open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked 0.0 changes (Caution: Contains wall of text)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Lets Blue Everything
Posted - 2011.02.03 10:47:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Lets Blue Everything on 03/02/2011 10:49:35
<--

Did CCP really intend for things to get this bad?

Lets have a breakdown on 0.0 including the mechanics

1. Well first of all those timers suck, we went from PoS warfare that involved activity in several systems with multiple timers (not amazing mechanics, but still workable) to lets call cuddle up in a ball and lag the system out.

2. 1 year after Dominion, lag is somewhat none existent, but with every sov holding alliance in a desperate attempt to blue each other to 'survive', just so they can get similar numbers as their enemies we will see lag return soon enough.

3. Supercaps, here, there everywhere, they are now used for ratting <sigh> dreads on the other hand are used for, hmm where can I use a dread instead of a supercap? Now before you give me the "but dreads are cheaper and can dock" reply, you should know carriers are also cheaper and can dock yet STILL fit a role, Dreads are somewhat useless mainly because of siege being too long but thats a different story.

4. Lets shoot stations, Rolling Eyes how exactly is shooting a station any better than PoS warfare?, at least with PoS warfare dreads could be used, now supercarriers fill the role of structure dps and well everything else

5. Number warfare, alliances are aware there is nothing stopping them from blueing all of 0.0, they also know this is the easiest way they can survive, while their player base goes inactive or NPCs they just get more blues. This is literally bull****, yes I am aware CCP and CSM are working on fixing this and want to get rid of number warfare I just dont want to see something as bad as Dominion.

6. Puppet Masters, Pets, Renters and NIPs (Non invasion pact, in other words Neutral with benefits) if you look at the sov map, each sov holding alliance fits into one of these categories.

7. Passive income, why is it 0.0 criticise lvl 4 mission runners or people who work for their ISK, when 0.0 alliances get passive income through moon goo.

8. Industry in 0.0 sucks, the only PvEing anyone does is ratting, mining overall is BAD, what happened to making people in 0.0 live in 0.0 majority of the time (free from mission alts).

I think it is time CCP focus on making a Dominion Mk II, no more empire stuff, no more random stuff no one even asked for.

Change 0.0 to encourage smaller local wars, that dont involve curling up in a ball in a single system shooting a stupid structure.

Charge alliances ISK based on their member and corp count like a human resource fee meaning if you are going to recruit everyone at least be charged for it, that way people can choose if a player is worth the upkeep and recruitment wont be as limited as "hey we have space, join and blob".

Change supercaps so dreads are useful again, I personally think if dreads had a 2 min siege timer they would used more often Very Happy

Make sov easier to claim that favours skill over blobbing, for example introduce a beacon that can be anchored fast and easy, the beacon will have about 2 mil HP and unless destroyed will claim the system for the alliance who deployed it. The beacon will be 500 m3 allowing smaller alliances to have a chance at sov warfare, a beacon can be placed at planets only and it takes 3hrs to online, once online the system will switch sov for the beacon holding alliance. This will encourage more wars, yes people will be outnumbered but because it will be easier to claim sov people are more likely to put effort in defence / offence rather than spending days risking only to get boredom.

As for stations, allow them to be incapped making it impossible to dock in them (or use services if already docked), this will require carriers etc to rep and encourage cap / supercap warfare. Also for the sake of industry allow 0.0 stations to manufacture, invent, copy, refine etc better than anything else, better than what they are atm.

Lets Blue Everything
Posted - 2011.02.03 10:48:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Lets Blue Everything on 03/02/2011 11:10:57
Introduce a new ship which leeches moon goo (from 0.0, WHs, lowsec, yes im well aware of the WH comment :P), if moon goo is being leeched the harvester will send a message to the starbase defence operators letting them know "there harvester is running at a reduced rate", during this time the moon harvester will only harvest 20% of efficiency.

These are some ideas and examples, I am hoping small gang warfare gets promoted where we see more black op hot drops and more conflicts that wont rely on numbers.

"how do you know people wont blob with this?" – Well based on everything that has happened in the last few years, I believe the major reason why blobs happen is because of timers allowing in advance planning of blobs AND because one system is usually affected.

Think of it this way, imagine you had 5 days to defend a system and 5 days to organise a fleet, can you really blame alliances for doing a “CTA: Everyone has 5 days to get to XXX”, 3hrs or lower timers promotes continuous battles, active alliances benefit but due to smaller sov structures there will be more fleets, more combat, more destruction.

Questions you may ask

“that’s not fair, when I claim sov someone can take it while im asleep!” – Yes, they could but then you can take it back, one of the major things people complain about is timers ruining everything, smaller alliances cant claim because they cant handle having mass numbers and larger alliances get bored due to spending more time shooting a station and less time shooting players.

“I have 1000 players in my alliance, they are all inactive why should I pay a fee to have members?” – Well managing an alliance isn’t exactly easy, it allows corps / alliances to decide who is worth having / not having that includes who and who shouldnt be kicked.

“I have 10 systems ready to swap in 3 hours, well done on this bad idea im going to lose everything!” – Maybe you should go kill their beacon? It doesn’t require a lot, you can even do it with a few SB, or if you want you can go claim someone elses system.

“The sov map is ruined, everyone is trying to kill everyone, people are claiming space everywhere and all you see is pvp in 0.0” – Good!

“I am in a 20k coalition, we will be able to defend all these places that are going to swap sov” – 3 hours is a lot of time to kill something with 3 mil HP, if you can manage to defend all 20k people, good luck

“This promotes piracy, you are a ****” – Actually im the biggest carebear in eve Shocked, not by choice either, sov warfare doesn’t happen much and when it does its all about the numbers and who or what is blue, where inactive alliances can sit back and have 50+ supercarriers defend their space.

“How exactly would this promote PvE?” – Imagine the huge increase in losses and pvp, well players will need to buy stuff, selling stuff in 0.0 NPC stations will make a fortune.

“My supercap is USELESS now that I cant blob!” – Nope, supercap / cap warfare will be to defend a station, huges fleets will be there but will be limited to defending / attacking structures, smaller fleets will focus on sov, you can always use supercaps to defend sov but that would be really inefficient.

“What about the current bonuses we get from Sov?” – Those will be there too, but I guess for the sake of things the current sov structures can be removed.

“bwhahaha I will claim all of 0.0, MARK MY WORD!” – You really think you can claim and defend that many systems, if you can manage that then great stuff.

“Black ops warfare, heh” – yup ;)


Once again these are just ideas, im sure not all of you agree but since most people (careless of epeen status) are disappointed in 0.0 atm

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2011.02.03 11:20:00 - [3]
 

I'd like to see some sort of convergence between sovereignty styles. At present we have "database sov" defining Empire space, "dominion sov" defining nullsec alliances, "occupation" impacting Faction Warfare and "incursion" where NPCs temporarily invade some region.

The Incursion and Faction Warfare styles of sovereignty encourage smaller groups and active PvP. Faction Warfare is a little broken due to "occupying" bunker deadspaces with cloaked ships to cheese your way to winning, so that needs to be fixed.

Perhaps there should be a kind of "grand unified sovereignty" system: empire space should be contestable, all Sov & sec status should be determined to some extent by the amount of PvP or PvE action that takes place. Nullsec alliances could launch attacks on their enemies by paying off an NPC empire to wander into some region the enemy controls (incursions on demand). Pilots could choose to align with the NPC empires, providing the casual players an authority to work for (because NPCs don't kick you from their alliance if you don't turn up to CTAs for a month).

Sovereignty would be determined by the amount of activity in a system, with the benefits being bonuses to those activities (i.e.: sov based on indexes, not structures). Contesting sov would require doing the activities that the sov holder is supposed to be doing. Go into enemy space and run their complexes, mine their ore, blow up their ratters, blow up their miners, engage in all available forms of PvP.

We need working treaties too. Then the alliances could hire carebears to occupy specific systems to rat and mine.

CONCORD or local police/navy could then be installed with an IHUB module, or a simple treaty with the appropriate NPC corp. Taxes not enough in empire space? CONCORD response time drops (as indicated by the security status). Too many missions being run? Security index goes up, mission quality drops. More PvP happening? Security index goes down, tougher rats appear, better mission agents move in (or existing mission agents become better quality).

Thus places like Sasoutikh, Emolgranlan, Dodixie and Motsu would end up as 1.0 sec with L1 agents , while places like Jita end up becoming lowsec with L5 agents.

A sandbox, where half the sand isn't glued in place? Yay!

Lets Blue Everything
Posted - 2011.02.03 11:46:00 - [4]
 

I would also like to mention, when people are asked "why arent they moving to 0.0 or joining a 0.0 alliance?" I get the following replies, in no specific order.

"lag"
"too many naps blobbing everything that isnt blue"
"supercap blobbing"
"shooting structures sucks"
"except for weekends there isnt any targets"

and many other criticisms, now when 0.0 players are asked "why dont you think non 0.0 players goto 0.0?" I get the following replies, in no specific order

"They are all carebears who like CCP to hold their hands" (which doesnt make sense, non 0.0 includes WHs and lowsec)
"0.0 sucks, no one really likes the current mechanics"
"because who really wants to spend hours getting ready and travelling just to die in a blob or get no combat"

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.02.03 12:01:00 - [5]
 

This is what I would start with:
Rotate moon minerals on a 3-6 month schedule with the nascent vein being discoverable on a similar schedule.
- Should spur some more wars to secure future income for the bloated null entities.

Allow small gangs to affect sovereignty upgrades by direct action as in external target-able upgrade modules on iHub.
- Makes patrolling/using ones space an actual requirement, go figure. Encourages entities to diversify their roster across timezones and loose some fat.

Restrict bridges (Titan+POS) to industrial type ship and boost null industry by a healthy margin.
- Increases gate use -> more pew. Gives null the opportunity to become self-sufficient when it comes to common goods.

Increase Dread damage, EHP and/or change siege function to near toggle.
- Dreads are OK'ish at what they do but have a WW1 pilots life expectancy against supers. Flip that and they may come out of hiding again.
Originally by: Mara Rinn
...

FW cloaked timer capture was fixed ages ago, you are behind the times Smile

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.02.03 12:43:00 - [6]
 

Originally by: Lets Blue Everything
2. 1 year after Dominion, lag is somewhat none existent,

Stopped reading at this point

Southern Suzy
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.02.03 14:08:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Scatim Helicon
Originally by: Lets Blue Everything
2. 1 year after Dominion, lag is somewhat none existent,

Stopped reading at this point


Shocked I actually agree with the goon there, lag is horrible in 0.0 as are lots of other things. They haven't come close to the lag levels from before dominion at all.

Lets Blue Everything
Posted - 2011.02.03 14:37:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Southern Suzy
Originally by: Scatim Helicon
Originally by: Lets Blue Everything
2. 1 year after Dominion, lag is somewhat none existent,

Stopped reading at this point


Shocked I actually agree with the goon there, lag is horrible in 0.0 as are lots of other things. They haven't come close to the lag levels from before dominion at all.


Originally by: Me
2. 1 year after Dominion, lag is somewhat none existent, but with every sov holding alliance in a desperate attempt to blue each other to 'survive', just so they can get similar numbers as their enemies we will see lag return soon enough.



Im finding 500 man fleets quite fine atm, cant really speak on a NCs 1200+ in a system point of view but most alliances cant reach those numbers anyway.

The very idea I am suggesting will reduce number wars (exception to station shooting) so there wouldnt ever strategically need to be a reason to bring more than 100 players.

Saying that, this conversation isnt about lag and while some people may feel lag is still present and some dont, I for one havent heard experienced much problems with lag recently OR heard lag affect average sized engagements.

The lag comment was todo with the nature and mechanics of 0.0 where people will just shove more players in a system until it lags anyway. Very Happy

Wolodymyr
Posted - 2011.02.04 05:50:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Wolodymyr on 04/02/2011 05:59:55
Originally by: Lets Blue Everything

2. 1 year after Dominion, lag is somewhat none existent, but with every sov holding alliance in a desperate attempt to blue each other to 'survive', just so they can get similar numbers as their enemies we will see lag return soon enough.


yeah but seeing 700 ships lag out looks cooler than seeing 300 ships lag out.

Originally by: Lets Blue Everything

3. Supercaps, here, there everywhere, they are now used for ratting <sigh> dreads on the other hand are used for, hmm where can I use a dread instead of a supercap? Now before you give me the "but dreads are cheaper and can dock" reply, you should know carriers are also cheaper and can dock yet STILL fit a role, Dreads are somewhat useless mainly because of siege being too long but thats a different story.


Make dreadnoughts useful for shooting other capitol ships. Making them more agile with a bit better ship to ship DPS should accomplish this.

Originally by: Lets Blue Everything

4. Lets shoot stations, Rolling Eyes how exactly is shooting a station any better than PoS warfare?, at least with PoS warfare dreads could be used, now supercarriers fill the role of structure dps and well everything else


Just make a station a really big POS. I think blowing up someone else's station would be pretty awesome personally. Also if a group of players can set up a station it makes sense that a group of players should be able to take one down. In theory you could track the amount of stations that go up each month and calculate a time when ever nullsec planet has a station around it.

Originally by: Lets Blue Everything

5. Number warfare, alliances are aware there is nothing stopping them from blueing all of 0.0, they also know this is the easiest way they can survive, while their player base goes inactive or NPCs they just get more blues. This is literally bull****, yes I am aware CCP and CSM are working on fixing this and want to get rid of number warfare I just dont want to see something as bad as Dominion.


I like the "lets get rid of jump bridges" solution that keeps getting kicked around.


Originally by: Lets Blue Everything

8. Industry in 0.0 sucks, the only PvEing anyone does is ratting, mining overall is BAD, what happened to making people in 0.0 live in 0.0 majority of the time (free from mission alts).


again getting rid of jump bridges would reduce the ease of just shipping in everything from Jita. Also CCP could just add on numerically more nullsec stars on the edge of the map

Originally by: Lets Blue Everything

I think it is time CCP focus on making a Dominion Mk II, no more empire stuff, no more random stuff no one even asked for.


Sure why not


Originally by: Lets Blue Everything

As for stations, allow them to be incapped making it impossible to dock in them (or use services if already docked), this will require carriers etc to rep and encourage cap / supercap warfare.


This could be another good role for a dreadnought to encourage people to fly 'em.


Originally by: Lets Blue Everything

Also for the sake of industry allow 0.0 stations to manufacture, invent, copy, refine etc better than anything else, better than what they are atm.

this would help 0.0 industry.

Omara Otawan
Posted - 2011.02.05 13:26:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida

Rotate moon minerals on a 3-6 month schedule with the nascent vein being discoverable on a similar schedule.
- Should spur some more wars to secure future income for the bloated null entities.



Thats a nice idea and would really spice things up, unfortunately the current owners of high profit moons simply will not tolerate it. And they can get quite vocal.

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida

Allow small gangs to affect sovereignty upgrades by direct action as in external target-able upgrade modules on iHub.
- Makes patrolling/using ones space an actual requirement, go figure. Encourages entities to diversify their roster across timezones and loose some fat.



Good idea as well, but again the large empires expect their space to be defendable by a giant blob rolling around. The necessity of patrolling space and engaging into small gang warfare is not gonna be accepted easily.

JitaPriceChecker2
Posted - 2011.02.05 13:38:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Scatim Helicon
Originally by: Lets Blue Everything
2. 1 year after Dominion, lag is somewhat none existent,

Stopped reading at this point


Nothing make me feel worse than have to agree with goon

Doctor Invictus
Gallente
Industry and Investments
Posted - 2011.02.06 01:38:00 - [12]
 

I posted a pretty comprehensive (and long/technical) sovereignty/0.0 proposal awhile ago. The last post in that thread is a bare-bones outline, in case the main proposal is too long.

The shortest version is I can manage is "more sand for the sandbox that is EVE".

Laechyd Eldgorn
Caldari
draketrain

Posted - 2011.02.06 11:36:00 - [13]
 

:/

Kim Jong Lau
Gallente
Hysteria Nexus

Posted - 2011.02.07 16:08:00 - [14]
 

TLDR version - Timers are causing 0.0 to be boring and blobby, fix timers and fix 0.0

I agree with this, but ccp are too busy with incarna, so you may as well spend the next year inactive, then when CCP do something there will be approx 8100 more supercarriers alone in 0.0

OH JOY!

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2011.02.07 18:29:00 - [15]
 

+1 for introducing concept of theft of non-actively defended assets (moon goo). Should be able to steal 100% of moon goo while ship is on station though.

Moon holder: Easy passive income when not being raided.

Raider: Income when active, assets (ship) at risk.


Burseg Sardaukar
Sardaukar Merc Guild
General Tso's Alliance
Posted - 2011.02.07 22:18:00 - [16]
 

I don't particularly care about 0.0 Sov warfare, mostly because of the mentioned reasons. If the system changed to allow small gangs to harass Sov holders, I would at least partake in this.

Especially not needing caps to accomplish crap and/or a leaching ship that can steal moon goo. VERY GOOD IDEA!

Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy
Spreadsheets Online
Posted - 2011.02.07 22:47:00 - [17]
 

1. Timers are setup such that you the attacker have to win 3 times straight or more. While the defender can just ignore you for 3 days. Manage 1 small win and then you're back to stage 1. Obviously this can be fixed relatively easily. Once past the first reinforce. You can only RR to the previous reinforce and it goes back into reinforce at the same timing.

Example: Shield reinforce when you had SOV 5. You now have sov 4. armor reinforce and now you have sov 3. Next one is dead ihub or they fight and rep it back to shield reinforce. Day later the attack puts it back into armor reinforce and now they have sov 2. Forces them to keep defending.

2. LOLWHAT?

3. Dreads arent used because you're better off flying a battleships because cap fights are decided by subcap fights. Capships now dont have the ability to kill subcap fleets. This is untrue for supercap pilots as they sure as hell wont eject and get in a battleship.

4. You've always had to shoot stations... what's the prob? Do you want to go back to 2006 where you could lose your station anytime.

5. Game balance means numbers are the only factor for winning. Unless you live in a country which allows you to ddos your enemy's comms. You cant stop this.

6. CCP will never be able to control who is blue and such. They could rip the standings system out of the game and there will be everso larger blues just to avoid conflict.

7. Yes we need a Moongoo mining capship that has to siege for like 1 hour at a moon. Thusly killing moongoo values.


 

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