open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New dev blog: Nullsec Development: Rules and Guidelines
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 : last (22)

Author Topic

Jita mcheck
Posted - 2011.08.08 13:13:00 - [541]
 

I don't always shop in jita because it's cheapest(it's not) but because it is eassier to make 1 trip to jita than to buy in 7 diffrent stations and fly between them to pick my stuff up.
This is why I also buy in amar and other hubs.

Another reason I use jita is that is where my "market alt"(look at this character name) Is located. It is much easier to buy in jita and auto pilot to where you want it within empire.

Pasadenasman
Born In Jungle
Ushra'Khan
Posted - 2011.08.08 13:13:00 - [542]
 

Edited by: Pasadenasman on 08/08/2011 13:16:39
Originally by: Nomad III

You are one of those few thinking more generally in term of concepts. But we have got rules because of the station ping pong. We have got new rules because it was to easy to conquer someone (MC versus D2 and allies) and then we have got more rules resulting into todays sov warefare. But no one is really happy. I know all the discussions and most of the were bad this thread is.

To me it's looking like the sandbox has a general problem of concept.

1) The warfare supports bigger entities better than smaller ones. It's not only the fleet war. Even logistics causes more work for a smaller entity. So I'm not wondering why there are so many big blobs.

2) ship design isn't made according to the principle scissor-stone-paper. An example is the discussion about SC. Many have ideas to get rid of SC, but this will solve nothing, because if this shiptype is dead, the big blobs comming with another shipsclass.

I like your idea of no rules, because it will solve several problems.




Ok so i have to go further...
I was working on that since a few weeks. (Felt on this thread by chance xD)

The first way of thinking the game was a limited area called EMPIRE where you can make stuff in a safer way than an other limited area called nullsec where there is no absolute safe and you can do pratically what you want to.
Between them you got a bunch of systems where you can do stuff like in empire (with no notable reward) with less risk than nullsec. (long story short, low-sec has none of the 2 others area's benefits).

I think this is a good concept, but a old one. It worked when 10 000 player was the pick of gamer. No end-game item/ships was reached and lagfest was not involved in the warfare.

I propose to re-invent all of this. No more no less. Understand my words, to be clear, there is one word you ve maybe noticed that give all the (non)sence the game we play. The word is LIMITED.
CCP launch the game and limited these areas. A good start tbh. But a sandbox game on a single server with 45 000 players can't go on this way. If the trend is to give tools to players to do all the stuff by their own and give choice at every single step of the game. That concept of LIMITED areas is obviously obsolete.

The background of the game already suggest all of the following ideas, there are just (by magic) not meet on the game, sometimes in a ridiculous way... Look, to have sov. on an area where concord has no presence or autority, you have to pay concord on a regular basis to keep holding this space... WTFLOLBBQ11 ?

In deep 0.0, i'm not talking about providence... I mean several cyno far away from that region you have stargates. Who the **** has dropped stargates there when you got 1-2 travel by day ? (the respond is in fact the jovian, but hey, they were supposed to be the olders, now we are far from that time)

So, here are my points.
I think the time is come to allow the playerbase to shape the game by themself and lead the game where the playerbase push it. I will recieve many vegetables at the face by saying this but you know...

Imagine the space has no definitively specialized limited area. Empire - lowsec - nullsec can be on the same place but a different time. Concord has to fight to maintain empire in place and nullsec residents has to fight too to push the empire at falling. lowsec will be a moment between empire-nullsec transition when specific action can be done.

Factional warfare will be on the empire side, 0.0 alliances will be on nullsec residents side. Trade will become the 1st activity before industry in empire to keep advantage of the safer place, it will be the opposite for the nullsec.

More ideas will come this night, not enought characters left on this message.
A different topic from CCP was called "give me monocle or give me death", I will give both, I bring WAR.
sorry for bad english and wall of text.

Prez21
Alpha Strike.
Posted - 2011.08.08 13:17:00 - [543]
 

Two comments that ive seen that I have strongly agreed with are both about trade hubs and travel times, and i think viceroys comment was spot on. There is no point in building or trying to establish a trabe hub in 0.0 when jita is so easily accessible. When i was part of a 0.0 alliance certain people using alts ran jf to empire and which system did they use? thats right jita, not rens, not amarr, jita. Yes there are other hubs about that are used, but jita is the big supermarket and the rest are just local shops that are used for small buys, where the price difference isnt as big so its not worth traveling to jita for.

If i lived in minmatar space or amarr space and needed a module for my ship, yes i would use rens or amarr, just to save the traveling. but if i needed a t2 ship or pirate battleship or lots of t2 modules or rigs then i would hop in a shuttle, autopilot to jita and do my shopping there because you save so much isk and jita is always well stocked. Why would people go anywhere else or produce in 0.0 when it is so much easier to use a jf to jita?

The only real 0.0 trade hub i remember was azn in the days of ASCN, this was because they lived in deep 0.0, warp to zero and jump drives werent about or were very new and hardly used so they had to make it so they could supply there pilots and they built a very well stocked 0.0 trade hub which saved there pilots hours in traveling time between there homes in 0.0 and empire and if this is ever to exist again travel times need to be looked at, there is no other way about it, EVE is too small.

Panem EtCircenses
Posted - 2011.08.08 16:55:00 - [544]
 

Ideally, I'd like to see something along the lines of:
1) alterable sec status in Empire so Faction Warfare means something, and the faction borders can move
2) Dynamically created systems in 0.0 so that it's never all discovered; the rate of expansion can be tailored to the number of null sec residents
3) No automatic 0.0 gates; they can be built and then controlled by the Alliance that holds space
4) New ships to allow exploration of systems without gates. New ships to allow fleets to be moved to these scouted systems.
5) No local as intel, but better specifically created intel tools
6) An end to 'bigger is always better' in ship design; maybe start with a T2 destroyer specifically designed to kill Capital ships, or something similar. Make joined up fleets, formations and tactics more of a necessity
7) etc ...

But that's mostly way way outside what is currently possible with the game I suspect, so I guess it would be easier to make EVE 2; oh well Rolling Eyes


Panem

WingTsun
Posted - 2011.08.08 17:48:00 - [545]
 

Comments on Jita.

The only places where a system will even come close to one of the market hubs is either in a location in the middle of a very large alliance, or in some sort of NRDS space. In typical NBSI, you are limited to that corp/alliance for a market. Those markets are going to be very inefficient. You may be able to buy a ship- but be not able to fit it properly with what the market provides. In this case the best thing is to jump back to at least a proper market hub and refit as a half finished ship is pretty much useless.

For production- minerals and moon goo are somewhat regional, so you need to exit 0.0 to grab full reactions for those mats anyways. So it makes sense not to deadhead and at least take something back for sale.

You can change market dynamics quickly with competition, but it seems to me that most are preoccupied with playing the .01 isk game instead of proper competition.

The very mechanics that allow an alliance to hold space make their markets much less efficient. If you homogenize moon goo and minerals there is less reason to move it around; which is a double edged sword. You get more in region production and healthier markets at the expense of GFs that happen because of the movement.

The big thing is that EVERYBODY can go to Jita...you have to have one of those fancy Cyrillic keyboards to go to the Drone Regions.

Muul Udonii
Minmatar
THORN Syndicate
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.08.08 18:19:00 - [546]
 

Disclaimer: I have not read the whole thread, so this may be repeating what someone else has said.

How I Thought Nullsec Was Going To Run Following Dominion:
Sov is given to those who utilise a system
Sov depends on active pilots in a system, the most active alliance holds sov.
Sov increases along with usage of a system; ratting, mining contributes to this
You can take sov without firing a shot if nobody opposes you
You won't lose a station just because you are blobbed into it

Only one of those actually came to fruition, and that I think was your mistake.

Just implement that and yous sov issues are sorted.

Couch Jason'Acinom
Posted - 2011.08.08 18:41:00 - [547]
 

VIVE the Resistance!!!

In the battle of the north is was a battle of high ball or low a ball till you time zone came into play and you had the larger force.

There should mechanics that encourage “a resistance” no matter what the odds are.
Have the invading fleet be required to bring in a fragile ship or supplies though a supply lines to take out the objective, so that the friendlies have an opportunity to take out the supply line with a small force.

In the process of knocking an object down for sovereignty have option for the defenders be able drag out or 'Dic” with the enemy to slow them down. Get that Block aid runner in to provide supplies to drag out a timer or something

this will allow a smaller force to do something while their empire falls and gives additional targets for the larger force to attack.

1. Eve is a game of reward vs time vs risk, Make some objectives like pushing back a timer may required a pilot to spend 2 hours of activity to push back the timer 10 mins if it is done reasonably safely or Push back the timer 2 Hours if it required you blockaid runner to dock at an object this is under siege.

The game is not simply who has the best fleet wins, it is also who can out think the other player..

I also love faction warfar as some objectives could only be effected by small ships because there were though acceleration gates, These, or something similar, need to be in place for these alternate targets. This will required smaller ships to be pulled off of the guarding of Super caps (as if they needed it) and partake in secondary objectives, instead of just stand and wait!

GRIEV3R
Gallente
Clan Shadow Wolf
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2011.08.08 20:21:00 - [548]
 

Originally by: Mioelnir
[Continue...]

Supercaps: While I am biased as the owner of half a supercarrier (or a full Hel in this case), I do not think supercaps can ever be truly balanced in a rock/paper/scissors/lizard/spock fashion. From the background alone, they will either not live up to them at all and be close to worthless from a game tactics standpoint (leaving players disappointed), or they will pronounce their arrival on the battlefield in confident, bold letters. The last set of changes made supercap use explode, yes. But only because it stagnated for years. As players got older, numbers should have continually increased but did not.
The only people that got into them were basically doing it for the looks and the fluff (kind of similar to the reasons behind my Hel). So right now, we are seeing a big rebound to what the numbers should have been all along, meaning we should not overreact.

But, there are certainly tweaks that could and/or need to be made. Personally, I always find it incredible that you put a generic module on a frigate, and *boom* instant wormhole big enough for 250 Titans. Orly?! Often proposed is powering the jump drives up, but I think that is the right idea on the wrong side of the equation. Not the source should need to power up, but the target - the cyno.

So why not introduce a third cyno harmonic for supers, activated not by a feeble module, but a ship (event horizon style)?
This ship powers up and creates a cyno that needs cap with mechanics similar to w-space wormholes. Upon activation, and on its own cap, it can't sustain a cyno worth anything but could eventually be enough for one supercarrier if it survives long enough to increase its mass limit sufficiently. Now, if you want to move 40 supercarriers through it, you need to power it up. Feed it cap. Protect it. You need to run it for 7 minutes and constantly pump the output of 8-10 large energy transfer array IIs into it, to swell it to sufficient levels. You need an actual fleet protecting it, defending it, summoning the might of your fleet onto the battlefield. It is hard. It should be hard.
And if you succeed, it does have an impact. Your enemies' counter escalation is not instant either but needs to go through the same, and you can disrupt them like they tried to disrupt you. It is also a lot harder to have an escape cyno in place, so if you actually run into a trap, there is only fight and no flight.

