EVE Search - A Bittervet's Perspective on Nullsec

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

A Bittervet's Perspective on Nullsec

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
masternerdguy Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E. 812	Posted - 2012.12.22 22:46:00 - [1] - Quote I've been playing since December 2007, so basically the start of 2008. I got into EVE at the Trinity expansion and was instantly hooked on the ideas the game presented. Non consensual open world pvp World Building / Empire Building Offline Leveling I was writing my life story about all the alliances I've been in since 2008, but then I realized it was kind of a long winded rant that wasn't going anywhere. Instead I want to offer you my perspective on what nullsec used to be, and what it is now. Then (2008-2010) Nullsec used to be several medium sized alliances competing for resources and space against each other, they would form temporary coalitions to defeat a common enemy but those would dissolve quite fast and the next era of nullsec sov wars would begin. There were few supercapitals and the Titan had the classic doomsday, which was ok because Titans were rare (supercap proliferation was in its infancy). There was a far wider range of fleet doctrines because the missile / nano nerfs hadn't been leveled yet. This presented an interesting and ever changing battlefield. People actually lived in their space and sov was tied to owning POSes in a system. The Transition (2011) The sov wars that led to the downfall of the NC (and its later Resurrection). The supercarrier era, many FCs wouldn't even fight if the enemy had one more super than their fleet did. Coalitions were forming to fight other coalition in a death spiral that created the NAPs we know today. This got pretty extreme. At one point I was a scimitar pilot in the NC, and I remember several occasions where we formed on a Titan for 8 hours and went home without a fight. One day the FC actually told us why, and we were collectively pissed that one supercarrier was enough to destroy all confidence in our abilities. There was a transition in nullsec mentality towards the meme spewing ~gudfites~ CoD culture we see today. Incarna sealed the deal here too, lots of people quit not just because of Incarna but because of how crappy nullsec was. Now (2012+) Many nullsec alliances laugh at holding sov, preferring to sell it to those who still think it matters. Individual alliances no longer matter, as we are now in the coalition era. The current strategy seems to be let the enemy take all your space, wait, and take it back when they get bored. -A- has taken that philosophy to the logical extreme by dropping all their sov and waiting until the CFHBC (lets be honest they're the same group - some alliances even are members of both) to get bored with beating up on them. The most successful alliances are supercapital blobs that use titan bridging to power project across huge regions of space for the sole purpose of ~gudfites~. Many people no longer use their space for money, they just do incursions on a hi sec alt in TVP. How can we fix this? If we want to return to the classic nullsec of 2008, there are 3 problems. Supercap proliferation - They're proliferated. That's the problem. Something needs to be done about supers, and I don't mean nerfing them. They need to be buffed so that they're worth fielding but made easier to kill so that fleets have a chance. I have no idea how to do this, maybe you do? Incursions - The white elephant in the room is hi sec incursions. They've made it more worthwhile to farm isk in hi sec instead of exploiting space. They need to be nerfed, or nullsec needs to become an isk faucet of epic proportions. Either one works but both have drawbacks. Little Things - Nullsec game mechanics are still stale and crap even after the Dominion expansion. Sov needs to be based on system activity, not based on timers and shooting large stationary structures. Holding sov should offer defensive and economic benefits to the holder that make it worth living in, and outposts need to be destructible. Lots of little things. The following are NOT problems with nullsec in my opinion. Teh Blobz - Ever since my first trip to nullsec in 2008 the blob has been the staple of nullsec warfare. Sure the blobs are bigger now, but the idea is still the same. The blob isn't keeping new alliances out, the fact that half of nullsec is a NAP is. Lack of Small Holdings - Nullsec has never been about small holding, it has been about empires fighting for survival and dominance in an ever changing landscape of drama and politics. Small holdings are wormhole space and lo sec, try there. Titan Bridges - The problem isn't the bridge's power, it is that it is so easy to use and there are so many titans available to do it. Solve the problem of super proliferation and you'll bring this into line. Things are only impossible until they are not.
SegaPhoenix BREAKING-POINT Primal Force 53	Posted - 2012.12.22 23:11:00 - [2] - Quote Good read +1 I started a little before you. Spent YEARS in null-sec. I'm having fun in lowsec now =)
Varius Xeral Galactic Trade Syndicate 55	Posted - 2012.12.22 23:20:00 - [3] - Quote "The most successful alliances are supercapital blobs" Dead wrong. Stopped reading.
Peter Raptor Galactic Hawks 312	Posted - 2012.12.22 23:31:00 - [4] - Quote Varius Xeral wrote: "The most successful alliances are supercapital blobs" Dead wrong. Stopped reading. Is there Anything right that this guy says?? LOL I started to read, I noticed the author, stopped reading. Evelopedia;-á The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion -áGÇá-á-á
HostageTaker Band of Freelancers 17	Posted - 2012.12.22 23:37:00 - [5] - Quote 2008?!! Bittervet.... right... I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Titans on fire outside "The Alamo" of NOL-M9. I watched massive Super Capital fleets glitter in the dark near the BKG-Q2 gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... -á Time to die.
Wo nko University of Caille Gallente Federation 4	Posted - 2012.12.22 23:42:00 - [6] - Quote 0.0 is a joke squad of spies and fat guys
Johan Civire Dirty Curse inc. 245	Posted - 2012.12.22 23:44:00 - [7] - Quote Let me keep it short. This is eve online if you want to do something about it do it. You want to make something about eve then do it. You want to protect your pos do it nobody stop you. But if thats the right choice well ...... you know.
Anndy The Evocati 11	Posted - 2012.12.22 23:56:00 - [8] - Quote aside from moon goo null is fine, just need to wait for the coalitions to implode and split into small alliances
Xtek Hemah Viziam Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2012.12.23 00:06:00 - [9] - Quote What if: instead of paying to hold sovereignty, you GOT PAID to have sov. A specific amount per system. Good money, like really really good money. Wouldn't all of nullsec erupt into war as the ~elite pvp~ dudes who dont care about sov in its current incarnation because its useless want to take some? Hell even the little guys could get in and snatch up all the unclaimed systems. Base payouts upon truesec.
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 2377	Posted - 2012.12.23 00:08:00 - [10] - Quote Anndy wrote: aside from moon goo null is fine, just need to wait for the coalitions to implode and split into small alliances Why should they? Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner!
Name Family Name Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 93	Posted - 2012.12.23 00:15:00 - [11] - Quote masternerdguy wrote: I was [...] in the NC lol.
Anndy The Evocati 11	Posted - 2012.12.23 00:17:00 - [12] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Anndy wrote: aside from moon goo null is fine, just need to wait for the coalitions to implode and split into small alliances Why should they? happens to pretty much every alliance eventually, theres always internal issues which have the potential to blow up and eventually cause an alliance to fall apart, should be even worse with these massive coalitions
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 2377	Posted - 2012.12.23 00:52:00 - [13] - Quote Anndy wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Anndy wrote: aside from moon goo null is fine, just need to wait for the coalitions to implode and split into small alliances Why should they? happens to pretty much every alliance eventually, theres always internal issues which have the potential to blow up and eventually cause an alliance to fall apart, should be even worse with these massive coalitions I'm not disagreeing with you. What has been the most common trend is waiting for the tree to rot within and then someone comes along and pushes it over. Remove local, structure mails and revamp the directional scanner!
octahexx Charante Morior Invictus. Ethereal Dawn 29	Posted - 2012.12.23 00:58:00 - [14] - Quote not everyone in nullsec strives to being a blob,but its assumed way to much,i think some people drop sov simply because they dont plan to join any blob..including the enemies of your enemy so they let it go...the sov itself is not worth what it leads to in the way of playing their game. also ive been thinking about nerfs...nerfs bother me...because i was told by ads for eve that this was the boldest game in the world...breaking the molds going where other games did not. but i can see eve mirroring the reality in becoming a safety culture...nerf everything until everything is tamed and predictable...no sudden movements...maybe ccp should try be that bold creator and shake stuff up...why should everything be tamed and predictable? why are we seeing the same fleet comps and tactics over and over...always benefiting the blobs? maybe null need a viable wild card factor here and there making small entities able to wage war without joining the blue sea. if null is gonna change ccp must give they who live there the tools to do it.
Anndy The Evocati 11	Posted - 2012.12.23 01:04:00 - [15] - Quote Marlona Sky wrote: Anndy wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Anndy wrote: aside from moon goo null is fine, just need to wait for the coalitions to implode and split into small alliances Why should they? happens to pretty much every alliance eventually, theres always internal issues which have the potential to blow up and eventually cause an alliance to fall apart, should be even worse with these massive coalitions I'm not disagreeing with you. What has been the most common trend is waiting for the tree to rot within and then someone comes along and pushes it over. problem is that very few actually have the will/ability to fight against these coalitions and those that do really have no reason to risk fighting waiting for them to rot is just easier really, no 1 wants to deal with super blobs and sov grinding
Buzzy Warstl The Strontium Asylum 241	Posted - 2012.12.23 01:07:00 - [16] - Quote Anndy wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Anndy wrote: aside from moon goo null is fine, just need to wait for the coalitions to implode and split into small alliances Why should they? happens to pretty much every alliance eventually, theres always internal issues which have the potential to blow up and eventually cause an alliance to fall apart, should be even worse with these massive coalitions If the best way to take space is to wait for the group holding it to implode, the mechanic is broken. http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Anndy The Evocati 11	Posted - 2012.12.23 01:14:00 - [17] - Quote Buzzy Warstl wrote: Anndy wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Anndy wrote: aside from moon goo null is fine, just need to wait for the coalitions to implode and split into small alliances Why should they? happens to pretty much every alliance eventually, theres always internal issues which have the potential to blow up and eventually cause an alliance to fall apart, should be even worse with these massive coalitions If the best way to take space is to wait for the group holding it to implode, the mechanic is broken. its been this way for quite some time now and i honestly dont think CCP has any idea how to fix it, hell i cant even think of any bad ideas to fix it
octahexx Charante Morior Invictus. Ethereal Dawn 29	Posted - 2012.12.23 01:21:00 - [18] - Quote maybe ccp should just dig up the old old old notes on the design plans for nullsec when they started on eve. dig out all the napkins and scribbled drawings and designs,maybe even dig up the old vet devs who was there and pick their brain about what the idea was from the start. i seriously doubt they implemnted the full ideas they had due to time/budget contraints and got distracted by stuff along the way.
Buzzy Warstl The Strontium Asylum 241	Posted - 2012.12.23 01:23:00 - [19] - Quote Anndy wrote: Buzzy Warstl wrote: Anndy wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Anndy wrote: aside from moon goo null is fine, just need to wait for the coalitions to implode and split into small alliances Why should they? happens to pretty much every alliance eventually, theres always internal issues which have the potential to blow up and eventually cause an alliance to fall apart, should be even worse with these massive coalitions If the best way to take space is to wait for the group holding it to implode, the mechanic is broken. its been this way for quite some time now and i honestly dont think CCP has any idea how to fix it, hell i cant even think of any bad ideas to fix it Any system that lacks 100 player-hours/day of activity averaged over 1 week from the holding alliance reverts to no sovereignty. That may be a bad idea, but it would definitely kick up sovereignty transitions, and would provide mechanics other than structure bashing to create changes in sovereignty. http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
killorbekilled TBE Initiated 127	Posted - 2012.12.23 01:28:00 - [20] - Quote JUST COMPLETELY RIP THE WHOLE SOV MECHANIC OUT - SORTED and the only thing that will be left is the revamped pos's TrollorbeTrolled
Alua Oresson Demon-War-Lords Fatal Ascension 178	Posted - 2012.12.23 01:47:00 - [21] - Quote So...being a bittervet is a status symbol now or what? Bittervet just means that you've been with the game a long time and hate it, but feel you must stay with it. Are you saying that you can't figure out how to pull away from a game you no longer like? http://pvpwannabe.blogspot.com/
masternerdguy Inner Shadow C.L.O.N.E. 824	Posted - 2012.12.23 01:50:00 - [22] - Quote Alua Oresson wrote: So...being a bittervet is a status symbol now or what? Bittervet just means that you've been with the game a long time and hate it, but feel you must stay with it. Are you saying that you can't figure out how to pull away from a game you no longer like? Nah, I've just gone to lo sec like many others. Things are only impossible until they are not.
Keen Fallsword Skyway Patrol 101	Posted - 2012.12.23 02:21:00 - [23] - Quote SegaPhoenix wrote: Good read +1 I started a little before you. Spent YEARS in null-sec. I'm having fun in lowsec now =) Good. This means that you will be DUST fighter ! nice !
Gilbaron Free-Space-Ranger Ev0ke 472	Posted - 2012.12.23 02:29:00 - [24] - Quote do you seriously consider highsec incursions a problem ? (some) of the real reasons why nobody want's to live in nullsec are the following: 1. industry sucks (really bad) - highsec production slots and refineries are basically available for free and in abundance, it is also nearly completely risk free - a good nullsec refinery can never be in the same spot like good nullsec production slots, - nullsec mining is MUCH worse than highsec mining if you calculate downtime due to reds and bad ores like spodumain that have to be mined in order to get more of the good stuff - Solutions: -- Modular starbase system that allows building a starbase that offers loads of production slots to be combined with great refining capability -- add quite a lot of lowend minerals in the nullsec ores that currently suck (spodumain and gneiss) 2. passive alliance income - alliance income currently comes from holding valueable moons -Solution: -- more active income by taxing members for stuff like usage of production lines, refineries, trading and all other kinds of income generation lack of smallscale pvp targets - hostile gangs can only disrupt active income generation and travel, this is mostly boring, not rewarding and there is no reason to undock other than "i would actually like to fight these dudes" - Solution: -- hostile gangs should be able to destroy, sabotage and disrupt all kinds of income generation, from PI installations to inventions and production lines. there should be plenty reasons to stop the dudes currently roaming through your space, because they actually cost you ISK and time instead of just beeing annoying We are recruiting german-speaking PVP players, contact me :) (BANNER WAS USED FOR THIS POST)
Commander Ted Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance 156	Posted - 2012.12.23 03:14:00 - [25] - Quote I have my own suggestion for a partial solution. Currently their are only a few power blocks in null, and a lot of the space these blocks hold is very empty. The amount of space you own is not based on how much you can OCCUPY like in the real world, but on how many ihubs you can bash. I have a suggestion for how to force alliances to hold less space not through things like taxes, but through actual gameplay. My solution in thread form: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=184770&find=unread Basically Goonswarm can instantaneously teleport an entire armada across their space to defend any given point. In the real world if you attack an empire at a point where very few people live, your likely not to encounter very much resistance until the owner can muster an army and move it to that point. Imagine for a second if during D-day one soldier with a flare gun could instantly bring in every member of the german army, that is what it is like in eve. I propose getting rid of cynos in sovereign null. Jump freighters, covops cynos, and rorquals may cyno just as they do now, and NPC null, and empire low will be totally unchanged for all ship types. At the same time I would BUFF titan jump bridges. Now you may jump both to and from a titan by using a jump bridge or another titan. The downside is now a titan has to use a stargate and move into the destination system. For traveling from sov space to NPC null and lowsec, an alliance would have to setup a anchored cyno generator in a heavily upgraded system that can jump capital ships back and forth from cyno safe space. Under this system alliances would have to strategically distribute their capital and sub capital fleets. It would require additional effort to maintain a large empire, and any attack on someone far away would leave your space semi vulnerable. Titans would no longer be glorified jump bridges, but would be beneficially to remain vulnerable and on the field in a roll that resembles the flagships titans were intended to be. Because less space would be held by large entities, more pockets of space would open up for weaker alliances to move in populating empty parts of null sec. Providing more people to fight. Battles versus large entities would be more tactical, instead of just being how many supers we can log on or sitting around a titan waiting to be dropped in. Also more supers would die and be unable to surprise ********* you from across space, fixing super proliferation. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Varius Xeral Galactic Trade Syndicate 57	Posted - 2012.12.23 03:18:00 - [26] - Quote Your idea is ******* awful. We already know what needs to be fixed in null. Thanks for your terrible input though.
Commander Ted Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance 156	Posted - 2012.12.23 03:21:00 - [27] - Quote Varius Xeral wrote: Your idea is ******* awful. We already know what needs to be fixed in null. Thanks for your terrible input though. Why? Your not using a forum for its proper purpose. Instead of cursing perhaps you should take the time to explain your points in detail https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Trendon Evenstar GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 74	Posted - 2012.12.23 03:32:00 - [28] - Quote Commander Ted wrote: Basically Goonswarm can instantaneously teleport an entire armada across their space to defend any given point. In the real world if you attack an empire at a point where very few people live, your likely not to encounter very much resistance until the owner can muster an army and move it to that point So if they got rid of jump bridges and cynos and titan bridges and everything was gate to gate would anyone really attack us? I mean really? Whos gonna attack us? And why would they? Somebody please invade us! But why would they? Why does anyone attack anyone? We attacked ncdot and took all their moons and space because they broke an agreement and the moons are good money and gave the space and a lot of moons to allies who it was an upgrade for. If no one wants to invade or take our **** now why would they invade if they too along with us had to gate it everywhere?
Commander Ted Sudden Buggery Swift Angels Alliance 156	Posted - 2012.12.23 03:44:00 - [29] - Quote Trendon Evenstar wrote: So if they got rid of jump bridges and cynos and titan bridges and everything was gate to gate would anyone really attack us? I mean really? Whos gonna attack us? And why would they? Somebody please invade us! But why would they? Why does anyone attack anyone? We attacked ncdot and took all their moons and space because they broke an agreement and the moons are good money and gave the space and a lot of moons to allies who it was an upgrade for. If no one wants to invade or take our **** now why would they invade if they too along with us had to gate it everywhere? Someone nearby? I mean your space is really big, if most of you live in VFK and another entity attacked you or one of your allies what is closer to said system, them or you? Are you really gonna go 10+ jumps with capital ships to fight over a system that nobody uses in your alliance? The system in question could belong to a reasonably powerful alliance and their home base could be only 3 jumps away. If one of your coalition mates is under attack would it be really worth it to go all the way over their to help them across multiple regions? How often will you guys be able to field large fleets if action isn't a titan bridge away and people start to get somewhat frustrated? Say your under attack on multiple fronts by multiple people, you have to go all the way across your space to fight each of them separately when before you can just be bridged in and rapidly redeploy once it has been taken care of. At the very least goons would have to deploy separate fleets to fight on multiple fronts make stronger alliances far easier to combat. If some 200 man alliance sets up sov 20 jumps away that only borders an ally are you going to drop capitals or even a large subcap fleet on them? No. Now the usefulness of coalitions becomes less across large swaths of territory like what you hold. Say a hypothetical test vs goons war happened, both sides forces would have to be permanently stationed near the fighting. Then if at any time someone attacks your territory on the other side you wouldn't have the ability to defend both sides, making a large territory unmanageable or at least significantly harder to do so. Your power would only be projected locally opening up new opportunities for new alliances to move in. If CCP added farms and fields who would have the power to hold them all? The person with the most forces, because those forces would have the power to project their entire fleet across the whole map. It would just be the same as moons but more spread out. In all seriousness HBC and CFC could conquer the entire game if they wanted to, but they don't. If all of null was equally valuable their would be great incentive to just keep going. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.
Elrich Kouvo Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 20	Posted - 2012.12.23 03:46:00 - [30] - Quote Trendon Evenstar wrote: Commander Ted wrote: Basically Goonswarm can instantaneously teleport an entire armada across their space to defend any given point. In the real world if you attack an empire at a point where very few people live, your likely not to encounter very much resistance until the owner can muster an army and move it to that point So if they got rid of jump bridges and cynos and titan bridges and everything was gate to gate would anyone really attack us? I mean really? Whos gonna attack us? And why would they? Somebody please invade us! But why would they? Why does anyone attack anyone? We attacked ncdot and took all their moons and space because they broke an agreement and the moons are good money and gave the space and a lot of moons to allies who it was an upgrade for. If no one wants to invade or take our **** now why would they invade if they too along with us had to gate it everywhere? CCP needs to create more value in 0.0 which is what the farms and fields is about. Capturing or destroying other peoples **** drives conflict in 0.0 and right now theres not much of value to capture or destroy. I kinda get that feeling that null was conquered long time ago.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: 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.