EVE Search - Change the null sov system

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Change the null sov system

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lord Zim 759	Posted - 2012.06.03 21:42:00 - [61] - Quote Over 9000, actually. And heh look at solar fleet, 164 systems for 1434 characters, and AAA with 123 for 3679 characters.
Tallian Saotome Fractured Core Fatal Ascension 752	Posted - 2012.06.03 21:44:00 - [62] - Quote Lord Zim wrote: Over 9000, actually. And heh look at solar fleet, 164 systems for 1434 characters, and AAA with 123 for 3679 characters. For Solar, should you also count the renter alliance? Makes it around 5500 with over 300 systems. To bad that space all sucks Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Shepard Wong Ogeko GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 27	Posted - 2012.06.03 21:49:00 - [63] - Quote Where does this sense of entitlement come from, that 6 guys should be able to take and hold there own system? Seriously, the solution to being too small of a group to hold sov is to get more friends. Or move to a wormhole or some corner of npc nullsec, where you "hold" it with activity rather than a sov system.
Marlona Sky Massive PVPness Psychotic Tendencies. 1040	Posted - 2012.06.03 22:08:00 - [64] - Quote Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: Where does this sense of entitlement come from, that 6 guys should be able to take and hold there own system? Fair question. So how many friends do you think it should take to own a system? You know so it doesn't come off sounding like a sense of entitlement. Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner!
Tallian Saotome Fractured Core Fatal Ascension 753	Posted - 2012.06.03 22:10:00 - [65] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: Where does this sense of entitlement come from, that 6 guys should be able to take and hold there own system? Fair question. So how many friends do you think it should take to own a system? You know so it doesn't come off sounding like a sense of entitlement. Enough to defend it from attack? You are aware that the 300 still lost, even tho they were peerless warriors, each of whom was worth many of his opponents, while holding a perfect defensive position, right? Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Lord Zim 759	Posted - 2012.06.03 22:11:00 - [66] - Quote Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: Where does this sense of entitlement come from, that 6 guys should be able to take and hold there own system? Actually, it's not necessarily a sense of entitlement. If the space is ** enough that nobody gives a flying **, then I see no problem with 6 people holding their own system.
Shepard Wong Ogeko GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 27	Posted - 2012.06.03 22:22:00 - [67] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: Where does this sense of entitlement come from, that 6 guys should be able to take and hold there own system? Fair question. So how many friends do you think it should take to own a system? You know so it doesn't come off sounding like a sense of entitlement. The number of players you need is what ever number is enough to repel your opposition. There is no fixed number, and there shouldn't be. If 6 players can manage to repel 5000, good for them. If ti takes 6000 players, then so be it. People really need to just forget the whole idea of them and a couple buddies holding there own sov null system, and that any significant chunk of sov null could operate that way. The only way it makes sense is if they are blue to all their neighbors, which just comes right back to the current state of things with member corps and renters.
engjin The Konvergent League 25	Posted - 2012.06.03 22:37:00 - [68] - Quote Rex Thompson wrote: CCP, people are getting tired of the null sov system. Even people in it. Yes its nice to be a group of people fighting to get your own space. But at one point it gets boring. Fighting for moons, anything else really? If a group of individual, let's say 6 of them, why cant they own there own system, why as it come the need to be 5000. It's nice to lots but that's not community. I suggest you change it so those 6 guys can actually own something and work to keep it. Anyhow, I don't think it ll change anytime soon, but lot's of people are getting bored. Mr T plays Eve +1
Theodoric Darkwind PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore 161	Posted - 2012.06.04 05:14:00 - [69] - Quote If your small group of friends want a system to call their own that they actually can at least stand a chance of defending there are plenty of unclaimed wormholes out there. The mechanics of WHs make it hard to get large blobs into them. If you are smart your small WH corp doesn't keep too many assets in the hole (move loot/industry stuff out regularly, keep only the ships needed for running sites and defense on hand) so if your poses are killed you can simply find a new hole to move into. Nullsec should be for the bigger alliances, its akin to player controlled cities/countries. The level of organization and logistical support needed to run a large nullsec alliance adds a whole other dimension to the game, in the case of a large alliance the CEOs role definitely resembles the role of a RL CEO of a large company rather than a small corp CEO whos role is more like that of a guild master from other MMOs.
Sri Nova Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 96	Posted - 2012.06.04 05:30:00 - [70] - Quote we need a new dev blog on where ccp is with this it has been over 6 months since we heard that they were looking at it . then they come out with this new ui ... its almost like they have A.D.D. Lets fix sov !!... alright great !! Lets do it !! oooooooooo look at war dec system... al right lets fix it !!! ahhhhhh this ui needs to be polished ... I CAN FIX IT !!! what were we doing again ?? oh yeah lets balance those ships !! which ship was it ?? black ops i think , oh yeah here is the notes, wait these are from 2010 that cant be right . oh look at this ambulation wow, now that is really cool, lets do that !! alright here we go !!!
Tallian Saotome Fractured Core Fatal Ascension 769	Posted - 2012.06.04 05:34:00 - [71] - Quote Sri Nova wrote: we need a new dev blog on where ccp is with this it has been over 6 months since we heard that they were looking at it . then they come out with this new ui ... its almost like they have A.D.D. Lets fix sov !!... alright great !! Lets do it !! oooooooooo look at war dec system... al right lets fix it !!! ahhhhhh this ui needs to be polished ... I CAN FIX IT !!! what were we doing again ?? oh yeah lets balance those ships !! which ship was it ?? black ops i think , oh yeah here is the notes, wait these are from 2010 that cant be right . oh look at this ambulation wow, now that is really cool, lets do that !! alright here we go !!! Just now figuring this out? Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Sri Nova Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 96	Posted - 2012.06.04 05:40:00 - [72] - Quote Tallian Saotome wrote: Just now figuring this out? All this back in forth and tail chasing one could be forgiving for having thought they were amidst the chaos of progress .
Tallian Saotome Fractured Core Fatal Ascension 771	Posted - 2012.06.04 05:45:00 - [73] - Quote Sri Nova wrote: Tallian Saotome wrote: Just now figuring this out? All this back in forth and tail chasing one could be forgiving for having thought they were amidst the chaos of progress . Not mutually exclusive, ya know. You can progress in a very ADD way, after all. Its just more... Chaotic, as you said, and ALOT less organized. I understand this has to do with the scrum system they use for development, but I don't really know how scrum works, so I don't want to get into it. Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Kyle Myr GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 240	Posted - 2012.06.04 06:00:00 - [74] - Quote You can take Sov with a 6-10 active people. Groon took Sov in Tenal while RaidenDOT ostensibly held that region with roughly 10-20 active players. Hell, a one man vanity corp may be able to pull off the same trick in, say, Cobalt edge, briefly. Actually holding that space, or doing anything meaningful with it, well, that's another thing. The current system for taking and holding Sov isn't exactly an enjoyable system , and if the OP were talking about this because of issues like, say, grinding through the literal billions of EHP to take regions like Branch with their tens of poorly conceived stations, that'd be one thing. Taking Sov in areas with stations at this point requires a super cap fleet and the ability to field a support fleet so your supers can stay on the field. Actually getting that super cap fleet requires either Sov to build your own, or hundreds of billions of ISK to buy them from people dumb enough to sell on the open market. It's a flawed system, and plenty would agree with that point. That said, i don't think that's what the OP is discussing here? I don't see any actual reasons aside from 'It'd be neat' or 'I should be able to do this, because.' given for why individuals or small corporations should be able to hold sovereign space. Suggestions for why this would be beneficial, how, mechanically, it could work, and such would be better. 'There should be more systems so more people could own them' is a step in the right direction for posting with content, albeit a really bad idea. Adding systems to EVE without having more players to fill them creates more dead regions, like, say, any given low sec region, or remote corners of null sec with terrible true sec. Or just parts of null sec inhabited by people that don't actually live there, like White Noise era Branch, or Raiden era Tenal. More empty space means that actually traveling from places where people live to places where other people live becomes more onerous, and turning 'burn 15 jumps' into 'burn 30 jumps' is a non-starter.
Marlona Sky Massive PVPness Psychotic Tendencies. 1040	Posted - 2012.06.04 06:11:00 - [75] - Quote Call me crazy, but if the time you are willing to spend on traveling is shorter than the time it takes you to reach the border of the territory you and your friends control; you have too many blues. Reset some! Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner!
Theodoric Darkwind PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore 161	Posted - 2012.06.04 06:32:00 - [76] - Quote Kyle Myr wrote: Hell, a one man vanity corp may be able to pull off the same trick in, say, Cobalt edge, briefly. Actually holding that space, or doing anything meaningful with it, well, that's another thing. That would be hilarious, but remember IRC does red pen CTAs for small roaming gangs in their space There needs to be less structure grinding and more violencing of spaceboats with sov warfare, at least cut down the amount of timers. There still needs to be some timers so you have a chance to defend in your own TZ. Forcing alliances to have 23/7 defense capability wont happen ... period, between language barriers and xenophobic russians you will never get total coverage of all the TZs, and alarm clock CTAs are just plain stupid, its simply not reasonable to expect people to call in sick to work or deprive themselves of sleep over a game.
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 998	Posted - 2012.06.04 06:38:00 - [77] - Quote Theodoric Darkwind wrote: Kyle Myr wrote: Hell, a one man vanity corp may be able to pull off the same trick in, say, Cobalt edge, briefly. Actually holding that space, or doing anything meaningful with it, well, that's another thing. That would be hilarious, but remember IRC does red pen CTAs for small roaming gangs in their space IRC are pretty hardcore about that. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd
Tallian Saotome Fractured Core Fatal Ascension 771	Posted - 2012.06.04 06:44:00 - [78] - Quote Maybe make ownership based on # of kills in the system? Whoever has the most kills in the past, say, week, holds sov? Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Akirei Scytale Test Alliance Please Ignore 1555	Posted - 2012.06.04 06:48:00 - [79] - Quote Tallian Saotome wrote: Maybe make ownership based on # of kills in the system? Whoever has the most kills in the past, say, week, holds sov? What if 90% of said kills are allies popping each other's pods? TEST Alliance BEST Alliance
No More Heroes GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 402	Posted - 2012.06.04 06:57:00 - [80] - Quote Rent. .
Lord Zim 763	Posted - 2012.06.04 07:12:00 - [81] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Call me crazy, but if the time you are willing to spend on traveling is shorter than the time it takes you to reach the border of the territory you and your friends control; you have too many blues. Reset some! Thank you for your valuable feedback on our way of playing. We'll take it into consideration.
Alavaria Fera GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 998	Posted - 2012.06.04 07:14:00 - [82] - Quote Akirei Scytale wrote: Tallian Saotome wrote: Maybe make ownership based on # of kills in the system? Whoever has the most kills in the past, say, week, holds sov? What if 90% of said kills are allies popping each other's pods? Player VS Pod. Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd
Richard Desturned GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 756	Posted - 2012.06.04 07:34:00 - [83] - Quote Theodoric Darkwind wrote: That would be hilarious, but remember IRC does red pen CTAs for small roaming gangs in their space Don't you mean ~LEVEL 5 CTA~ with all corps set to 100% tax and all that noise eh
Tallian Saotome Fractured Core Fatal Ascension 773	Posted - 2012.06.04 08:00:00 - [84] - Quote Akirei Scytale wrote: Tallian Saotome wrote: Maybe make ownership based on # of kills in the system? Whoever has the most kills in the past, say, week, holds sov? What if 90% of said kills are allies popping each other's pods? Nothing? The kills and losses would balance out. Think highest isk eff. but using just # of kills. Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Nariya Kentaya Tartarus Ventures Surely You're Joking 202	Posted - 2012.06.04 08:06:00 - [85] - Quote Rex Thompson wrote: I like the way you put it there. But inside that city, I do own my lot with my house on it, and its mine. I live in my city because I like it here. But I do own something and when there is people that want to steal my stuff I defend it. I think it would be more fun in eve that people get to own the system and call it home, not a station where you park your stuff in. and when the city decides they don't want you there anymroe? what do they do? they kick you out and build a highway that they will then neglect for 40 eyars until it falls down. there is no reason that 6 people should be able to hole off thousands, period, SOVEREIGNTY IS NOT FOR SMALL GROUPS, face it, your tlaking about owning an EMPIRE, even if it is only 1 system, Sovereignty means you own space, and i guarantee if china decided to invade, lets say, kuwait, vietnam, korea, the philippines, heck, even all of them at once, there are enough chinese that those other countries couldn't do much to stop them. there is always a point where ability/strength cannot trump numbers, since numbers increase power exponentially in any situation.
Nariya Kentaya Tartarus Ventures Surely You're Joking 203	Posted - 2012.06.04 08:16:00 - [86] - Quote Tallian Saotome wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: Where does this sense of entitlement come from, that 6 guys should be able to take and hold there own system? Fair question. So how many friends do you think it should take to own a system? You know so it doesn't come off sounding like a sense of entitlement. Enough to defend it from attack? You are aware that the 300 still lost, even tho they were peerless warriors, each of whom was worth many of his opponents, while holding a perfect defensive position, right? if your referencing teh spartans, then it was more then 300, adn they brought a couple thousand friends too. persians just brought more.
Nariya Kentaya Tartarus Ventures Surely You're Joking 203	Posted - 2012.06.04 08:18:00 - [87] - Quote Akirei Scytale wrote: Tallian Saotome wrote: Maybe make ownership based on # of kills in the system? Whoever has the most kills in the past, say, week, holds sov? What if 90% of said kills are allies popping each other's pods? or one side is winning economically/militarily, but is losing the KB board because they live off rifter swarms.
Tallian Saotome Fractured Core Fatal Ascension 773	Posted - 2012.06.04 08:19:00 - [88] - Quote The feature you are talking about was covered at fanfest, when they said they want to make POSes into something owned by players, instead of corps, and that they want them to be our space houses that everyone aspires to own. Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Tallian Saotome Fractured Core Fatal Ascension 773	Posted - 2012.06.04 08:21:00 - [89] - Quote Nariya Kentaya wrote: Tallian Saotome wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote: Where does this sense of entitlement come from, that 6 guys should be able to take and hold there own system? Fair question. So how many friends do you think it should take to own a system? You know so it doesn't come off sounding like a sense of entitlement. Enough to defend it from attack? You are aware that the 300 still lost, even tho they were peerless warriors, each of whom was worth many of his opponents, while holding a perfect defensive position, right? if your referencing teh spartans, then it was more then 300, adn they brought a couple thousand friends too. persians just brought more. History still refers to them as the 300 now, thanks to Frank Miller ;) Inappropriate signature removed, CCP Phantom.
Sir Asterix Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2012.06.04 08:44:00 - [90] - Quote The problem is not sov or the mechanics governing it. The problem is large alliances will claim sov only in the systems they need it but assume control over a much larger area of space. The only way in my mind to make alliance space contract is to make logistics in eve more difficult so it no longer becomes worth defending systems over a certain distance away. Unfortunately eve is moving in the opposite direction and making travel a lot easier.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.