EVE Search - CSM7 Summit Topic: Null Sec

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Jita Park Speakers Corner

CSM7 Summit Topic: Null Sec

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Two step Aperture Harmonics K162 1937	Posted - 2012.05.17 21:25:00 - [1] - Quote Null Sec - Will Winter be the TotalHellDeath patch? What is 'The Ultimate Plan' for where CCP sees 0.0 heading? Farms and Fields? Ultracaps? Supertitans? What should CCP do to "fix" 0.0? Or is 0.0 just fine as is? CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Scatim Helicon GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 364	Posted - 2012.05.17 22:20:00 - [2] - Quote Adjustments to 0.0 are irrelevant as long as highsec continues to provide everything anybody could possibly want in an environment of near-total safety. Will CSM7 be prepared to discuss that elephant in the room with CCP? 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.
Two step Aperture Harmonics K162 1937	Posted - 2012.05.17 22:26:00 - [3] - Quote Scatim Helicon wrote: Adjustments to 0.0 are irrelevant as long as highsec continues to provide everything anybody could possibly want in an environment of near-total safety. Will CSM7 be prepared to discuss that elephant in the room with CCP? I think the current risk-reward balance is very very wrong for most of the game, so yeah, I don't think anything is off the table right now. CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
Xorv Questionable Acquisitions 336	Posted - 2012.05.17 22:28:00 - [4] - Quote Scatim Helicon wrote: Adjustments to 0.0 are irrelevant as long as highsec continues to provide everything anybody could possibly want in an environment of near-total safety. Will CSM7 be prepared to discuss that elephant in the room with CCP? Yes this is pretty critical (also applies to WH and Low Sec Space). Good Farms and Fields should be outside of NPC protection. That said there's a second elephant in this particular room, It's called Local Chat, and the automatic Intel and consequential safety it provides weakens any argument that Null should be getting way better Farms and Fields than High Sec.
Lord Zim 654	Posted - 2012.05.17 22:41:00 - [5] - Quote Xorv wrote: Yes this is pretty critical (also applies to WH and Low Sec Space). Good Farms and Fields should be outside of NPC protection. That said there's a second elephant in this particular room, It's called Local Chat, and the automatic Intel and consequential safety it provides weakens any argument that Null should be getting way better Farms and Fields than High Sec. Make local chat regional, and/or optional. And let's not forget the third elephant in the room, which is rampant power projection and ease of logistics. In this regard, remove JBs and jumpdrives of all ships.
Xorv Questionable Acquisitions 336	Posted - 2012.05.17 22:51:00 - [6] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: And let's not forget the third elephant in the room, which is rampant power projection and ease of logistics. In this regard, remove JBs and jumpdrives of all ships. Good point. We'll have a whole herd of Elephants in the room at this rate.
Richard Desturned GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 382	Posted - 2012.05.18 06:24:00 - [7] - Quote Xorv wrote: It's called Local Chat, and the automatic Intel and consequential safety it provides This is completely untrue and saying that local is anything more than a part of a greater intel apparatus is an unfounded argument. Changing local without balancing other aspects of the game would break the game in favor of one niche playstyle which would become immensely overpowered. eh
Mara Rinn Cosmic Industrial Complex Cosmic Consortium 1411	Posted - 2012.05.18 07:06:00 - [8] - Quote Scatim Helicon wrote: Adjustments to 0.0 are irrelevant as long as highsec continues to provide everything anybody could possibly want in an environment of near-total safety. Hisec is safe folks, you heard it here first! Helicity & Mittani's Hulkageddon is a sham! Most ships lost in PvP? Hisec. Where does Morphite come from? Not hisec. So hisec is simultaneously neither the safest place to be, nor a cornucopia of resources. Now if you were to adjust your statement to something more like, "POSes and outposts do not provide sufficient capacity for nullsec industry, to the point that we cannot even supply our own ammunition" it might be easier to take you seriously.
Lord Zim 654	Posted - 2012.05.18 08:18:00 - [9] - Quote Mara Rinn wrote: Hisec is safe folks It's not safe, it's safer.
Richard Desturned GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 382	Posted - 2012.05.18 08:27:00 - [10] - Quote Mara Rinn wrote: Most ships lost in PvP? Hisec. now if you were to adjust these numbers based on the population of the areas, we'd arrive to the conclusion that eh

Wolodymyr Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation 139	Posted - 2012.05.18 13:42:00 - [11] - Quote I think the biggest problem with power projection are the incredibly long timers (dominion sov) From the moment when you drop SBUs to the final station shoot the defenders have about a week before you need to deal with it. Imagine your alliance leaders playing a big game of Civ 5 in space. Now imagine that it takes 20 turns to take over a city. You could leave your entire empire undefended and stomp around the map with one giant army that could come home and put out any fires. That's pretty much blob warfare there. Now look at people setting up PoCos in lowsec. Those things have a 1-2 day timer so any lowsec alliances with planets keep their empires close together because they are always having to run around swatting away people all the time.
Lord Rahvin League of Non-Aligned Worlds Nulli Secunda 2	Posted - 2012.05.18 13:52:00 - [12] - Quote FIX TECH!!! this has been an blatant rigged part of the game for over 2 years now and CCP still has not fixed the reactions, locations of moons, and the quantities and ratio's needed in building things using tech. 2 Years is long enough for a completely broken game aspect.
VaL Iscariot The Concilium Enterprises Spectrum Alliance 33	Posted - 2012.05.18 14:05:00 - [13] - Quote At what point did we stop talking about null sec and start talking about elephants? Do you wanna know why more people don't flock to null-sec? Its not because they can make more ISK in high sec or even that its safer. That's a joke. Anyone keen on any kind of exploration (beyond 100% scan sites) knows Incursions are chump change compared to the real ISK to be made in null-sec. Hell, I out ISK Incursions every single time I'm short on cash in low-sec. (deal with it) Let me make this point clear: ISK is not the factor that keeps people away. The truth of the matter is, people stay away because of... the people. Just because you don't know how to make ISK, is not my problem. I'd rather die fighting in a small gang of friends, then achieve victory in a blob of people that I don't even care about. Want to "fix" null sec? Make it so that the accomplishments of the little guy mean more then the accomplishments of the blob.
Krom Thomson Jumpbridg KnightRaven Alliance 0	Posted - 2012.05.18 14:43:00 - [14] - Quote Scatim Helicon wrote: Adjustments to 0.0 are irrelevant as long as highsec continues to provide everything anybody could possibly want in an environment of near-total safety. Will CSM7 be prepared to discuss that elephant in the room with CCP? Hi-sec safe? when did this happen? did i miss this change well losing my ships to hi-sec ganking teams? lets do some math here 4 to 1 every 4 hulks iv lost in hi-sec to every 1 hulk iv lost to null-sec that's not even adding ships iv lost to gankers on other accounts
rob3r Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 41	Posted - 2012.05.18 14:46:00 - [15] - Quote Lord Rahvin wrote: FIX TECH!!! this has been an blatant rigged part of the game for over 2 years now and CCP still has not fixed the reactions, locations of moons, and the quantities and ratio's needed in building things using tech. 2 Years is long enough for a completely broken game aspect. Agreed, tech needs to be nerfed. CCP has been talking about ring mining, very interested to see what that is going to actually mean in practice. I'd love for the whole moon mining thing to go away, would be much more fun and social to need to get a bunch of space ship nerds together at an alliance level to mine the equivalent of tech. 0.0 Industry needs some serious love. if CCP touches our logistics capability without FIRST making 0.0 a place to actually mine/build stuff I'll punch Elise in the ****. Power projection is a non-issue in my opinion. Jumpbridges are one of the few things that actually makes owning sov worthwhile, take it away and Test (and many others) will drop sov. Make more/better system upgrades, but allow them to be targeted like a station service and with the EHP that a 30-40 man gang could disable it if they shoot it for say 30 minutes. Having Local be a upgrade would be pretty cool. We need a way to punish nerds that live in NPC null while not being able to completely evict them. We should be able to shoot NPC station services just like any other station. Alliance hangars/roles would be AMAZING and would make life so much easier. It would allow more people to get involved in the day to day running of a alliance.
Lord Zim 656	Posted - 2012.05.18 15:16:00 - [16] - Quote Krom Thomson wrote: Hi-sec safe? when did this happen? did i miss this change well losing my ships to hi-sec ganking teams? lets do some math here 4 to 1 every 4 hulks iv lost in hi-sec to every 1 hulk iv lost to null-sec that's not even adding ships iv lost to gankers on other accounts I've yet to lose a single ship in hisec to a player, on any char I've got, but then again I'm not a dumbass flying around with several billions of stuff in a hauler or a freighter, or a faction-pimped ratting ship.
Snow Axe GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 260	Posted - 2012.05.18 15:58:00 - [17] - Quote Lord Rahvin wrote: FIX TECH!!! this has been an blatant rigged part of the game for over 2 years now and CCP still has not fixed the reactions, locations of moons, and the quantities and ratio's needed in building things using tech. 2 Years is long enough for a completely broken game aspect. A lot of things have been broken for 2+ years, you have Incarna to thank for that. As for Tech, obviously it needs fixed, but CCP need to be careful how they do it. Tech having the value it does already is an accident, and if they rush in and halfass a "fix", they'll just create a whole new Tech with a different name.
Spikeflach Echo's of Liberty Dominatus Atrum Mortis 8	Posted - 2012.05.18 16:48:00 - [18] - Quote A lot of the problems with Null comes from the groups that control it. The groups, for whatever reason, control vast amounts of systems and only really use around less than half the systems. Any small, or even somewhat large groups looking for even one single system to own has to get in bed with the large groups or risk being completely obliterated from the system that the large group is never going to use anyways. From a game mechanics standpoint, its probably impossible to fix that issue. More PvE content in Null may be nice. Perhaps the possibility to "install" mission agents in player stations.
Veshta Yoshida PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 115	Posted - 2012.05.18 17:19:00 - [19] - Quote "Small" has to be able to make a difference. We have moved from a multitude of 'players/contenders' to a handful (if that) .. blocs have always existed but the extreme it has been allowed to de-evolve into is doing more harm than good. Revisit the original plans for Dominion, you know the ones where mechanics would spread out fighting and make active patrolling of space a necessity .. all the lovely high-flung ideas they threw around when presenting their concept for that expansion. In short: Anything that confronts the "More is better" paradigm. We still need/want the big blow-outs, but they shouldn't be the only thing.
Wolodymyr Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation 140	Posted - 2012.05.18 19:17:00 - [20] - Quote Spikeflach wrote: From a game mechanics standpoint, its probably impossible to fix that issue. Naw dude, just make it really easy to flip sov. Maybe not faction warfare easy, where you can take a system and then wake up the next day in someone else's space Have you ever been called out on deployment by your masters in null before? Basically one big coalition calls up all their pets, "Hey dudes pack all your CTA stuff and move it to the other side of eve. You'll be staying there for a few weeks while you are shooting people we want you to shoot at." This sort of thing used to happen in the middle ages all the time. Kings would call up all their dukes, and baron, and landed gentry and tell them all to arm all their peasants and send them off to war. Or on a larger scale the Pope would call a crusade and everyone would have to road trip to the middle east. The one drawback to doing this is that they would leave their crops unattended and their families unprotected. If rumors of anything nasty happening back at home came up people would start deserting and the nobility would call their armies back. But in eve the week long station shoot timers make home defense something you can ignore for a while.

Spikeflach Echo's of Liberty Dominatus Atrum Mortis 8	Posted - 2012.05.18 19:29:00 - [21] - Quote Wolodymyr wrote: Spikeflach wrote: From a game mechanics standpoint, its probably impossible to fix that issue. Naw dude, just make it really easy to flip sov. Maybe not faction warfare easy, where you can take a system and then wake up the next day in someone else's space Have you ever been called out on deployment by your masters in null before? Basically one big coalition calls up all their pets, "Hey dudes pack all your CTA stuff and move it to the other side of eve. You'll be staying there for a few weeks while you are shooting people we want you to shoot at." This sort of thing used to happen in the middle ages all the time. Kings would call up all their dukes, and baron, and landed gentry and tell them all to arm all their peasants and send them off to war. Or on a larger scale the Pope would call a crusade and everyone would have to road trip to the middle east. The one drawback to doing this is that they would leave their crops unattended and their families unprotected. If rumors of anything nasty happening back at home came up people would start deserting and the nobility would call their armies back. But in eve the week long station shoot timers make home defense something you can ignore for a while. The war Idea you have there makes sense, except most reasoning for going to "war" in eve is the "just because we can" factor. Not everyone wants to go off and destroy other people in a system that is essentially worthless to your corp/alliance/coalition.
Wolodymyr Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation 140	Posted - 2012.05.18 19:52:00 - [22] - Quote Spikeflach wrote: Not everyone wants to go off and destroy other people in a system that is essentially worthless to your corp/alliance/coalition. That's a good point. A lot of the "Because we can" punitive wars are more about shooting dudes and less about taking space. And they are the more enjoyable parts of eve. It's the wars of conquest where people are trying to take space / tech moons that make it impossible for smaller entities moving into null .
Xorth Adimus Blackwater USA Inc. Against ALL Authorities 16	Posted - 2012.05.18 21:06:00 - [23] - Quote Issue boils down to a few key points: First.. the problem with 0.0 is the balance with other types of space in terms of risk and in making people join together so please bare with me: In high sec -Missions are too easy and have no risk and little reward high end, missions should be risky and rewarding (like they used to be) and encourage people to gang together. -Incursions are low risk in high sec they encourage people to gang together but not in any permanent or useful way. Income is about to be nerfed but still too little risk for payout. -Wormhole space should not be accessible from high sec, logistics is too easy and should involve some transit through low sec. wormhole space in turn needs to be improved (pos management improvements so you can live there without it being a ballache would be good). Low sec -Low sec has no real rewards and is a risky environment (perceived or otherwise) which is sadly under utilised and populated (plonking some FW on it wont fix it) wormhole space and incursion access should be a big plus to living in low sec over high sec and make people join together in competition with other. -Low sec needs further iteration to have pirate and drug runner type missions and counter concord /local police missions with unique rewards and elements -Low sec needs to be independent from 0.0 and high sec, you should be able to live their and make your gameplay focus on that. I would suggest low sec improvement is a whole new expansion to give it its worth. Once again low sec improvement is NOT FW. Moons/mining High end Moons in 0.0 and low sec are static income and risk free once you have enough of them What do we replace moons in general with, cause if 'tech is nerfed' it'll only be a matter of time till another T2 bottleneck is found: -CCP Soundwave was proposing removing or reducing moon output and allowing minerals to be gathered from moon belts, I am somewhat dubious about the idea of 'mining' since mining is ** (but apparently some people like it) and is very open to abuse by bots. -'Roid Mining is utter crap and open to easy abuse by bots, recent changes in drops/ drones means most minerals come now from those crazy few sitting there mining all day. Mining needs iterating on to make it more productive more exploration based and interactive potentially more risky and hence (god help us all) fun and a non semi-AFK group activity. -I'd prefer less pos mining output and more POS options and better use of POS's and all moons in a way that requires much more player interaction as a particular moon mineral depletes you need to manage the POS to target a new area of the moon which if overmined will deplete but allow other minerals to mine (like PI). -There should also be more trade/ transport between moon types (requiring careful strategic placement) and even solar system types ('Sorry that reaction is only available in a system with a white dwarf') rather then an 'endless magic gold moon' you staticly mine/fuel forever and which never depletes. -Some Moon minerals and other high end industrial goods/ores should also be available from other routes in limited amounts, such as PI within 0.0 sov. 0.0 income The problem is not just were moon types are spread, its the whole concept of top down alliance funding and sov. Income should come from the grass roots and activity. - 'Empire management' tools don't exist today. - Alliance and corp treaty renting/ tribute management doesn't exist. - Alliance taxation doesn't exist. Current sov is stupid and boring, I almost prefer the tower spamming. The amount of space and sov an alliance has should be based on its activity in PVP and PVE, not how much sov bill it pays and how many stupid big fat sov structures it puts up / grinds thru. The current sov mechanics 'incremental sov' is a joke and doesn't mean anything except for a few key upgrades. Sov should be more key to how useful a system is how profitable it is and how much a target for raiding it could be for hostiles. Sov should be based on players using a system but at risk: - A fat plump system makes it a target for people to come along and take out your PI, NPC traders, trading posts, pos, manufacturing etc money making operations and blow up and actually loot your sov income. This should then create more fights and things to fight over at a much more macro scale. Not just BLOB THE TCU SBU, in fact I'd like these kind of structures to be one of a few different types of lower hp reinforcable sov bonus /management structures in sov warfare you can find scattered around systems not the only defining ones. - A fat plump system can also be upgraded in terms of new defence structures that could be set around key structures (eg batteries / fighter /drone arrays) to help mitigate raids but this adds expense and requires efforts to equip and fuel, as well as more expensive stuff to blow up or die to, especially if defended with/by players. This and a overall structure upkeep cost should be the sov bill not the 'flat fee'. Eg: Spaceballs alliance- FC #spaceballsingravy: LOL they docked up, again, ok lets spend 10 minutes and blow up their trade NPCs and RF their trade and commerce hubs. If they keep this up we will blow it all up and they will lose industrial sov 1 in two days. Can't wait to loot all their stuff, should be a hundred mils worth at least. Rainbowbears alliance - Director #Carebear1: FFS guys we are going to lose 2 bil in structures and all our income in FF-69 if we dont go sort this ** out tomorrow, they also hit B3AR and l3-34 just cause you faggots didn't undock and defend it from 10 guys, get out there and defend our space tomorrow or we will be dropping sov in here and pulling back to somewhere we can defend.
Traidir Hedion University Amarr Empire 17	Posted - 2012.05.19 08:31:00 - [24] - Quote Here's an idea to fix the Tech problem: have moon minerals change location over time (like the PI depletion layer, but the heavy concentrations of resources jump from moon to moon across different systems over a period of weeks or months). This solves the problem of alliances sitting on high value moons forever and encourages them to fight over territory, causing more war, more destruction, more industry. Also, a concord style police-drone-fleet could be introduced as a high level infrastructure upgrade which would encourage the immigration of industrialists from high sec by providing some measure of security.
Lord Zim 659	Posted - 2012.05.19 08:33:00 - [25] - Quote Great idea. Make it so the moon minerals move every 2-3 weeks so everyone has to spend a lot of time scanning moons and moving their reaction tower around. It'll be awesome.
Tarkelan ARES Unlimited 0	Posted - 2012.05.19 09:54:00 - [26] - Quote Just to mention a few things that are wrong with Null from my point of view. distribution of tech moons distribution of security levels sov warfare system with all it's structure related grind blob warfare to many blue standings and NAPs sphere of influence of super alliances is to huge -> limit the power projection capabilities of super alliances to give smaller alliances and even corps the chance to get a piece of Null without being forced into a renter system
Lord Zim 659	Posted - 2012.05.19 10:03:00 - [27] - Quote Tarkelan wrote: distribution of tech moons This isn't the problem you think it is. Tarkelan wrote: sphere of influence of super alliances is to huge -> limit the power projection capabilities of super alliances to give smaller alliances and even corps the chance to get a piece of Null without being forced into a renter system Remove JBs and all jumpdrives. Power projection problem solved.
Traidir Hedion University Amarr Empire 17	Posted - 2012.05.19 10:31:00 - [28] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: Great idea. Make it so the moon minerals move every 2-3 weeks so everyone has to spend a lot of time scanning moons and moving their reaction tower around. It'll be awesome. No one's saying the cycle time has to be that short, I could easily be 2-3 months before minerals begin to taper off. That would also give time for other alliances to come contest the moon and still profit.
Scatim Helicon GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 374	Posted - 2012.05.19 10:34:00 - [29] - Quote Tarkelan wrote: sphere of influence of super alliances is to huge -> to give smaller alliances and even corps the chance to get a piece of Null without being forced into a renter system How do you intent to "limit the power projection capabilities of super alliances" without also limiting smaller alliances in the same way? Explain this whilst also accounting for the ability of large alliances to divide themselves into multiple smaller entities in order to game the system. 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.
Tarkelan ARES Unlimited 0	Posted - 2012.05.19 10:37:00 - [30] - Quote Not every moon material is found in every region as far as i know. So specific regions have far more valuable moons than others. Which grants the alliances in control of the region with a certain edge in ISK to replace ships and keep the alliance runing. A more even spread of moon materials removes the edge and favours the talented managers, FCs and so on of alliances and corps in Null. It's about talent to do something which is player driven and not the brute force of numbers. Logistics and fleet movement without Jump Bridges and Jump Drives would be a nightmare without them. Thought they would limit the ability to project force. But i'm not really convinced that a removal would make Null more fun.



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.