| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Frank Gallagher
Chattsworth Buccaneers
D0GS OF WAR
3
   |
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
I just thought i'd get a discussion going on how you could possibly fix 0.0 so that smaller alliances could get out and take on the bigger alliances for their sov.
The blob has always caused the lag issues and node crashes, for which you gave us TIDI. The outcome of all battles will be decided on who has the most numbers in system. But what about the smaller alliances in game, how do they get a foothold in 0.0 to grow their alliances ?
Fleets have a maximum number, and i think that should be all that you are allowed to bring to the fight. 250 vs 250 in a system would reduce TIDI and probably the stress load on the sever, plus fights would come down to skills and FC's abilities. Just imagine going into fights knowing that your 5 years of skill training and pvp experience will have some sort of outcome on a fight rather than it being who has the greater number of pilots.
Give the minnows and skill based pvp a chance please. |
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
712
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
Why? sounds like it will just shrink the game.
I will not be voting in the CSM election, so you need to go vote to make up for me. |
Sabrina Solette
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
84
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:09:00 -
[3] - Quote
Frank Gallagher wrote:I just thought i'd get a discussion going on how you could possibly fix 0.0 so that smaller alliances could get out and take on the bigger alliances for their sov.
The blob has always caused the lag issues and node crashes, for which you gave us TIDI. The outcome of all battles will be decided on who has the most numbers in system. But what about the smaller alliances in game, how do they get a foothold in 0.0 to grow their alliances ?
Fleets have a maximum number, and i think that should be all that you are allowed to bring to the fight. 250 vs 250 in a system would reduce TIDI and probably the stress load on the sever, plus fights would come down to skills and FC's abilities. Just imagine going into fights knowing that your 5 years of skill training and pvp experience will have some sort of outcome on a fight rather than it being who has the greater number of pilots.
Give the minnows and skill based pvp a chance please.
I think Sov killed 0.0, all it did was create bigger corp/alliances.
Small alliances in 0.0? You could always take over systems nobody else wants or pay a large alliance to stay there. |
Kunming
CyberShield Inc
ROMANIAN-LEGION
70
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:10:00 -
[4] - Quote
You achieve this by reducing the power projection capabilities of said alliances.
Go out there see for your self, most 0.0 is empty space with a sov banner of some power block.
|
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum
Still Censored
707
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:15:00 -
[5] - Quote
Limit movement, and limit power projection. Make it harder for groups to control large areas and make it harder for people to give support far away. |
Frank Gallagher
Chattsworth Buccaneers
D0GS OF WAR
3
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:27:00 -
[6] - Quote
rodyas wrote:Why? sounds like it will just shrink the game.
I think it would open it up more. If you open the map up ingame and look for numbers of people in system, you'll probably find a big red dot in 2 places, 1 where Test and friends are fighting -A- and friends, and the other being where Goons and friends are fighting NC. and friends.
So the game at the moment is channeling everyone to 2 areas of 0.0 space. Now just imagine that 8 smaller alliances with their 250 man fleets can go out and sbu a system they want to try and take, knowing that a 10000 strong alliance can only bring the same number to stop them. The game would open up alot more and channel people to different areas of 0.0 |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
742
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:28:00 -
[7] - Quote
Its easy just remove the profits that have previously been made by tech moons and listen to them scream all over 0.0 how they are all suddenly broke.
I will state this is a joke as some people do not seem to be able to get those here.
Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
2040
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:43:00 -
[8] - Quote
Frank Gallagher wrote:I just thought i'd get a discussion going on how you could possibly fix 0.0 so that smaller alliances could get out and take on the bigger alliances for their sov.
What's wrong with spies and paying some other people to do it? Worked for us for the 6 years I've been here 
"A genius throws a Molotov cocktail and soon realizes that he's going to die choking in a maze of smoke and flame. A hero drinks a Molotov cocktail and soon realizes that if he does a split in midair, he can hit twice as many zombies per kick. Drunk hero wins again, wusses." ~Cracked.com |
Inquisitor Kitchner
Galaxy Punks
Executive Outcomes
49
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:47:00 -
[9] - Quote
Frank Gallagher wrote:
Give the minnows and skill based pvp a chance please.
Just negotiate with an already established alliance to live in their area and prove yourself useful, then when you have earned their trust negotiate your own system (or help them win the land for you to live in).
Realistically in EVE as in real life politics you need friends on the international stage or you'll struggle to get anything done. Swallow your pride and cozy up to a "big" alliance while you establish yourself as a nullsec alliance. |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
2040
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:48:00 -
[10] - Quote
Inquisitor Kitchner wrote:Frank Gallagher wrote:
Give the minnows and skill based pvp a chance please.
Just negotiate with an already established alliance to live in their area and prove yourself useful, then when you have earned their trust negotiate your own system
Don't forget your knee pads 
"A genius throws a Molotov cocktail and soon realizes that he's going to die choking in a maze of smoke and flame. A hero drinks a Molotov cocktail and soon realizes that if he does a split in midair, he can hit twice as many zombies per kick. Drunk hero wins again, wusses." ~Cracked.com |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
315
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:49:00 -
[11] - Quote
Why should small alliances be able to take on larger ones? |
James 315
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
2619
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 00:57:00 -
[12] - Quote
Use diplomacy to either
a) join/ally with a larger nullsec bloc
b) increase your own size
Remember, there's no guaranteed right for any entity to claim its own space. 
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ MinerBumping.com -½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½-½Now one of the most popular blogs in EVE. Find out why! |
Theodoric Darkwind
PonyWaffe
Test Alliance Please Ignore
176
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 01:45:00 -
[13] - Quote
Aruken Marr wrote:Why should small alliances be able to take on larger ones?
This^^, sov null is where the big fights take place, go big or go home.
If you and your tiny corp want your own little slice of space to call home try wormholes, the mechanics favor smaller, tight knit entities and is at least as profitable if not moreso than nullsec. If you dont care about holding a system try NPC nullsec, its far more small gang friendly than sov null.
|
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
235
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 01:49:00 -
[14] - Quote
I thought Dronelands was the new kiddie pool? 
With the mineral drop nerf, no one else could possibly want it...
"CCP, is a cutting edge developer, they have found a way to sell lag to their customers, and make them believe it's a feature." |
Startha Mewart
An Eye For An Eye
AN EYE F0R AN EYE
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 01:56:00 -
[15] - Quote
Aruken Marr wrote:Why should small alliances be able to take on larger ones?
Because in nearly any other game, or even in RL, an entity must deal with things like Line of Sight, Area of Effect weapons, and much better guerrilla warfare tactics than are available in Eve. When the game is actually out of beta, and these things are fleshed out, you will see the blob fade. |
Ghazu
100
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 02:01:00 -
[16] - Quote
NPC Null |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
1290
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 02:03:00 -
[17] - Quote
Startha Mewart wrote:Aruken Marr wrote:Why should small alliances be able to take on larger ones? Because in nearly any other game, or even in RL, an entity must deal with things like Line of Sight, Area of Effect weapons, and much better guerrilla warfare tactics than are available in Eve. When the game is actually out of beta, and these things are fleshed out, you will see the blob fade.
Hahaha.
So magically adding a person makes you weaker? Sure.
Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolugalbugaslugakjlwsdhvbzxd
Click for old school EVE Portraits: http://jadeconstantine.web44.net/Maison.htm |
Cyprus Black
Perkone
Caldari State
346
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 02:10:00 -
[18] - Quote
When Apocrypha was in conception, CCP proposed an idea that several constellations and regions of nullsec could only be accessible through wormhole travels. I think this would be a brilliant addition to the game and it would make nullsec more accessible for small budding alliances.
Even if this doesn't happen, it would still be a neat concept to shut down the gates in systems owned by an alliance. They can still be accessed via wormholes, but for an alliance to isolate themselves from the major super cap blobs it would give them a major leg up and a chance to actually survive in nullsec.
Hijinks of a highsec pirate
http://cyprusblack.blogspot.com/ |
Surfin's PlunderBunny
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
2041
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 02:29:00 -
[19] - Quote
Cyprus Black wrote:When Apocrypha was in conception, CCP proposed an idea that several constellations and regions of nullsec could only be accessible through wormhole travels. I think this would be a brilliant addition to the game and it would make nullsec more accessible for small budding alliances.
Even if this doesn't happen, it would still be a neat concept to shut down the gates in systems owned by an alliance. They can still be accessed via wormholes, but for an alliance to isolate themselves from the major super cap blobs it would give them a major leg up and a chance to actually survive in nullsec.
You can't turn off gates unless you find an artifact on an archaeological dig site that can do it
"A genius throws a Molotov cocktail and soon realizes that he's going to die choking in a maze of smoke and flame. A hero drinks a Molotov cocktail and soon realizes that if he does a split in midair, he can hit twice as many zombies per kick. Drunk hero wins again, wusses." ~Cracked.com |
Katran Luftschreck
Royal Ammatar Engineering Corps
39
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 05:37:00 -
[20] - Quote
The problem with this is the same as with all problems in EvE:
As soon as CCP finds a way to fix something the Players will then refuse to sleep until they find some way to break it again.
Join Us |
C DeLeon
Pangalactic Punks n' Playboys
HUN Reloaded
43
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 09:45:00 -
[21] - Quote
I kind of agree with OP in some way. Of course it's not good to limit numbers. It's one of the significant aspects of eve that there is no limitations in the size of the conflicts. On the other hand there was a not intended limiting factor in the numbers game and it was the lagg. The lagg gave advantages to the defenders but it limited the offensive actions. TiDi turned the numbers game to an absolute I-win button and soon or later CCP have to deal with it because it's not good for 0.0.
The current situation drives away more people from null than attracts. The constantly growing powerblocks are leaving three options to individual small alliances:
1: joining the powerblocks: Some people keep saying it's a good way but it is not. It kills diversity which is not good for the sandbox. If it is keep going like that we will end up with 2 big factions and we can play wow in space.
2: Deploying back to npc null: I'm not saying it can't be fun, but it feels more like lowsec with bubbles than null. Also npc null territories are already overcrowded while sov territories are empty. A sign that there is something broken in null.
3: lowsec
My hopes are in the modular stations. Maybe with dust and the modular stations we will see a sov warfare overhaul too. I don't think we will see any significant change before that.
Edit: I hope that cloaky pirate base with jump drive wasn't just a side joke and they are taking it into account seriously. It could solve a lot of problem. |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
320
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 09:55:00 -
[22] - Quote
Startha Mewart wrote:Aruken Marr wrote:Why should small alliances be able to take on larger ones? Because in nearly any other game, or even in RL, an entity must deal with things like Line of Sight, Area of Effect weapons, and much better guerrilla warfare tactics than are available in Eve. When the game is actually out of beta, and these things are fleshed out, you will see the blob fade.
Then reduce power projection. Don't place arbitrary limits on what alliances can deploy but rather limit how far they can deploy. Through reducing projection more space could be "claimable" for smaller entities. The optimal distribution, in my opinion, would be that alliances occupy roughly the same amount of space as they actively utilize. Large alliances can then occupy relatively large amounts of space and any small entity will face difficulty, as usual, in taking said space. However, it would then allow smaller entities to carve out a smaller area of their own that is otherwise unused. But I don't think small entities should ever be able to dramatically affect larger entities within their field of influence.
I have no idea how this could be done but I think it's something to be solved with projection rather than limiting numbers. Still smaller entities have other options such as force multipliers (more effective/valuable ships, better pilots etc.) |
Chokichi Ozuwara
Lucky Dragon Convenience
466
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 09:58:00 -
[23] - Quote
Remove local, and 0.0 will get very intredasting.
Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round. |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
320
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 09:59:00 -
[24] - Quote
Chokichi Ozuwara wrote:Remove local, and 0.0 will get very intredasting.
Move to WH space? |
Pak Narhoo
Knights of Kador
677
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 10:02:00 -
[25] - Quote
People have already said so, there is already a mechanic in place for small entities to join the current big ones: diplomacy and blue standings, though they're not bullet proof.
