Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Milkman Dani
Gallente RuffRyders Eradication Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 01:00:00 -
[181]
Edited by: Milkman Dani on 09/12/2008 01:08:24 Spartan had a good idea earlier in the thread, I hadn't gotten past his post yet to read all the others here. I think, what could be a good quick solution, would be to take the DED mails out, totally out and get rid of the local chat box. Therefore, we could see (as a hypothetical) a small corp or small alliance sneaking in with their Black Ops, Recons, and what nots, to a region or group of systems (or hell just 1 system) and install themselves there quietly. Then, they could start doing what they want to do from there within that quiet little area without "The Blob Monster" noticing. Sure, they'll notice, but you are gonna be infested with so many groups like that, let's say, if you are Goons, or -a- or Bob, or the NC entities.
Look at a sov map, just at the territory some of the alliances are controlling, and tell me that the idea wouldn't work? It'd be like weeds growing up through your nice green lawn, but I think we need that aspect in Eve now. Can you imagine the fun that would be? To actually have to control your territory, and if you can't manage to control it, then you didn't need that area to begin with. I agree with a lot that's in here, there are some great ideas. Taking Titans and capital ships away from those that worked their butt of for them isn't right, and I think the JB network should be region wide, not Eve wide (I totally think it should be region wide).
The game is a game, and I think everyone agrees that if they had more important stuff going on in their lives, they'd be doing that instead. However, we either don't have important stuff going on, or we do and we play as a hobby. Derailing, sorry.
Anyway, I think that if we got rid of local, make the scanner something more like a radar or more powerful with skill points (sorta make it, with SP, a system wide scanner). Getting rid of local will force us to use our scanners more, taking the DeD mails out for pos's will force us to monitor our pos's more closely, and allows smaller corps and alliances to work within a region or area of territory that isn't frequented, which would force the home alliance to set up roaming patrols to keep the home front secure, which would then breed small scale fighting like bunnies in heat. This would then force alliances to form two entities (more i guess if you want) one for home defense, and one for fighting foreign wars. Sure, you can have the same pilots in each, but could you honestly guarantee that you could be in both places at once? Even with alts, that would be too hard for one person to manage.
It's an idea that stemmed from Spartan and a few of you other fellows in here. I think it would seriously spice up eve a bit, and allow, to some extent, for small actions going on. There'd need to be more thought involved here, but I think that it could work, and be a stop gap for a time for the issues we are seeing atm.
(Edit) Sorry there are a lot of grammatical errors, and I'm just too damn lazy to get them all, so please bear with me, laptop keyboard kinda small for my large hands. Or fat fingers, whatever.
|
HakanSherif
Minmatar Amok.
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 01:05:00 -
[182]
Now this is a good idea.
|
BruceLee CRO
Caldari Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 01:14:00 -
[183]
Edited by: BruceLee CRO on 09/12/2008 01:15:04 get nano back remove standings or put it by skills - lvl 5 five standings rank (20:D) remove local window remove jb remove dd in npc space put atleast 2-3 more npc stations in deeper region in first 0.0 systems make when guy jump to appear on random ss to prevent gate camping make some difference between 1mil sp chars and 70mil sp chars make moon mining - that guys actually need to mine with tower like they mine inbelts instead of just putting tower
most wanted inc recruiment video |
Flinx Evenstar
Minmatar North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 01:42:00 -
[184]
Edited by: Flinx Evenstar on 09/12/2008 01:43:15
Originally by: BruceLee CRO Edited by: BruceLee CRO on 09/12/2008 01:15:04 get nano back remove standings or put it by skills - lvl 5 five standings rank (20:D) remove local window remove jb remove dd in npc space put atleast 2-3 more npc stations in deeper region in first 0.0 systems make when guy jump to appear on random ss to prevent gate camping make some difference between 1mil sp chars and 70mil sp chars make moon mining - that guys actually need to mine with tower like they mine inbelts instead of just putting tower
"remove standings or put it by skills - lvl 5 five standings rank (20:D)" WTF
"in first 0.0 systems make when guy jump to appear on random ss to prevent gate camping"
I don't know where to start with that one. Apart from the fact it completely bypasses the ability to lock down a system
You have some good ideas in your post, but those two are a little crazy. Local can't be removed until there is an alternative (no one wants to spam the scan button every 5 seconds)
"make some difference between 1mil sp chars and 70mil sp chars"
There is already
Maybe I got trolled, but you are suggesting farmers can just park up and mine moons, then cloak.
Yeah I got trolled ___
|
BruceLee CRO
Caldari Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 01:50:00 -
[185]
Edited by: BruceLee CRO on 09/12/2008 01:51:43
Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Edited by: Flinx Evenstar on 09/12/2008 01:43:15
Originally by: BruceLee CRO Edited by: BruceLee CRO on 09/12/2008 01:15:04 get nano back remove standings or put it by skills - lvl 5 five standings rank (20:D) remove local window remove jb remove dd in npc space put atleast 2-3 more npc stations in deeper region in first 0.0 systems make when guy jump to appear on random ss to prevent gate camping make some difference between 1mil sp chars and 70mil sp chars make moon mining - that guys actually need to mine with tower like they mine inbelts instead of just putting tower
"remove standings or put it by skills - lvl 5 five standings rank (20:D)" WTF
"in first 0.0 systems make when guy jump to appear on random ss to prevent gate camping"
I don't know where to start with that one. Apart from the fact it completely bypasses the ability to lock down a system
You have some good ideas in your post, but those two are a little crazy. Local can't be removed until there is an alternative (no one wants to spam the scan button every 5 seconds)
"make some difference between 1mil sp chars and 70mil sp chars"
There is already
Maybe I got trolled, but you are suggesting farmers can just park up and mine moons, then cloak.
Yeah I got trolled
yeh it will disable to lock down only systems like a2- hed-gp doril p3en m-oe etc. nothing else
about moons its just that guy that put tower needs to sit there and mine it not just put tower and collect minerals every week
about local then can remove local one and put only const window or similar but local window kills small gang warfare and all that nice nano roaming gangs that ccp allready kill and its big advantage in any kind of combat. really ******ed. you should send scout and find holstile gang not just see them in local see all that nice red minuses and get bigger blob.
about standings i write wrong. thought like when you learn skill on lvl1 you can add one standign. when you learn on lvl2 you cna add 2 etc..
most wanted inc recruiment video |
Flinx Evenstar
Minmatar North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 01:56:00 -
[186]
Ah I see, you want the tower up, but instead of moon harvester they have to put ships out to gather mins.
The standings thing as skill wont change anything, as you will get some guy who just max trains it, and tbh, if someone says on TS "dont shoot <insert corp> it doesn't really matter what standings are set in game.
To add something to the thread, I would like to see sov gained, NOT by the number of towers present, but by the number of pilots present. To occupy space, you would actually have to occupy it.
___
|
Wesley Baird
Caldari BURN EDEN Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 02:02:00 -
[187]
Originally by: Tzrailasa Kill an NPC, your alliance gets sov. points. Mine a 'roid, your alliance gets sov. points. Kill a ship/POS belonging to another alliance, you gain some of their sov. points. ...(possible other ways too).
You'd still be able to shoot POS, and a fair amount of that would be done, but it would no longer be the center of the sov. mechanics.
Lots of great ideas! Would really encourage people to use their space.
|
Mistress Suffering
Amarr Einherjar Rising Cry Havoc.
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 02:16:00 -
[188]
None of the solutions that say to limit allowable standings are going to work. Groups form regardless of how well the game supports them, its just more annoying without proper support.
Still allowed to see other corps ticker? Then standings are just based off ticker. Or a Goonlike FoF identifier pack, etc... There's plenty of solutions to the same challenge, and the reward for solving it is that you get to form up in bigger groups than everyone else.
|
Milkman Dani
Gallente RuffRyders Eradication Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 02:19:00 -
[189]
Originally by: Flinx Evenstar Edited by: Flinx Evenstar on 09/12/2008 02:11:13 Ah I see, you want the tower up, but instead of moon harvester they have to put ships out to gather mins.
The standings thing as skill wont change anything, as you will get some guy who just max trains it, and tbh, if someone says on TS "don't shoot <insert corp>" it doesn't really matter what standings are set in game.
To add something to the thread, I would like to see sov gained, NOT by the number of towers present, but by the number of pilots present. To occupy space, you would actually have to occupy it. Not permanently, just long enough to stamp an average on the map, in the meantime they are a beacon for a fight, and you don't have to shoot a POS (which is good)
Edit: when you said first systems you meant entry points to 0.0, I misunderstood. While that is a much better idea, I still think people should have the ability to lock down any system they chose.
Oh I like that idea Flinx, that's something that would really have regional conflicts, not just multi regional conflicts. Man, that would be cool to see that in action. Then again, if you want those high ends, you better populate them. Would put a whole new meaning to need before greed, or in some cases, greed before need.
It would certainly change the landscape dramatically. I still think getting rid of the local thing is needed, and maybe put in a sorta radar system that shows an unknown icon until it's been seen on scanner or another type of monitoring system for systems. I think that if they could advance the scanner so that it's used more instead of just used whenever we want to scan someone down would be a great leap forward. I mean, each ship has a targetting system, but each ship also has system scanners that work like a dradis in BSG or would work like a conventional radar system. It just make sense that ships would have that sorta capability, if not more so. Why not integrate ship scanners to the tactical overview so that when you use that overview you are able to see what's in the entire system instead of just around you (some sorta camera improvement would need to be made, or allow for a window to come up with that overview so that is lists unknown ship contacts).
The solutions we've all made are great, I mean every single one. I think that CCP should listen, or at least take a look at what we've been dicussing although every year one of these posts come up and just seems to get ignored. I know CCP was looking into it last year sometime, but I (as well as all of us) think they need to take a much closer look.
|
Invendi
Caldari Comply Or Die G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 02:51:00 -
[190]
Originally by: Mistress Suffering None of the solutions that say to limit allowable standings are going to work. Groups form regardless of how well the game supports them, its just more annoying without proper support.
Still allowed to see other corps ticker? Then standings are just based off ticker. Or a Goonlike FoF identifier pack, etc... There's plenty of solutions to the same challenge, and the reward for solving it is that you get to form up in bigger groups than everyone else.
Thinking in context purely for my suggestion, I think that it would be difficult to the point of being pointless.
Lets say standings were reduced to two available possibilities, blue standings and neutral standings. If you also removed the ability to see neutral standings players corp and alliance ticker, how would you identify them as blue?
|
|
Garok Nor
Caldari Blueprint Haus Shadow of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 02:57:00 -
[191]
Originally by: Shadoo
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Shadoo
Originally by: Malachon Draco
And none of the young alliances will be able to claim space unless they join one of the powerblocks, that I am certain of.
And yet you've been proven wrong already on this thread -- all you have to do is look at Cloud Ring.
Sorry, regions that don't even yield enough revenue to fuel the towers needed to hold Sov don't really count, especially if they have no strategic significance. Who would even want CR? And the moment one of the powerblocks even looks at it, the alliance there will fold.
Perhaps your answer gives a clue to what is wrong with 0.0 EVE. Can you spot it?
Too many regions are self-supporting and/or too wealthy?
Probably not what you were hinting at, but imagine if the Cloud Ring situation were reversed, and instead of being a small worthless region in a sea of wealthier regions, it was a small wealthy region in a sea of mediocrity/poverty? Small rich constellations surrounded by vast areas of barely profitable space might spice things up a bit,and keep the wealthy blocs from having a whole bunch of support, as everyone around them would want their space.
Course I am over tired, maybe I'm just talkin out my ass. ------------------------------------------------- Items posted by me are in no way a reflection of the policies and/or opinions of my corporation or alliance. {though they maybe really ought to be} |
ardik
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 03:18:00 -
[192]
static complexes, solves every single problem
****, ccp should be ****ing paying me for this solid ****ing gold post
|
Yazoul Samaiel
Caldari North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 09:40:00 -
[193]
The problem is never income or isk , the problem is how ppl/alliances are spending it.
Put x amount of faction death stars , cyno jam the system , cram x amount of titans and you have an impregnable fortress and you are now a power block which is pretty much the case with all power blocks now. The most popular way to beat that is to bring 100000 times then umber of defenders to have a chance of beating it providing the servers hold which is a random roll of the dice .
Imo there has to be a limit on how much you can defend your space , for instance only 1 titan can DD in a sov 3 system and above or introducing new ship classes that can shield/reduce the effect of DD . This threshold will force the power blocks to be always on the attack to secure their space against other would be opponents and not just sit in their space looking for the next soft target or capital gank , EVE should imply the simplest of concepts about attacking is the best way of defense and not the current status which i explained earlier.
|
Lorq vonRay
Caldari Spartan Industrial Manufacturing Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 09:42:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Toffles
high end moons
I agree that these are dumb. I think all r64 materials should be moved to asteroid belts in the lowest truesec systems (-.8 to -1 maybe) in the farthest from empire regions. Period Basis, Omist, Branch, etc. are more remote and should have better rewards than say Scalding Pass. The type of r64 material should be region specific as well to give regions more variety. Make 0.0 lucrative for the common man again, and not just a place where alliances control vast networks of isk printing machines, backed up by massive capital fleets. As a side benefit, belt and hauler ganking would be much more frequent.
like the sound of that, instead of getting a huge amount of isk for what? dumping fuel in a pos once a month u have to mine it
although it would make isk farming easier it would also allow for small gangs to disrupt corp/alliance profits
and only allow cloaks on ships designed for cloaks
GOD WILLS IT! |
Moon Kitten
Gallente GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 09:45:00 -
[195]
Edited by: Moon Kitten on 09/12/2008 09:46:02 Your cloak nerf can easily be circumvented by using a scout(on a trial account or even on the same account if you feel like it) and and quitting the game as soon as a hostile enters local.
See you on the battlefield
|
Lorq vonRay
Caldari Spartan Industrial Manufacturing Systematic-Chaos
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 09:50:00 -
[196]
Originally by: Moon Kitten Edited by: Moon Kitten on 09/12/2008 09:46:02 Your cloak nerf can easily be circumvented by using a scout(on a trial account or even on the same account if you feel like it) and and quitting the game as soon as a hostile enters local.
See you on the battlefield
not if/when local is removed
GOD WILLS IT! |
Shadowsword
Gallente Epsilon Lyr Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 10:08:00 -
[197]
I had given some tought to the subject months earlier, and came to the following conclusion: The only way to fight the "more is better" trend would be to erase as much has possible the friend/foe identification.
That mean no more standings, anything outside your corp/alliance is hostile.
That mean alliances strictly limited in size.
That mean no possibility to convo someone in 0.0, and mails would be delayed a little. No trades or private contracts, either
Also, to limit out-of-game comunication and coordination, 0.0 systems, constellations and regions would have different names depending of which alliance you're in. That would also open the possibility for alliances to name the systems they own.
Of course, it just won't be possible to prevent completely powerblocs forming via out-of-game forums, etc. But it would make it hard, and alliances in powerblocs wouldn't benefit from each other infrastructure... ------------------------------------------
|
Naridos
Caldari IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 10:18:00 -
[198]
O.O is overrated. Move into low sec.
Quote: You Know you play too much Eve when you get into a car crash and you run away as fast as you can so that you don't get podded.
|
Glengrant
Minmatar TOHA Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 10:30:00 -
[199]
I disagree with op.
Large scale power structures in EVE are highly unstable. BoB has been the exception to the rule for a long time and kudos for surviving several crisis (they *did* get close to failing a couple of times).
EVE is several games rolled into one. An RPG game, an economics game, a small gang combat game, a big fleet combat game and a strategic game.
Deep 0.0 with its outposts and big alliances is the strategic ("risk"-like) part of the game. If you don't want that - stay in unclaimable npc 0.0 space. Plenty of that - no outposts and sov games.
Size will always matter. Whatever CCP does people will organize to protect themselves and get an advantage. People did that before alliances were an integral part of game supported by mechanics.
If you go back in time on this forum you will find many predictions that turned out very wrong, very soon.
Most of the alliances that ever existed are either gone or a shadow of their former incarnations.
Also if you look at the political maps you can see how the map is changing still almost every week - sometimes dramatically.
That's not to say that finetuning is not needed and welcome. But whatever CCP does - people will cluster and claim valuable resources and the worth of those resources will roughly correlate with the size/power of the alliances that claims it. It's human nature. --- Save the forum: Think before you post. ISK BUYER = LOOSER EVE TV- Bring it back!
|
Moon Kitten
Gallente GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 10:32:00 -
[200]
Originally by: Lorq vonRay
Originally by: Moon Kitten Edited by: Moon Kitten on 09/12/2008 09:46:02 Your cloak nerf can easily be circumvented by using a scout(on a trial account or even on the same account if you feel like it) and and quitting the game as soon as a hostile enters local.
See you on the battlefield
not if/when local is removed
when unicorns can fly I will say see you on the battlefield
|
|
Glengrant
Minmatar TOHA Heavy Industries
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 10:53:00 -
[201]
With regard to removing standings: Sorry folks but that's both arbitrary and insane. And people had alliances before they were an ingame mechanic.
CFS, Fountain Alliance, Stain Alliance, Curse Alliance, Phoenix Alliance, etc - all just names people wrote in bio and had a forum - voila - Alliance.
The mechanics make things more convenient - but they are not the reason alliances and blobs exist.
I like the idea (that CCP already plans) of making local a pure comm channel. People only show when they initiate communication.
Scanning can't just be a skill based thing - because SP don't work as a limit beyond the very short term. Enough people will train the necessary skills ASAP that it soon would be ineffective as a limiting factor.
Not much change is needed re scanner. If finding intruders take active effort - it will be more focused. Pilots will do it a lot in primary systems (valuable moons, chokepoints, outposts) - but rarely in the rest of low pop density claimed space. Not showing map statistics in 0.0 either and sneakiness becomes a real option.
Larger fleets should be easier to detect than small gangs. That feels correct and would make small gangs an interesting alternative to big blobs. Make the scanner dependent on "fleet signature". Total signature within a grid will act as a value to compare with scanner distance.
A very big "fleet signature" that's not too many AUs away could then pethaps even show on a passive scan (= u don't hit the button - you get an automatic blip). While small gangs would rarely show up (unless very close) and would need probes to be detected at all.
Even if you want to bring a big fleet to capture the outpost - attacker would be encouraged to move in with many small gangs - while defender would need many smaller gangs to detect what's happening within his territory - or tolerate small intruder camps that "infest" low-pop outlying systems. --- Save the forum: Think before you post. ISK BUYER = LOOSER EVE TV- Bring it back!
|
gordon cain
Minmatar x13 X13 Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 11:00:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Lord WarATron
Originally by: Minigin problem one... invention.
cheep t2 items are the worst thing that happend to this game. we have total morons flying around in ships with maxed capabilities and being able to replace them in a heartbeat. i am of the opinion that if you cant keep your ship alive you should have some real dificulty replacing it.
problem two... rigs and t1 insurance. no real risk flying a fleet bs. rigs prodomenantly used for extra tanking with no real adverse side effects.
{SNIP}
basically, I would disagree. Before, we would see fleets of lolfit t1 ships flown by players with little pride on the battlefield. Now at least they have a semi-decent fit, even if you still get t2 fitted sniper BS's trying to snip a intercepter that is orbiting them etc. Lower cost means people are willing to bring less crap to the battlefield, which is a good thing.
As for rigs/ships etc, the issue is that there is no real loss in pvp. Insurance means that losses do not really matter, in the same way the old t1 lolfit ships could fight forever without caring aboout loss. Once you add in serious losses, then people logoff/dock or hide like they did back in the Delve war, so its not a easy issue to solve. The real answer is how do you force people to fight and also fight with pride in their fitout?
Yeah for fitting invention has made progress. But not to people that normally would live of the loot.
Before invention if you could loot fiel and get like 20 railguns t2 you would maybe make 200mil+. Now its easier to simply shoot the wrecks.
Invention has ****ed up t2 prices. I still think invention should be available but it should be harder, expensive and time consuming to do it.
G
Never argue with idiots, they will just drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience. |
Sionn Klorgh
Minmatar The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 11:14:00 -
[203]
I wish CCP did more with NPCs. I could think up some logic for a system where NPCs could patrol their space, assess enemy fleets, take back stations by killing pos, do mining ops etc. NPC space is a joke right now where these entities are farmed like fish. NPCs could inflict heavy losses on the big alliances if a proper system was coded up (it could evolve over time). CCP could give it objectives or play actions could do it. Say Xalliance farmed Xnpcs the most, it get a tough campaign.
If an alliance develops TOO much infrastructure under a faction influence, it could progressive receive more warfare from these NPCs. Not some chicken**** spawning stuff but REALLY thought out logically offensives. Their strength should be greater than the occupying alliances and a real threat. Some relationship scale would fit in with the entire CCP theme of factional warfare. If you rat them, it should go down but even building in their space should cause friction.
|
Bodica
Caldari Section XIII Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 11:39:00 -
[204]
Edited by: Bodica on 09/12/2008 11:43:22 Eve wants to be like a simulator, a game that is near what things could happen in reality. politics economy logistic everything is great for me... The powerblocks aren't the problems here, like a lot have said, they've allway existed they will allways exist even without standing.
But, I'm gonna give my part here with my own experience in 0.0... As anyone know in CAOD, TCF is in Deklein ATM, and OMG how it's boring, I mean we just stay in a system 12h doing nothing as Goods doesn't want to defend (it's not a smack it's their choice I'm not bringing **** in a good topic). But the point here, it's how long and boring it is to take a place even if there is NO DEFENSE AT ALL. In reality you take a city, you take it okay it's yours ./ I think things don't move fast and it's why ppl thinks that the game don't move... The POS warfare is a broken system, you pew pew the tower and the enemy has 24h to prepare to defend... If things move faster, there will be mutch more change in eve univers... I'm 100% for the thing that you could build "forteress" even with many more diferent moduls but when an alliance take down your forteress its over... I don't understand why we must wait 6 DT to hold a system... that's crazy and boring.
PS : I just want to add that I don't think that add new 0.0 regions would change things I mean, ATN you could do 10 jumps in 0.0 without encounter a single player...
|
Elfaen Ethenwe
Caldari Infusion.
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 11:50:00 -
[205]
endeva.... err i mean bruce.
You do come out with some **** at times :p
There is nothing wrong with powerblocs, there IS something wrong with how they can dominate so effectivly.
<><><>Together we gank, devided we pop<><><><>
|
Torhas
Gallente the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 11:59:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Sionn Klorgh I wish CCP did more with NPCs. I could think up some logic for a system where NPCs could patrol their space, assess enemy fleets, take back stations by killing pos, do mining ops etc. NPC space is a joke right now where these entities are farmed like fish. NPCs could inflict heavy losses on the big alliances if a proper system was coded up (it could evolve over time). CCP could give it objectives or play actions could do it. Say Xalliance farmed Xnpcs the most, it get a tough campaign.
If an alliance develops TOO much infrastructure under a faction influence, it could progressive receive more warfare from these NPCs. Not some chicken**** spawning stuff but REALLY thought out logically offensives. Their strength should be greater than the occupying alliances and a real threat. Some relationship scale would fit in with the entire CCP theme of factional warfare. If you rat them, it should go down but even building in their space should cause friction.
THIS!
And about the "no man's land" between BS and Capital ships, let see what T3 BS will propose, its maybe what CCP plan to do with them. |
BruceLee CRO
Caldari Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 12:04:00 -
[207]
Originally by: El**** Ethenwe Edited by: El**** Ethenwe on 09/12/2008 11:58:34 endeva.... err i mean bruce.
You do come out with some **** at times :p
There is nothing wrong with powerblocs, there IS something wrong with how they can dominate so effectivly.
but i still love you <3
mine post was mainly about small gang warfare pvp cos most of ppl that writing here dont have a clue about that and whats ccp ****ed. if you wanna more factions IN EVE boost small gang warfare pvp and allow smaller alliances to do some dmg instead of - we cant do **** we need to blue someone. **** like removing local getting nano back and few other changes would give hope to smaller alliances that they dont need to nap someone to have fun tat they can do dmg on thier own. i know that cos i staterd mine allaince like that and basicly invent allaince roaming. |
BruceLee CRO
Caldari Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 12:05:00 -
[208]
Edited by: BruceLee CRO on 09/12/2008 12:05:33
|
tikki
Caldari Malicious Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 12:06:00 -
[209]
Firsty...as a person not in a big alliance it's heart warming to see that even members of those power blocks recognise change would be good for EVE.
As many have already stated changes so that small corps could live in NPC 0.0 and disrupt the lives of those in conquerable space.
In my distant past with NBSI and then D2 livingin Branch we had tretchorous trips to get to empire with raiding parties camping gates. I'd love to see that feasible again.
To take the jump bridge discussion 1 step further, I don't have a problem with alliances being able to have these but it does make travel almost risk free for them, especially with cyno jammers.
I would like to see Jump Bridges become completly seperated from POSes and be more like stargates. Alliances can put up a Bridge and anchor sentries to the bridge to help defend it and attackers. Only alliance members can use the bridge however it can be disabled, as can it's sentries.
This would mean that alliances cannot travel risk free, they have to defend their bridge network...and smaller alliance can really disrupt a bigger alliances ability to move through vast amounts of space quickly. |
ollobrains
Gallente 5th Front enterprises CryoGenesis Mining Syndicate
|
Posted - 2008.12.09 12:17:00 -
[210]
these new unstable wormholes should lead us to random systems , find one in jita and end up in 0.0. perhaps limit them to gangs of 10 and perhaps max size of battleship. Perhaps a cyno jammer and system ownership in 0.0 might reduce such wormholes by say 80% chance of occouring but would make it random to slip in behind enemy lines to rat but they would be totally random and u would have no idea where u would end up.
Would give alliances something to think about in controlling their space, carebears and pirates alike could take the risk. Perhaps make em hardish to find and a limit of say 5 at any one time in any constellation.
Would spice things up
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |