Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
BattyBoys
DISSONANCE EXECUTIVE HOLDINGS
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 22:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
Ideas for Sov change mechanic,
I have been playing eve now for a 6 years plusGǪ.
I have seen many alliances come and go (and some I created myself)GǪ
Think its time for a new approach to sov and re-population of 0.0 (and thus good fights)
I want to throw a few ideas out there to get the communityGÇÖs view on this, (jumps into fire proof suit in anticipation of the flamers and gramma police).
1. Corps should be allowed to hold sov.
2. The amount of Sov a Corp or Alliance holds should be determined by a number of factors and ultimately capped per alliance registration:-
The Skill of the Ceo.(currently the CEO skill determines the amount of players that can be held in a corporation)
The amounts of players in the corp/alliance. (see above skill linked)
The more sov that is held, the higher the monthly cost (sliding scale / multiplier aka you hold swathes of eve space you pay a higher price for it something similar sliding scale like war deck system)
The Tax system is shifted to also allow a maximum of 10 % alliance tax if alliance is in effect, (in conjunction with lowering the value of moon goo with increasing availability across Null).
Alliances should be limited to the space they can hold (aka as above)
There should be defense bonuses for small entities that hold sov, as prior to latest sov changes your home system would be defended my swathes of towers and thus would be your GÇ£capitalGÇ¥ this in turn formed a defense bonus within this system, what I am proposing would be that the GÇ£home systemGÇ¥ comes back into effect, not via poses though but via a new module developed that doubled the amount of defense capabilities of that system (for example), this way you would give a bonus to smaller entities starting out and also the home system of the entity would get a bonus for defense. (after all most home systems are usually last to be taken would make for a even more interesting fight other than a straight oh well lets simply GÇ£abandon the spaceGÇ¥ attitude, (could also be scaled dependent on attackers something like a increase in the amount of hit points a defense structure has dependent upon the amount of dps).
Okay so what would the above do / achieve ?
It would encourage more corps and smaller alliances into null sec space
It would encourage smaller to medium size fights, (hopefully moving away from the large scale blob warfare).
Corps / alliances could get a foot hold and develop in Null.
Would allow for GÇ£pactsGÇ¥ to be made and more skirmishes over space
Would help GÇ£manageGÇ¥ the issue of some alliance GÇ£owningGÇ¥ multiple regions.(they would be limited via skills/player count)
Will put GÇ£diplomacyGÇ¥ and cooperation back up there in EVE politics and diminish the blob warfare as a "I win" button.
Would help ensure more of 0.0 is actually utilized rather than simply GÇ£heldGÇ¥.
The above is not a total road-map but more of a discussion view point, I realize that the above could upset some people especially those alliances that hold multiple regions and I guess initially some GÇ£allowanceGÇ¥ would have to be made for those, and IGÇÖm also sure you could get some GÇ£power players/rangersGÇ¥ saying there unhappy and treating to burn Jita or some other such event (hmm think I heard that one before), but those would be replaced in time by smaller corps and alliances wanting that element of null sec that would be limited, yes there would be more GÇ£coalitionsGÇ¥ and this could be formal and informal mechanic, but overall I think it would create more opportunities for small to medium scale conflict, whilst allowing smaller entityGÇÖs to financially viable in null.GǪ
Thoughts ?
I would also like to get the views of any devs that read this, not on the validity of the proposal itself but on the viability to implement and develop the mechanics of doing so.......
(thread is replicated from assembly room) |
Zella Polaris
The Minutemen Catastrophic Uprising
3
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 23:25:00 -
[2] - Quote
I'm highly in favor of corp's holding sov... That alone could repopulate nullsec.
And destroyable gate guns. Probably a horrible idea but I have no shame. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1637
|
Posted - 2013.02.25 23:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
Your restrictions are both overly limiting and easily circumvented by shell alliances, and would do little to achieve the goals you have stated.
Here are some better ideas Titans were never meant to be "cost effective", its a huge ****.-á- CCP Oveur, 2006
~If you want a picture of the future of WiS, imagine a spaceship, stamping on an avatar's face. Forever. |
BattyBoys
DISSONANCE EXECUTIVE HOLDINGS
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 08:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Your restrictions are both overly limiting and easily circumvented by shell alliances, and your suggestions are largely solutions in search of a problem, do little to address the wider issues that there's essentially nothing worth fighting for in 90% of nullsec space, and would do little to achieve the goals you have stated. Here are some better ideas
Please do not link to external site, keep the topic to the eve forums please.......
Pride of owning and controlling your own corp space can be enough for some, not all have the same drivers as "one particular" group when it comes to controlling space.....
Whilst it may not be to your particular way of thinking, (my suggestion for discussion) It does not make it any more or less valid than another, and i did say this is for discussion not a "road-map".... |
Sigras
Conglomo IMPERIAL LEGI0N
375
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 10:24:00 -
[5] - Quote
The main problem with limiting things statically on an alliance basis (other than the fact that I am against arbitrary limits in the first place) is that people can game the system by breaking their large alliance into a series of smaller alliances and reaping the benefit of the bonuses that were intended to protect actual small alliances.
What's to prevent GoonSwarm Federation from breaking themselves into "Go" "onS" "warm" "Fed" "era" "tion" and making their own puppet coalition
The only way to populate 0.0 would be to make it far more "bottom up" economically and encourage industry and small gang warfare out there by: Moving the moon miners outside of the shield bubble. nerfing mineral compression removing the titan's ability to throw around freighters adding compact low ends to belts adding a sov bonus to POS manufacturing facilities (both time and materials)
I think all of the above done simultaneously would be a great way to get additional people out to 0.0 and all doing a variety of things
Compact Minerals
I wrote a post a while back about compact minerals, how in 0.0 when the low end roids grew to be full sized, they should collapse into a denser form of themselves able to be mined at the same speed, but with much greater yield (like 5x)
This would make the rocks extremely valuable even more than mercoxit, and would be all over in 0.0 but would only happen in the natural belts, because the roids in hidden belts dont grow. This would be an easy way for 0.0 dwellers to get their hands on the low ends themselves and thus could justify the complete removal of mineral compression while simultaneously encouraging mining and manufacturing in 0.0
adding a sov bonus to POS manufacturing facilities (both time and materials)
You cant just give a straight discount to manufacturing, but my thought was, what if you made a third "construction index" in the sov system. this would grow as a result of things being produced in the system through POSs or stations. Each level would allow you to put in an I-hub module in that would give you a 2%/5%/10%/20%/50% reduction to waste and production time for anything built in the system.
This means it would be significantly cheaper to build large items like ships out in 0.0 because you cannot research large items to perfect ME
I would also move supercapital construction to need level 5 of the construction index; this would simultaneously do two things: 1. It would force alliances to centralize their supercapital construction shipyards and tell everyone where manufacturing was going on. 2. It would be a significant blow for an alliance to lose their supercapital shipyards because they couldnt just plop down another one, it would take time to build that index back up as the construction index would reset if they lost the I-hub in that system. |
BattyBoys
DISSONANCE EXECUTIVE HOLDINGS
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 11:47:00 -
[6] - Quote
Sigras wrote:The main problem with limiting things statically on an alliance basis (other than the fact that I am against arbitrary limits in the first place) is that people can game the system by breaking their large alliance into a series of smaller alliances and reaping the benefit of the bonuses that were intended to protect actual small alliances.
What's to prevent GoonSwarm Federation from breaking themselves into "Go" "onS" "warm" "Fed" "era" "tion" and making their own puppet coalition
The only way to populate 0.0 would be to make it far more "bottom up" economically and encourage industry and small gang warfare out there by: Moving the moon miners outside of the shield bubble. nerfing mineral compression removing the titan's ability to throw around freighters adding compact low ends to belts adding a sov bonus to POS manufacturing facilities (both time and materials)
I think all of the above done simultaneously would be a great way to get additional people out to 0.0 and all doing a variety of things
Compact Minerals
I wrote a post a while back about compact minerals, how in 0.0 when the low end roids grew to be full sized, they should collapse into a denser form of themselves able to be mined at the same speed, but with much greater yield (like 5x)
This would make the rocks extremely valuable even more than mercoxit, and would be all over in 0.0 but would only happen in the natural belts, because the roids in hidden belts dont grow. This would be an easy way for 0.0 dwellers to get their hands on the low ends themselves and thus could justify the complete removal of mineral compression while simultaneously encouraging mining and manufacturing in 0.0
adding a sov bonus to POS manufacturing facilities (both time and materials)
You cant just give a straight discount to manufacturing, but my thought was, what if you made a third "construction index" in the sov system. this would grow as a result of things being produced in the system through POSs or stations. Each level would allow you to put in an I-hub module in that would give you a 2%/5%/10%/20%/50% reduction to waste and production time for anything built in the system.
This means it would be significantly cheaper to build large items like ships out in 0.0 because you cannot research large items to perfect ME
I would also move supercapital construction to need level 5 of the construction index; this would simultaneously do two things: 1. It would force alliances to centralize their supercapital construction shipyards and tell everyone where manufacturing was going on. 2. It would be a significant blow for an alliance to lose their supercapital shipyards because they couldnt just plop down another one, it would take time to build that index back up as the construction index would reset if they lost the I-hub in that system.
I agree with many of the elements you've posted above, but the biggest complaint I've heard is about corps getting a foothold, the discussion point I'm putting forward would go some way to addressing that, yes I agree shell alliances would be a issue wi upper limits, but it does provide more scope for things to go wrong and become fragmented......and things going wrong in null is usually a good driver for conflict......many corp CEOs I speak to would love to get into null to explore what ifs from a corp perspective other than being part of a "swarm mentality" .......and allowing them to do so but limiting the amount that could be held would be one way of doing so.... |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
25
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 13:12:00 -
[7] - Quote
Perhaps the first key to unlocking the mystery of the legendary "Sov That Doesn't Suck" is to design and implement a sov system that doesn't rely on enormous and soul-crushing structure grind at its core.
Oh, and destructible outposts just because it sounds like a good idea at the moment. |
Yolo
Dominion of Inter-Celestial Kings SQUEE.
15
|
Posted - 2013.02.26 21:10:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:Perhaps the first key to unlocking the mystery of the legendary "Sov That Doesn't Suck" is to design and implement a sov system that doesn't rely on enormous and soul-crushing structure grind at its core.
Oh, and destructible outposts just because it sounds like a good idea at the moment. Destructible, or atleast break able. Eg; you can run it to a ruin which would have less requirements of actually conquering it but would also mean that you cannot actually use it anymore. All the stuff is still there, but the station is in such a state that it will take massive repair to fix (basicly it would be as if it was an egg again, and you have to 're'build it up). |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |