| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Xaarous
Caldari
Woopatang
Primary.
   |
Posted - 2011.04.21 13:37:00 -
[1]
(Cross post from EveChatter: http://evechatter.com/index.php/topic,4387.0.html)
If removing Jump Bridges is too much of a blow to 0.0 logistics, how about we replace them with some pew-worthy new features. Well, I have one main one in mind, but I bet there are complementary ideas.
Introduce a new minor capital ship, the Escort Carrier.
- Has a jump drive (range TBD), but can use gates similar to a Jump Freighter.
- Has minimal cargohold, minimal to modest corp hangar, but a sizeable Ship Maintenance Bay
----- Think 5-10 BSes at level 1, +1 or 2 BSes worth of space per level of the Escort Carrier skill
----- Caveat: Need to check for abuse potential on the upper end - e.g. no carrying a dread or other cap inside this thing
- Should NOT be a good option for ratting/solo PVP:
----- Minimal defenses: Weaker tank than a standard carrier, maybe can use fighters but no bonus fighter per level, no triage.
----- Maybe only enough bandwidth for 1 fighter/level of Escort Carrier?
----- Agility no higher than a carrier, maybe lower.
- Construction costs >Orca, <= Carrier.
- Ideally one per race, but could start as a cross-race type evolving from storylines (e.g. Sansha or a future threat like the Drones), or a warfare-oriented expansion of the Rorq/Orca projects.
- Escort carrier skill would have similar skill pre-reqs to carrier, but not require carrier or vice versa.
- Could have a lower-skill "ferry" version with no jump drive, and a T2 jump-capable version, similar to the existing freighters/jump freighters.
This would allow for efficient but less "safe" and somewhat less rapid movement of ship assets within 0.0 space and between 0.0 and Empire space. The range could be limited such that you have to choose between having lots of jump points, needing escorts while moving through gates, or a mix of the two (giving it range equal or longer to jump bridge range would be WORSE, not better).
I derived this idea partly from a blog post ... someone, don't remember who ... had about splitting up the SuperCarrier into multiple specialist roles. I think the idea of a Fleet Carrier is still a good one, but IMHO the existing SuperCarriers are too much of a silver bullet. That's a separate problem; this idea was more about how to give 0.0 forces the ability to manage logistics and strategic movement in a way that will reduce tedium by adding risk. On the flip side, it will add time but could be designed to save resources (e.g. tweak the numbers such that it offers a net reduction in the amount of ozone used to jump over significant distances compared to jump bridging the same number of subcaps).
Thoughts? Are there other (especially exploitable) flaws in this design that I didn't think of? (Obviously, the reship-under-fire scenario would need addressing)
|
Xaarous
Caldari
Woopatang
Primary.
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 13:40:00 -
[2]
Just realized I should have posted this HERE...whoops. :(
|
Aubrey Maturin
RennTech
Fatal Ascension
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 13:53:00 -
[3]
I dont think you really understand why losing jump-bridges would be such a pain in the ass....
|
Miss Rabblt
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 14:59:00 -
[4]
story: i go for shoping to "local" trade hub. i mean "local" == 20+ jumps through gates or 10 if i use JBs.
You want me to waste 30 minutes more just to make some pvp-kiddos happy by "removing safety"?
|
Xaarous
Caldari
Woopatang
Primary.
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 15:01:00 -
[5]
I've used jump bridges enough to know how nice they are. I tend to agree with the assertion that they're *TOO NICE*.
But, I don't think just eliminating them entirely leaves the game in a good state; this is a proposal to help bridge the gap (heh).
There are other options - e.g. some kind of cool-down between jump bridge cycles (either applied to the pilot or the bridge), changing the cost or range.
|
Miss Rabblt
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 15:04:00 -
[6]
 Originally by: Xaarous
I've used jump bridges enough to know how nice they are. I tend to agree with the assertion that they're *TOO NICE*.
i miss something. Why are they "too nice"? JBs have enough restrictions to be "too...."
|
Xaarous
Caldari
Woopatang
Primary.
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 15:06:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
story: i go for shoping to "local" trade hub. i mean "local" == 20+ jumps through gates or 10 if i use JBs.
You want me to waste 30 minutes more just to make some pvp-kiddos happy by "removing safety"?
I'm not sure how many of those respective 20 and 10 jumps are friendly vs. hostile 0.0 space, vs. Empire space. But yes, generally, I don't think it should be 'safe' or particularly fast to cover 20 jumps of 0.0 space via infrastructure upgrades. At most, bridges should give you "internal" mobility, not be a galaxy-spanning superhighway.
If that option wasn't there, there'd be a reason to create an *actual* local market.
|
Xaarous
Caldari
Woopatang
Primary.
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 15:14:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
Originally by: Xaarous
I've used jump bridges enough to know how nice they are. I tend to agree with the assertion that they're *TOO NICE*.
i miss something. Why are they "too nice"? JBs have enough restrictions to be "too...."
If you measure their effectiveness as a function of how many ships can be moved how far a distance in how much *real time*, they're incredibly powerful compared to the alternatives (gate-to-gate warping and jump drives - ship jumps require a longer recharge between hops and subcaps need either a Titan or to ride inside a larger jump-capable ship).
In the end, I'd probably be OK with slowing them down and/or limiting their reach. But this thread intended to suggest a change in kind rather than a change in degree.
|
Jim Tudeski
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 16:02:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Jim Tudeski on 21/04/2011 16:02:29
Originally by: Aubrey Maturin
I dont think you really understand why losing jump-bridges would be such a pain in the ass....
People lived without jump bridges and managed quite well. Just because kids these days are too scared and lazy to get around without them doesn't make them "okay".
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
story: i go for shoping to "local" trade hub. i mean "local" == 20+ jumps through gates or 10 if i use JBs.
You want me to waste 30 minutes more just to make some pvp-kiddos happy by "removing safety"?
I really hope you are trolling, otherwise please go back to whatever kiddie MMO you came from that caters to your every need.
To the OP: I say just remove them and let the 0.0 carebears cry their hearts out. 
|
Miss Rabblt
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 17:32:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Xaarous
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
story: i go for shoping to "local" trade hub. i mean "local" == 20+ jumps through gates or 10 if i use JBs.
You want me to waste 30 minutes more just to make some pvp-kiddos happy by "removing safety"?
I'm not sure how many of those respective 20 and 10 jumps are friendly vs. hostile 0.0 space, vs. Empire space. But yes, generally, I don't think it should be 'safe' or particularly fast to cover 20 jumps of 0.0 space via infrastructure upgrades. At most, bridges should give you "internal" mobility, not be a galaxy-spanning superhighway.
If that option wasn't there, there'd be a reason to create an *actual* local market.
have you ever been in 0.0 space? This is really big space. Usually i need to make 18+ jumps to run 10/10 plexes. And it is inside my alliance space. And about 40% of this systems are just empty.
And again: why 'safe'? It doesn't matter to me if a random kiddo-gank will try to get me on the way. This is all about time. Place where i live is quite. Neutrals and reds are rare. So why the hell you want me to waste more of my time to make boring travels?
|
|
|
Dek Kato
Amarr
Origin.
Black Legion.
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 18:19:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
i...make 18+ jumps to run 10/10 plexes.
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
And about 40% of this systems are just empty.
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
Place where i live is quite. Neutrals and reds are rare.
You make an excellent argument for the removal of jump bridges.
Originally by: CCP Shadow
Thread locked due to troll convention.
|
Felix Maynard
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 18:26:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Dek Kato
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
i...make 18+ jumps to run 10/10 plexes.
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
And about 40% of this systems are just empty.
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
Place where i live is quite. Neutrals and reds are rare.
You make an excellent argument for the removal of jump bridges.
This.
|
rumncock
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 18:47:00 -
[13]
No thanks op. Sorry you can't build and uphold something yourself.
|
Renarla
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 18:53:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Dek Kato
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
i...make 18+ jumps to run 10/10 plexes.
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
And about 40% of this systems are just empty.
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
Place where i live is quite. Neutrals and reds are rare.
You make an excellent argument for the removal of jump bridges.
+1 You basically just listed the biggest issues with Jump Bridges.
|
Guillame Herschel
Gallente
NME1
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 19:41:00 -
[15]
Replace jump bridges with a wormhole generator. It would allow you to zap ships back and forth between 0.0 sov space and a fixed point within an Empire system, but not allow movement within 0.0 sov space. Only one allowed per alliance. You only get defense at the 0.0 side. Anyone can enter from the Empire side (but of course, can be fired upon by POS defenses when they land).
|
Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 19:49:00 -
[16]
Say, I have an idea.. if you dislike jump bridges so much, use current game mechanics and incap them! Then you won't have to beg Mommy to hold your **** for you anymore!
Jump bridges require long term sov to anchor. If no one can be bothered to attack my system for the weeks it takes to achieve sov 3, why shouldn't I be able to have great advantages? If you people are too fail to stop me, that's not my fault.
|
Mutnin
Amarr
Mutineers
|
Posted - 2011.04.21 22:27:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Mutnin on 21/04/2011 22:35:00
The problem, with the current state of jump bridges is they make much of null sec safer than freaking high sec. It's safer for null sec care bears to run sanctums in their tengu's in null than it is to undock from any high sec mission hub station.
Something is very wrong with the picture when people barely have to use actual gates. Yet oin the other hand you don't want to make logistics such a PITA that it becomes yet another grind.
Seems there is a missing "risk vs reward" aspect as currently there is no risk but only rewards.
Personally, I think each sov holding alliance should be limited to "1" jump bridge per region. This would allow them to have easy access from low sec space to their sov space or from one sov region to another.
This would require people to actively defend their space insted of warping to a jump bridge, to go to the next care-bear happy land if reds show up in one system.
This would add minimal extra work for logistical purposes because jump frighteners could still move the goods via cyno's but it would end some of the current lameness that is null sec carebear and unicorn land.
Right now no one has to fight unless you bubble their station with them inside.. Even then half the time they just log off. You need to be able to force people into a situation where they have to fight if they want the benefits that comes with having sov.
|
LiarLiarPantsOnFire
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 06:45:00 -
[18]
Those escort carriers?
Dont we have titan jump bridges allready?
|
Miss Rabblt
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 08:17:00 -
[19]
ok. so we found that JBs are the problem of a fail pirates. That's why JBs must be removed. 
well. ok.
next question: what do you think about whole Sovereignty idea? What people pays for? Why people buy and place hubs? JBs are the part of benefits from sov. You need to hold sov long enough to have ability to place JBs. You need to supply it with fuel.
You want to remove it? Why not add some defend to sov space then? Like in RL. You want "risk"? Well. Try to invade some powerful country in RL from border? How much time will you roam inside?
|
dhunpael
Caldari
Narwhals Ate My Duck
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 08:36:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
next question: what do you think about whole Sovereignty idea? What people pays for? Why people buy and place hubs? JBs are the part of benefits from sov. You need to hold sov long enough to have ability to place JBs. You need to supply it with fuel.
You want to remove it? Why not add some defend to sov space then? Like in RL. You want "risk"? Well. Try to invade some powerful country in RL from border? How much time will you roam inside?
ok, but this isn't RL.
Players now get 2 options when they want to live in 0.0, join a big alliance/corp or be killed.
What with players who want to start for themselves, give them a chance to...
|
|
|
draxxeon
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 10:42:00 -
[21]
My personal view is that 4 changes together would solve the issue of JBs are they are, which is mainly that by reducing have traffic and making logistics too easy they remove most of the reasons for using smaller hit and run gangs to wear down opponents, meaning blobs happen too frequently, and meaning everyone can easily join in the blobs when they happen, making for lovely lag!
1)only allow alliance members to use JBS
2)do not allow cap ships, inc freighters, to use JBs.
3)increase costs of maintaining JBs.
4)decrease JB range.
|
Hidden Snake
Caldari
Inglorious-Basterds
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 11:24:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Mutnin
Edited by: Mutnin on 21/04/2011 22:35:00
The problem, with the current state of jump bridges is they make much of null sec safer than freaking high sec. It's safer for null sec care bears to run sanctums in their tengu's in null than it is to undock from any high sec mission hub station.
Something is very wrong with the picture when people barely have to use actual gates. Yet oin the other hand you don't want to make logistics such a PITA that it becomes yet another grind.
Seems there is a missing "risk vs reward" aspect as currently there is no risk but only rewards.
Personally, I think each sov holding alliance should be limited to "1" jump bridge per region. This would allow them to have easy access from low sec space to their sov space or from one sov region to another.
This would require people to actively defend their space insted of warping to a jump bridge, to go to the next care-bear happy land if reds show up in one system.
This would add minimal extra work for logistical purposes because jump frighteners could still move the goods via cyno's but it would end some of the current lameness that is null sec carebear and unicorn land.
Right now no one has to fight unless you bubble their station with them inside.. Even then half the time they just log off. You need to be able to force people into a situation where they have to fight if they want the benefits that comes with having sov.
in general this. Big null mofos will of course argue against low sec pvpers, but hey CCP is making ur life very easy guys so FU! 
I vote for fragmented dynamic null not for that monstrosity which is it now. More pvp - less bears.
|
Xaarous
Caldari
Woopatang
Primary.
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 12:49:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Feligast
Say, I have an idea.. if you dislike jump bridges so much, use current game mechanics and incap them! Then you won't have to beg Mommy to hold your **** for you anymore!
Jump bridges require long term sov to anchor. If no one can be bothered to attack my system for the weeks it takes to achieve sov 3, why shouldn't I be able to have great advantages? If you people are too fail to stop me, that's not my fault.
Quoting this one because it's my favorite "doesn't get it" response so far.
Gee, sorry Mr. Goonie, I don't want nothing but mega-coalitions in 0.0 space. No I'm not particularly interested in blob-or-go-home as my options for PVP, which seems to be what you want.
Jump bridge networks let the big dogs get and stay bigger too cheaply. As I said earlier in the thread, they could be balanced by simply increasing the sov costs and/or fuel costs. They could be nerfed by limiting their use to alliance members or somehow limiting the number per region. But those are all changes in degree, and I was talking about a possible change in kind instead.
My point in starting this thread was that removing them entirely, without some alternatives to ease the tedium of 0.0 logistics seems too extreme, and a ship ferry ship-type might be one way to address that. Can we stay focused on that?
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 13:07:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Xaarous
Quoting this one because it's my favorite "doesn't get it" response so far...
Odd, first thing that I thought of when reading that was why 'hand' was being censored.
Then until I realised his own mother probably touches him in an inappropriate manner so frequently that he considers it the norm
As for the suggested ship: Being able to carry up to ten times more than a fully fledged freighter with a jump capable ship, you serious?
JB's are on the table to limit force projection, adding a ship that effectively removes that limit immediately makes no sense ..
It should be an arduous task to mobilise ones military, be it for defence or offence.
PS: Secondary function of JB nerf is to cut the Jita umbilical cord so try to keep any mention of a high-sec connection out of ideas.
PPS: Only the idiots complain about JB removal as they have gotten into their heads that it will happen without any other changes taking place.
Even I, who harbour a profound loathing for the status quo, realise that is a fool errand.
|
Sjugar
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 14:48:00 -
[25]
Originally by: draxxeon
Edited by: draxxeon on 22/04/2011 10:48:32
My personal view is that 4 changes together would solve the issue of JBs are they are, which is mainly that by reducing gate traffic and making logistics too easy they remove most of the reasons for using smaller hit and run gangs to wear down opponents, meaning blobs happen too frequently, and meaning everyone can easily join in the blobs when they happen, making for lovely lag!
1)only allow alliance members to use JBS
2)do not allow cap ships, inc freighters, to use JBs.
3)increase costs of maintaining JBs.
4)decrease JB range.
additionally, i'd also make it so only subcaps can use the Titan bridge. So, when u move stuff now, u either do it in a safer manner more times in a jump freighter, or u do it less times but in a longer, more dangerous route by normal freighter.
More logistics effort, sure, but then logistics should be a big part of owning space.
I would say quite the opposite.
1)Make jumpbridges available to everyone without passwords.
2)Anchor at planets instead of a pos, like the ihub.
|
Kriegman
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:25:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Kriegman on 22/04/2011 16:28:56
Originally by: Sjugar
Originally by: draxxeon
Edited by: draxxeon on 22/04/2011 10:48:32
My personal view is that 4 changes together would solve the issue of JBs are they are, which is mainly that by reducing gate traffic and making logistics too easy they remove most of the reasons for using smaller hit and run gangs to wear down opponents, meaning blobs happen too frequently, and meaning everyone can easily join in the blobs when they happen, making for lovely lag!
1)only allow alliance members to use JBS
2)do not allow cap ships, inc freighters, to use JBs.
3)increase costs of maintaining JBs.
4)decrease JB range.
additionally, i'd also make it so only subcaps can use the Titan bridge. So, when u move stuff now, u either do it in a safer manner more times in a jump freighter, or u do it less times but in a longer, more dangerous route by normal freighter.
More logistics effort, sure, but then logistics should be a big part of owning space.
I would say quite the opposite.
1)Make jumpbridges available to everyone without passwords.
2)Anchor at planets instead of a pos, like the ihub.
And who is going to be installing and fueling JBs? The JB is important part of 0.0 sov infrastructure, and can only maintained and used by well organised alliance/corporations that own sov.
Managing JBs is a lot work and is expensive, it is not like a magic portal. Each ship going through JB consumes liquid ozone fuel based on ships mass. Many times I have seen fleets split because JB ran out of fuel. This forces FCs to bring logistics along or request everyone to carry liquid ozone to top off JBs in route. I don't think many of you guys that scream to nerf JBs understand how much work and organisational skill it takes to maintain and use effective JB networks.
The benefits are clear; strategic advantage. However there are entire divisions in large alliances that manage and maintain JB routes. Just ask NC and GoonSwarm pilots, they have some of the most awesome JB networks I have seen.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:44:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 22/04/2011 16:45:00
Originally by: Kriegman
And who is going to be installing and fueling JBs?..
Very simple concept really, think of modern high-ways:
- Sov holder installs at planet and pays maintenance.
- Sovereignty management interface introduced where any and all necessary data/functions can be accessed.
- Sov holder can offline remotely within a minute or less, onlining takes hour(s) and physical presence.
- Fuel requirement is removed.
- Open access for anyone, even hostiles.
Allows for the exact same wide spread networks as now, it would be suicide though as enemy roams can go anywhere (ie. actual thought has to be used in planning  ).
Defensive function in that you can trap hostiles or even funnel them into kill-zones by offlining bridges ahead/behind them.
PS: If the bridge fuellers you mention are anything like the POS fuellers of old, then they'll be thrilled to get that removed
|
Hugh The Hand
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 16:54:00 -
[28]
...back in my day we didn't have any of these new-fangled "jump bridges" and "ihubs," but we got on all the same.
I've been lurking about the forums today since I got back into the game and I must ask: When did this sense of entitlement seep into 0.0? Years ago it was the highsec carebears who constantly whined about not being catured to and having nerfs to their easy income. Today i've read around a dozen threads of 0.0 players saying they can't function without jump bridges, they can't make money without sanctums, and almost none of them seem to be the same caliber of player I recall.
Looking at the dominion changes (all kinds of ****ed, I agree) to sov, I can see the crux of the capital ship bloat, but what got all the average nullsec pilots hooked on these creature comforts? Is literally everyone now blue to their neighbors? Has intra-regional pvp died completely? And if all of this is the case... why does anyone bother with 0.0 anymore? It sounds like a complete carebear wasteland.
|
Azhpol
Gallente
Casa Del Wombat
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 17:25:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Hugh The Hand
...back in my day we didn't have any of these new-fangled "jump bridges" and "ihubs," but we got on all the same.
I've been lurking about the forums today since I got back into the game and I must ask: When did this sense of entitlement seep into 0.0? Years ago it was the highsec carebears who constantly whined about not being catured to and having nerfs to their easy income. Today i've read around a dozen threads of 0.0 players saying they can't function without jump bridges, they can't make money without sanctums, and almost none of them seem to be the same caliber of player I recall.
Looking at the dominion changes (all kinds of ****ed, I agree) to sov, I can see the crux of the capital ship bloat, but what got all the average nullsec pilots hooked on these creature comforts? Is literally everyone now blue to their neighbors? Has intra-regional pvp died completely? And if all of this is the case... why does anyone bother with 0.0 anymore? It sounds like a complete carebear wasteland.
You are hearing the crazies who only know NC space talking. Outside of NC space there is plenty of pew and you see plenty of hostiles moving... Just not settling if your holding space decently, or moving in big fleets. Big fleets get met by big fleets, and I haven't seen many blobs since leaving NC space.
NC space is so big its easier to catch people before they get into the inner regions, so you have a safe zone there where you never see anything hostile, and a buffer between where you see very few people.
Not all of 0.0 has the same blob culture, contrary to what the forums tell us 
-----------------------------------------------
Market help thread, or troll magnet? |
napolion II
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 18:00:00 -
[30]
Yea, the orca should have a tecII that can jump in empire.
|
|
|
X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.04.22 18:32:00 -
[31]
Yeah jump bridges should be used by everybody - just like real roads and shouldn't be allowed to be turned off except by manual removal of fuel (defender) or putting them into reinforce (attacker).
Reward = You can get your stuff to and from empire more quickly.
Risk = Your enemy can get to your empire more quickly.
Keep them at POSes, whatever, add some excitement when you use them as a hostile force.
|
Shade Millith
Caldari
Macabre Votum
Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.04.23 04:57:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Xaarous
I'm not sure how many of those respective 20 and 10 jumps are friendly vs. hostile 0.0 space, vs. Empire space. But yes, generally, I don't think it should be 'safe' or particularly fast to cover 20 jumps of 0.0 space via infrastructure upgrades. At most, bridges should give you "internal" mobility, not be a galaxy-spanning superhighway.
If that option wasn't there, there'd be a reason to create an *actual* local market.
JB's are not 'safe'. There's are several ways to have fun with hostile JB's.
------------------------
|
Mutnin
Amarr
Mutineers
|
Posted - 2011.04.23 08:43:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Hugh The Hand
When did this sense of entitlement seep into 0.0?
Probably, when care bearing became the main reason to move to null sec, rather than for the PVP.
|
Jack Abramof
|
Posted - 2011.04.23 12:35:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Jack Abramof on 23/04/2011 12:35:56
Edited by: Jack Abramof on 23/04/2011 12:35:23
CCP needs to :
1/ removes Jump Bridge, so people have either to use either gates or carriers/jump freighters etc
2/ remove local completely since its lawless space
3/ adds more 0.0 entry . so less camping at chokepoints
4/ removes the whole notion of "upgraded system", its just basically high sec inside 0.0
Basicallly what is needed is make 0.0 much more dangerous but also improves explo sites and plex drops . The idea is to go from high sec with medium reward/very low risk to low sec with higher reward for more risk to finally 0.0 with max reward but also max danger, like no local, no jump bridge etc etc.
IN the current state of the game, when you live in 0.0 with a corp or an alliance behind your back, you have very little chance to loose anything unless you do something really stupid.
You should only know the presence of someone by visual contact or Dscan, why having some magical trick who tells you : " hey there is 1 or 2 neutral in system", quick run to dock or bring the blob " 0.0 should be the wild west for all who lives there, actually its only like this if you dont belong to 0.0 corp/alliance.
|
Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.04.23 16:52:00 -
[35]
ITT: A MASSIVE pile of butthurt.
|
Kriegman
|
Posted - 2011.04.23 17:55:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Kriegman on 23/04/2011 17:55:24
Originally by: Feligast
ITT: A MASSIVE pile of butthurt.
Agree 100%, I'm willing to say most of the "nerf 0.0" crowd does not live in 0.0 space. The so called "elite PvP" warriors sit in 0.4 systems next high sec and gank noobs. When they dare to go in to alliance controlled sov space, they get blobbed and come here crying for nerfs.
|
Mutnin
Amarr
Mutineers
|
Posted - 2011.04.23 18:34:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Mutnin on 23/04/2011 18:35:44
Originally by: Feligast
ITT: A MASSIVE pile of butthurt.
Agree 100%, I'm willing to say most of the "nerf 0.0" crowd does not live in 0.0 space. The so called "elite PvP" warriors sit in 0.4 systems next high sec and gank noobs. When they dare to go in to alliance controlled sov space, they get blobbed and come here crying for nerfs.
umm you forgot the most common steps between them getting blobbed.
1. l33t PVPers from low sec go to null and find every person in local hiding in a POS or station.
2. l33t PVPer says hey I know I'll wait around maybe they will grow a pair and fight.
3. System empties in about 15 mins as l33t PVPer watches them all go warping to a POS and leave system.
4. L33t PVPer goes to closest dead end system, to find 15 bubbles on the gate with all the little care bears running Anomms.
5. 5 hours later, after l33t PVPer waits "AFK" the bears have had enough and either A. log off for the day or B. form up 50 man gate camp on exit for a single L33t PVPer.
This is null sec.. yey \0/
|
debbie harrio
|
Posted - 2011.04.24 12:57:00 -
[38]
Edited by: debbie harrio on 24/04/2011 13:00:29
Edited by: debbie harrio on 24/04/2011 12:58:59
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
story: i go for shoping to "local" trade hub. i mean "local" == 20+ jumps through gates or 10 if i use JBs.
You want me to waste 30 minutes more just to make some pvp-kiddos happy by "removing safety"?
This is why jump bridges are OP, you serve us an injustice by actually under exaggerating the power of them.
When you can JB from the southern reach of fountain to the Northern reach of geminate by using 15ish JB's, a total of over 120 gate jumps, there is something wrong.
Just look at this for clarifacation.
|
Azelor Delaria
Caldari
Unfortunate Soldiers
|
Posted - 2011.04.24 22:00:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Kriegman
Edited by: Kriegman on 23/04/2011 17:55:24
Originally by: Feligast
ITT: A MASSIVE pile of butthurt.
Agree 100%, I'm willing to say most of the "nerf 0.0" crowd does not live in 0.0 space. The so called "elite PvP" warriors sit in 0.4 systems next high sec and gank noobs. When they dare to go in to alliance controlled sov space, they get blobbed and come here crying for nerfs.
I think you're right. A lot of people not living in 0.0 want jump bridges removed. At the same time, many small alliances and corporations living in null sec want the same thing. Is their opinion less valid because they aren't part of Goons or NC?
***** ***** ***** *****
"No OPLAN ever survives first contact with the enemy." |
Mfume Apocal
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2011.04.25 07:03:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Mfume Apocal on 25/04/2011 07:03:58
Originally by: Jack Abramof
Basicallly what is needed is make 0.0 much more dangerous but also improves explo sites and plex drops . The idea is to go from high sec with medium reward/very low risk to low sec with higher reward for more risk to finally 0.0 with max reward but also max danger, like no local, no jump bridge etc etc.
Man all those sound cool! And it'd be awesome if like... that space was accessible to everyone because they were random connections. They could dedicate a whole release to this new space, with ships specialized just for it too! Great idea!
Goddamn you are stupid.
|
|
|
Miss Rabblt
|
Posted - 2011.04.25 10:45:00 -
[41]
Originally by: dhunpael
Players now get 2 options when they want to live in 0.0, join a big alliance/corp or be killed.
What with players who want to start for themselves, give them a chance to...
well. you have low-sec and you have NPC 0.0 space.
Again: Eve is sandbox. People made universe so that it is.
|
Larry Wickes
|
Posted - 2011.04.26 13:34:00 -
[42]
It's definitely an interesting ship. I'm going to go ahead and assume you don't fly a Carrier, because if you did you would realize how silly it sounds to take a ship half the size of a Carrier and stuff it with 5-10 Battleships at once, considering an actual Carrier is only capable of fitting two Battleships.
The idea itself isn't so bad honestly if you ask me, but the second you add in jump drives then the not so safe factor is much safer. At least from my perspective of going from low sec to 0.0, as the route is blue.
If this ship were put through and had similar jump ranges to a carrier; I'd buy it. I hate when I have to move my ships x jumps and have to make 3-5 trips due to the number of ships I have. This Escort Carrier might allow me to do it all in one trip. 
|
Cyrus Doul
Infinite Development
|
Posted - 2011.04.26 15:51:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Miss Rabblt
Originally by: dhunpael
Players now get 2 options when they want to live in 0.0, join a big alliance/corp or be killed.
What with players who want to start for themselves, give them a chance to...
well. you have low-sec and you have NPC 0.0 space.
Again: Eve is sandbox. People made universe so that it is.
NPC 0.0 tends to somewhat be controlled by the people who live in the surrounding area. and any decent low sec (see Aridia) is controlled by people who live by it to farm moons.
|
Miss Rabblt
|
Posted - 2011.04.26 16:34:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Cyrus Doul
NPC 0.0 tends to somewhat be controlled by the people who live in the surrounding area. and any decent low sec (see Aridia) is controlled by people who live by it to farm moons.
yep. but what now? Isn't NPC 0.0 space == sov 0.0 space without sov?
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |