EVE Search - EVE's summer expansion better focus on sovereignty

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

EVE's summer expansion better focus on sovereignty

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 3461	Posted - 2013.01.23 16:44:00 - [61] - Quote Ranger 1 wrote: CCP wants to develop themes for their expansions that touch on many area's of play, which is an excellent idea. I'd personally like to see the next theme be "Make it your own", which would include ownership and customization of the things you own (Your Avatar, your CQ, your POS, your Outpost, your Sov, your ship). I think that would encompass many of the more pressing, more desired, and more interesting area's currently being discussed. 0/10 Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm Want to enable BBcode on the forums? Here's how.
JD No7 Malevolent Intentions Ineluctable. 16	Posted - 2013.01.23 16:51:00 - [62] - Quote Benny Ohu wrote: JD No7 wrote: atm? you haven't thought this through I did start typing about small gangs / corps being able to knock over POS defences quite easily, but deleted it. So yes I thought about it, but didn't want to get into an argument about the specifics. I still believe it would help in hte short term to make something happen. It matters little though what we say on this subject though, it seems. I hold CPP in the highest regard, but their dismissal of the Tech situation for a number of years and the monsters it has created leaves a very sour taste.
Ranger 1 Ranger Corp 3384	Posted - 2013.01.23 16:57:00 - [63] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: Ranger 1 wrote: CCP wants to develop themes for their expansions that touch on many area's of play, which is an excellent idea. I'd personally like to see the next theme be "Make it your own", which would include ownership and customization of the things you own (Your Avatar, your CQ, your POS, your Outpost, your Sov, your ship). I think that would encompass many of the more pressing, more desired, and more interesting area's currently being discussed. 0/10 You aren't having a very good day today are you James. In case it escaped you this would include things such as getting, holding, and enhancing territories you have (or want to have) Sov in... as well as modular, customizable POS's and Outposts... and other more personal things. Obviously this would encompass more than one expansion and would touch on every player in all area's of space, but that is rather the whole idea of a theme. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base.
March rabbit Aliastra 504	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:07:00 - [64] - Quote Xpaulusx wrote: I smell an unsub riot coming soon if somethings not done with Sov. This is now gotton so rediculously out of control that it is now hurting the game. CCP better wake up and smell the coffee before they have a repeat of thousands ubsubing. Nevermind the new ships, eyecandy, and other crap, start addressing issues that hurt the game, Sov being the main one. that was WORDS OF MAN
Toku Jiang Jiang Laboratories and Discovery 138	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:08:00 - [65] - Quote The sov structure grind is terrible. It needs a big rework and it has kept me out of null for the past 2 years as I got sick of deploying my dread on timer fleets to go blow crap up that doesn't shoot back and no one defends. Boring as all hell.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. 1531	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:11:00 - [66] - Quote Sov mechanics changed to what? That is complete this sentence: "A Sov mechanic that would be fun and interesting instead of a boring grind would be......." http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 3461	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:12:00 - [67] - Quote Vincent Athena wrote: Sov mechanics changed to what? That is complete this sentence: "A Sov mechanic that would be fun and interesting instead of a boring grind would be......." I'm sure CCP can think of something. Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm Want to enable BBcode on the forums? Here's how.
De'Veldrin East India Ore Trade The East India Co. 786	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:16:00 - [68] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: Vincent Athena wrote: Sov mechanics changed to what? That is complete this sentence: "A Sov mechanic that would be fun and interesting instead of a boring grind would be......." I'm sure CCP can think of something. They'd damned sure better, or Eve may really be dying this time. The Margin Trading Scam: If you fell for it, it's your own damned fault. Malcanis for CSM 8
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 3461	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:19:00 - [69] - Quote De'Veldrin wrote: James Amril-Kesh wrote: Vincent Athena wrote: Sov mechanics changed to what? That is complete this sentence: "A Sov mechanic that would be fun and interesting instead of a boring grind would be......." I'm sure CCP can think of something. They'd damned sure better, or Eve may really be dying this time. Well I never said that EVE would die because of sov mechanics, but it sure is one of the biggest flaws in the game at the moment. Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm Want to enable BBcode on the forums? Here's how.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. 1531	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:20:00 - [70] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: Vincent Athena wrote: Sov mechanics changed to what? That is complete this sentence: "A Sov mechanic that would be fun and interesting instead of a boring grind would be......." I'm sure CCP can think of something. Last time they thought of something we got TCUs. IHUBs, and so on. Maybe we should think of something. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/

Natsett Amuinn GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1660	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:26:00 - [71] - Quote I want them to make all of 2013 about sov. A new system for high sec, and improvement for null. Summer gets null sov fixes, including improvements to system upgrades; which could lay the foundation for a new station control system in high sec in the winter.
De'Veldrin East India Ore Trade The East India Co. 787	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:26:00 - [72] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: De'Veldrin wrote: They'd damned sure better, or Eve may really be dying this time. Well I never said that EVE would die because of sov mechanics, but it sure is one of the biggest flaws in the game at the moment. The real problem is the lack of room in which to build your own empire. Even systems that don't have people living in them are claimed by large alliances, and a lot of newer players are looking at that space, and at the promises that Eve makes of being able to control your own space empire, and they're feeling, frankly, like they were suckered. There's nowhere for a small alliance to build up without at least tacit approval from one of the major power blocks (discounting WH space, and even that has its issues with alliances like K162). It's becoming harder and harder for the little guy to make a start, and that feeling of disenfranchisement will kill Eve a lot faster than anything else due to lost subscriptions, and the lack of new blood. Eve needs PvP - it needs conflict to survive. But it needs room for the new players of today to become the bittervets of tomorrow - and to do it on their own terms, not on terms dictated to them by coalitions so large that no one can challenge them because there just aren't enough players in the game to do so. Vincent Athena wrote: James Amril-Kesh wrote: Vincent Athena wrote: Sov mechanics changed to what? That is complete this sentence: "A Sov mechanic that would be fun and interesting instead of a boring grind would be......." I'm sure CCP can think of something. Last time they thought of something we got TCUs. IHUBs, and so on. Maybe we should think of something. Quoted for truth. The Margin Trading Scam: If you fell for it, it's your own damned fault. Malcanis for CSM 8
Fredric Wolf BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team 0	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:50:00 - [73] - Quote Said it before and will say it again. Make moon mining an extension of PI that way it is ground up taxed like so many players want and gets rid of some of the POS clutter we have. It also allows DUST players and smaller entities to affect an alliances cash flow. Plus this will also stop alliances using systems on the way out reaches of space. Planetary Hubs will be the new conflict point in systems and wars can rage in 0.0 and null sec alike. Needs a POS overhaul soon so people in Null are able to build and sustain themselves better then having to jump everything in from Jita.
Vincent Athena V.I.C.E. 1532	Posted - 2013.01.23 17:57:00 - [74] - Quote Null certainly need to be able to mine what they want and build what they want. Right now the grav sits dictate what is mined and they cannot install sufficient manufacturing lines. But that's industry. How about Sov? I concocted an influence system loosely modeled on the influence you see in an incursion area. One where player activity gave you influence and with enough you can claim sov. But its been poorly received. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 631	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:09:00 - [75] - Quote Malcanis wrote: Make it viable for 0.0 players to actually live* in 0.0 by reworking outposts so that we can upgrade them to match NPC systems. Careful you're treading on the ~highsec intellectual~'s toes here. We can't have a functioning nullsec because its not supposed to be a functioning nullsec. This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team.
La Nariz GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 631	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:12:00 - [76] - Quote Mayhaw Morgan wrote: YES WE DO! acta non verba Here's my question: If 0.0 is such a terrible place, why don't you just leave? If there are such better options, then leave null to the people who think it rocks. We do leave nullsec, for example I have all of my isk making alts in highsec and only log on for essential tasks/fleets. I'm on my highsec awoxing alt more than I am on my main. This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team.
Artimis Scout Wormhole Cartography 5	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:13:00 - [77] - Quote Meh keep it the same. Right now the only 2 groups of people this is affecting are Goons and Test. Let them get bored and quit. After enough quit they won't be able to hold the space as others swoop in and take it. War will be had. Sounds like this a self correcting problem.
Natsett Amuinn GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1663	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:14:00 - [78] - Quote If sov supported the little guys ability to hold sov and survive in null, fewer corporations would be encouraged to grow. Currently sov is a reason to really grow your corp and alliance. Small guys need ownership of something tha tthey can use to allow them to interact in a way with the big guys. The PoS revamp would have provided this if players could attach a jump drive device on a PoS and put it in someone's space for staging. The big guys need some way to drive large fights. The structure grind is discouraging this, and most people seem to agree that blowing up ships for the sake of blowing up ships isn't something isn't something that most people want to do. I do not think CCP can really "fix" the sov grind, I have a feeling it's neccesary for balancing reasons. I feel like they need conflict drivers that aren't tied to sov. I think people will fight for ownership of something, just to have ownership of it. I don't think moons are really needed to drive people into wanting to claim sov, and that's a part of what they seem to be for. Messing with moons sounds like a really easy way to for CCP to screw up some aspects of EVE's economy, and they don't want to do that. They may just need to come up with some new form of a conflict driver. Something that's worth fighting over with large fleets, but doesn't require you to flip sov, and provides line members some kind of passive benefit. Off the wall thought below. Maybe something like a station "embassy" that a corporation can install in one system, that will have an effect in a number of adjacent ones. The corporation can use it to create NPC supply routes that generate PvE content through several systems, using a single destructible object. It could create NPC cargo ships that "attract" NPC rats. "Red" and "blue" NPC's. One group feeds on the rats, the other group the cargo ships and "embassy" itself; as well as, obviously, the ratters. Make it content that will support a large number of people. Make it pay well. Make the "bllue" NPC getting destroyed cause the "red" NPC to pay less. Have it provide small level of passive income to the corporation, but not "significant" that it's generating to much isk, or be considered harmful if lost. Tie activity to standing, like having an "embassy" destroyed causes the corporation to lose an amount of standing with the appropriate faction. Basically, it needs to be things that people can benefit from at both the line member level and at the corporate level.
No More Heroes GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 2154	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:19:00 - [79] - Quote Docter Daniel Jackson wrote: I know this is a noobie thing to ask, but what u you get from 0.0 space anyways? other then planets moons and belts. anything worth fighting over? Not really. Technetium was the conflict driver, so we monopolized and cartelled it. CCP nerfed it, its still pretty good but not enough for someone to invade us over. So no, there is nothing worth fighting for other than taking a dump on someones porch and the amount of poopsocking, shooting inanimate objects, waiting, blueballing and alarm-clocking you gotta do is not worth it. fix sov CSM Winter 2012 Summit Minutes- "On the subject of vanity items, Two step expressed many player's desire to be able to build a ***** in-áspace."
handige harrie Hedion University Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:25:00 - [80] - Quote No More Heroes wrote: Docter Daniel Jackson wrote: I know this is a noobie thing to ask, but what u you get from 0.0 space anyways? other then planets moons and belts. anything worth fighting over? Not really. Technetium was the conflict driver, so we monopolized and cartelled it. CCP nerfed it, its still pretty good but not enough for someone to invade us over. So no, there is nothing worth fighting for other than taking a dump on someones porch and the amount of poopsocking, shooting inanimate objects, waiting, blueballing and alarm-clocking you gotta do is not worth it. fix sov Even with a new SOV system it would get (ab)e it as unfun for your enemies to attack as you can, a new system isn't gonna change that it's the most efficient way to fight. CFC has nobody to blame for there boredom but themselves. Baddest poster ever

Gianna Thirostin State War Academy Caldari State 6	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:25:00 - [81] - Quote No More Heroes wrote: Docter Daniel Jackson wrote: I know this is a noobie thing to ask, but what u you get from 0.0 space anyways? other then planets moons and belts. anything worth fighting over? Not really. Technetium was the conflict driver, so we monopolized and cartelled it. CCP nerfed it, its still pretty good but not enough for someone to invade us over. Player generated content causing nulls "problems". Fix yourselves. Whining to CCP because you caused the problem makes you look like an entitled child.
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 3465	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:28:00 - [82] - Quote Gianna Thirostin wrote: No More Heroes wrote: Docter Daniel Jackson wrote: I know this is a noobie thing to ask, but what u you get from 0.0 space anyways? other then planets moons and belts. anything worth fighting over? Not really. Technetium was the conflict driver, so we monopolized and cartelled it. CCP nerfed it, its still pretty good but not enough for someone to invade us over. Player generated content causing nulls "problems". Fix yourselves. Whining to CCP because you caused the problem makes you look like an entitled child. We didn't cause the game mechanics to be as they are, and the game mechanics are the problem. Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm Want to enable BBcode on the forums? Here's how.
Nicolo da'Vicenza Air The Unthinkables 2621	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:31:00 - [83] - Quote flakeys wrote: Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote: this sov problem didn't seem to stop your alliance from the conquest of mighty Cobalt Edge mere weeks ago hmmmm It's only a problem when they are not 100% sure they win , they have come to the point where it is inevitable to risk a loss now , how amusingly ironic sov system sucks though so i'll roll with this thread until sov is fixed then the big two can find new excuses not to fight later
Natsett Amuinn GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1663	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:31:00 - [84] - Quote Gianna Thirostin wrote: No More Heroes wrote: Docter Daniel Jackson wrote: I know this is a noobie thing to ask, but what u you get from 0.0 space anyways? other then planets moons and belts. anything worth fighting over? Not really. Technetium was the conflict driver, so we monopolized and cartelled it. CCP nerfed it, its still pretty good but not enough for someone to invade us over. Player generated content causing nulls "problems". Fix yourselves. Whining to CCP because you caused the problem makes you look like an entitled child. There's a huge amount of difference between causing a problem, and the majority of people who would be engaging in an activity pointing out a problem. What you see is, most of the people who would be doing the structure grinding for sov, don't like it. NOT the minority group. They didn't like it the 1st time, the 2nd time, the 3rd time. Everytime they do it, they ***** about it. There's a patern here. Are you that guy that sees the stray animal backed into a corner hissing at you, and thinks it's to cute not to pet?
handige harrie Hedion University Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:32:00 - [85] - Quote James Amril-Kesh wrote: Gianna Thirostin wrote: No More Heroes wrote: Docter Daniel Jackson wrote: I know this is a noobie thing to ask, but what u you get from 0.0 space anyways? other then planets moons and belts. anything worth fighting over? Not really. Technetium was the conflict driver, so we monopolized and cartelled it. CCP nerfed it, its still pretty good but not enough for someone to invade us over. Player generated content causing nulls "problems". Fix yourselves. Whining to CCP because you caused the problem makes you look like an entitled child. We didn't cause the game mechanics to be as they are, and the game mechanics are the problem. Weird, as I look down to SOLAR space, they seem to be having a ball regularly, no problems with game mechanics there... You're just to scared to lose stuff, that's why you don't do anything, this hasn't anything to do with game mechanics and everything with attitude. , which game mechanics can't fix. Baddest poster ever
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 7335	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:36:00 - [86] - Quote Artimis Scout wrote: Meh keep it the same. Right now the only 2 groups of people this is affecting are Goons and Test. Let them get bored and quit. After enough quit they won't be able to hold the space as others swoop in and take it... And find out for themselves that we're not making this ** up. Oh boy, your faces will be a picture "We ground this **ing station system for a week to get HOW MANY OFFICE SLOTS?" Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 7335	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:37:00 - [87] - Quote handige harrie wrote: James Amril-Kesh wrote: Gianna Thirostin wrote: No More Heroes wrote: Docter Daniel Jackson wrote: I know this is a noobie thing to ask, but what u you get from 0.0 space anyways? other then planets moons and belts. anything worth fighting over? Not really. Technetium was the conflict driver, so we monopolized and cartelled it. CCP nerfed it, its still pretty good but not enough for someone to invade us over. Player generated content causing nulls "problems". Fix yourselves. Whining to CCP because you caused the problem makes you look like an entitled child. We didn't cause the game mechanics to be as they are, and the game mechanics are the problem. Weird, as I look down to SOLAR space, they seem to be having a ball regularly, no problems with game mechanics there... the CFC is scared to lose stuff, that's why they don't do anything, this hasn't anything to do with game mechanics and everything with attitude, which game mechanics can't fix. Please remember to stay on-message here: 0.0 is all one big blue donut and no fighting occurrs. Vote for Malcanis for CSM8 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=192717&find=unread
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 3465	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:53:00 - [88] - Quote That reminds me, I have something to add to my signature... Malcanis for CSM 8 Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm
Gianna Thirostin State War Academy Caldari State 6	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:55:00 - [89] - Quote Every complaint about sov can be boiled down to one key idea: boredom. "Structure grinding sucks" "null is a nap/nip fest" "theres no conflict drivers" et al. Boredom caused by the current state of null politics (aka player generated content). If you wanted to bring a war, theres no game mechanic prohibiting it. People being "too bored" to engage in an activity doesnt mean the problem is a mechanic, just that you feel it isnt worth your time/effort (which is also a player-generated decision)
James Amril-Kesh 4S Corporation RAZOR Alliance 3467	Posted - 2013.01.23 18:59:00 - [90] - Quote Well it is, because, you know, conflict is supposed to be fun... Malcanis for CSM 8 Phrases like "you can't nerf / buff X EVE is a Sandbox" have the same amount of meaning as "If this is a sack of potatoes then you can not carrot." - Alara IonStorm



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .. 19 :: 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.