholes from different regions might lead to the same wormhole space, just from different entrances.
So for instance you could have a wormhole from Tribute leading to the same wormhole space as the wormhole that BOB found in Delve. Thats a hell of a fight if the T3 resources is worth as much as I think it will be.

Also if you put more NPC space between regions you cant use jumpbridges to cross multiple regions as easily.

Another possibility for wormhole space:
It may be impossible to jump caps through wormholes. If that were the case, suddenly you would have alliances like Tri interested for the fight alone. Imagine a region of space without titans or caps, without POSes with just a whole load of expensive T3 resources ready to be fought over.
Disclaimer: I dont know if this is what is planned, but it would seen reasonable.
You could for instance find a smaller wormhole to a region from say, empire or lowsec, that is only big enough to fit cruisers and HACs through...

Darknesss
Gallente
V0LTA
VOLTA Corp
Posted - 2008.12.10 09:58:00 - [256]
 

Originally by: blkmajik
The problem with trying to charge for or remove standings is that it just encourages people to merge instead of NAP. This makes things more of an old boy's club than it already is. The result would be switching from having huge coalitions, to just having huge alliances where the strongest of the bunch will require the smallest to be absorbed instead of NAP'd. You are treating the symptom, not the cause, and the result will make the situation even worse.



Not at all. This has been a suggestion of mine for months removing standings. Take the NC or GBC as an example, imagine now to keep their size and clout they had to merge... would it happen? Whether you know their internal politics or not each alliance has its own ambition whether it be wealth or power and they want to climb a ladder, there are not enough top spots and too many ego's for an alliance to form that would be the size of the NC.

When it comes to coalitions all you have to do is have a chat with the leader set standings and keep some sort of vague contact, i've been sat in the NC leader channels before and i've watched a complete lack of organisation, now they have largely improved in that organisation but there is no way in hell these groups of people could merge under one name, it would be anarchy and the ammount of corporations involved would be insane. You woud have an entity 3x maybe more the size of Goonswarm each with its own leaders and their goals.

Removing standings would force alliances to improve their communication, it would force them to become more organised to cover more space and it would make them REALLY work for being a massively powerful entity, work in this game should always be rewarded. As it is now its incredibly easy to set a standing and have a massive coalition, not only is it easy but its becoming completely acceptable. Why wouldn't many of these alliances accept these coalitions, simply put money or perhaps the drive to counter another coalition. We are now in a situation where coalitions will never stop existing on a massive scale unless CCP directly intervenes.

Aside from anything else the servers in complete honesty cannot handle the numbers, and this does stop the rise of new alliances.

I'm sure you will look at my alliance ticker and quote me with some ridiculous post about tears, its not that at all. If an alliance wants massive power, to cover great sections of eve they should NEED a better and larger infrastructure, this would encourage possible mutiny's and other entertaining ideas within the larger alliances.

The benefits of such a move are:

-Less pressure on the server
-Multiple wars across all of 0.0 between smaller entities
-Forcing powerful alliances to work for what they have rather than NAP for what they have
-Giving smaller and newer alliances the opportunity to get into the 0.0 game
-Increasing the standard of players and fleet tactics in order to hold onto space (because lets be brutally honest, there are some awful alliances out there holding onto space because of their allies only)

It used to be in games that an alliance was the end of the road and you fight for that one alliance, now its moved up a notch alliances of yesterday are now the coalitions of today only without there needing to be any complex or stable infrastructure.

Remove standings and eve will be an insanely entertaining and rewarding game, it will encourage people to fight for their alliance and that alliances name, and will force members to fight to retain the benefits.




Cippalippus Primus
Caldari
eXceed Inc.
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:07:00 - [257]
 

EVE is a sandbox and the size of alliances and coalitions reflects the will of the players.

Deal with it.

Minigin
Caldari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:11:00 - [258]
 

i am now posting in limegreen to support the removal of standings in eve.

Alak D'bor
Minmatar
Syncore
One Stop Research
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:13:00 - [259]
 

Perhaps finite edges of space are ludicrous. If the population grew 4x in the past 4 years, why not expand the known galaxy by 4x, with 75% of it no stations, constellation blocks each out of all capital jump range from other constellation blocs (so you can only use what you build local), old school nasty rats making even gate travel dangerous (remember when ratting solo was iffy?), no ice, and just average ore. The blocs might fight over mainstream 0.0, but it would give places for pirates and small alliances to smack each other in local.

I remember travelling 70 jumps in 0.0 if I wanted to insure a battleship built at my home station. The game definitely had an edge back then.

Zackalwe
Gallente
Rodents of Unusual Size
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:14:00 - [260]
 

To be honest I dont see removing standings making a lot of difference. For example I dont ever see Razor attacking MM just because we have no standings structure anymore, we will still be allies.
What would happen is on joint ops, razor support will camp one gate while MM support will camp the other. MM and RZR caps can still attack POS together, its not hard to refrain from shooting neutrals. If enemy caps jump in, it might make it a bit tricky, but the FC should be able to call enemies only going on location on the battlefield, and known enemy names first, then "targeting to check alliance before calling as primary" second.

I cant see it having the desired effect of splitting up the super blocs. All it will do is make it a pain in the arse. But people will suffer it, thus decreasing enjoyment generally, but not actually solving the problem.

Idaeus
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:15:00 - [261]
 

Originally by: Minigin
i am now posting in limegreen to support the removal of standings in eve.


Certainly one of your better colors.

Adeptus mecanicus
Caldari
The Flaming Sideburn's
Art of War Alliance
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:21:00 - [262]
 

Think a max number in a alliance is a good way, even if there is a nap fest the segregation will lead more frequently to strife inside a NAP entity compared to a 2000+ alliance.
and as mentioned being not able to nap as many will make it harder, considering a POS and overview settings.Wink

Minigin
Caldari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:31:00 - [263]
 

Edited by: Minigin on 10/12/2008 10:32:47
Originally by: Zackalwe
Edited by: Zackalwe on 10/12/2008 09:52:51
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Zackalwe
Edited by: Zackalwe on 10/12/2008 09:07:22

I think it would be beneficial to wait for the next expansion, to see how that impacts the big alliances.
The next expansion "T3" should relieve some of the problems we are seeing. The big alliances are going to be fighting over "wormhole space" to try to control T3. Which will leave oppertunity for smaller alliances to get a foothold in 0.0


Strategically speaking, how will these wormholes be any different from r64 moons? Large alliances hold moons in nearly empty regions already, via jump-bridge networks.


As far as I understood, wormhole space cant be soved up like normal space, it has to be defended. Also multiple wormholes from different regions might lead to the same wormhole space, just from different entrances.
So for instance you could have a wormhole from Tribute leading to the same wormhole space as the wormhole that BOB found in Delve. Thats a hell of a fight if the T3 resources is worth as much as I think it will be.

Also if you put more NPC space between regions you cant use jumpbridges to cross multiple regions as easily.

Another possibility for wormhole space:
It may be impossible to jump caps through wormholes. If that were the case, suddenly you would have alliances like Tri interested for the fight alone. Imagine a region of space without titans or caps, without POSes with just a whole load of expensive T3 resources ready to be fought over.
Disclaimer: I dont know if this is what is planned, but it would seen reasonable.
You could for instance find a smaller wormhole to a region from say, empire or lowsec, that is only big enough to fit cruisers and HACs through...


yes that would be fantastic for all of 2 months until a super coalition decides to move close to the edge of that space and effectivly control the entire thing.

i used to complain to alliance leaders about having too many standings... i think it would be prudent and fun of ccp to remove standings from the game.

Darknesss > viva le revolution!

tbh.

Privavarian
Gallente
BENEVOLENC3
Imperial 0rder
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:32:00 - [264]
 

I liked you better when you were still a hydra muppet, minigin

Minigin
Caldari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:34:00 - [265]
 

Originally by: Privavarian
I liked you better when you were still a hydra muppet, minigin


i still am a hydra muppet tbh :hydra:

Varrakk
Caldari
Menace ll Society
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:37:00 - [266]
 

Is removing standings the way to go?
But it would still need a make over.

Not sure how to type this and make sense ugh
Wouldnt making space harder and less profitable to hold,
remove the need for coalitions?

If a alliance was unable to hold more then 1 region without running into a massive logistical nightmare, it wouldnt need to rely as heavily on others to defend space they couldnt hold by them self.

In addition, I would change the distance between regions.
Making it very difficult for capitals to travel between them and at the same time, deal with the Jump Bridge Networks.

Idaeus
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:40:00 - [267]
 

Standings won't go away. Too much is tied to it and CCP is lazy.

Minigin
Caldari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:41:00 - [268]
 

Originally by: Varrakk
Is removing standings the way to go?
But it would still need a make over.

Not sure how to type this and make sense ugh
Wouldnt making space harder and less profitable to hold,
remove the need for coalitions?

If a alliance was unable to hold more then 1 region without running into a massive logistical nightmare, it wouldnt need to rely as heavily on others to defend space they couldnt hold by them self.

In addition, I would change the distance between regions.
Making it very difficult for capitals to travel between them and at the same time, deal with the Jump Bridge Networks.


damn im posting a lot today... but anyway, i think making it harder to hold large areas prolly wont break up coalitions... it would just create more of them i think.

for example youll have all of these alliances holding a couple of constelations each all the while inviting new alliances to come and take other constellations and aid in the defence of others.

also i mean if we really look at it... making space more expencive to hold isnt that big an issue. most of these super coalitions have been carebearing for years!
i hardly think they are that strapped for isk as it is. so pretty much they have no real reason to be blue to each other any more than to make even more isk.

so seeing as they wont drop standings for themselves i personaly rkn itd be pretty nifty for ccp to do it for them. who knows... they might actually have fun! :tinfoil:

Draahk Chimera
Caldari
Interstellar eXodus
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:58:00 - [269]
 

Since I was the first to suggest changes to how sov works. On page 2 if you are interested. I of course thinks that is the best idea.

And about tech 3 and wormholes. As far as I understand from the fanfest video it will be conquarable. Wich means there must be poses. Wich in turn means that there must be capitals or else the first alliance to place a faction deathstar will win forever and ever.

And if all current systems stay the way they are how will wormholes change anything for non-powerblock alliances? So I scan a wormhole. I tell my Atlas mates and we roll in and place a pos and start collecting tech 3 stuff. 3 hours later a GBC or NC or Drone/Goon member scans the wormhole too and in comes 150 capitals, 10 titans, 20 mommas and 600 regular ships. Well that was fun for 3 hours.

Zackalwe
Gallente
Rodents of Unusual Size
Posted - 2008.12.10 10:58:00 - [270]
 

Originally by: Minigin

yes that would be fantastic for all of 2 months until a super coalition decides to move close to the edge of that space and effectivly control the entire thing.

i used to complain to alliance leaders about having too many standings... i think it would be prudent and fun of ccp to remove standings from the game.

Darknesss > viva le revolution!

tbh.



I dont believe you can move closer to wormhole space, its only accessed by the wormholes, which I presume shift about every now and then. (This is the only way exploration can be continually tied to wormholes is if they are not permanent).
Its also possible that the wormhole space itself isnt permanent.


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 : last (10)

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