"The most successful alliances are supercapital blobs"

Dead wrong. Stopped reading.

aside from moon goo null is fine, just need to wait for the coalitions to implode and split into small alliances

I was [...] in the NC

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.

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

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?

Good read +1

I started a little before you. Spent YEARS in null-sec. I'm having fun in lowsec now =)

Your idea is ******* awful.

We already know what needs to be fixed in null. Thanks for your terrible input though.

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?

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.

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

I remember you. Last week, in less than two siege cycle time, we formed up a fleet and cyno'd across four regions to slam dunk your dread fleet somewhere in Derelik low-sec. The whole time you were sperging in local and cursing at us incoherently.

Faction Warfare is better isk than incursions, more pvp to.

I started to read, I noticed the author, stopped reading.

Supers needs to get nerfed into Tier 2 Capitals in terms of price and ability. Thats it, there is no realistic alternative solution to supercap proliferation that doesnt involve a massive price hike in the form of either material cost or buildtime/accessability.

Price hikes don't work. It will always be overcome eventually. If titans were a trillion each in 3 years it would be a trivial amount.

The problem with supers is the obsolesence of the idea that they are supposed to be so far above average.

Which is why I said price hikes is not the way to go. I'd prefer to see supers in the 5-10 bil range in regards to buildcost. with regular caps not far behind, Tackle and ewar immunity needs to go. Ehp needs to get knocked down to maybe 10 mil tops for titans to make stuff blow up more ofthen. Supercarrier vs Carrier DPS also needs an overhaul, if regular carriers could use Fighter bombers we'd see alot less supers out there relatively quickly.


Changes like this would make current supercap pilots pissed off though as their investment drops in value. Hell, Im in an alliance and corp that has invested conciderably into supers and we'd see alot of money flushed down the toilet if something like this is implemented. Does not make it any less necessary however.

Supers needs to get nerfed into Tier 2 Capitals in terms of price and ability. Thats it, there is no realistic alternative solution to supercap proliferation that doesnt involve a massive price hike in the form of either material cost or buildtime/accessability.

Supers might be a problem but they are also a lense. People want to be on the field longer than 12 seconds, they get in a Super. Every nerf, buff, expansion, patch has evaded the one constant in EVE. Nothing tanks below super capitals. For reasons unexplained, CCP have refused to make Defense a valid play style. We adapted and simply refuse to fight battles we deem not worth the loss or loss of no strategic value. They can have it two ways. Fights that don't always end in a kill mail or no fights. They choose no fights.

Supers rarely get fielded because they are to expensive to risk in small numbers and when they do get fielded it's usually when you have the confidence of numbers on your side. Defense is a perfectly viable playstyle, I have survived being primriaried in 500 man fleet fights. I wont say it's easy or common it all depends on how many logis/triage carriers you have on field. The problem is not that we don't have the means, its how you make it happen. Being alpha striked is a part of mass pvp, if you don't like it stick to small gangs.

Supers also helped with that problem by nullifying subcaps on field untill the tracking nerfs.. Sov grinding is still a painful process without supers and dreads however.

Most problems in nullsec can be traced to supers in one way or another. Sov mechanics, capitals being useless without supers on call and mineral prices being the most prominent.

Thread cleaned.

Please keep posts constructive and on-topic folks.
- ISD Praetoxx

I dont think supers are the problem , what i do think is their ability to move from region to another like a lightning , that promotes coalitions and coalitions promote blobs .

Maybe restrict their use on a 3 region radios from their "home" and they cant go further than that .

Supers are a non-issue now.

General power projection for jump drives and titan bridges is still a big issue, but not the actual place of supers in the chain of combat escalation, which people in this thread still seem to be harping about 8-10 months too late.

The problem with nerfing power projection right now is that it is currently the only way people manage to get fights in a galaxy where there really is no reason to fight anyone else. Therefore, a power projection nerf needs to coincide with the addition of features that increase localized gameplay so people don't want to go halfway across the galaxy to drop on someone because they have their own close to home content.

Perhaps if we remove projection of power the size of territories would be reduced and maybe more people would move in remove the needs for NIPs and just having gudfites anyway.

Perhaps if we remove projection of power the size of territories would be reduced and maybe more people would move in remove the needs for NIPs and just having gudfites anyway.

First point is that NIPs are a good thing for content, not bad. NIPs allow you to engage your neighbors in low end conflict with less fear that it will lead to terrible structure bashing, so they actually increase content by allowing controlled conflict.

As to your main point, I will not disagree that it is a possibility. However, it could also not work that way, leaving an already content starved nullsec even hungrier. The point about needing power projection is that there are so few actual wars worth having that you need the range capability to find a good one. If you only have the ability to attack one region over, then you'll likely have a few hyperpowerful alliances with massive dead-zones in between them, as they can't project power to fight someone worthy, they just demolish anyone brave enough to situate beside them in a desperate need for any kind of group content.

Again, you very well could be right, but you also very well could be wrong. I think there are better ways to approaching the issue with much better odds of positive outcomes.

It would be better if players didnt have to create nips in the first place but the gameplay and the number of people living in null made such things redundant. If players have to create artificial wars that have no direct benefit then that indicates something wrong.

Absolutely. Welcome to the "holy **** it's time to properly update nullsec for the first time since the game was released" club.

I believe that both projection of power must be reduced while value increased.. Goons owning large areas wouldn't be so bad if it was evenly populated. The only reason they control that territory is for consistency and a few strategic moons.

In all honesty if we made all of null worth great isk then it may be possible for HBC and CFC to control all of it with everyone joining them to have access to the easiest rats and ore turning null into a carebear's dream.

I think the part of the conversation that is missing is

With lo-sec and Wormholes do we really Need Null or more specifically Sov space

Over the years so much has been put into Null, resources wise, balancing adding, nerfing it that it is now a jumbled mess that needs even more resources to again fix. There is no guarantee that this time they will get it right either.

So why not just get rid of it?

The only real answer I can think of is, "But then those people would have to live near me".

Not really a great reason to keep the resource sucking chest wound Null is.

I am not recommending this course of action but I do feel it should be discussed and not just by the minority that is Null but by the community as a whole, after all it is our subscription fees that fund yet another fix Null drive.

I think the part of the conversation that is missing is

With lo-sec and Wormholes do we really Need Null or more specifically Sov space

Over the years so much has been put into Null, resources wise, balancing adding, nerfing it that it is now a jumbled mess that needs even more resources to again fix. There is no guarantee that this time they will get it right either.

So why not just get rid of it?

The only real answer I can think of is, "But then those people would have to live near me".

Not really a great reason to keep the resource sucking chest wound Null is.

I am not recommending this course of action but I do feel it should be discussed and not just by the minority that is Null but by the community as a whole, after all it is our subscription fees that fund yet another fix Null drive.

THE space that most of the trailers are about. THE space where most of the news has been genertated. THE space where a sandbox pvp game lets people both sand box AND pvp.

This is the single stupidest post anyone has ever posted in GD, and that's saying something.

So as I said being it is a massive resource hog, do we really need it?

nullsec has better PI than lowsec and highsec !

If it was changed so that super carriers had a hacking module that made sov structures vulnerable after being held 20 minutes, and it then took say 10 racial doomsdays to kill the thing, would that work better?
With the structure other wise invulnerable?

20 minutes to get together a blob or two and at least 10 titans, if not more, for a supercarrier killmail?

Nice... I think Boat would be very agreeable to this.

nullsec has better PI than lowsec and highsec !

First off - I have not lived in low sec for any large amount of time. Have primarily just roamed through it on occasion.

From an outside perspective I do agree that power projection does seem to be too effective. I would personally like to see ALL of null sec get its value buffed to a degree and have more smaller pockets of high value territory appearing. While giving Titans a primarily new role or reducing the range in which they can drop blobs on people.

I see so many empty unused systems that are completely unoccupied just sitting there doing nothing. I would like to see small corporations and alliances attempting to take, use and build infrastructure in said systems. Without having to deal with capitals being dropped on them, not because their territory even has value to an alliance, but 'simply because they could'. At the same time things need to become even more active then they are in order to maintain and flourish these territories.

The idea essentially becomes, is it logistically worth it to bigger alliances to stop other systems from being taken when they don't even use them? With the POS changes this would get even better. But at the moment it seems that large amounts of alliances don't even fully use the regions they occupy, nor do they have to station a garrison in regions they plan on holding because they can simply drop death on one lone frigate.

Wormhole PI is better.

null has quite a few things better but it gets ignored a lot since people are swimming in moon goo

- the same if you factor in downtime due to neuts in local (incursions, grinding rats, ...)

So, if we nerfed local...

So, if we nerfed local...

this is not true

exploration and PI are the only things that scale well, everything else is
either

- actually worse in most cases (mining, industry)
- the same if you factor in downtime due to neuts in local (incursions, grinding rats, ...)

mining is (much) worse

do not forget that you also 'have to' mine stuff like gneiss and spodumain, picking the raisins does not work for anything that involves a group of players. it is also a major pain in the ass and very very expensive (a minmatar outpost and several amarr outposts, several towers, rorquals, and at least one JF if you actually want to mine and/or produce on a corporation or alliance basis)

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.

The elite peeveepee guys are busy ganking miners and sitting around waiting for freighter in Niarja and Uaedama... The emorage against highsec is fail poasting by people who make their living in high but can't be seen shaking it twice when done.

We should nerf cyno's then you couldn't drop 10 titans on a super.

what if cynos only worked at the end of the 10 minute cycle?
Would that reduce capital?

Also what of my other suggestions?

I have an idea: let's just delete all the supercaps in the game. I've stated time and time again that I don't think the bridge mechanic is actually a problem, but honestly I could give two ***** less if the fleet battleship became the mainstay of all sov warfare.

Also reduce all structure HP by about 50% to compensate.

The supercap balancing act is just impossible.

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?

Supers might be a problem but they are also a lense. People want to be on the field longer than 12 seconds, they get in a Super. Every nerf, buff, expansion, patch has evaded the one constant in EVE. Nothing tanks below super capitals. For reasons unexplained, CCP have refused to make Defense a valid play style. We adapted and simply refuse to fight battles we deem not worth the loss or loss of no strategic value. They can have it two ways. Fights that don't always end in a kill mail or no fights. They choose no fights.

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

So now capitals can still move all the way across the universe faster than a subcap and easily project their power? Really doesn't change much except you can't hot drop people.

You have 10 minutes to pop the cyno ship.
I see that as being a lot easier to start a fight in as you can then just go and kill a subcap more easily.
Of course that becomes somewhat less if they do get a capital in and then have that light a cyno.

Are cynos greetings to all or only to corp/fleet?

Also is the issue with capitals, that they invalidate subcaps or that they just simply have sufficient numbers so that subcap fleets can not effectively compete?

In no way am I saying there does not need to a slew of other changes to the game, but being able to send your military force over to one side of the map in the morning and be back home (no matter where in galaxy that may be) in time for tea is incredibly broken.

I guess when CCP introduced this mechanics they didnt think we will have infestation of titans like we have today,so imo they need to change old mechanic and make defending vast sov block less easy .You should have more problems as much more territory you are getting.

Titans were supposed to be rare because of how expensive they were.

Welp.

That is how it is today,some player even mine in titans.Anyway you cant blame players using game mechanics for their needs,cause they can.Problem is that CCP is really slow and bad in predicting how some changes will develop in future.They react when something is so much abused , even when they change something you need almost same time for things to come in right place.

uu i like this actually. Really good idea

(...)

I'm not longer a residence of 0.0 with such a reduced play time so I reside in empire FW hoping to see some awesome changes to the sov mechanic in the future.

The underlying cause of all of this is CCP. They created mechanics that facilitate this current age of coalitions with no incentive to de-homogenize the major players alliances.

(...)
The issue I have with this is that I believe that myself and many people in smaller organizations or are now glimpsing threw the looking glass at the current situation want mechanics that favor creating coalitions out of necessity not out of convenience. Once the necessity is gone the mechanics would create an incentive to breaking the coalition and get people back to shooting each other. At the current it seems like the closest we have and 0.0 NIP's to stave off the boredom.

NUllsec main here...and even I have to admit, the whole "Sea of Blues" thing is corny as hell.

Null should be complete and utter chaos.

That's why I have to agree with the Highseccers who laugh at Nullseccers who complain about Risk VS Reward.

I feel safer in null sec than in low or high,and thats the damned truth.


...Just sayin. Null could be a lot better. All of this buddy buddy crap is lame.

There should be mechanics in game that keep the blue listing and the formation of long standing super coalitions in check.
Another way to promote more interest, drama and pvp could be to limit the number of characters within alliances/corporations. EVE favours numbers to much.

(...)
Yes, having friends is bad, the more friends you have, the worse of a person you are.

There should be mechanics in game that keep the blue listing and the formation of long standing super coalitions in check.
Another way to promote more interest, drama and pvp could be to limit the number of characters within alliances/corporations. EVE favours numbers to much.

goonswarm federation (1000 members)
goonswarm people's republic (1000 members)
kingdom of goonswarmia (1000 members)
goonswarm union (1000 members)

see my point? limiting the size of corps or alliances will not solve anything

nullsec needs conflict drivers and the need to actually defend assets against roaming gangs

Interesting from that point of view your SOV systems should be full of players mining, ratting or fighting each other. But your systems are empty. Nobody there.
You have to fly half the galaxy to find some fights. Sometimes it's tough to have to many friends.

that's not because people have too many friends, it's because game mechanics do not have enough conflict drivers in nullsec

for example roaming gangs that can steal from technetium moons, pocos, research towers, production lines, refineries and the like

Yes, let's make nullsec industry even more dead.

I guess the next time we find a CSAA somewhere we'll take three blobs to steal the whole titan and carry it back in 750 drake cargo holds.

absolutely, but you will not reach that by allowing no more than 1000 members per alliance

you can reach that by introducing mechanics to the game that may drive a wedge between people who consider themselves friends but do not really know each other well

I didn't say anything about numbers in this thread. Just that there should be some game mechanic. The current system which led to the long standing coalitions with nearly no targets left can't be the right way.

Care to divulge which nullsec alliance you belong to. You know, to give us some perspective on how far your blue list actually extends.

Or is this another NPC corp member telling me I'm blue to people I'm not just because they some some partisan propaganda map of how half of nullsec are all blue to each other.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2370333#post2370333

read the last two lines again

Blue, not blue, who cares,having friends is what really needs to be nerfed, not just +5 and +10 standings.

Aye? I haven't said anything about a specific number just that there should be game mechanic to keep the power of numbers in check. Limit the number of characters could be a game mechanic. You came up with that 1000 player thing not me.

To make sov more active all that needs to be done is to make people who hold Sov actually have to use it to keep it.

And actually make people have to travel around.

Keeping sov where you don't have to actually use the space and making it so you can just jump past massive areas of space while increasing Nulls manufacturing abilities will just end up making Null even more boring while just making the mega alliances into super mega alliances.

That's not going to help when a large amount of sov isn't worth using anyway. You'll just end up seeing a lot more "unclaimed".

So smaller alliances would be able to make a foot hold in this less used space rather than having to face a massive blob that has titan bridged in because you are trying to take one of the mega alliances Sov systems.

What I never understand in this scenario is; what is the small upstart corporation going to do with a system that a much larger and wealthier alliance couldn't find a use for?

CCP needs to brainstorm on how to bring back small gangs and kill the nullsec alliances, and coalitions, but it may to big of a monster to tackle and change. anyways im rambling, fly safe......

Yeah having friends is evil and needs to be murdered in the most bloody manner.

The fact that alliances hold large amounts of space isn't itself a problem, it's the fact that no one wants to even try to fight for new sov because the reward for winning a terrible solar system from a large alliance is a bill.

Sov is already tied to usage, if you never used or needed the sov nobody would show up to defend it. Fleet losses come at a price. You can't replace player morale with isk, and morale is something that every bloc-level FC in the game thinks of before they commit to a campaign. If you win a meaningless war at a high cost, people are going to ask questions and doubt your ability.

The fact that alliances hold large amounts of space isn't itself a problem, it's the fact that no one wants to even try to fight for new sov because the reward for winning a terrible solar system from a large alliance is a bill. Smaller entities biting at the heels of larger ones are currently 100% able to take sov from existing entities. If you want a good example take a look at WHY SO SERIOUS in Detroid/Wicked Creek who have defeated the mighty SOLAR while their back was turned and have founded their own coalition. There are just very little incentives for scenarios like this to play out right now.

If you made space more valuable, large coalitions spanning multiple regions would become more volatile as they simple become unnecessary. Situations may arise where space is abandoned in order to fight a "greater evil", or specific alliances don't pull their weight, and animosity will grow between allies.

The solution to the sov issue shouldn't be to put in place artificial limits, like a cap on sov systems you can take, a minimum military index, limiting the amount of players in an alliance, or to nerf/remove fast movement. They are only attempts at fixing symptoms. The solution is to address the problem head on. Make space worth holding for everybody.

No the solution is not just to buff the space up and make the mega alliances into super mega alliances.
Just buffing null with no negatives will just make the current problems worse not better.

The solution is very much that if you want to hold Sov on a system you must use it, yes some larger alliances might decide space is not worth it and not be multi region

Forcing groups to grind systems in order to keep them is not a fun mechanic. You want to people to have an incentive to do something, not punish them for being too successful. Plus it doesn't even work well, if you wanted to have a buffer zone you could just let the space go and block anyone who tries to live there. It also gives an incentive for alliances to recruit as many people as possible (blob) so you can keep indexes up in every system they want to hold. It's a solution for the symptom. Bad space that an alliance doesn't want or isn't worthwhile to defend heavily would end up being taken by a smallholding alliance if it was worth it.

Large alliances already rule nullsec. How are they going to rule even more after changes are made? All of the isk in the world means nothing if you are not having fun, and large, rich groups not having fun will splinter. The fixes would allow for a new pathway to open up for progressively smaller blocs to jump into the fray, which is a Good Thing. At the very least there will be more targets for elite-pvp types to shoot up. Things can't get much worse than they already are in terms of coalition size.

There is very little to remove from nullsec because to be quite honest there is very little to take away from it in the first place without drastically changing nullsec life for the worse. When things get added, we can start talking about adjusting certain things. Namely local/dscan/intelligence gathering which is better off being discussed down the road because right now there are more important things to worry about.


Forcing groups to grind systems in order to keep them is not a fun mechanic. You want to people to have an incentive to do something, not punish them for being too successful. Plus it doesn't even work well, if you wanted to have a buffer zone you could just let the space go and block anyone who tries to live there. It also gives an incentive for alliances to recruit as many people as possible (blob) so you can keep indexes up in every system they want to hold. It's a solution for the symptom. Bad space that an alliance doesn't want or isn't worthwhile to defend heavily would end up being taken by a smallholding alliance if it was worth it.

Blobbing and ratting CTAs sound like fun. Also, we could always use more structure shooting. Eg: The rats set up a proper gate camp, complete with bubbles, instalocking ships and capitals waiting for a cyno. You must then kill their SBU, which, because NPCs are dumb, has 10x the EHP of a player SBU.

Supers might be a problem but they are also a lense. People want to be on the field longer than 12 seconds, they get in a Super. Every nerf, buff, expansion, patch has evaded the one constant in EVE. Nothing tanks below super capitals. For reasons unexplained, CCP have refused to make Defense a valid play style. We adapted and simply refuse to fight battles we deem not worth the loss or loss of no strategic value. They can have it two ways. Fights that don't always end in a kill mail or no fights. They choose no fights.

Me personally I think the numbers in TEST and Goonswarm are great, however the massive amount of unused space you have under Sov and the fact that you can and do minimize risk with bridges, titan bridges and jump ships, makes Null kind of pointless and a bit like a hi-sec suburb.

Well, this is due to the fact that damage don-¦t really reduces your ships capabilities. You are 100% effective until you explode. If your ship would be less and less effective with damage, slower, modules offlining and so on... then and only then the alpha strike would only be viable for VIP-targets, for the normal case a fleet with numerous damaged ships would be less effective than a fleet that is perfectly fine aside from losing one ship. Until damage will have an effect, fleet fights will remain alpha vs. logi.

The solution to the sov issue shouldn't be to put in place artificial limits, like a cap on sov systems you can take, a minimum military index, limiting the amount of players in an alliance, or to nerf/remove fast movement. They are only attempts at fixing symptoms. The solution is to address the problem head on. Make space worth holding for everybody.

Actually, very few of the systems we hold are never used. You can find activity going on in any of our systems each day.

The funny thing is, we aren't the bad guys in this whole "unused space" issue. It is an issue nullsec has, but we are hardly the worst offenders. But Nullsec == Goons for so many here.

Of the great nullsec empires, the in-game map only shows me one that keeps unclaimed space in its borders. And it ain't the GSF.

Our space is used, upgraded, and we even have our POCOs on the vast majority of the planets.

I've been playing since December 2007, so basically the start of 2008.

mining is (much) worse

do not forget that you also 'have to' mine stuff like gneiss and spodumain, picking the raisins does not work for anything that involves a group of players. it is also a major pain in the ass and very very expensive (a minmatar outpost and several amarr outposts, several towers, rorquals, and at least one JF if you actually want to mine and/or produce on a corporation or alliance basis)

[

Most people don't notice because, once into structure, they die faster than they notice the modules taking damage. Either that, or they are already overheating and not noticing the extra damage.

I've read alot of posts here today that go along in my direction. There is not enough penalty for ever growing numbers may it be corporations, alliances, coalitions or fleet fights.
Smaller is better!

Smaller is better!

EVE, you're best when you're alone.

Space: Cold, harsh, forever alone, elite solo.

Seems you found the smallest small there. No, not that small. But much smaller than the current numbers of the top 10 alliances.

so you mean mining in high-sec is much better? mining when you often can't just run 2+ cycles of strip miner because average asteroid tends to deplete?
I remember how i tried to mine in empire after 0.0: it was really painful because of small scattered roids. Quite a big difference with 0.0 when you sit semi-afk in one place mining 1 roid and droping your ore into can.

on the other side: how did it happen so ABC got so cheap? When i used to mine in 0.0 i remember ABC were giving quite nice profit above all other ores.

Goonswarm low to no use in the last 48 hours

http://evemaps.dotlan.net/system/XCBK-X

As to POCOs these are another set and forget idea, by use I mean mining, ratting, plex running ect...

I know that system. It is in an area we call "The Testagram". That particular system doesn't have the ratting upgrades, so you'll never see a lot of NPC kills in it. That does not mean that it isn't used.

Compare the NPC kills and other Index info in the neighboring systems, and you'll see that area in general is plenty used.

No point in setting them if people aren't going to actually do PI. People fly around all the time in industrials, getting the planet goo that often goes into making POS fuel and other stuff.

"The most successful alliances are supercapital blobs"

Dead wrong. Stopped reading.

Didn't even get THAT far. Saw OP, laughed at the vet part and left...

Yes the area in general is there are some areas (not goonswarm) where a section 3-4 systems wide is unused, as to xcbk-x it is still only used to go through as you can not do much activity without killing something.

What do you mean "not goonswarm"? All the systems in that area are owned by GSF.

Oh, and no one goes through xcbk-x for anything. Sometimes these out of the way systems are great for other purposes. And part of that they suck for other uses. That system only has 4 belts, so trying to rat or mine that system heavily to put in upgrades is near impossible.

What do you mean "not goonswarm"? All the systems in that area are owned by GSF.

Oh, and no one goes through xcbk-x for anything. Sometimes these out of the way systems are great for other purposes. And part of that they suck for other uses. That system only has 4 belts, so trying to rat or mine that system heavily to put in upgrades is near impossible.

You could try mining the belts to get a small grav site and then to upgrade, BUT.

Someone will cloaky camp you so it's just blahhh

stuff.

I've read alot of posts here today that go along in my direction. There is not enough penalty for ever growing numbers may it be corporations, alliances, coalitions or fleet fights.
Smaller is better!

But this is eve. There is no plot protection. Smaller isnt better. 100 dies to 1000.

we are arguing in circles

you can not nerf having friends, all you can do is provide content for small groups. myself and others have already listed some examples

Actually when I said area in general I was referring to Null.

4 belts is actually a reasonable number of man hours to mine out. But yes you are right the amount of hours requires of usage to get and maintain sov would need to be modified as a base value per system.

Or, you just end up going to some place that has more belts or what ever it takes to get to get the activity rolling for the upgrades. Hint, xcbk-x is very close to several system with both ratting and mining upgrades. Those that want to chew on spod with the hope of getting another batch of ABC's already have places to do it. The biggest impediment to mining in null right now is that you can make just as much on highsec ores, and arguably more since the mining buff curtailed most of the ganking. Seriously, the biggest complaint from highsec miners is possibly gettign bumped by James315's friends, if you happen to be in a few parts of Caldari space.

Crappy systems are a reality in Eve. And most people realize that making every system totally awesome, or even upgraded to be totally awesome, would also have downsides. If sov was tied strictly to usage, you would see powerful alliances cherry pick the best systems, and just be glad to not have to pay sov bills on the others. Up and coming corps that want to pick up those "unused" systems are never going to really worry about some group like GSF dropping supers on them. They'll fail because they can only grab the crappy systems and the small-gang PvP'ers will make life miserable even without the hotdrops.

It is one thing to deal with roams and gankers and afk cloakers when you have a system with tech moons, good true-sec, crokite in the betls, plasma and storm planets, and overall easy to upgrade. It's another if the moons just pay for fuel cost, bad true-sec, few belts that are no better than highsec ores, few and lower bounty rats, and a bunch of gas and barren planets.

Or, you just end up going to some place that has more belts or what ever it takes to get to get the activity rolling for the upgrades. Hint, xcbk-x is very close to several system with both ratting and mining upgrades. Those that want to chew on spod with the hope of getting another batch of ABC's already have places to do it. The biggest impediment to mining in null right now is that you can make just as much on highsec ores, and arguably more since the mining buff curtailed most of the ganking. Seriously, the biggest complaint from highsec miners is possibly gettign bumped by James315's friends, if you happen to be in a few parts of Caldari space.

Crappy systems are a reality in Eve. And most people realize that making every system totally awesome, or even upgraded to be totally awesome, would also have downsides. If sov was tied strictly to usage, you would see powerful alliances cherry pick the best systems, and just be glad to not have to pay sov bills on the others. Up and coming corps that want to pick up those "unused" systems are never going to really worry about some group like GSF dropping supers on them. They'll fail because they can only grab the crappy systems and the small-gang PvP'ers will make life miserable even without the hotdrops.

It is one thing to deal with roams and gankers and afk cloakers when you have a system with tech moons, good true-sec, crokite in the betls, plasma and storm planets, and overall easy to upgrade. It's another if the moons just pay for fuel cost, bad true-sec, few belts that are no better than highsec ores, few and lower bounty rats, and a bunch of gas and barren planets.

Crappy systems are a reality in Eve. And most people realize that making every system totally awesome, or even upgraded to be totally awesome, would also have downsides. If sov was tied strictly to usage, you would see powerful alliances cherry pick the best systems, and just be glad to not have to pay sov bills on the others. Up and coming corps that want to pick up those "unused" systems are never going to really worry about some group like GSF dropping supers on them. They'll fail because they can only grab the crappy systems and the small-gang PvP'ers will make life miserable even without the hotdrops.

It is one thing to deal with roams and gankers and afk cloakers when you have a system with tech moons, good true-sec, crokite in the betls, plasma and storm planets, and overall easy to upgrade. It's another if the moons just pay for fuel cost, bad true-sec, few belts that are no better than highsec ores, few and lower bounty rats, and a bunch of gas and barren planets.

But this is eve. There is no plot protection. Smaller isnt better. 100 dies to 1000.

you can not nerf having friends, all you can do is provide content for small groups. myself and others have already listed some examples

No, must nerf having friends because of blobbers and blue lists, these are killing eve. Why can't you understand ?

Do you really know all your "friends" within Goonswarm Federation? Nearly 9000 characters the equivalent of a small town.
Do you know all your "friends" within GoonWaffe? Nearly 4000 characters which is still alot.

You must spend all your time keeping in touch with them.
If you ask me, i highly doubt that you really know 25% of them in the sense of friend.

I don't know every player's cyno alt, no. But thankfully, we're all able to cooperate and have fun shooting structures with the help of some boat stories.

I know, you jealous we have fun. Sorry.

The way nullsec is now is a result of player controled content

the players made the blob to adapt to enemys
the players made coalitions to adapt to enemys
the players adapted the sov to meet they own needs

0.0 is just moon warfare or evicting for lulz/power trip

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

so basically the start of 2008.

lol who am i kidding?

CCP was right, titans were rare.

But then blobs happened Blobs... of titans.

actually kinda funny really the titan and original DD were meant to stop blobs now they have become part of the blob

It was pretty much inevitable.

suppose we can thank BoB for that

biggest problem is that supers just dont die often enough, i'd like to see them seriously lower their tanking ability but also really cut the price, maybe just have like double a carriers tank for moms but lower the cost to 5 bill then a titan could be say 4x a carriers tank with a cost of around 10 bill

that will make sure they die as people wont be as scared to lose them plus smaller alliances could afford them which will allow them to actually attempt to fight the blob

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

Yoru modules can get damaged and knocked out once you start taking structure damage.

Most people don't notice because, once into structure, they die faster than they notice the modules taking damage. Either that, or they are already overheating and not noticing the extra damage.

Remove the alliance mechanic from the game. It kills the competitiveness and fosters inertia/mass.