open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Blog: Upgrading and Upkeep of Sovereign Solar Systems in Dominion
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 ... : last (119)

Author Topic

Crias Taylor
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:25:00 - [1831]
 

Edited by: Crias Taylor on 08/11/2009 14:25:41
Welp. I have been meaning to roll a lvl 4 running Raven alt anyway.

Jen Ravenlock
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:33:00 - [1832]
 

Edited by: Jen Ravenlock on 08/11/2009 14:34:39
Originally by: Hertford
I get the distinct impression that at no point during CCPs design process did anyone sit down and write a proper Requirements Specification. A document that, literally, specifies the requirements. For example, it might have contained the following:

"Dominion shall encourage players who do not live in 0.0 to consider moving to 0.0"

"Dominion shall encourage alliances to hold less space"

"Dominion shall discourage alliance dependency on R64 moons"

"Dominion shall rebalance all R64s to be of roughly equal value"

"Dominion shall provide means for individual players and alliances to generate wealth that is not a second job"

And so on. Simple statements and goals, expressed clearly and concisely. Then you start the actual design process, and while throwing around wonderful ideas there's this Requirements Specification that acts as a sanity check. Because out of those five examples above, you managed to stick to two of them so far and failed on the other three.


I'm sure they did, but requirements analysis should be drafted after consulting the domain experts (the player base). That clearly didn't happen, or CCP's customer base wouldn't be ranting about a product they don't want 3 weeks before launch

Elassus Herron
Caldari
Construction Cabal
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:38:00 - [1833]
 

Our alliance has been looking forward to this patch for some time, right up until this dev blog. From the nearly unanimous opposition to the terms of the patch thus far outlined, this looks to be a disaster. It's too bad CCP fixed the release date to 1. December, since there really isn't much time to fix what is clearly a very poorly conceived system.

And since we're on a new page - though the fact that CCP stopped answering makes me wonder at its utility - let me pose the essential question again:

Given that living in 0.0 is going to be much more expensive, risky, and logistically difficult, what reason would an empire L4 grinder have for moving there?

The fact that the one alliance you explicitly referenced as a reason for this patch might not actually survive it should tell you something.

tsocheff karma
There Is No God.
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:38:00 - [1834]
 

first ever post \o/
now wheres my nuke proof suit?

so, 7mill a day for me to help my ally keep sov, tax set at 20%, thats roughly 4 hours of grind/ratting, so i get back from work and ignore all the CTA's till my tax is paid, but wait, oh noes! the doorbell has gone and some visitors have arrived. i quietly seethe while i put the kettle on, talk ****e for a few hours with stilted conversation hoping they'll p1ss off soon.

friday, but wait, oh noes! its my going out gettin hammered day.

saturday, i gotta grind for 12 hours with no pvp or my ally goes down the s***ter :(

sunday, my connection goes down or some other rl contrivance.
---------------------------

i would also like to complain about the "isk going to concord" malarky, what do they deserve isk for? they don't do crap all in 0.0 BUT, minerals to run the upgrades and sov markers makes more sense in game and also i imagine would give the indy guys a stiffy i.e. higher mins prices making them richer (thats pretty much their endgame innit?) and more able to help alliances by selling cheaper ships etc coz they can afford it. i can't be arsed quoting the fellow who suggested this but big up to you chap wot wot!

0.0 has to be more lucrative than empire, end of. i do not have ten accounts and 30 chars, i have one account and one char and i love helping my ally mates out by dying regularly and barely rat for myself. ccp should consider who plays this game, not everyone can devote hours upon hours of isk grinding and less people want to.
ccp have also not posted here since last night, so i either assume they chucked out their toys or are thinking hard about fixing these problems, whatever, by not replying to the most asked question here they have slapped everyone who has posted here in the face.

congrats to the guys who have posted clear and viable alternatives to the ccp failscade called dominion.

CANCEL THE UPGRADE, YOU HAVE NOT GOT ENOUGH TIME IN 3 WEEKS TO ADDRESS HALF OF THE ISSUES RAISED IN THIS FORUM.

wallenbergaren
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:39:00 - [1835]
 

The only way to make 0.0 more profitable is to increase the ISK PRINTING i.e. bounties
Adding asteroids or plexes doesn't help because their value is dynamic. If you add more then the value drops and you haven't made 0.0 more profitable

sg3s
Caldari
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:43:00 - [1836]
 

Loads of words in this thread, so I apologise if it has been brought up already.

Basically the blog proposed a high barrier of entry (cost wise) for new alliances while old established alliances weren't hurt much, also due to the possesion of high value moons...

It was somewhat changed, which made me see that the thing CCP tries to do is make the upgrades more expensive. That made me come up with a reasonable good idea that will scale depending on how big your logistics network is, and on how big your jumpbridge network is, but with added benefits.

I put it in a thread on F&I since it is pretty significant and I do not believe CCP is willing to change a lot 3 weeks before release (though it seems they didn't have a problem thinking this up only a few weeks ago).

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1211066

What the crap CCP, you disappoint me with this, I know you probably have nice and good changes in store for us with this system but if this is the main feature for the patch then it's awfully weak for the time you had for it.

Treji
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:45:00 - [1837]
 

62 pages for comments so far, which might look like overwhelming outrage against proposed changes...until you count them all and figure out how many are from one alliance(around 80% so far, inc. some known alts Wink). It's to be expected I suppose when a large group of players that will have to now develop and utilise conquered 0.0 space find themselves faced with something unfamiliar...

I also LOL a lot reading about 0.0 isk income compared to running lvl 4's in Empire. Especially when I read that many alliance members don't do WH's, anoms etc!!! If it is all about iskies, you really should just be trading in Jita...

Change can be a good thing. Making alliances do something with all their claimed space is a smart move; much better than collecting systems to have a good ol' E-****k Wink

Zurioc
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:49:00 - [1838]
 

Agreed should be able to generate more isk in 0.0 than doing lvl'4s, But shesh how about more creative input then Tears from Goons and co, As CCP said Harden the .... up.

Mkiaki
Gallente
Progressive Business Solutions
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:56:00 - [1839]
 

Please continue to cry, your tears are fueling my mission shipsCool

Slobodanka
Posted - 2009.11.08 14:57:00 - [1840]
 

Edited by: Slobodanka on 08/11/2009 15:00:03
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.

I'm getting really worried by the lack of reply to this question from CCP. This was probably outlined at the time they got the idea to make this game, not when they started to develop Dominion patch. The answer should be so clear and straightforward that if you ask a cleaning lady in CCP building this exact question, she should look at you like you've been living under a rock for the past 5 years and shoot out "yes". Everyone who ever played eve knows it, it is touted in every PR material CCP has released, it is taught from the very start you are spawned into your first pod.

Obviously the question here is not the one outlined above, but rather "what is CCP doing to meet this goal". This is where things get really scary...

Also: ignoring player base hasn't really worked that well in the past. Maybe CCPs profits didn't suffer as much as they should, but eve-online end game is already boring and repetitive, not to mention what will become of it post dominion. Is that spot on the map really the biggest problem with 0.0 today? Are 0.0 individuals really that rich compared to empire dwellers? Is it really so easy to make ISK in 0.0 that more of it should be flushed down the sink? I'm guessing you have the answers to these questions (after all this is your game and you should be able to get this data from your DBs), but if you don't, please get them quick and at least decide if proposed patch will have a positive effect on current state.

Make 0.0 the land of opportunity. For carebears and pirates alike. No alliance leader cares about how much ISK I can make ratting in my alliance systems. No alliance leader cares how much ISK I can make mining/exploring whatever. Alliances and corps have different ISK sources than individuals (which is quite fine, although I'd like to see more ISK moved from alliances to individuals via game mechanics).
It's the grunts that need ISK to buy ships. Molle will still be able to buy his titans whenever he pleases, but most of 0.0 will still ***** and moan about how much time they have to spend to be able to field that snipe BS which will instapop once primaried.

"Power to the people" or something along these lines... dunno how to make this any clearer. That will make people fight for their little patch of 0.0 ISK whoring and spending all that ISK (yes empire carebears, 0.0 residents buy new ships and fittings quite often. You see, player 5 man HAC gang will eat your raven as fast as 10 BS NPC gang if not faster) fighting some other "enemy" for fun and ability to show your epeen on CAOD.

EDIT: I'm also not sure if empire people realize that 0.0 is where your products are being used. 0.0 is where all those pretty pictures, videos and shocking ingame news come from. You do not want 0.0 to collapse because it's impossible to live in it, you really don't. If for no other reasons you do not want to see goons occupying high sec mission hubs turning all those factions BSs into salvage parts and scrap metal. Empire is not an isolated system.

Will Hunter
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:00:00 - [1841]
 

Originally by: Vadinho
Originally by: Zahorite
Table for 300,000 subscribers soon to be 100,000 please.
Right sir. You have your choice of two seating areas. The tables next to the kitchen are free and can support several hundred guests who may never talk to or even see one another as they eat. We also have seating much further from the kitchen, and those tables can only support one or two people, are much more expensive, and everyone has to fight over the same basket of bread and glass of water.

Which will your party prefer?


quoting this again

Treji
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:01:00 - [1842]
 

Edited by: Treji on 08/11/2009 15:02:04
The isk question for 0.0 vrs Lvl 4 is irrelevant for this discussion- surely isk is down the scale as a reason for holding 0.0 space as an alliance? You surely are part of an alliance for larger goals...

And as for the drop in playerbase: Goons are just 2-3k right?

wallenbergaren
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:03:00 - [1843]
 

Originally by: Slobodanka
Edited by: Slobodanka on 08/11/2009 15:00:03
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.


Quote for answer

Sethur Blackcoat
Merch Industrial
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:08:00 - [1844]
 

Originally by: Treji
Edited by: Treji on 08/11/2009 15:02:04
The isk question for 0.0 vrs Lvl 4 is irrelevant for this discussion- surely isk is down the scale as a reason for holding 0.0 space as an alliance? You surely are part of an alliance for larger goals...

And as for the drop in playerbase: Goons are just 2-3k right?


What exactly is the "larger goal" of an alliance, if not increased personal wealth for the members?

El Liptonez
V0LTA
VOLTA Corp
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:11:00 - [1845]
 

Originally by: Treji
Edited by: Treji on 08/11/2009 15:02:04
The isk question for 0.0 vrs Lvl 4 is irrelevant for this discussion- surely isk is down the scale as a reason for holding 0.0 space as an alliance? You surely are part of an alliance for larger goals...

And as for the drop in playerbase: Goons are just 2-3k right?


I think it's not irrelevant if 0.0 people have to go to empire to make isk.

Antir
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:11:00 - [1846]
 

Edited by: Antir on 08/11/2009 15:12:06
Originally by: Sethur Blackcoat
Originally by: Treji
Edited by: Treji on 08/11/2009 15:02:04
The isk question for 0.0 vrs Lvl 4 is irrelevant for this discussion- surely isk is down the scale as a reason for holding 0.0 space as an alliance? You surely are part of an alliance for larger goals...

And as for the drop in playerbase: Goons are just 2-3k right?


What exactly is the "larger goal" of an alliance, if not increased personal wealth for the members?

More importaly do you expect people to leave empire for 0.0 where you can pay to make almost as much isk as lvl4s with mcuh more risk?

Also it's funny how many people think claming a system needs sov.

Slobodanka
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:13:00 - [1847]
 

Originally by: Treji
And as for the drop in playerbase: Goons are just 2-3k right?

I don't think you should worry about any of the big 0.0 guys emo rage quiting. Sure they will ***** and moan about it but in the end they will adapt and they will still try to run as much 0.0 as they need to keep their guys fit and ready to fight.

What we need is more people in 0.0. So if you are a high sec/low sec alliance with an ambition to claim and fight for a patch of 0.0 you'd like to call your own (and please keep in mind that small corps/alliances will NEVER be able to beat 2000+ man alliance just because they wished for it), please write down what needs to change so that you will be able to accomplish this goal.

Originally by: Treji
The isk question for 0.0 vrs Lvl 4 is irrelevant for this discussion- surely isk is down the scale as a reason for holding 0.0 space as an alliance? You surely are part of an alliance for larger goals...

Ships need to be bought (at much faster pace than you imagine), modules have to be fitted, ammo needs to be fired and big ships need to waste ice products _just_to_keep_the_space_you_fought_for_. We're not even close to making money from it. After yous space is actually yours you put up moon harvesters so your alliance will be able to recover some loss from PvP (that is protecting your space, not pew pew for ****s and giggles). After that is secure 0.0 individuals are able to make their ISK to their best ability. This is mostly done through ratting and mining, other methods are too time consuming and have frequently have to be aborted due to raiding gangs and cloakers.

I was really hoping 0.0 individuals would be able to stand their own (ISK wise) more than they can now. This would make alliance reimbursement less mandatory (giving new player more advantage than they have now), put more people out of outposts/POSes and make them fight for their farming grounds.

Layla
Our Lord Jesus
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:18:00 - [1848]
 

Originally by: Moore cyno
Don't know if anyone suggested this idea, as i have to admit i didn't read all 60 pages :-)

I both agree and disagree with the concern that the upkeep cost is too high. It will be too much to draw out smaller alliances, and large volumes of space will become unused. However, claiming space shouldn't be so cheap/easy that large alliances will just keep all their space and the rest claimed by small entities.

So, the goal is to bring out more people and smaller entities to 0.0, and force people to actively use the space. But as the grind needed to make that profitable is "a lot" it wont happen with the current numbers. Decreasing the cost too much wont open up any space as the existing alliances will just keep their space. Finding a compromise cost which achieves both goals, is in my opinion more or less impossible with the current mechanics.

Solution: Link activity index to upkeep cost.

Instead of just having a fixed large upkeep cost, forcing alliances to use much grinding time before any profit is seen, decrease upkeep if activity index is high. I.e. super high activity index over a month in an upkeep system, upkeep cost is decreased by 90% (or some other significant number), low activity index alliance pays the full cost. Probably should be some scaling to systems around claimed, such that ratting, mining, plexing will still improve activity index say by a factor 0.5 at neighbouring systems and so forth. Obviously passive income such as moon mining shouldn't decrease upkeep.

This will accomplish exactly what was intended. Unused space will be left, actively claimed and used systems can become profitable.



I like this idea. It would go a long way to resolving the concerns being expressed, imo

ropnes
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:19:00 - [1849]
 

Edited by: ropnes on 08/11/2009 15:25:20
Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang
Solution to sov problems:

0.0 alliances need to start griefing the hell out of everyone who lives in empire space until they beg CCP to improve 0.0 enough that we go away. Then we'll see some worthwhile changes.




lol I support this idea

The whole idea of sov costing raw isk is stupid anyway
I thought 0.0 was lawless space

Destrim
Koshaku
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:31:00 - [1850]
 

Back again from last night.

My concern, as stated before, is not with the steep prices, but with the fairly weak rewards.

It's important to understand a few of the dynamics of an alliance for this. First, an alliance/corp sustains itself through industry. Second, it is only the individual who sustains themselves through rat'ing, not the alliance/corp.

That being said, the industry upgrades really do not help an alliance sustain itself. An increased chance of getting hidden belts really does very little. Any alliance's logistics depend very heavily on ICE, both for POS fuel, and for CAP-ship fuel... unless you guarantee icefields, the fact that people have bee condensed into small areas means that they no longer have access to ice unless they are occupying an ice-belt system.

Some proposed industry infrastructure upgrades:

  • Guarantees one (hidden?) icebelt in system at all times

  • Increases refine (that's ore exclusively, not "reprocess," which includes modules) rate by 2% per sov level, giving the sovereign a 110% return on refine rates at sov-5

  • Increases the warp strength of industrial-type ships by 1 per sov level (makes them less vulnerable to ganks)

  • Increases mining amount/speed by 2% per sov level

  • Decreases build/research times by 2% per sov level



Again, those are just ideas to get peoples' thoughts flowing.

Now, for military. You know, by condensing people into smaller areas, you have made them far, FAR more vulnerable to small roaming gangs and cloakers. If I remember correctly, you (CCP) very specifically wanted to make people less vulnerable to such things, so I was expecting the "military infrastructure hug upgrades" to do just that: upgrade an alliance/corp's military infrastructure! And yet, you did no such thing, instead giving some anomalies. To make things viable, you MUST give added system security through the military infrastructure!

That being said, here are some thoughts... and, mind you, be careful with using the word "unbalanced," since the very definition of "advantage" or even "benefit" means that things are unbalanced in someone's favor. If it bothers you, then tweak the numbers a bit, maybe lowering the % or something. But the idea is to make the system more defensible in an "active" manner... meaning that it still requires activity from people to defend.

  • Increases shield HP by 4% per sov level (total 20% @ sov 5)

  • Increase armor HP by 4% per sov level (can only have shield OR armor, not both)

  • Increase local armor/shield repair amount by 2% per sov level

  • Increase remote repair range by 4% per sov level

  • Decrease cap recharge time by 2% per sov level

  • Allow anchoring of POS guns around gates and stations, increasing "calibration points" of gates and stations per sov level (small guns use less cal-points than larger ones etc., so you can mix around how many of what you want to post where... still need to feed 'em ammo)

  • Increase speed/agility of ships by 2% per sov level

  • Increase the range of affect for military upgrades by 1 light year per sov level



Again, these are just ideas.

I understand that everyone ticked about the lackluster infrastructure upgrades... so PUT FORTH YOUR OWN IDEAS, ones which you think do NOT suck. Flaming really does little, other than make known our dissatisfaction.

Shawna Gray
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:37:00 - [1851]
 

Originally by: Destrim
Back again from last night.

My concern, as stated before, is not with the steep prices, but with the fairly weak rewards.



This was the problem with 0.0 before dominion and if anything it looks worse now.

Alski
Ministers Of Destruction.
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:40:00 - [1852]
 

Originally by: Sidus Sarmiang
Solution to sov problems:

0.0 alliances need to start griefing the hell out of everyone who lives in empire space until they beg CCP to improve 0.0 enough that we go away. Then we'll see some worthwhile changes.





Gonna go one better, shift+delete 0.0 from the game, make empire 0.0, lowsec becomes the new empire, Eve will be Eve again Twisted EvilLaughing

TZeer
BURN EDEN
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:44:00 - [1853]
 

Like the new changes, just hope CCP doesn`t backs out and give in to the cry babies Laughing

Anyway:

- Alliances are not supposed to have every single system withing 10 jumps of their outpost cynojammed. Without having to pay for it.

- Jump bridges, also a huge tactical tool. And all of you are whining and moaning about you need it for logistics. Well after this you dont need to keep 150 systems with POS fuel and what not.

Today I did a 70 jump trip from empire and into 0.0... What did I see? Alot of empty space with no people in, but sov was up. Why?

Example: Open up map and have a look at Impass. How many people in thoose systems? How many systems are not in use? Also, Feythabolis, Paragon Soul, Tenerifis it`s all wasteland. Most of the systems are only in use by 1 person. And quite a few of the systems are not even used.

Example: Feythabolis consists of 89 systems, when I did a count now I found 92 people in thoose systems. Thats 1,03 people per system.
After patch:
So the systems are upgraded to some extent, and can support 10 people in each system, You wont suddenly need 89 systems, you could reduce it to 9!!!. And suddenly there would be no need for jumpbridge networks in the scale that you have now.

With the first prices CCP came with it would cost 20 mil per day per system, so you are looking at 20*9=180 mil per day. 30 days= 5,4 Bil

Divide that on 92 people= 58,6 Mil per person. Then divide it with number of days, 30= 1,96 mil per day per person. In average thats the taxes from 1 hour of ratting. If you have 10% taxes.

Then start adding income you get from refining, eventual docking fee if you have people in your space, rental agreements, POS mining. And I think most of thoose 58 mil should be covered by a large margin.

Ofcourse if you want to start adding cynojammers and jumpdriges in every system out of thoose 9 systems it`s gonna get expensive. But thats also the point.

Kim Wilde
Gallente
Covenant
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:51:00 - [1854]
 

well speaking for a smallish footprint alliance i can just say that the changes were calc'ed to cost us 50bill and most would agree that a 3k member count needs at least 50 systems with upgrades to support living there

why does ccp insist on forcing 0.0 into changing to something most who has lived there can say wont work?
consider that even if there is no claims flag up the system is just as claimed with a simple you come we will come as well, to perform some surprise rear pipe inspections.

if you think there is a way to stop the current residents from just doing scorched earth on any infrastructure+logistics needed to even use the area then consider that most 0.0 can field a 100 man combat/reinforcement gang and no miner crew can effectivly hide from black ops etc cause if they are hiding they dont make any money, same again if in a complex you would normally expect a few expeditions and guess what try exiting your single system and i can guarantee you a risky few jumps for often no gain

jumpportal+caps means inside a region the current owners would rule supreme and if you consider further nerfs to titan then ..i.. would suggest just removing em and refunding the rigs+mods etc to the pilots,

Stucks alt
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:54:00 - [1855]
 

Originally by: Bobby Atlas
Edited by: Bobby Atlas on 08/11/2009 05:22:58
Originally by: Pointfive
YES OR NO: Due to the increased risk and logistics effort required, 0.0 should be more - not as - profitable (in raw isk/h) than highsec L4 mission running.


As CCP Chronitus pointed out, the amount of reward to offset a small amount of risk is allot but I also think that is a matter of perception, in either case it is not in of itself the argument being made. The actual argument being made by allot of people is the fact that 0.0 is less profitable than running LVL4 missions in empire and these upgrades in dominion do little if anything to change that situation.

I personally have been playing eve for some 6 years now and I remember when I first came to 0.0 it was a niche idea that you came out here to make money, however that is something that quickly evaporated and has been the consensus for a long time that you do not come out to 0.0 to make money. This should not be the case, 0.0 should not be unprofitable or certainly not less profitable than empire - please do not counter about pvp risks etc.. as we all accept those risks and costs but that is not what we are talking about.

The simple point is that 0.0 life is less profitable than LVL4 missions when in reality it should at very least be equal to or greater than.

Allot of this boils down to lazy development work, I remember 2-3 years ago when the concept of touching the POS code was a nightmare to CCP, you said it wouldn't happen and were admit that it was a monumental challenge. This is the very same situation we see at the moment regarding making true sec values dynamic, belt numbers, the npc spawn density/value within and astroid types/density, all dynamic. This is something CCP needs to tackle head on, the proposed system we have in front of us now is the most indirect method possible of actually fixing the economic inadequacies of 0.0 and it is frankly very lazy way.

I personally have never run a wormhole, never run an anomaly and I know for a fact I am not the only person, there is a large player base that is just not interested in it - we rather fight NPC's in belts in a far more straight forward fashion. So please, get off your collective behindes and rethink the implementation of dominion and actually addressing the economic issues and more importantly the short comings of the code base.

Wait 24Hours
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:55:00 - [1856]
 

I find it odd that I agree with so many alliances I have had disdain for so long; I find it even more odd that it kind of angers me the blatant lack of thought some posters have put into exactly what these changes mean.

They will mean higher taxes for people living in 0.0 == Bad
They will mean the map colors and sov will change == Good

However with that said nothing is going to change; because 0.0 is before and after this change going to still be too harsh for all those carebear level 4 mission runners and empire miners who want to login and earn their isk and never loose any of it.

Sure there will be those with the adventurous spirit who make a dash for nullsec the day after the patch and I don't care where they go but I am sure they will be met with roaming gangs of 0.0 pilots with near decades of pvp experience who will quickly send them packing.

The tears you speak of from goons and others right now are not tears; they are warnings to CCP; that they have clearly not entirely thought this through. You can however be sure that afer Dominion goons and others will not be crying; their killboards will be full and those who thought they were getting something new and fun in Dominion will be flooding the boards with plentiful amounts of tears of how unfair 0.0 is. All of the current major power blocks will be simply posting we told you so; now stop your crying.

Word of advice before you come to 0.0 make sure your clone is up to date; you're going to need it.

Alski
Ministers Of Destruction.
Posted - 2009.11.08 15:58:00 - [1857]
 

Originally by: TZeer
Like the new changes, just hope CCP doesn`t backs out and give in to the cry babies Laughing

Anyway:

- Alliances are not supposed to have every single system withing 10 jumps of their outpost cynojammed. Without having to pay for it.

- Jump bridges, also a huge tactical tool. And all of you are whining and moaning about you need it for logistics. Well after this you dont need to keep 150 systems with POS fuel and what not.

Today I did a 70 jump trip from empire and into 0.0... What did I see? Alot of empty space with no people in, but sov was up. Why?

Example: Open up map and have a look at Impass. How many people in thoose systems? How many systems are not in use? Also, Feythabolis, Paragon Soul, Tenerifis it`s all wasteland. Most of the systems are only in use by 1 person. And quite a few of the systems are not even used.

Example: Feythabolis consists of 89 systems, when I did a count now I found 92 people in thoose systems. Thats 1,03 people per system.
After patch:
So the systems are upgraded to some extent, and can support 10 people in each system, You wont suddenly need 89 systems, you could reduce it to 9!!!. And suddenly there would be no need for jumpbridge networks in the scale that you have now.

With the first prices CCP came with it would cost 20 mil per day per system, so you are looking at 20*9=180 mil per day. 30 days= 5,4 Bil

Divide that on 92 people= 58,6 Mil per person. Then divide it with number of days, 30= 1,96 mil per day per person. In average thats the taxes from 1 hour of ratting. If you have 10% taxes.

Then start adding income you get from refining, eventual docking fee if you have people in your space, rental agreements, POS mining. And I think most of thoose 58 mil should be covered by a large margin.

Ofcourse if you want to start adding cynojammers and jumpdriges in every system out of thoose 9 systems it`s gonna get expensive. But thats also the point.



Your maths seems fairly sound and in any case I wouldn’t argue with the proposed costs of claiming sov, it’s the rewards, or lack thereof that is the problem, a system being able to support more people sounds nice enough however the proposed implementation is terrible.

Just as an example, equate the nature of these “improved” and *shared* resources with having a s system with 120 belts in it, sounds awesome right? 120 belts, loads of rats, great.
Except how much of your time do you think your battleship will be spent in warp looking for a belt that isn’t already taken?
That’s what these supposed changes offer, the exact same CRAP we already have and have had for years apon years without any significant improvement – worse infact – mining is far less profitable than the good old days when crokite was 100m isk/ph, or when your local static DED plex was worth a good 30-100m in bountys for an hours work, minus loot, and with far less competition than present.

0.0 is LONG past overdue for some very serious risk/reward balancing and countless other minor fixes (industry esp.) and practically nothing in this expansion offers anything to correct that.

Less POS pewing is awesome, the sovereignty system changes are somewhat intriguing, however nothing stated in this blog is anything more than scratching the surface.

Off topic: Belt ratting is where the vast majority of non-empire-alt-using 0.0 players make their isk, no belt ratting improvement is no improvement at all for countless numbers of players.

Mkiaki
Gallente
Progressive Business Solutions
Posted - 2009.11.08 16:01:00 - [1858]
 

More tears please.

dabatman
Caldari
Priory Of The Lemon
Atlas Alliance
Posted - 2009.11.08 16:01:00 - [1859]
 

I too think this stuff is going to asplode the economy. I, unlike our beloved Bobby God, have run 0.0 anomolies and at the moment they suck really hard unless you're just looking to burn time in a less efficient way than belt ratting. If CCP is looking to make this concept work, one thing they could try is removing a whole load of items from static empire plexes for the mini professions. That might actually make it worth taking the time to do them out in 0.0. There has to be scarcity of a resource to make it worth anything meaningful. This whole new system just looks like a great way to drive down the prices of everything (dons his tin foil hat) so that people don't complain as much while CCP tries to suck tons of the avaliable currency out of the game (with the sov costs) and rebalance the isk.
TL;DR
dominion = markets asplode, isk worth nothing; quickly followed by it costing way too much for everything, and this thread needs more Dasty.

Shawna Gray
Gallente
Posted - 2009.11.08 16:03:00 - [1860]
 

Originally by: TZeer
Like the new changes, just hope CCP doesn`t backs out and give in to the cry babies Laughing

Anyway:

- Alliances are not supposed to have every single system withing 10 jumps of their outpost cynojammed. Without having to pay for it.

- Jump bridges, also a huge tactical tool. And all of you are whining and moaning about you need it for logistics. Well after this you dont need to keep 150 systems with POS fuel and what not.

Today I did a 70 jump trip from empire and into 0.0... What did I see? Alot of empty space with no people in, but sov was up. Why?

Example: Open up map and have a look at Impass. How many people in thoose systems? How many systems are not in use? Also, Feythabolis, Paragon Soul, Tenerifis it`s all wasteland. Most of the systems are only in use by 1 person. And quite a few of the systems are not even used.

Example: Feythabolis consists of 89 systems, when I did a count now I found 92 people in thoose systems. Thats 1,03 people per system.
After patch:
So the systems are upgraded to some extent, and can support 10 people in each system, You wont suddenly need 89 systems, you could reduce it to 9!!!. And suddenly there would be no need for jumpbridge networks in the scale that you have now.

With the first prices CCP came with it would cost 20 mil per day per system, so you are looking at 20*9=180 mil per day. 30 days= 5,4 Bil

Divide that on 92 people= 58,6 Mil per person. Then divide it with number of days, 30= 1,96 mil per day per person. In average thats the taxes from 1 hour of ratting. If you have 10% taxes.

Then start adding income you get from refining, eventual docking fee if you have people in your space, rental agreements, POS mining. And I think most of thoose 58 mil should be covered by a large margin.

Ofcourse if you want to start adding cynojammers and jumpdriges in every system out of thoose 9 systems it`s gonna get expensive. But thats also the point.



Less jumpbridges/cynojammers etc and less systems pr alliance sounds good. The problem is the profitability of the systems that you do claim. There is a reason why there are only 1 char in space in those systems you mentioned. Its all they can support. That wont change much with dominion. While it theoretically can support larger numbers of players, they still will earn (a lot) less than in empire.


Pages: first : previous : ... 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 ... : last (119)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only