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) |
Shepard Wong Ogeko
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 01:47:00 -
[61] - Quote
There are already 2000+ wormholes systems for those that want nerfed local. Your wish has already been granted, so go probe down a wormhole, enjoy some small gang fights, and get hilariously wealthy off gas clouds and Sleeper loot. Also, no blobs, supercap or otherwise, no jump bridges/drives, and no sov grinding.
Seriously, what you are asking for already exists, and makes up a third of the systems in the Eve universe.
Removing local, jump bridges and jump drives will not improve nullsec. If you think it is empty now, implement those ideas and watch as sov nullsec becomes completely depopulated. No one is going to pay sov taxes for space that has less benefits than npc nullsec or w-space.
|
Manssell
OmiHyperMultiNationalDrunksConglomerate
89
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 02:29:00 -
[62] - Quote
Xorth Adimus wrote:
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. ....
I want to come at this from a different angle.
"Income should come from the grass roots and activity." Yes, but lets not give them the tools to automatically tax those grass root activities. I have floated the idea before to remove the alliance holding corp, and replace it with a true treaty system, but that's never going to happen. I think though if you do force alliance income to come from grass root activities (and SOV ownership) that without automatic in game tools to manage those sources of income, we would finally get back to some corp on corp intrigue. At least for my 2isk I think part of the stagnation of 0.0 is the tendency for people to now have alliance identities, and not so much for the corp they are in.
I would like to see more chances/opportunities for corps to backstab/cheat/fight/get jealous of and hate each other while moving the focus away from alliances. Of course they still will exist (I am NOT trying to change that), but I don't think empire management should be made easier. A bit of the opposite actually, lets give more power to the corps. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
428
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 03:02:00 -
[63] - Quote
Signal11th wrote:Richard Desturned wrote: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. No not really at all, local should be removed in 0.0. I agree with LZ it's free intel and completely misplaced in the lawless tough place called 0.0 (although it's actually a very safe place to be and very warm and cuddly because of things like "local")
Read: "I want to camp cyno beacons without risk of detection" eh |
Serina Tsukaya
Lonetrek Trade and Industries Test Friends Please Ignore
5
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 10:10:00 -
[64] - Quote
People dislike alliances for doing things that they themselves would do in a heartbeat given the opportunity. Players in high do market manipulation and attempt to control the prices of certain items, but when big alliances do the same, they're hated for it. Removing moon goo and replacing it with ring mining would completely screw up the logical hierarchy of an alliance. Part of the reason large alliances can exist at all is the profit they make from moon goo, which is a large contribution to the ship replacement program most alliances have.
Tech moons are rare and valuable. Valuable things creates envy in those that don't have it. Envy and the wish to obtain tech creates conflict. Eve is conflict. |
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc. Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
129
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 17:06:00 -
[65] - Quote
But if Moongoo is so pivotal in the operation of the average alliance, then having all of it on the hands of but a few stifles conflict as strong quickly becomes untouchable due to the infini-ISK of goo.
Having a feudal system like we have in Eve is perfectly fine, but it should have been allowed to develop on its own and not appear out of nowhere due to mechanics.
Quarter to one half of goo to PI with upgrades available through sovereignty. Quarter of goo to exploration and other DED spaces with existing/revised upgrades available through sovereignty. Quarter to one half of Goo remain on moons.
Conquering a system upgraded for one or the other has a high'ish chance of "leaving behind" some of the upgrade. Moons will still be the premiere ISK faucet due to the passive nature of it but with more of it around, made available by playing the game (emptying a hangar/silo once a week is not playing the game ), more entities get to set up replacement programs thus not only driving but creating conflict (weapons tend to be used when acquired in Eve). Spread the goo around (PI+Moons) and fill gaps with whopping big mining/industrial potential and the drive is reinforced even further plus you open the door for hubs and manufacturing powerhouses to develop in null .. rather than most industry being in high-sec with crap ferried back and forth. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
962
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 19:16:00 -
[66] - Quote
believe it or not large sovholding empires existed before technetium was buffed |
Lord Zim
693
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 19:30:00 -
[67] - Quote
Filthy goon-sponsored propaganda. |
Signal11th
479
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 23:37:00 -
[68] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Signal11th wrote:Richard Desturned wrote: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. No not really at all, local should be removed in 0.0. I agree with LZ it's free intel and completely misplaced in the lawless tough place called 0.0 (although it's actually a very safe place to be and very warm and cuddly because of things like "local") Read: "I want to camp cyno beacons without risk of detection"
and your point being? God you goons are such pussies, you always are professing to save eve from becoming kitty online but all your actions to this point are creating the exact thing which you profess to hate. obviously i'm only responding to the dangleberry gsf leadership might have differing views.
i roam mate i don't camp if you didn't have everyone blue you could actually roam yourselves but as it probably takes you 20 jumps in any direction to find a neut you only options are to camp or bridge.
You know in nearly three years of living in 0.0 i've only ever seen 4 (yes it's that exact) Goon roams into whatever region i've been living! aNd considering I've pretty much been at war with you lot for that period I find it quite sad. God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!"-á I came second and won a toaster. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
965
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 23:41:00 -
[69] - Quote
the concept that 0.0 ratters will put up with risks far beyond those of wormholes for l4 mission +30% income is an idea dearly treasured by the naiive |
Brisco County
The Shadow Plague Fidelas Constans
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 23:52:00 -
[70] - Quote
lol raidenDOT is mad o7o7 |
|
Lord Zim
694
|
Posted - 2012.05.23 23:54:00 -
[71] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:the concept that 0.0 ratters will put up with risks far beyond those of wormholes for l4 mission +30% income is an idea dearly treasured by the naiive Nonsense. Everyone knows that what needs to happen is that local needs to just disappear, JBs need to go away, and cynos/jumpdrives must go away as well. And suddenly, even will become ~fun~ and ~awesome~ again. |
Brisco County
The Shadow Plague Fidelas Constans
42
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 00:03:00 -
[72] - Quote
Anomalies already make me want to staple my **** to a beehive. Pretty sure I wouldn't do them if I also had to mash the d-scan every 2 seconds. I would just grind out isk safely on my level 4 mission alt. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
968
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 03:30:00 -
[73] - Quote
Here's a good idea:
Make "military sov" buildup (required for most sov-based advantages) based on multiple factors instead of just million-hp structures and time. Howabout TCU + Occupancy of system+ Length of time owning system + Planetary ownership + Nu-Faction Warfare-style "combat metric" (defaulting to sov holder) = Total level of sov. In return, the cost for owning a system decreases drastically as level of ownership increases. Perhaps the exact EHP of stations would be effected by the strength of the hold on the system.
Power projection of expansive alliances is curbed since much of their space isn't used enough to unlock jump bridges, and alliances would deliberately choose not to take needless systems in order to streamline costs. AFKing in station has a serious penalty to it as two out of five of the claims to the system are lowered by not defending it. The DUST integration serves as a tiebreaker and a way of fomenting conflict with otherwise heavily advantaged alliances. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
436
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 03:46:00 -
[74] - Quote
Signal11th wrote:You know in nearly three years of living in 0.0 i've only ever seen 4 (yes it's that exact) Goon roams into whatever region i've been living! aNd considering I've pretty much been at war with you lot for that period I find it quite sad.
yeah generally wulfpax are the losing side's strategy
hint: not ours eh |
Shepard Wong Ogeko
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 05:22:00 -
[75] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote: Nonsense. Everyone knows that what needs to happen is that local needs to just disappear, JBs need to go away, and cynos/jumpdrives must go away as well. And suddenly, eve will become ~fun~ and ~awesome~ again.
They're called wormholes, maybe you have heard of them. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
389
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 06:22:00 -
[76] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:the concept that 0.0 ratters will put up with risks far beyond those of wormholes for l4 mission +30% income is an idea dearly treasured by the naiive Nonsense. Everyone knows that what needs to happen is that local needs to just disappear, JBs need to go away, and cynos/jumpdrives must go away as well. And suddenly, eve will become ~fun~ and ~awesome~ again. Remove everything that makes living in 0.0 even vaguely tolerable, surely a winning formula. 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. |
Frying Doom
170
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 07:21:00 -
[77] - Quote
Scatim Helicon wrote:Remove everything that makes living in 0.0 even vaguely tolerable, surely a winning formula. TBH even with the sarcasm your right. 0.0 should be hard lawless space, so you really shouldn't get advanced warning of incoming fleets from a cloaked alt in an adjoining system. Null should be more removed than a couple of jumps from jita in a JF. You should be more isolated out there. Local should die and jump drives more costly.
So in summary, as you null people always say. HTFU.
You live in Null space it should be lawless and hard. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
970
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 07:24:00 -
[78] - Quote
Tell us more about living hard, member of 'The Trade Guild' |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
437
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 07:30:00 -
[79] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:You live in Null space it should be lawless and hard.
if you think living in nullsec is at all "effortless" you probably shouldn't talk about nullsec eh |
Frying Doom
170
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 07:41:00 -
[80] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Frying Doom wrote:You live in Null space it should be lawless and hard. if you think living in nullsec is at all "effortless" you probably shouldn't talk about nullsec Well its not exactly hard, Especially for the large alliances, Lo-sec is a lot more dangerous. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge. |
|
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
437
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 09:56:00 -
[81] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Frying Doom wrote:You live in Null space it should be lawless and hard. if you think living in nullsec is at all "effortless" you probably shouldn't talk about nullsec Well its not exactly hard, Especially for the large alliances, Lo-sec is a lot more dangerous.
so you are absolutely disgusted by the fact that large alliances can devote resources to keeping their space secure, as opposed to the hisec carebears who feel entitled to safety that they do not work one bit for? eh |
cBOLTSON
Star Frontiers Ignore This.
53
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 09:58:00 -
[82] - Quote
Lord Zim wrote: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.
Do it. Make all caps have to go through gates like everything else. Ignore This.-á "Were not elitists, were just tired of fail" - The Sorn |
Frying Doom
170
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 11:14:00 -
[83] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Frying Doom wrote:Richard Desturned wrote:Frying Doom wrote:You live in Null space it should be lawless and hard. if you think living in nullsec is at all "effortless" you probably shouldn't talk about nullsec Well its not exactly hard, Especially for the large alliances, Lo-sec is a lot more dangerous. so you are absolutely disgusted by the fact that large alliances can devote resources to keeping their space secure, as opposed to the hisec carebears who feel entitled to safety that they do not work one bit for?
No I am opposed to the abilities currently given in Null sec do not make them tough lawless space.
With no concord to prevent indiscriminate killing it is actually easier to remain safe in Null than it is in hi-sec. The people in Null really need to harden up there is not much of a challenge in it when you can just kill everyone entering a system unlike in Hi-sec where pirates can be indistinguishable from the victim right up till they fire. Also the opposite exists where you don't have enough people to counter the invasion of the system at that time so you can just dock up if you see a neut or a red in system.
Doesn't sound very nasty to me. Hi-sec = no warning until you are about to die. Null-sec = warning given as soon as someone enters system or previous systems using simple cloaked alts.
I think big alliances in a permanent state of combat is a great idea and great for the game, I think large alliances stagnating and using jump bridges to be able to attack small groups of players kind of sad. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge. |
Signal11th
479
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 11:23:00 -
[84] - Quote
Richard Desturned wrote:Signal11th wrote:You know in nearly three years of living in 0.0 i've only ever seen 4 (yes it's that exact) Goon roams into whatever region i've been living! aNd considering I've pretty much been at war with you lot for that period I find it quite sad. yeah generally wulfpax are the losing side's strategy hint: not ours
Yes mate didn't see many of your wolfpacks when you only had a few systems a few years back? God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!"-á I came second and won a toaster. |
Serina Tsukaya
Lonetrek Trade and Industries Test Friends Please Ignore
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 11:42:00 -
[85] - Quote
Veshta Yoshida wrote:But if Moongoo is so pivotal in the operation of the average alliance, then having all of it on the hands of but a few stifles conflict as strong quickly becomes untouchable due to the infini-ISK of goo. Having a feudal system like we have in Eve is perfectly fine, but it should have been allowed to develop on its own and not appear out of nowhere due to mechanics. Quarter to one half of goo to PI with upgrades available through sovereignty. Quarter of goo to exploration and other DED spaces with existing/revised upgrades available through sovereignty. Quarter to one half of Goo remain on moons. Conquering a system upgraded for one or the other has a high'ish chance of "leaving behind" some of the upgrade. Moons will still be the premiere ISK faucet due to the passive nature of it but with more of it around, made available by playing the game (emptying a hangar/silo once a week is not playing the game ), more entities get to set up replacement programs thus not only driving but creating conflict (weapons tend to be used when acquired in Eve). Spread the goo around (PI+Moons) and fill gaps with whopping big mining/industrial potential and the drive is reinforced even further plus you open the door for hubs and manufacturing powerhouses to develop in null .. rather than most industry being in high-sec with crap ferried back and forth.
Why is it in the hands of so few? Because they're the only ones that want it enough. Move it to PI? People would pocket it personally, and none of it would ever find it's way to the alliance. Move it to DeD complexes? People would hoard it for personal use and alliances wouldn't be able to use it for ship replacement programs. Drops from sites would also mean a highly unstable supply rate which would make the prices bounce daily like a kid bouncing on a bed, high on sugar.
Holding sov is the largest isk sink in the game, and Moon mining isn't an isk faucet, isk isn't being brought into the game from an external source. Goo is traded for isk that was obtained in the end by bounties or mission rewards, those are isk faucets.
Here's a slightly better idea:
No moon goo in ring mining for highsec, small amounts of very common to common moongoo in lowsec ring mining, null gets uncommon to rare. (leaving the rarest stuff, Neo and Thul, to moon mining only).
Rarest stuff stays in moons as a passive way of obtaining currency to keep their sov, and make it worthwhile aswell.
Increase the amount of tech moons slightly, or the amount of materials harvested, alternatively reduce the amount needed for construction, whilst increasing the need of other materials. Make more different types of moon goo profitable to run, so that those can help sustain smaller alliances, whilst larger ones just can't be bothered to take systems for them.
Add a small increase in sov expenses per system held, to miginate the advantage of holding a bunch of systems and being filthy rich, making alliances more inclinced to think more about which systems are worth holding, and which just aren't creating any income for them, and therefore aren't worth the expense.
Or, keep it how it is and have them fix poses and rebalance the ships. Rebalancing would be a great oppertunity to modify those bpos/bpcs after all. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
973
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 15:09:00 -
[86] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote: With no concord to prevent indiscriminate killing it is actually easier to remain safe in Null than it is in hi-sec. .
Agreed, we should make all of space nullsec so that everyone can enjoy our high level of safety. Elite, experienced corps like "The Trade Guild" shouldn't be left out. |
Shepard Wong Ogeko
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
20
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 20:08:00 -
[87] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:
No I am opposed to the abilities currently given in Null sec do not make them tough lawless space.
Why should sov null be tough and lawless when it allows a group to gain control of it and make changes to it?
It is not some sort of lawless wild west. It is an area conquered and held by what amounts to petty kingdoms up to great empires. The groups of players that have sovereignty get to make "laws", like NBSI, report intel, join homeland defence ops, and docking up when you aren't in a pvp ship doesn't need to be a law because its just common sense.
The sov system allows for players to civilize the frontiers. To bring stations, and infrastructure and player support to a blank slate and to create content that often rivals what ever canned npc stuff highsec offers. |
Frying Doom
170
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 23:34:00 -
[88] - Quote
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:Frying Doom wrote:
No I am opposed to the abilities currently given in Null sec do not make them tough lawless space.
Why should sov null be tough and lawless when it allows a group to gain control of it and make changes to it? It is not some sort of lawless wild west. It is an area conquered and held by what amounts to petty kingdoms up to great empires. The groups of players that have sovereignty get to make "laws", like NBSI, report intel, join homeland defence ops, and docking up when you aren't in a pvp ship doesn't need to be a law because its just common sense. The sov system allows for players to civilize the frontiers. To bring stations, and infrastructure and player support to a blank slate and to create content that often rivals what ever canned npc stuff highsec offers. Your argument begs the question, if Null is conquerable by the Sov system, and made into feudal kingdoms then following the normal course of history shouldn't you then be getting attacked by larger alliances like the Amarr to increase there space?
I don't argue that docking up makes good sense, just that giving the supposedly hardened players free intel tools like local, really detracts from it, or to follow your argument with the sov system. You want Local you should have to pay for the intel tool.
To my understanding Null was made to be tough, you argue that because you can take i over it should be easier and safer? You hardly make the case that Null players are the best players in EVE, just that Null players want Hello Kitty out there. Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge. |
Richard Desturned
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
437
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 05:03:00 -
[89] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:I think big alliances in a permanent state of combat is a great idea and great for the game, I think large alliances stagnating and using jump bridges to be able to attack small groups of players kind of sad.
removing local and jump drives will benefit smaller alliances how?
i mean I understand that you've never left hisec but I'd really like to know the basis of this argument eh |
Traidir
Hedion University Amarr Empire
22
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 06:23:00 -
[90] - Quote
I'm rather fond of the notion that cap ships can navigate beyond the stargate network. How 'bout instead of removing Jump bridges and drives, they add increased risk to the procedure of jumping a fleet across the map?
For instance, if they were to add a delay before the jump drive could be reactivated of, say... 10-15 minutes, a fleet would have to plan carefully before committing itself to a distant location.
If they wanted to get really tricky with it, they could have the time delay increase based on the number of ships jumping into a system (the Devs could claim that jump drive use has begun to tear at the fabric of space causing "subspace instability", requiring jump ships to slow down or risk their own destruction). Thus if 5 capital ships jump into a system, no ships from any fleet may jump out within a 15 minute window. But if 20 cap ships jumped into a system, no ship could jump out for 30 minutes. 40 cap ships -> 60 minutes... ect...
In this way, capital fleet engagements would nearly guarantee destruction for one of the fleets (and the victor would risk being swooped down upon by additional cap ship fleets, which would again increase the jump out timer, setting up a nice little domino effect).
Also, capital ship fleets would be more vulnerable when moving fleets around, since before the final jump in, the ships would need to move in smaller groups to avoid the longer timer delays. This creates additional opportunities for portions of the fleet to be "tackled" (or at least attacked) as they transit.
Thoughts? |
|
|
|
|
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 |