Cyno Harmonic 1 (regular cyno): Dread, Carrier, JFreighter, Rorqual, BlackOps, Titan bridge
Cyno Harmonic 2 (covert cyno): BlackOps
Cyno Harmonic 3 (cyno ship): Supercarrier, Titan itself


I'm a Nyx pilot and I support this idea.

Big Bad Mofo
Posted - 2011.08.08 22:01:00 - [549]
 

are you going to do something about the following (which i feel seriously need looking at)

1) The amount of space/stations an alliance can hold
2) The stupid amount of easy isk from moongold (its a joke tbh) randomise moons every month?
3) Make outposts destructible - they are player made, so like all player made items they should be able to get destroyed, only real stations can be conquered
4) stop supers carriers online.

Gevlin
Minmatar
Lone Star Exploration
Lone Star Partners
Posted - 2011.08.08 22:24:00 - [550]
 

Edited by: Gevlin on 08/08/2011 23:15:37
The ability to raise or lower effective level of a system via certain upgrades (ones that make things more convenient or safe will increase rating value to empire, while) Ones that make the space more dangerous lower the true sect

Safer:
Jump Bridge,
Industrial Upgrades,
Cyno Becon, cyno Jammer
Gate guns
Defence force
Profession up grades
Station
Number of POS in system


Dangerous
Increase Pirate AI
Increase the Number Of Pirate Escalations
Military upgrades
Removal of Local
adjusting the Rules of Physics (like worm holes)

This will allow alliances to increase or decrease the effective level of their systems so they can earn more isk in some systems and produce more in others.
It will be in the players hands how to upgrade vs whether or not to up grade.

The current sov is the basis, but will allow those with out to increase the risk of their home systems to increase the reward.

Owning the only highsec station in the nearest 20 jumps may be a big advantage to be the the trade hub of the east.

Being able to upgrade a system to Highsec level and being able to produce stuff only found in High sec would make Null sec self selfcifcent.



Corp Management
Posted - 2011.08.08 22:34:00 - [551]
 

◦Nullsec features and content should support and enhance a clear perception that some areas of space are "better" than others, measured by a given metric, but the hierarchy does not need to be uniform across different metrics
◦Nullsec features and content should support and enhance the perception that every area of nullsec space is different, in as many ways and to as fine a granularity as is practical

perhaps redistributing the content available in given areas of 0.0. perhaps making some regions provide mining/industry boosts, while others provide better ratting / exploration, and others provide defensive bonuses to pvp. Maybe making all of these bonuses/boosts require your alliance to hold sov and to run on a cycle where they get stronger or weaker depending on what percentage of time an alliance has held an area over a certain timespan. for example, over a 6 month period the higher the % of time you've held sov the lower the bonus gets until it eventually goes into a negative bonus 4 or 5 months in followed by a swift return to the original value between months 6 and 7... kind of a bell curve on the bonuses to holding sov in a given area. the more "carebear" effects could be restricted to the corporation owning sov in the system while the "pvp" bonuses could be applied alliance wide.

effects like this would encourage the nullsec boundries to be constantly changing and thus encourage player interaction/conflict. if these effects and timers were publicly available then opposing alliances could plan an assault when their enemy is at it's weakest, and thus requiring fewer forces to take the space. Also, it would provide that every piece of nullsec is valuable space and that there's no "trash" areas like there is now. Even the worst nullsec should provide a higher rate of income by mining/ratting/missioning/plexing etc than any highsec can if sov is managed properly.

maybe it's ******ed, or far fetched but i think these types of ideas would be hell on the nullsec landscape and people who have long since tried to farm the "good space", but will accomplish many of the overall goals of that the blog listed.

Thoro Gurthang
Amarr
The-Forsaken
The Forsaken.
Posted - 2011.08.08 23:53:00 - [552]
 

Get rid of the local channel in nullsec.

Gevlin
Minmatar
Lone Star Exploration
Lone Star Partners
Posted - 2011.08.09 00:45:00 - [553]
 


Question
With the mention of null sec being a 5 year plan does this mean there will be at lease one team continuously working on Nulls sec gradually upgrading it? This getting away from the old model of a massive push every 6 months in one area. Will this be a test model of a new development strategy?

Leah Pendragon
Posted - 2011.08.09 01:34:00 - [554]
 

Edited by: Leah Pendragon on 09/08/2011 01:45:35
A few [probably bad] ideas...

1) Have a reasonable limit to the number of people in a corp, lower numbers of corps in an alliance and have a limit on blues, large enough to have regional friends but not half of eve. This would make blocs and blobs smaller and generate a load of pvp.

2) Limit the number of systems any one political entity can hold.

3) Make a raiding mechanic that would mean sov holders had to actually defend their space to difuse massive player concentrations.

4) Nerf supers. Can we haz dreads back too please?

5) Try to create a mechanism that makes it impossible for a bot to instawarp somehow. I know combating bots must be hard work but if you could create a way for the player base to get at them we'd maul the hell out of 'em and thus make bots counter productive.

6) Not allow JFs to cyno into low sec (the more I think of this the more I like it).

7) Rather than have slightly better ores in empire f.e Dense Veldspar over normal Veldspar, allow these to be much better and only in Null. Also grant slightly increased me/pe/copy/invention research times in sov held space and other small bonus. Basically nerf the ease of one stop Jita shopping and boost indy to make up for this, creating a more self sufficient Null.

8) Nerf Empire.

Probably bad ideas but some I thinks are good.

Kogh Ayon
Posted - 2011.08.09 03:27:00 - [555]
 

Edited by: Kogh Ayon on 09/08/2011 03:36:50
Originally by: Gevlin
Edited by: Gevlin on 08/08/2011 23:15:37
The ability to raise or lower effective level of a system via certain upgrades (ones that make things more convenient or safe will increase rating value to empire, while) Ones that make the space more dangerous lower the true sect

Safer:
Jump Bridge,
Industrial Upgrades,
Cyno Becon, cyno Jammer
Gate guns
Defence force
Profession up grades
Station
Number of POS in system


Dangerous
Increase Pirate AI
Increase the Number Of Pirate Escalations
Military upgrades
Removal of Local
adjusting the Rules of Physics (like worm holes)

This will allow alliances to increase or decrease the effective level of their systems so they can earn more isk in some systems and produce more in others.
It will be in the players hands how to upgrade vs whether or not to up grade.

The current sov is the basis, but will allow those with out to increase the risk of their home systems to increase the reward.

Owning the only highsec station in the nearest 20 jumps may be a big advantage to be the the trade hub of the east.

Being able to upgrade a system to Highsec level and being able to produce stuff only found in High sec would make Null sec self selfcifcent.





Just never mention something like "removal of local". "Dangerous" does not mean "definite to die". Without the protection of sleepers, a team of bombers will catch and kill any players doing pve with a 99% chance to be succeed.

Risk free PVE is bad, risk free PVP is worse.
Risk free PVPs:
Docking game with carrier/neut logis
High-sec grief war
AFK cloaking
Super super-cap blobs

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2011.08.09 05:05:00 - [556]
 

Originally by: Mioelnir
[Continue...]


Cyno Harmonic 1 (regular cyno): Dread, Carrier, JFreighter, Rorqual, BlackOps, Titan bridge
Cyno Harmonic 2 (covert cyno): BlackOps
Cyno Harmonic 3 (cyno ship): Supercarrier, Titan itself


Im a soon to be Wyvern Pilot and i couldn't agree more. make it harder to use this powerful tool and it wont be a spam instant win button anymore. it would be along the lines of what you did with the titan doomsday AoE. turning it into a single target shot made it less prevalent.

ALSO...

Originally by: Gevlin
Edited by: Gevlin on 08/08/2011 23:15:37
The ability to raise or lower effective level of a system via certain upgrades (ones that make things more convenient or safe will increase rating value to empire, while) Ones that make the space more dangerous lower the true sect

Safer:
Jump Bridge,
Industrial Upgrades,
Cyno Becon, cyno Jammer
Gate guns
Defence force
Profession up grades
Station
Number of POS in system


Dangerous
Increase Pirate AI
Increase the Number Of Pirate Escalations
Military upgrades
Removal of Local
adjusting the Rules of Physics (like worm holes)

This will allow alliances to increase or decrease the effective level of their systems so they can earn more isk in some systems and produce more in others.
It will be in the players hands how to upgrade vs whether or not to up grade.

The current sov is the basis, but will allow those with out to increase the risk of their home systems to increase the reward.

Owning the only highsec station in the nearest 20 jumps may be a big advantage to be the the trade hub of the east.

Being able to upgrade a system to Highsec level and being able to produce stuff only found in High sec would make Null sec self selfcifcent.



While i agree with his ideas stated here i dont agree with the high sec rating. no system in null sec should ever go above 0.0 . what should change is the systems true sec rating as he stated via the dangerous upgrades. that way people can customize space and make it their own thus creating value in it but also being able to have some stations that are able to be protected.

Ramman K'arojic
Posted - 2011.08.09 06:10:00 - [557]
 

I have been brewing these thoughts for a while now:
The functionality Role of null sec as you have defined the boundaries does not describe how nullsec is different from high sec or low sec. As in what function of nullsec could draw me there. Is it eve @ 11 or is just a different flavor / pace of eve.

I like eve @ 11 however eve at 11 should be more of eve with out reducing the things I can do; in other words High sec offering vs null sec offering should be the same; have the same opportunities; but with out the safety net.

On your design rules:
Null sec space is designed differently; it has been engineered to have significantly less paths though the space and thus that breeds contented space and passage. Does that mean its better? To me yes; and here is why:
Alliances that occupy space don’t allow space for the little fellow (corp. or person) to exist consequentially you have to:
  • You have to assimilate or rent unrealistic amounts
    • Traffic goods though there space


Consequentially I recommend:
Space be changed such that there can actually be agreements for better logistics i.e there are multiple paths to move goods though null sec. More Gates.

Home is where your ships are:
You state.
• Nullsec allows players to build a home and make a lasting mark on the world
• Nullsec should feel big and uneven
o Nullsec features should support and enhance the perception that Nullsec is a big place
• Support multiple sizes and styles of organizations across multiple time zones

Consequentially I recommend:
• Make more space more regions; with more interconnection not hanging off the existing null sec more interconnection interconnections. Null sec should encase high sec / low sec space. There should be null space at the top, bottom, left side.
• This is to make logistics easier
• Make it possible to have a home as a 1 man band or a small corp.



Stop making high sec the place to go for goods.
You sate: People like to do one-stop shopping, and will "go to Jita" for everything unless doing so is comparatively very inconvenient
I propose:
Once you have Sov or the YTB solution; that you can pay for concord to come protect it however again you will pay for it. A couple of Billion a Day should be enough (however you can get a discount if do the same to a next door systems); the purpose of this is not to make care bare heaven but to allow markets to develop; so people can dock there ships in safely pull out.. You can still war dec and the like. The high end minerals would run out only respawn with common.
The alternate suggestion (which I was scared of being laughed at) was to allow conveys (from station A to Station B via a route) – NPC convoys that would allow people to hitch a ride with the group that could be attacked but NPCs would defend themselves and fleet pactiplaents (but once destroyed they don’t respsawn).
When your ready can leave the convoy and then your on your own
The routes and times departure would be published and it still may take hours.
Fleet participants could manoeuvre within a small envelope of the fleet eg 50km but not more.
You would pay based on your ship type (more for freighters) and the strength of the escort and number of jumps the length is.


PS: Once all this has been done it would excellent to see some final conclusions about what null sec is supposed to be.

Cheers and Beers
Ramm

Nomad III
Posted - 2011.08.09 06:47:00 - [558]
 

In terms of a concepts, we can't just nerf logistics to get rid of Jita. The reason why Jita is existing, is


  1. A very good marked access. You get all your commodities on one place

  2. Price transparency. You know that the price is right

  3. In Jita sellers and buyer are able to meet eachother



If you simply nerf logistics, a pilot will be forced to work for logistiocs instead of PVP.

What we need is:


  1. A ingame marked tool to get price transparency. The region borders are crap

  2. The ability for neutral traders to sell and buy in 0.0 without horrible costs (risk, stationdock)

  3. A ingame tool to build trade relations

  4. More slots on outpost and POS to build

  5. Better logistic ships. A JF is nice, but the demand for minerals from outside is terrible high. We won't work for logistics, but for PVP. Logistics should be an important part, but not not the main one.







El'Niaga
Minmatar
Republic Military School
Posted - 2011.08.09 10:43:00 - [559]
 

Increasing logistics decreases fun.

Since the jb changes I've only been able to make about half the fights I used to make. Often by the time I arrive now the battle is over. Thus nuking JBs to one a system did not have the desired effect. Look at the collapse of the NC as another result.

Changing the mix on the anomalies did not magically have those in empire clamoring to 0.0. Why? Because over half of 0.0 is so poor you'd make more money in empire doing level 3s.

Just as nerfing 0.0 has not had the desired effect, nerfing high sec will not have the desired effect.

The number one problem in 0.0 is that players need to be able to earn isk at almost twice the rate of empire in order to accommodate the loss of ships due to raids etc. Systems with less than belts are almost useless no matter what the security standing of the system.

Bring all systems to a minimum of 6 static belts. Double all belts in a system with 4 or more belts. This will help make it able for more to come. Double the number of added belts, sites and anomalies created by military and industry upgrades.

Create new upgrades that add hidden ice belts. One such upgrade for each race and you can put any race or even all of them into your system.

Rework moon materials in a fashion similar to planetary commodities. Have moon colonies and make the operation dynamic like planets, the more you pull the less avail in the future.

New ships are needed. Not necessaril/ ship nerfs. Dramiel is a problem then someone will build the ship to beat the dramiel. What kind of ship might that be? Could be a ship that dampens drone crontrol reducing how many drones the ship can control at once, might be a ship with superior targeting and tracking abilities. The answer is not constant nerfs but treat it like a real military. If the enemy events a better weapon, you have to come up with a better defense.

In theory lets assume the Amarr invented shield penetrating lasers using multi phasic properties. This would certainly have the Minmatar and the Caldari quaking in terror. I'm certain their scientist will soon develop multiphasic shielding to counter the shield piercing lasers. Same if the Mimatar invented armor piercing shells, the Amarr and Gallente would be terrified and they'd quickly come up with a reinforced armor that countered such a threat.

Supercarrier got you down. What's the major problem of a supercarrier? Is it the fighter bombers....only if your a capital. Is it the immunity to EW? Yep that is the principle problem with the ship. Solution, EW Capital ship for each race. They have larger EW modules that can affect the Supercarrier. They can warp scram, warp disrupt, ecm, tp, rsd, and td Supercarriers depending on their race and modules. Simple solution easy, no real tweaking of code.

Drones got you done? Why isn't their a drone interdiction ship. Take the current interdictors code. Copy it. Edit the copy so that the bubbles instead of stopping warp now deal damage only to drones/fighters/fighter bombers.

Not enough experienced cap pilots to launch an attack on 0.0 empire. Well not that hard mate to fix. You need a subcap ship that can fit 1 or 2 capital weapons. A modest tank and go at it. Be kinda like a Q Ship from WWII, instead of that drake carrying heavy missiles she's carrying 2 citadel launchers.

If you think along such lines you can solve almost any imbalance in the game. Sadly to date CCP's not shown the level of competence with such. After all we have Greyscale here and Soundwave elsewhere advocating all pilots should be the same, skills shouldn't be a deterent to fleeting up etc. Basically they want a different game system where you do what they want how they want it rather than letting you play the game that is and just adding onto it.

Spanking Monkeys
Posted - 2011.08.09 11:06:00 - [560]
 

i like the idea of a constellation of high sec in the npc 0.0 regions, could link on to 5-10 systems some of them could be player owned space.

so that would end up giving you a trade and industry hub for all the surrounding regions. dont have to have belts or anoms or plex's just a few systems and a few stations where people could run trade and build.

could dress it up as concord systems paid for by sov isk. make it so war dec's dont apply if you wanted to for even more trade

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2011.08.09 11:58:00 - [561]
 

Originally by: Prez21
Two comments that ive seen that I have strongly agreed with are both about trade hubs and travel times, and i think viceroys comment was spot on. There is no point in building or trying to establish a trabe hub in 0.0 when jita is so easily accessible. When i was part of a 0.0 alliance certain people using alts ran jf to empire and which system did they use? thats right jita, not rens, not amarr, jita. Yes there are other hubs about that are used, but jita is the big supermarket and the rest are just local shops that are used for small buys, where the price difference isnt as big so its not worth traveling to jita for.



Travel time is only part of the problem. When some of the member of your corporation resent you for selling in 0.0 at Jita prices (Amarr actually as I was taking my stuff from there) there is no incentive in trying to get a trade hub up in 0.0.



DeadDuck
Amarr
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.09 16:10:00 - [562]
 

Edited by: DeadDuck on 09/08/2011 16:50:23
So here are my 2 cents for 0.0 way of life:

1) Outposts should be destructible

If it is destructed there will be a space outpost ruin with some materials in there. People can rebuild them using some of those materials.

If an outpost is destroyed ALL assets inside the Outpost will be destroyed also. Yes, includes BPO's.

Also the owners of the outpost can simply self destroy it.

"Yes you can have the dam system but all what you will get will be a scorched land"

"So you didn't defend your home and run to empire waiting for us to go away. You can have it now. What's left of it Wink

2) Limit SC's build to outpost systems

If the Outpost is conquered the SC's being built will suffer an alt and last but not the least the new Outpost owner can capture the SC being built there. It will only take them to do that destroy the POS force field.

If the attacker destroys the Outpost. All the SC's under construction will suffer an alt and last but not the least the Attacking force can capture all the SC components that are being used to build the SC. It will only take them to do that destroy the force field.

3) End the Docking games

You can only dock after 10M having pass since the LAST agro. If you are outside for 9M59secs and then you suffer an aggression the timer will be reset for another 10M. If you come outside, you better be prepared to fight. You can always maneuver your ship and go to a SS and let the timer pass after all.

4) Revisit Agro timers

SC's completely alone and under heavy fire, manage to survive due to the ridiculous agro timer and EHP they have at the moment. This poor grunt has seen entire SC fleets trapped and logging off to be saved. It's errr... ridiculous.

Again reset the timer like proposed in the docking games. So if a SC pilot logoff to save is ship 10m have to pass since LAST aggression to the ships disappear. If he is under attack logoff will not save is ship, because the timer will be continuously reset.

Yes SC pilots will have to take it like a man and try to survive.

5) All the SC BPO's should turn in to BPC's. Every time you want to build a SC you will have to buy that BPC from the NPC corp. Price will have to be very close to the current BPO price.

This will make Titans and SC's extremely expensive. Jointly with the Outpost rule people will think very hard before start building one. After all everyone knows where they can be built.

With time SC's will be what they are supposed to be ... RARE

6) Moon Income.

The bottleneck has to be over, so the moon minerals required to build stuff have to be more balanced. If people want the isks they have to work for it. Make the production prices fall with the number of POS under labor an alliance has in possession. The bigger the number the cheaper is to run a pos. Fuel consumption to produce something is lower and POS runs for longer times with the same fuel.

The True Sec status of a system should influence these costs also. The lower the sec status the more efficient a fuel pos performance will be.

The Alliances with more logistics and running more POS's will earn (MUCH) more than the ones that don’t have an industrial wing. Having some Tec, Dysp moon's will not fund your SC's anymore.

7) Suicide Ganking nerfed

Well if someone is killed by concord the insurance payment should be 0.0 isks...

8) Anomalies

Get rid of those upgrades. Buy an upgrade so you can have more anomalies... err the simple concept is stupid... Make it like depending of the Number of Outposts in a region.

Makes sense in an immersion way... the bigger is the Alliance presence more reinforcements are needed...

It will be more interesting, from an alliance point of view, having their space filled with Outposts and SC construction capability.

9) SOV changes

Well. Those will be reduced to systems with an outpost/station. Simple. There will be 2 cycles Shield/Armor… after that the outpost can be conquered or destroyed
JB's. Reduced to systems with outposts.

Frosteye
Posted - 2011.08.09 16:53:00 - [563]
 

Originally by: Mioelnir
[Continue...]

Supercaps: While I am biased as the owner of half a supercarrier (or a full Hel in this case), I do not think supercaps can ever be truly balanced in a rock/paper/scissors/lizard/spock fashion. From the background alone, they will either not live up to them at all and be close to worthless from a game tactics standpoint (leaving players disappointed), or they will pronounce their arrival on the battlefield in confident, bold letters. The last set of changes made supercap use explode, yes. But only because it stagnated for years. As players got older, numbers should have continually increased but did not.
The only people that got into them were basically doing it for the looks and the fluff (kind of similar to the reasons behind my Hel). So right now, we are seeing a big rebound to what the numbers should have been all along, meaning we should not overreact.

But, there are certainly tweaks that could and/or need to be made. Personally, I always find it incredible that you put a generic module on a frigate, and *boom* instant wormhole big enough for 250 Titans. Orly?! Often proposed is powering the jump drives up, but I think that is the right idea on the wrong side of the equation. Not the source should need to power up, but the target - the cyno.

So why not introduce a third cyno harmonic for supers, activated not by a feeble module, but a ship (event horizon style)?
This ship powers up and creates a cyno that needs cap with mechanics similar to w-space wormholes. Upon activation, and on its own cap, it can't sustain a cyno worth anything but could eventually be enough for one supercarrier if it survives long enough to increase its mass limit sufficiently. Now, if you want to move 40 supercarriers through it, you need to power it up. Feed it cap. Protect it. You need to run it for 7 minutes and constantly pump the output of 8-10 large energy transfer array IIs into it, to swell it to sufficient levels. You need an actual fleet protecting it, defending it, summoning the might of your fleet onto the battlefield. It is hard. It should be hard.
And if you succeed, it does have an impact. Your enemies' counter escalation is not instant either but needs to go through the same, and you can disrupt them like they tried to disrupt you. It is also a lot harder to have an escape cyno in place, so if you actually run into a trap, there is only fight and no flight.

Cyno Harmonic 1 (regular cyno): Dread, Carrier, JFreighter, Rorqual, BlackOps, Titan bridge
Cyno Harmonic 2 (covert cyno): BlackOps
Cyno Harmonic 3 (cyno ship): Supercarrier, Titan itself


This makes the most imersion sense to me and logic for gameplay...but adding my two cents...why not make the BLACKOPS fill this role of being the ship to only be able to bridge in super caps? Unless that was what he was driving at.
+1 Supported

Tazerschmitz
Posted - 2011.08.09 18:15:00 - [564]
 

There has been a lot of great feedback and I love seeing the list of epic development stories. There are many thoughts but I'll list just a few.

One key item that strikes me is the statement that CCP Greyscale made about treaties not being a priority. In my view, treaties could play an integral part in an improved 0.0 sovereignty system. Treaties could be used to allow corps to maintain control of assets when a new alliance take military control of a system. Having treaties in place could also contribute points toward gaining system sovereignty. It gives alliances options other than pure projection of force.

Overall, I hope the sovereignty system goes toward the control points system so there is less black and white in 0.0. Big alliances need a reason to open up their space to less trustworthy people. Treaties could allow this to happen as they could be setup to only allow certain classes of ships or cargo. If you get caught violating, you get flagged for breaking the treaty.

The existing upgrade system seems like a whimsical game mechanic rather than logical sci-fi system. The strategic upgrades are a good start but could use to be expanded, potentially incorporating some of the other outstanding suggestions such as communications upgrade to enable local channel, stargate control upgrade etc. The military arrays could be somewhat similar, but should be for more than just NPC spawns. The upgrades could tracking of activities in the system, preferable not pinpoint tracking but broad areas. I think this leads to other fun game play like hacking the military network to get a glimpse of the system activity. Being able to plant covert bases in systems with low military upgrades could also add a new dynamic and allow for small gorilla operations.

Players should be able to build industrial empires within the military empires, just like how one can find Quafe stations in multiple NPC empire faction space.

Last comment. I'd like to see the ability for capital ships to transport players, not just act as a hangar for ships. Pods should remain with the ship and be ejected if the capital ship is destroyed. If you aren't logged in, you would end up in your pod somewhere in the system where the capital ship was destroyed. With this mechanic, people could be offline and still be able to come online and join fleet fights without having to travel. Fighters and fighter bombers are frigate size ships. They are just another thing that makes player flown frigates useless. Just like in the real world navy, carriers are more like mobile bases that launch other craft. Giving carriers automated frigates makes them their own weapon platform rather than a fleet operations hub.

Good work and can't wait to see what's coming next.

Dr Cedric
Caldari
Orbital Industry and Research.
Posted - 2011.08.09 18:21:00 - [565]
 

I am almost sure this has been said, but I have had a hard time reading up on all 19 pages! I've been keeping up with the dev. posts though, and I really like what I've been reading. So here are a few more ideas:

To make capitals more of a "chore," or at least regulate it, there needs to be a timer or cooldown on jumping. Something like 90 seconds, with skills to modify seems like a good idea. If you jump in your capital fleet, you are committing to the engagement for at least a short period. This makes capital baiting an possibility. Also, I think there needs to be a dedicated module specifically for bridging/jumping. This module should be a mid/high slot module, have a capacity that is filled w/ Isotopes or LO or whatever is used for capital jumping (this might make fuel bay supporters happy) and it can be the timer driven component of this system. In general it seems that capital ships have become separated from non-capitals. I think this breaks gameplay because you either have your caps fighting or your non-caps (for the most part). Capitals need to have design "flaws" that absolutely require support fleets to operate. These flaws would then make a "ceiling" effect to how many caps a fleet could field effectively given logistical constraints on bringing them to the fight. Perhaps a "powered-on/off" state for Super-carriers/Titans that requires fuel, similar to POS could accomplish this...perhaps not.

I've also read about making null sec "emptier." I agree with this as well. As it stand, every system in null sec is "worth it." True sec has a small impact on how attractive a system is, as well as the "pipe" to that system. I think to encourage null sec trading hubs, and also to encourage "safety in numbers" for settled systems, there needs to be more "space," i.e. completely empty, with no availablility to upgrade, no belt rats, no ice, no nothing systems. The only opportunity to be had in these "empty" spaces would be for a middle man to set up a random trading POS. For the most part, it seems to "easy" to get to a place in null sec. Easy in terms of I can set my autopilot, follow the yellow stargates and cloak my self wherever. Getting there should be a bit more challenging in terms of actually finding a viable route to the system you're aiming for. I also think there need to be multiple "routes" to get to the system. For example, I can go over the river, or through the woods, or take the road less traveled to get to Grandma's house. For the mechanics in eve...I have to go through the choke point at 99X-YY if I want to get to 88Z-BB. Since space is so empty, I should be able to locate an alternate route, that is perhaps more or less dangerous, to get to my destination.

Again, my two cents, but I hope I'm adding to the solution/enjoyment of my favorite game!

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2011.08.09 18:44:00 - [566]
 

Originally by: Frosteye
Originally by: Mioelnir
[Continue...]

Supercaps: While I am biased as the owner of half a supercarrier (or a full Hel in this case), I do not think supercaps can ever be truly balanced in a rock/paper/scissors/lizard/spock fashion. From the background alone, they will either not live up to them at all and be close to worthless from a game tactics standpoint (leaving players disappointed), or they will pronounce their arrival on the battlefield in confident, bold letters. The last set of changes made supercap use explode, yes. But only because it stagnated for years. As players got older, numbers should have continually increased but did not.
The only people that got into them were basically doing it for the looks and the fluff (kind of similar to the reasons behind my Hel). So right now, we are seeing a big rebound to what the numbers should have been all along, meaning we should not overreact.

But, there are certainly tweaks that could and/or need to be made. Personally, I always find it incredible that you put a generic module on a frigate, and *boom* instant wormhole big enough for 250 Titans. Orly?! Often proposed is powering the jump drives up, but I think that is the right idea on the wrong side of the equation. Not the source should need to power up, but the target - the cyno.

So why not introduce a third cyno harmonic for supers, activated not by a feeble module, but a ship (event horizon style)?
This ship powers up and creates a cyno that needs cap with mechanics similar to w-space wormholes. Upon activation, and on its own cap, it can't sustain a cyno worth anything but could eventually be enough for one supercarrier if it survives long enough to increase its mass limit sufficiently. Now, if you want to move 40 supercarriers through it, you need to power it up. Feed it cap. Protect it. You need to run it for 7 minutes and constantly pump the output of 8-10 large energy transfer array IIs into it, to swell it to sufficient levels. You need an actual fleet protecting it, defending it, summoning the might of your fleet onto the battlefield. It is hard. It should be hard.
And if you succeed, it does have an impact. Your enemies' counter escalation is not instant either but needs to go through the same, and you can disrupt them like they tried to disrupt you. It is also a lot harder to have an escape cyno in place, so if you actually run into a trap, there is only fight and no flight.

Cyno Harmonic 1 (regular cyno): Dread, Carrier, JFreighter, Rorqual, BlackOps, Titan bridge
Cyno Harmonic 2 (covert cyno): BlackOps
Cyno Harmonic 3 (cyno ship): Supercarrier, Titan itself


This makes the most imersion sense to me and logic for gameplay...but adding my two cents...why not make the BLACKOPS fill this role of being the ship to only be able to bridge in super caps? Unless that was what he was driving at.
+1 Supported


I think the idea in general is nice, but it won't fix the basic problem of supercaps being teh uber with no counters besides more supers. When they are on the field there is no point in fighting at all if you can't field close to similar numbers of them. That is the one thing that has to finally come to an end.

It needs to be that when supers are on the field they can change how the entire fight will be fought and perform strongly against certain targets, but are vulnerable to attacks by a fleet designed/fitted to counter them. By vulnerable I don't mean vulnerable in some theoretical situation that actually never or almost never happens because how the game works. I mean it in a way, that if they don't have other fleet assets covering them and the enemy is prepared to counter them, they face a real risk of significant losses while retreating or a total wipeout if they stay.

I'll stress two points here. One, supers need to be strong at something good to keep them useful. Two, they need to be vulnerable to something widely available. High potential risk/benefit in using them.

Letrange
Minmatar
Red Horizon Inc
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2011.08.09 18:46:00 - [567]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Diomedes Calypso
***** I'd like to see this guiding principle put on your list:

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


This is a good principle, I think I will add it to my list.



Just don't make the carrots so rare that every single carrot has a cyno ship guarding it ready to hot drop the sucker. The reason w-space works so well is that the PVE people flying there outnumber the PVP purists by quite a bit.

Isabella Thresher
Fat Kitty Inc.
Posted - 2011.08.09 19:04:00 - [568]
 

i quote this for some great ideas:

Originally by: Panem EtCircenses
Ideally, I'd like to see something along the lines of:
1) alterable sec status in Empire so Faction Warfare means something, and the faction borders can move
2) Dynamically created systems in 0.0 so that it's never all discovered; the rate of expansion can be tailored to the number of null sec residents
3) No automatic 0.0 gates; they can be built and then controlled by the Alliance that holds space
4) New ships to allow exploration of systems without gates. New ships to allow fleets to be moved to these scouted systems.
5) No local as intel, but better specifically created intel tools
6) An end to 'bigger is always better' in ship design; maybe start with a T2 destroyer specifically designed to kill Capital ships, or something similar. Make joined up fleets, formations and tactics more of a necessity
7) etc ...

But that's mostly way way outside what is currently possible with the game I suspect, so I guess it would be easier to make EVE 2; oh well Rolling Eyes

Panem


what about removing stargates altogether?
replace it with a new mechanic, e.g. "acceleration zones" to warp to border systems, instead of the immersion killing "switch" to a new "room" that it is now.

Isabella Thresher
Fat Kitty Inc.
Posted - 2011.08.09 19:22:00 - [569]
 

Originally by: Viceroy
snip

anything you said so far - i agree.
afk freighting/easy JF usage is killing any kind of local market. guess what i am doing right now in the background?

Nasro Drags
Posted - 2011.08.09 22:16:00 - [570]
 

I don't think that making Stations destroyable is hard. You just introduce some "Deux ex machina" to get everything moved to another station (just introduce some interesting techno babble and it should be fine). Ideally, it would move from alliance outpost to alliance outpost. When there are no more alliance outposts, it would move to high sec, taking into account security status/standing. The only flaw i see is when someone has terrible security status/standing with everyone. But i guess in those cases it could be moved to some null sec npc station or something.


Pages: first : previous : ... 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 21 22 : last (22)

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


 


The new forums are live

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

These forums are archived and read-only