I remember a little alliance that could called Vanguard and was doing just fine. Then when they had cleaned up all the garbage 'IT' had left behind the big alliance that let them do their thing in the first place revoked the blue status and kicked Vanguard out, which died very fast after that. Funnily history seems to repeat itself and Atlas that used vanguard as a broomstick is now way of the dodo them selfs.
Anywho, how do you want to control that I bring 250 from my side and not 500 -1 (499 so we still can have a "fight")?
Some sort of pre-fight sign up form? 
Hi, I'm CCP Arrow, I screwed up the.. ummm... |
C DeLeon
Pangalactic Punks n' Playboys
HUN Reloaded
43
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 10:04:00 -
[26] - Quote
Aruken Marr wrote:
Then reduce power projection. Don't place arbitrary limits on what alliances can deploy but rather limit how far they can deploy. Through reducing projection more space could be "claimable" for smaller entities. The optimal distribution, in my opinion, would be that alliances occupy roughly the same amount of space as they actively utilize. Large alliances can then occupy relatively large amounts of space and any small entity will face difficulty, as usual, in taking said space. However, it would then allow smaller entities to carve out a smaller area of their own that is otherwise unused. But I don't think small entities should ever be able to dramatically affect larger entities within their field of influence.
I have no idea how this could be done but I think it's something to be solved with projection rather than limiting numbers. Still smaller entities have other options such as force multipliers (more effective/valuable ships, better pilots etc.)
The claoky pirate base with jump drive. If an entity is sitting on a huge unused territory, it could attract ninja ratters/gankers enjoying the fruit while not paying the bills. It could limit the powerblocks offense. Why should they conquer unecessarily huge teritories and paying the bills while the territory will be used only by ninja ratters :) |
Aruken Marr
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
320
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 10:08:00 -
[27] - Quote
C DeLeon wrote:Aruken Marr wrote:
Then reduce power projection. Don't place arbitrary limits on what alliances can deploy but rather limit how far they can deploy. Through reducing projection more space could be "claimable" for smaller entities. The optimal distribution, in my opinion, would be that alliances occupy roughly the same amount of space as they actively utilize. Large alliances can then occupy relatively large amounts of space and any small entity will face difficulty, as usual, in taking said space. However, it would then allow smaller entities to carve out a smaller area of their own that is otherwise unused. But I don't think small entities should ever be able to dramatically affect larger entities within their field of influence.
I have no idea how this could be done but I think it's something to be solved with projection rather than limiting numbers. Still smaller entities have other options such as force multipliers (more effective/valuable ships, better pilots etc.)
The claoky pirate base with jump drive. If an entity is sitting on a huge unused territory, it could attract ninja ratters/gankers enjoying the fruit while not paying the bills. It could limit the powerblocks offense. Why should they conquer unecessarily huge teritories and paying the bills while the territory will be used only by ninja ratters :)
What stops it from attracting Ninja ratters/gankers of their own? It makes some sense, but sounds extremely farmable by the larger entities. |
Rifter Rafter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 10:15:00 -
[28] - Quote
Add more npc stations and regions or just divide 0.0. Coz now 0.0 is for bots and isk farmers doing stupid anomalies and plexes..
So divide 0.0 for more sectors with npc stations give ppl docking posibilities |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol
Project Wildfire
414
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 10:16:00 -
[29] - Quote
I don't know if i can go on much longer...
If you don't "like" my posts, how will i know to reply to your troll? |
C DeLeon
Pangalactic Punks n' Playboys
HUN Reloaded
43
|
Posted - 2012.09.05 10:17:00 -
[30] - Quote
Aruken Marr wrote:
What stops it from attracting Ninja ratters/gankers of their own? It makes some sense, but sounds extremely farmable by the larger entities.
Because of the distance it's hard to reship and form a defense fleet when someone is in trouble. Also the lack of intel. Currently it is easier to run agents than going out and ratting if someone is forced to live in npc null. Of course it could make farmable by larger entities but that would mean they can defend the territory anyway from ninja ratters bacuse their staging system is close. In that case the station could move away to a more safe place. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |