open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Are you happy with 0.0 space rules?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Shadow Lord77
Posted - 2011.07.26 03:13:00 - [1]
 

I want to know what the worlds opinion on 0.0 sec is.

Are they happy with 0.0 as it is? With the method by which 0.0 sec solar systems are won and lost, and how outposts last forever? Was it a good idea to tax 0.0 Alliances and Corporations on the systems they officially possess?

Would you rather have EVE be incorporated with a mechanic that allows anarchy? No rules, no taxes. In this game play you can build wherever you want in 0.0 sec, and whatever structure/ship you want, (depending on CCP's corporate discretion). To be able to base your Corporation's mates and friends wherever inside EVE it is accounted to be proper as long as you have enough force? Solar systems wouldn't be won by flipping Territorial claim units, they'd be won by battle, occupation, and corporate influence. System sovereignty would be measured in game-code by Alliance success, kill/death ratios, occupation times, base locations, populations, etc.

Is this not a much better venture? Please, write your comment for below.

Spurty
Caldari
V0LTA
VOLTA Corp
Posted - 2011.07.26 03:17:00 - [2]
 

the CSM is outside with some large sticks. They said they wanted a word with you.

Fix Lag
Posted - 2011.07.26 03:21:00 - [3]
 

Having an alliance's influence in a system be a factor in determining sov is a ludicrous notion and you should be ashamed for mentioning it. Get out.

Digital Messiah
Gallente
N7 Corporation
PandaMonium.
Posted - 2011.07.26 03:28:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: Fix Lag
Having an alliance's influence in a system be a factor in determining sov is a ludicrous notion and you should be ashamed for mentioning it. Get out.
ATM it is like a galactic king of the hill. Which sort of makes sense. You need a base of operations to do things. Without a place to store, launch, build, and invent, you can't really plan to succeed over someone else. I just think perhaps it would be better, if having sov meant you were harder to conquer. Put a little more difficulty in pos bashing and such. Currently it is who ever gets the most supercaps to out live the other fleet and then storm the castle right? Shouldn't a pos be able to disrupt super capitals, have outstanding defenses, and pilots get some kind of sovereignty booster based on choice for roaming in their own space?

Plus there would be a lot of complaints. Oh I can't do industry because I get more sov for inventing etc.

Sator Nyatt
Posted - 2011.07.26 03:36:00 - [5]
 

There is a mechanic for making sov harder to conquer. Its called timers, which you can set to your advantage. There's something which makes POS bashing harder. It's called POS guns. And there's something which makes everything a lot easier - numbers in fleet.

Taking sov isn't easy. SBUs, then taking down the ihub, then the TCU, station as well if its there. All of these things are invulnerable unless the right conditions are met, ihubs and stations have 3 cycles where you have to wait for up to 2.5 days before you can attack again. POSes have a similar invulnerable reinforcement.

Grinding sov is pretty damn hard, really. And slow, and destroys your soul. Large regions are more easily conquered by making the other person not turn up, then run away, and drop sov, rather than having to grind everything against opposing fleets.


Doctor Invictus
Gallente
Industry and Investments
Posted - 2011.07.26 04:00:00 - [6]
 

I went ahead and fixed nullsec for you here.

You're welcomed.

Florestan Bronstein
24th Imperial Crusade
Posted - 2011.07.26 04:27:00 - [7]
 

replace sov with the WoT model Razz


catinboots
Minmatar
Vintage heavy industries
Posted - 2011.07.26 06:19:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Doctor Invictus
I went ahead and fixed nullsec for you here.

You're welcomed.


Damn what is that post doing in the graveyard thread

Sadly the 0.0 overlords will NEVER accept thaét Too much work for them

Taipion
Caldari
Operations Control
United Pod Service
Posted - 2011.07.26 06:24:00 - [9]
 

Corporate influence and stuff???

Like how many POSes everyone has in the system?!?!



I personally dont like the ISK sink that sov is now, it makes 0.0 a bit more empty, but other than that it is way better than anything you could imagine!


-1

Tiven loves Tansien
Posted - 2011.07.26 06:33:00 - [10]
 

I think nosec has the easiest and most profitable ways to earn money, without any risk at all to be honest.

This must be addressed.

catinboots
Minmatar
Vintage heavy industries
Posted - 2011.07.26 06:51:00 - [11]
 


Overall i am not , i feel the 6 months i lived in immensee ( with 2 other accounts ) were the most boring and frustrating time of my time on eve and i left the game for a few months burned out , politic politics restrictions and more restrictions you have more opportunities in high and low sed then in 0.0 that is how it felt

What about limiting the number of systems one alliance can control.
my reasoning . burocracy, the faction empires all have a large burcracy to control the systems they own , none of the 0.0 alliance hardly have one if they have one in the first place and still some of them control more space than two of the largest factions combined. Also alliance can have influence in systems they can control which they can hire out or use as a buffer zone no restriction on poses

may also create a system to create diplomatic agreements , something like the personal corporate and faction standing we have now ex a pink color for non aggrsion pacts, blue for allies etc

Kunming
Amarr
T.H.U.G L.I.F.E
Xenon-Empire
Posted - 2011.07.26 07:01:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Tiven loves Tansien
I think nosec has the easiest and most profitable ways to earn money, without any risk at all to be honest.

This must be addressed.


I have lived in 0.0 exclusively from 2003 to 2008, the problem is not the risk free environment (its anything but risk free), but the ability of alliances to smash any lil guerilla force with overwhelming SC blobs or at least hot drop with a bunch of carriers, or at least move from one end of the region to the other in no time through JBs.

Back in the day a dedicated and smart force of 5-10 ppl could disturb your money making activities considerably if you didnt actively hunted them down with smart tactics. This has nothing to do with sov mechanics IMO, it is the "power projection" problem of 0.0 alliances nowadays. This all started with the addition of super capital ships, that might be a coincidense though.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.07.26 08:52:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Tiven loves Tansien
I think nosec has the easiest and most profitable ways to earn money, without any risk at all to be honest.

This must be addressed.

I think you are sadly mistaken, you can earn on an individual level more in highsec than in 0.0.


@OP, I agree sov should be activity based, would solve pretty much all the problems with 0.0.

EvEa Deva
Posted - 2011.07.26 09:50:00 - [14]
 

adding laws to lawless space in the so called sandbox game = great idea

Abrazzar
Posted - 2011.07.26 09:54:00 - [15]
 

Sov mechanics should be a 4X strategy game, not spam the structures and sit on your ass.

Mr Blue
Caldari
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2011.07.26 09:57:00 - [16]
 

nowadays its no reason to own space(sov), besides to rent it out.

Its no reason to loose anything expensive to hold your space either...no alliance will drop a capital(or super) fleet to defend a lost cause.

Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
Posted - 2011.07.26 10:14:00 - [17]
 

Three years ago I'd thought outposts should've been indestructable. As it is today.. well just look at regions near highsec. It's getting ridicilous. So yeah, destructible outposts would be one of few improvements.

Another would be boosts to nullsec mining. That does not mean a nerf to WH mining howevever. Rather that null could have components that are so big (volumes), and can't be reprocessed through modules, so that you are more or less forced to mine 'at site of production' when you build supercaps (just one example).

Jumpbridges, both the static as well as the titan ones have made defending (as well as blobbing and bait-/counterdropping) ridicilously fast and easy. Those needs to be gone from the game, completely. There's really no option to it.

The supercap warfare is being looked at already, but the changes that has been mentioned is quite offputting as well. Motherships were weak years ago when I picked up my first. They got a health buff (a must when dreads just killed them in seconds), they got a jump range (CCP wanted supers to commit to fighting, so this was necessary as well). They also got fighterbombers.. and that's where we are today. With 20 fighters, and the regular drones, and the hp/range buff, the moms would've been fine. And the changes they're looking at now is to.. remove regular drones and make them FB/Fighter only, and instade make a specific supercap-killer.

The effects of that is quite obvious, you'd think people realise that if supers keep their damage, they'll still be ace for sovgrind. And without their smaller dronebays, they will keep moving in giant blobs and/or with support fleet. If anything, this is promoting blobbing. Removing FB's, will make it more a skirmish logistic ship for smaller alliances. It would mean less chance of blobs of them, it would mean alot less damage from them. And it would mean it actually is the "mothership" (logistic/support) boat it was originally. Hell, even the new 'supercarrier' name suggest such a role.

But hey, OP's ironic post with hints to the past is alot more fun to read than me putting the finger in the eye of the carebearblobs that inhibit null nowadays. Razz

Jekyl Eraser
Posted - 2011.07.26 14:05:00 - [18]
 

Edited by: Jekyl Eraser on 26/07/2011 14:11:27
I think it's too easy to destroy some smaller guys base and i think it's too easy to reach out any small alliance. This means any small guy will get pummeled eventually.

I also think it shouldn't be about the home base but about the resources. If you wan't some moon or planet from the enemy, you go to that location, pummel it down and take it. If you want their rats and anomalies you gotta go live there... This is the point. ATM you can go and kill enemy rats and anomalies by killing the base. IMO 0.0 should be available to anyone... and it's not because you're fixed to a location... you're a sitting duck.

EDIT: Base should only be for manufacturing items of power. You shouldn't be able to prevent masses from making ISK on the rats and anomalies but you should be able to prevent that someone from building an army to crush you.

Sinikka Huiputti
Posted - 2011.07.26 14:21:00 - [19]
 

i see a problem with that there's no real reason to hold and conquer space, combined to fact that you'll just get supercapitaled/megablobbed if you try.

i think this is because of way too easy logistics (still) combined to magical jumping around whole universe.

then imho other problem is that there's no haulers and structures you could shoot, most of them are pretty much out of reach for any smaller entities. real pirating (shooting defenseless idiots for isk) is mostly dead, only wololo "pirate (read elite pvp) for fun" guys remain.


hurfdurf

Solhild
Posted - 2011.07.26 14:28:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Doctor Invictus
I went ahead and fixed nullsec for you here.

You're welcomed.


Excellent stuff in this, give it a read Very Happy

Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon
Posted - 2011.07.26 14:31:00 - [21]
 

Erase supercaps and reduce structure hp a whole bunch.

I don't know. Probably a bad idea (except the removing supercaps part ... and the structure hp reduction). I don't care. **** sov games.


 

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