|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page | |
| Author | Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
 James Lyrus    |
Posted - 2005.10.14 08:37:00 -
[91] I've moved into 0.0 recently. I'm rather liking it. My only minor gripe is that '0.0' doesn't automatically imply 'better than empire'. We get better rats, but there's whole constellations where the best ore is omber/kernite. 12 jumps from the nearest refinery, for stuff that can be mined in empire _really_ isn't worth it. Now I'm not saying that every system should be brimming with Arkonor and Mercoxit, but I _do_ think there should be a notably higher ratio of 'low sec' ores. (Jaspet, Hemamorphite, Hedbergite etc.) But this is just a whinge. I have a couple of starbases, where I live. I'm doing quite well between those and going ratting. Which is nice. |
 James Lyrus Lyrus Associates Betrayal Under Mayhem |
Posted - 2005.10.14 08:37:00 -
[92] I've moved into 0.0 recently. I'm rather liking it. My only minor gripe is that '0.0' doesn't automatically imply 'better than empire'. We get better rats, but there's whole constellations where the best ore is omber/kernite. 12 jumps from the nearest refinery, for stuff that can be mined in empire _really_ isn't worth it. Now I'm not saying that every system should be brimming with Arkonor and Mercoxit, but I _do_ think there should be a notably higher ratio of 'low sec' ores. (Jaspet, Hemamorphite, Hedbergite etc.) But this is just a whinge. I have a couple of starbases, where I live. I'm doing quite well between those and going ratting. Which is nice. |
 TotensBurntCorpse |
Posted - 2005.10.14 16:41:00 -
[93]
Arlon - I didnt mean to make you not do your missions, but what if the level 4 agents were based in NPC bases in the dodge city islands? I think you convince yourself what would get you do 0.0, alot more access routes, something I "blab" about in my posting. As to joining an alliance I agree to a point. Everyone has personal preferences. Mine would be to see alliances be numerous and on the smaller side rather than the mega side which tends to be the majority of 0.0. IMHO alliances are nations, and the more the merrier. As in the real world mega alliances or superpowers are very upsetting to game play. TotensBurntCorpse Likes EVE, Starfleet Command Series, Earth & Beyond, Anything Battlefield, MOHAA, Call of Duty. Dislikes Not much. |
 TotensBurntCorpse Minmatar Miners of Moria Corp |
Posted - 2005.10.14 16:41:00 -
[94]
Arlon - I didnt mean to make you not do your missions, but what if the level 4 agents were based in NPC bases in the dodge city islands? I think you convince yourself what would get you do 0.0, alot more access routes, something I "blab" about in my posting. As to joining an alliance I agree to a point. Everyone has personal preferences. Mine would be to see alliances be numerous and on the smaller side rather than the mega side which tends to be the majority of 0.0. IMHO alliances are nations, and the more the merrier. As in the real world mega alliances or superpowers are very upsetting to game play. TotensBurntCorpse Likes EVE, Starfleet Command Series, Earth & Beyond, Anything Battlefield, MOHAA, Call of Duty. Dislikes Not much. |
 Aralon |
Posted - 2005.10.14 19:44:00 -
[95]
Even if you had safe zones in 0.0 space there is still the problem of getting to them. I do not happen to have a problem with people trying to claim space. My problem is that most of the space that is claimed is unused and everyone is forced into Empire unless they wish to join the Alliances. This is sort of defeating the purpose of a 0.0 "lawless" space. The law now is join us, pay us, or stay in Empire. The majority of players in Eve reside in Empire space not because it is a fluffy carebear mass. They reside there because they do not like the alternative 0.0 life. This life being Alliances. We get what we want being in Empire. The solution as I see it is to make the Alliances personally responsible for what happens in thier so called borders. If someone is shot down tribute should be paid to the Empire that lost a ship. If tribute is refused the affronted Empire should declare war on said Alliance. This would up the stakes for the Alliances to peacably work out the situation. It would also allow for a serious player driven roleplaying situation in the Empires and Alliances. In additon, if you add in hundreds of access points it would force Alliances to actually size down thier borders to meet thier size. Also, throw in bonuses for working peacably (ie- limited concord patrols, cash bonuses for assisting empires with alliance problems, advanced technologies offered for the same assistance). Give these new nations help if they help you. That is what a risk/reward scenario would look like in terms of building a nation. How could this be done? Adjust the current standings system to corp and alliance levels. Ship kills to any particular race go toward that empire unless said person is attached to an alliance. Alliance aggressors lose standing of said Empire until a Kill on Sight order is issued by that Empire. Bounties offered for player kills of offending groups. Of course, Empire aggressors lose standing with thier Empire and Alliances. Recycled alts rules would apply toward griefers in Empire and Alliance corps. With this done you add in the access points. What is accomplished with this system? 1)Alliances are forced to take responsibility for thier members actions. 2)Empire players are given another 0.0 option. 3)Alliances are forced to control thier borders at the cost of an all out war. 4)Alliances are rewarded for controlling thier borders in a peaceful and neighborly way. 5)Alliances are rewarded for helping Empire within thier means. For people saying that this is too harsh on the Alliances... They want to be a nation let them have the benefits and pitfalls of being a nation. But what do I know? |
 Aralon |
Posted - 2005.10.14 19:44:00 -
[96]
Even if you had safe zones in 0.0 space there is still the problem of getting to them. I do not happen to have a problem with people trying to claim space. My problem is that most of the space that is claimed is unused and everyone is forced into Empire unless they wish to join the Alliances. This is sort of defeating the purpose of a 0.0 "lawless" space. The law now is join us, pay us, or stay in Empire. The majority of players in Eve reside in Empire space not because it is a fluffy carebear mass. They reside there because they do not like the alternative 0.0 life. This life being Alliances. We get what we want being in Empire. The solution as I see it is to make the Alliances personally responsible for what happens in thier so called borders. If someone is shot down tribute should be paid to the Empire that lost a ship. If tribute is refused the affronted Empire should declare war on said Alliance. This would up the stakes for the Alliances to peacably work out the situation. It would also allow for a serious player driven roleplaying situation in the Empires and Alliances. In additon, if you add in hundreds of access points it would force Alliances to actually size down thier borders to meet thier size. Also, throw in bonuses for working peacably (ie- limited concord patrols, cash bonuses for assisting empires with alliance problems, advanced technologies offered for the same assistance). Give these new nations help if they help you. That is what a risk/reward scenario would look like in terms of building a nation. How could this be done? Adjust the current standings system to corp and alliance levels. Ship kills to any particular race go toward that empire unless said person is attached to an alliance. Alliance aggressors lose standing of said Empire until a Kill on Sight order is issued by that Empire. Bounties offered for player kills of offending groups. Of course, Empire aggressors lose standing with thier Empire and Alliances. Recycled alts rules would apply toward griefers in Empire and Alliance corps. With this done you add in the access points. What is accomplished with this system? 1)Alliances are forced to take responsibility for thier members actions. 2)Empire players are given another 0.0 option. 3)Alliances are forced to control thier borders at the cost of an all out war. 4)Alliances are rewarded for controlling thier borders in a peaceful and neighborly way. 5)Alliances are rewarded for helping Empire within thier means. For people saying that this is too harsh on the Alliances... They want to be a nation let them have the benefits and pitfalls of being a nation. But what do I know? |
 TotensBurntCorpse |
Posted - 2005.10.14 20:39:00 -
[97] I dont disagree. I do think alliances are somewhat functional but not to the level of being nations. That would take quite a bit more discussion. Unfortunately IMHO most wildspace is deemed to be KOS space which doesnt promote much in the way of nationhood wrt trade exploration teamwork etc unless ur part of the alliance where u work. If you model reality then an alliance is a country made up of member corporations each of which could be similar in abilities or also complimentry in abilities. Each corporation adds to the health of the nationstate promoting internal interaction and also international interaction. But due to the current size and make up of alliances as they stand you see entire regions being claimed, but not administered effectively with the gun point and pilot mob being the ruling factors. The map logistics and conflict rules limit the ability for fledgeling micro alliances to form. TotensBurntCorpse Likes EVE, Starfleet Command Series, Earth & Beyond, Anything Battlefield, MOHAA, Call of Duty. Dislikes Not much. |
TotensBurntCorpse Minmatar Miners of Moria Corp |
Posted - 2005.10.14 20:39:00 -
[98] I dont disagree. I do think alliances are somewhat functional but not to the level of being nations. That would take quite a bit more discussion. Unfortunately IMHO most wildspace is deemed to be KOS space which doesnt promote much in the way of nationhood wrt trade exploration teamwork etc unless ur part of the alliance where u work. If you model reality then an alliance is a country made up of member corporations each of which could be similar in abilities or also complimentry in abilities. Each corporation adds to the health of the nationstate promoting internal interaction and also international interaction. But due to the current size and make up of alliances as they stand you see entire regions being claimed, but not administered effectively with the gun point and pilot mob being the ruling factors. The map logistics and conflict rules limit the ability for fledgeling micro alliances to form. TotensBurntCorpse Likes EVE, Starfleet Command Series, Earth & Beyond, Anything Battlefield, MOHAA, Call of Duty. Dislikes Not much. |
 Karrihn |
Posted - 2005.10.14 20:47:00 -
[99] I have read all the posts, <phew> a very heated topic. 0.0 space is a place that is void of law, rules regulations and general warm and fuzzy feelings. Alliances attempt to claim 0.0 space, in essence atempt to exert control over a region/sector. This is an act that indicates that someone is attempting to bring law to a lawless area. The current game mechanics only allow for a might makes right form of control. Which does not attract anyone except those that subscribe to that way of thinking. here is my idea: Make it possible for an "alliance" to become a "nation". So we would have Caldari,armarr, minmatar, gallante and "new nation/faction etc" Then from there allow other players to become "citezens" of that nation. The leader(s) of the founding alliance become the first Rulers of that nation. Every law or rule that is imposed or enforced in an empire system is available to this new nation. Perhaps to varying degrees. The nation will collect taxes from sales and bounties etc... and that would be put into a national treasury. From there it would be used to provide security forces, stricter enforcement of laws, support the construction of stations with services etc... The idea should support the idea of elections and things that involve somthing other than mere Pain and loss. It should start on a scale of putting up a station that governs a single system. Then, when a stabilized government for a system is established, would pave the way to expand to a neighboring system. All this would be made possible by enticing the population out of empire with the possibility of greener pastures. This is what drove the settling of all of the United states. Hope, a new begining a better existence than what is possible staying where you are. I'm not saying that any joe should be able to fly out there and start a new nation or anything like that. It would be too expensive for a ity-bity corp like mine. But as a corp we could decide to trade our national identity for another. It would then be beneficial for more people to be a part of somthing that could very well be better than the existing empire. This idea incorporates both the need for Millitary might and the need to call out for the average joe to join you. It also has the idea that there is somthing for the buyers, the builders, traders and politicians. Fighters for conquering/securing space. Politicians to govern. traders,miners,builders etc... to provide the means to grow. The idea of corporations and alliances are great ideas. but I sense many of the vetran players are wanting more than being a part of MegaCorpXXX and playing ping-pong with each other. Tired of Blasting ice and rocks, in order to play more ping-pong. My Idea is by no means complete or all inclusive, more of a vision of what kind of new challege that could be introduced. A vison that would be the greatest challenge to the most seasoned EVE veterans: To make a real, possibly permanent change to the face of EVE, involving the monumental task of bringing together more than a mass of ships bristling with weaponry. Instead, bring a mass of PEOPLE bristling with skills and products. To protect them to make somthing better than anything else seen in EVE today. The ESTABLISHMENT of a new entity. I know the thought of being part of somthing, that had a REAL affect on EVE, would serioulsy compel me to uproot and move out. The Destruction of your ship is usually preceeded by the thought,"I think I will try somthing a little different this time...." |
 Karrihn Caldari Black Company |
Posted - 2005.10.14 20:47:00 -
[100] I have read all the posts, <phew> a very heated topic. 0.0 space is a place that is void of law, rules regulations and general warm and fuzzy feelings. Alliances attempt to claim 0.0 space, in essence atempt to exert control over a region/sector. This is an act that indicates that someone is attempting to bring law to a lawless area. The current game mechanics only allow for a might makes right form of control. Which does not attract anyone except those that subscribe to that way of thinking. here is my idea: Make it possible for an "alliance" to become a "nation". So we would have Caldari,armarr, minmatar, gallante and "new nation/faction etc" Then from there allow other players to become "citezens" of that nation. The leader(s) of the founding alliance become the first Rulers of that nation. Every law or rule that is imposed or enforced in an empire system is available to this new nation. Perhaps to varying degrees. The nation will collect taxes from sales and bounties etc... and that would be put into a national treasury. From there it would be used to provide security forces, stricter enforcement of laws, support the construction of stations with services etc... The idea should support the idea of elections and things that involve somthing other than mere Pain and loss. It should start on a scale of putting up a station that governs a single system. Then, when a stabilized government for a system is established, would pave the way to expand to a neighboring system. All this would be made possible by enticing the population out of empire with the possibility of greener pastures. This is what drove the settling of all of the United states. Hope, a new begining a better existence than what is possible staying where you are. I'm not saying that any joe should be able to fly out there and start a new nation or anything like that. It would be too expensive for a ity-bity corp like mine. But as a corp we could decide to trade our national identity for another. It would then be beneficial for more people to be a part of somthing that could very well be better than the existing empire. This idea incorporates both the need for Millitary might and the need to call out for the average joe to join you. It also has the idea that there is somthing for the buyers, the builders, traders and politicians. Fighters for conquering/securing space. Politicians to govern. traders,miners,builders etc... to provide the means to grow. The idea of corporations and alliances are great ideas. but I sense many of the vetran players are wanting more than being a part of MegaCorpXXX and playing ping-pong with each other. Tired of Blasting ice and rocks, in order to play more ping-pong. My Idea is by no means complete or all inclusive, more of a vision of what kind of new challege that could be introduced. A vison that would be the greatest challenge to the most seasoned EVE veterans: To make a real, possibly permanent change to the face of EVE, involving the monumental task of bringing together more than a mass of ships bristling with weaponry. Instead, bring a mass of PEOPLE bristling with skills and products. To protect them to make somthing better than anything else seen in EVE today. The ESTABLISHMENT of a new entity. I know the thought of being part of somthing, that had a REAL affect on EVE, would serioulsy compel me to uproot and move out. The Destruction of your ship is usually preceeded by the thought,"I think I will try somthing a little different this time...." |
 Aralon |
Posted - 2005.10.14 22:09:00 -
[101]
I wish that map logistics and conflict rules were the only things limiting the micro alliances to form. The biggest problem in that is when no power exists in an area anarchy takes over. In turn anarchy forms into a militaristic form of government. Which really is what an alliance is. He with the biggest stick makes the rules. Map logistics wouldn't be a problem if the alliance was dealing with an area that they could police. Instead they take an eighth of the galaxy with a couple hundred people and say this is mine. The only mechanism allowing this at the current time is a limited number of access points. More access points means that a true map logistics nightmare occurs. This will force alliances to shrink in on themselves in order to retain control of just about any area. Hence, the number of members in an alliance would help to dictate thier regional effect. Unfortunately you are correct in your judgement of conflict rules. They suck. There is not a whole lot of middle ground for a defender. Destroy or be destroyed. Items such as warp bubbles are trying to deal with it in a small way. This leads back to Empire standing settings for Alliances. It could even be expanded to deal with Alliance vs. Alliance conflicts. This would lead to more negotiation for inter-regional conflicts. Imagine an alliance that could issue Alliance wide bounties with all friendly groups (Alliance and Empire). If you offered a 1 million bounty on every killed member of an opposing Alliance a lot of solo mercanaries would at least go find shuttles, indies, and barges in that Alliances territory to destroy. This could lead to economic collapse for an Alliance. Of course it could also lead to Eve-wide war. But, a lot of people would find it intresting.  |
Aralon |
Posted - 2005.10.14 22:09:00 -
[102]
I wish that map logistics and conflict rules were the only things limiting the micro alliances to form. The biggest problem in that is when no power exists in an area anarchy takes over. In turn anarchy forms into a militaristic form of government. Which really is what an alliance is. He with the biggest stick makes the rules. Map logistics wouldn't be a problem if the alliance was dealing with an area that they could police. Instead they take an eighth of the galaxy with a couple hundred people and say this is mine. The only mechanism allowing this at the current time is a limited number of access points. More access points means that a true map logistics nightmare occurs. This will force alliances to shrink in on themselves in order to retain control of just about any area. Hence, the number of members in an alliance would help to dictate thier regional effect. Unfortunately you are correct in your judgement of conflict rules. They suck. There is not a whole lot of middle ground for a defender. Destroy or be destroyed. Items such as warp bubbles are trying to deal with it in a small way. This leads back to Empire standing settings for Alliances. It could even be expanded to deal with Alliance vs. Alliance conflicts. This would lead to more negotiation for inter-regional conflicts. Imagine an alliance that could issue Alliance wide bounties with all friendly groups (Alliance and Empire). If you offered a 1 million bounty on every killed member of an opposing Alliance a lot of solo mercanaries would at least go find shuttles, indies, and barges in that Alliances territory to destroy. This could lead to economic collapse for an Alliance. Of course it could also lead to Eve-wide war. But, a lot of people would find it intresting. |
 Vaaliant |
Posted - 2005.10.15 01:27:00 -
[103] Its not just having gates that causes people to not go into 0.0. Its the fact that implants are sooo damn expensive and are non-removable unless you want to lose them. A person with a 100 million all the way up to 1 billion worth of implants usually doesn't like losing them to the gate gankers that usually infest the 0.0 entrances. Which in turn makes it so that ANYONE who has even 1-4 implants tends to avoid 0.0 space as well. If CCP would just make it so that an implant can be removed a certain number of times before it has to be replaced they would increase the number of people willing to go venture into deepspace by a huge margin. |
 Vaaliant |
Posted - 2005.10.15 01:27:00 -
[104] Its not just having gates that causes people to not go into 0.0. Its the fact that implants are sooo damn expensive and are non-removable unless you want to lose them. A person with a 100 million all the way up to 1 billion worth of implants usually doesn't like losing them to the gate gankers that usually infest the 0.0 entrances. Which in turn makes it so that ANYONE who has even 1-4 implants tends to avoid 0.0 space as well. If CCP would just make it so that an implant can be removed a certain number of times before it has to be replaced they would increase the number of people willing to go venture into deepspace by a huge margin. |
 Nyrram |
Posted - 2005.10.15 06:24:00 -
[105] Edited by: Nyrram on 15/10/2005 06:31:55
This would not work (nor should it even be attempted IMO), and I can give you specific reasons. Your suggestion is saying one of the following, but I'm not quite sure which one.(and people wonder why my posts are so long.. I hate ambiguity): 1) Any alliance that actively shoots down a neutral/noobcorp pilot in space that they control is forced to pay this "tribute" 2) Any alliance that actively shoots down any non-war target in space they control, whether it has negative standing toward that alliance or not, so long as there is no declared war between the pilots involved is forced to pay tribute. 3) Any alliance that actively shoots down ANY target in space they control, whether it has negative standing toward that alliance or is at war with that alliance is forced to pay tribute. 4) Apply above possibilities to not the 0.0 that alliance controls, but the 0.1+ that is in empire on the other side of the gate. Another thing that is unclear, but I didn't want to show that many options.. which empire gets the tribute.. the race of the pilot or the race of the corp the pilot is in, or the empire closest to the "offense".. At any rate, all suggestions are invalid. If the tribute is limited to ships lost in only neutral corps, then opposing alliances would simply bring in noob alts in shuttles, parked at gates, smack talking the people in that system. When one pilot finally gets tired of the abuse and whacks the guy, whammo, big ole bill in corp wallet, and smacker returns to system roughly 1 minute later. If negative standing corps or war targets are added to the 'protected' list.. then now you have made alliances unable to perform even what you would (I HOPE) consider 'valid' defense of their space. If you are suggesting it be limited to the .1+ on the other side of the gate, then there are already measures in place in those systems to deter fighting (possible loss of ship near gates/stations, security loss, etc) and I see no reason why alliance members should be treated differently in this regard. If you want better OMFGCONCORDWTFPWN in low sec, start a thread petitioning it.. doubt you'll get it though. At any rate.. no.. no.. no.. lesee.. 123.4... and NO.. -- Nyrram |
 Nyrram Minmatar Quam Singulari Lotka Volterra |
Posted - 2005.10.15 06:24:00 -
[106] Edited by: Nyrram on 15/10/2005 06:45:42
This would not work (nor should it even be attempted IMO), and I can give you specific reasons. Your suggestion is saying one of the following, but I'm not quite sure which one.(and people wonder why my posts are so long.. I hate ambiguity): 1) Any alliance that actively shoots down a neutral/noobcorp pilot in space that they control is forced to pay this "tribute" 2) Any alliance that actively shoots down any non-war target in space they control, whether it has negative standing toward that alliance or not, so long as there is no declared war between the pilots involved is forced to pay tribute. 3) Any alliance that actively shoots down ANY target in space they control, whether it has negative standing toward that alliance or is at war with that alliance is forced to pay tribute. 4) Apply above possibilities to not the 0.0 that alliance controls, but the 0.1+ that is in empire on the other side of the gate. 5) Apply above possibilities to any space anywhere, 0.0 or not, whether or not the alliance actively controls it. Another thing that is unclear, but I didn't want to show that many options.. which empire gets the tribute.. the race of the pilot or the race of the corp the pilot is in, the race of the ship, or the empire closest to the "offense".. At any rate, all suggestions are invalid. If the tribute is limited to ships lost in only neutral corps, then opposing alliances would simply bring in noob alts in shuttles, parked at gates, smack talking the people in that system. When one pilot finally gets tired of the abuse and whacks the guy, whammo, big ole bill in alliance wallet, and smacker returns to system roughly 1 minute later. If negative standing corps or war targets are added to the 'protected' list.. then now you have made alliances unable to perform even what you would (I HOPE) consider 'valid' defense of their space. If you are suggesting it be limited to the .1+ on the other side of the gate, then there are already measures in place in those systems to deter fighting (possible loss of ship near gates/stations, security loss, etc) and I see no reason why alliance members should be treated differently in this regard. If you want better OMFGCONCORDWTFPWN in low sec, start a thread petitioning it.. doubt you'll get it though. And if.. (OMG) you are suggesting that it be applied to any space anywhere anytime, 0.0 or not, whether or not they 'claim it'.. well.. I... I... I... *must control fist of death* OK, you want a specific reason for that one too probably.. how about it's f**king stupid.. It's 0.0, not Empire.. don't try to enforce CONCORD rules on the entire galaxy.. encourage nonviolence, sure.. but don't enforce it without the decision of those 'controling' the space.. At any rate.. no.. no.. no.. lesee.. 1234.5... and NO.. -- Nyrram |
Nyrram |
Posted - 2005.10.15 07:28:00 -
[107]
This sounds extremely familiar.... you are sounding like an old timer yourself, Kar, because this dream (minus the nations) was shared by tons of us from Beta.. this was an ideal for the 'soon' to be realeased Player Stations we agonized over for so long, then were crushed when they were finally implemented. The possibility to 'retrofit' systems of our own to be somewhat like Empire, even the possibility to rename that system given sufficient control, was the ideal solution. The ability to claim a system as ours, add sentry guns and security patrols to (help) keep the peace, etc. A lot of it was batted down as 'too automated', like sentry guns and NPC security forces.. the justification being that if you couldn't instantly field a force large enough to defend a massive attack, you didn't deserve the space, which is crap.. no one entity will ever have that much constant in-game, focused power in this game.. not unless EVE goes super PvE.. sorry.. Suggestions were made to limit total security forces available so that they weren't infinate and could be expended sort of like 'system ammo'.. lots of suggestions were made, both good and bad.. Personally, I've always held on to that idealized version of deep space outpost creation.. you cut out a system for the alliance, build a station (not a 'starbase', but an actual station) with the ability to add services to the station, factories, market, refining, cloning, whatever. You add defenses to the station, outfitting it with sentries, missle batteries, whatever. You place sentries at gates in your system... at belts if you wish, whatever.. open ended. You purchase or earn defensive NPC forces to be made available in your space, allocated how you wish (10 bships for this system, 4 for the system next to it, spawn like concord, not as tough, destroyable, etc) As the sovereign alliance of the area, you would collect taxes on sales transactions, NPC hunting, etc that is performed in your space.. tons of amazing places to go with it.. The original concept of PoS has come a long way, and I saw the introduction of additional modules to the market that promise to add services to those stations (unsure if they work or are actually in game yet?).. but still there is no way to defend those stations without a constant camp of a huge fleet, which should not be required IMO.. In the end, space any alliance controls should be very small in comparison to what it is now, with only those things worth defending actually being defended, and attacking a war-target alliance in their space should be more difficult than getting some frigs together and harrassing some people... not impossible, mind you, but difficult. Taking down an alliance-hub station should take days of conflict and huge, glorious battles raging back and forth for hours upon hours upon hours.. not just "wait till they go to sleep, then attack their undefended PoS".. their station SHOULD withstand a full day of pounding before falling. -- Nyrram |
Nyrram Minmatar Quam Singulari Lotka Volterra |
Posted - 2005.10.15 07:28:00 -
[108]
This sounds extremely familiar.... you are sounding like an old timer yourself, Kar, because this dream (minus the nations) was shared by tons of us from Beta.. this was an ideal for the 'soon' to be realeased Player Stations we agonized over for so long, then were crushed when they were finally implemented. The possibility to 'retrofit' systems of our own to be somewhat like Empire, even the possibility to rename that system given sufficient control, was the ideal solution. The ability to claim a system as ours, add sentry guns and security patrols to (help) keep the peace, etc. A lot of it was batted down as 'too automated', like sentry guns and NPC security forces.. the justification being that if you couldn't instantly field a force large enough to defend a massive attack, you didn't deserve the space, which is crap.. no one entity will ever have that much constant in-game, focused power in this game.. not unless EVE goes super PvE.. sorry.. Suggestions were made to limit total security forces available so that they weren't infinate and could be expended sort of like 'system ammo'.. lots of suggestions were made, both good and bad.. Personally, I've always held on to that idealized version of deep space outpost creation.. you cut out a system for the alliance, build a station (not a 'starbase', but an actual station) with the ability to add services to the station, factories, market, refining, cloning, whatever. You add defenses to the station, outfitting it with sentries, missle batteries, whatever. You place sentries at gates in your system... at belts if you wish, whatever.. open ended. You purchase or earn defensive NPC forces to be made available in your space, allocated how you wish (10 bships for this system, 4 for the system next to it, spawn like concord, not as tough, destroyable, etc) As the sovereign alliance of the area, you would collect taxes on sales transactions, NPC hunting, etc that is performed in your space.. tons of amazing places to go with it.. The original concept of PoS has come a long way, and I saw the introduction of additional modules to the market that promise to add services to those stations (unsure if they work or are actually in game yet?).. but still there is no way to defend those stations without a constant camp of a huge fleet, which should not be required IMO.. In the end, space any alliance controls should be very small in comparison to what it is now, with only those things worth defending actually being defended, and attacking a war-target alliance in their space should be more difficult than getting some frigs together and harrassing some people... not impossible, mind you, but difficult. Taking down an alliance-hub station should take days of conflict and huge, glorious battles raging back and forth for hours upon hours upon hours.. not just "wait till they go to sleep, then attack their undefended PoS".. their station SHOULD withstand a full day of pounding before falling. -- Nyrram |
Grey Area |
Posted - 2005.10.15 09:24:00 -
[109]
And there's your answer...for the existing population of 0.0 space, gate=camp. And your comment that "being able to do level 4 missions means you have outgrown Concord" is just laughable. Now that scanners can find mission runners quite easily, it is a simple thing for the pirates to use a covert ops ship to warp to you within 15km. If you're fitted out to do level 4 missions, you're easy prey for PVPers. The ransom they charge to let you get away with your ship is roughly in the order of 50 mission rewards, or put another way, assuming one hour per mission (optimistic), 2 DAYS solid play to get the money back. My excursions into 0.0 have been brief. Some have been rewarding, most have been fatal and financially ruinous. You can open a direct stargate to every 0.0 system from Jita if you want...it wouldn't make me want to go there any more than I do now. ========================================= * I'm ALLOWED to cheat. I'm a STARSHIP. * ========================================= |
 Grey Area Caldari |
Posted - 2005.10.15 09:24:00 -
[110]
And there's your answer...for the existing population of 0.0 space, gate=camp. And your comment that "being able to do level 4 missions means you have outgrown Concord" is just laughable. Now that scanners can find mission runners quite easily, it is a simple thing for the pirates to use a covert ops ship to warp to you within 15km. If you're fitted out to do level 4 missions, you're easy prey for PVPers. The ransom they charge to let you get away with your ship is roughly in the order of 50 mission rewards, or put another way, assuming one hour per mission (optimistic), 2 DAYS solid play to get the money back. My excursions into 0.0 have been brief. Some have been rewarding, most have been fatal and financially ruinous. You can open a direct stargate to every 0.0 system from Jita if you want...it wouldn't make me want to go there any more than I do now. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment. |
Grey Area |
Posted - 2005.10.15 09:31:00 -
[111] More thoughts... The question to answer is....why would you want to go into 0.0? Currently the answer is "to PVP", so all the people who want that are already there. And there's your basic flaw - it is the layout of the map. What if, instead of 0.0 being all AROUND empire space, it was BETWEEN them all? So...to go from Amarr space to Minmatar space required 6 jumps through 0.0? Then you get more reasons for non-PVPers to travel...all of course, profit related...projectile weapons very cheap in Amarr space, but very expensive in Minmatar space. Certain commodities simply not available in Gallente space, but richly available in Caldari space (and again, a gap full of 0.0 systems in between). Whether or not this radical change to the map could be implemented now, I have no idea. ========================================= * I'm ALLOWED to cheat. I'm a STARSHIP. * ========================================= |
Grey Area Caldari |
Posted - 2005.10.15 09:31:00 -
[112] More thoughts... The question to answer is....why would you want to go into 0.0? Currently the answer is "to PVP", so all the people who want that are already there. And there's your basic flaw - it is the layout of the map. What if, instead of 0.0 being all AROUND empire space, it was BETWEEN them all? So...to go from Amarr space to Minmatar space required 6 jumps through 0.0? Then you get more reasons for non-PVPers to travel...all of course, profit related...projectile weapons very cheap in Amarr space, but very expensive in Minmatar space. Certain commodities simply not available in Gallente space, but richly available in Caldari space (and again, a gap full of 0.0 systems in between). Whether or not this radical change to the map could be implemented now, I have no idea. --- I don't mind you disagreeing with me. Just don't say I don't have the SKILLS to comment. |
 Karrihn |
Posted - 2005.10.15 11:30:00 -
[113] I'm not an old timer, I played for about 4 months during The Second Genesis, and was heavy into mining. I started to feel like EVE was just another job. So I left for around a year and tried other games. They were all too warm and fuzzy. Too easy. so I came back to eve. I just sensed that my Vison or Idea is really what the people in 0.0 want. They do want PvP, just not PvP that achieves no real goal. My vision provides a reason for venturing into 0.0 and a goal to achieve. New nations, New markets, New goals and a Reason to stand agaisnt an enemy. A reason that dosen't end up being a mere ping-pong battle of POS deployment. I have had conversations with alot of ex-0.0 pilots. complaints were mostly Ping-pong, ice mining, battle battle battle all for no real advantage or benefit. And the picture that has been painted for me concerning alliances is that they are usually not as well organized as one would be led to believe. I know how to get in and out of 0.0 safely. Its just more work than its worth for what I would gain. I do not make ISK hand over fist, I make it in a slow constant pace day in and day out. For months my only ship losses have been due to poor judgement. The grass where I am at is green, I have a goal to meet, a purpose and the means to obtain it. 0.0 is a crap-shoot, maybe i'll win, maybe I won't but it would take a long streak of winning to make it better than empire. The Destruction of your ship is usually preceeded by the thought,"I think I will try somthing a little different this time...." |
Karrihn Caldari Black Company |
Posted - 2005.10.15 11:30:00 -
[114] I'm not an old timer, I played for about 4 months during The Second Genesis, and was heavy into mining. I started to feel like EVE was just another job. So I left for around a year and tried other games. They were all too warm and fuzzy. Too easy. so I came back to eve. I just sensed that my Vison or Idea is really what the people in 0.0 want. They do want PvP, just not PvP that achieves no real goal. My vision provides a reason for venturing into 0.0 and a goal to achieve. New nations, New markets, New goals and a Reason to stand agaisnt an enemy. A reason that dosen't end up being a mere ping-pong battle of POS deployment. I have had conversations with alot of ex-0.0 pilots. complaints were mostly Ping-pong, ice mining, battle battle battle all for no real advantage or benefit. And the picture that has been painted for me concerning alliances is that they are usually not as well organized as one would be led to believe. I know how to get in and out of 0.0 safely. Its just more work than its worth for what I would gain. I do not make ISK hand over fist, I make it in a slow constant pace day in and day out. For months my only ship losses have been due to poor judgement. The grass where I am at is green, I have a goal to meet, a purpose and the means to obtain it. 0.0 is a crap-shoot, maybe i'll win, maybe I won't but it would take a long streak of winning to make it better than empire. The Destruction of your ship is usually preceeded by the thought,"I think I will try somthing a little different this time...." |
Sarf |
Posted - 2005.10.15 18:43:00 -
[115] Just finished reading the thread... I like the idea of deep jump points. and have the system a 0.1 system at the other end. Each constalation that has one of these systems also has a concrobal station. this alows the alanace or corp to take it over. each 2weeks that a aliance holds the station the sec status goes up 0.1 ontill it gets to 0.6 at this point concord starts patrolling this system. and any player build outpost that is in a avacent system starts building faction to 0.5. and so on untill the entire constilation is claimed. At this point the Aliance becomes a nation. A nation collects sales tax just like empires space. This sounds like a big money maker for the aliance, but if you want to have your own navy patrolling a system it costs. you rent naval assets, and gate guns on a system by system basis. as long as rent is paid anyone wiht a positive standing with this new nation is protected. If another aliance or nation invades then they need to fight not only the the nations members, but also the rented troops, catch is the rented troups don't respawn, they have to be bought again. this way empires will grow out of the nothing that is out there, wars between nataions would erupt.. but those with good standing to that nation would be able to pass, killing players with bad standing in a nations space would up your standing, killing other player with good standing would lower yours. this way you can prove your alegiance, the nations can set there standing with all other nations and aliances to reflect the poiltics. i think this would make the 0.0 space a more intresting place, and a place i might be willing to risk all to visit. This would let a neutra player to gein faction with |
 Sarf Asgard Industries Safe And Fun Environment |
Posted - 2005.10.15 18:43:00 -
[116] Edited by: Sarf on 15/10/2005 18:49:55 Just finished reading the thread... I like the idea of deep jump points. and have the system a 0.1 system at the other end. Each constalation that has one of these systems also has a concrobal station. this alows the alanace or corp to take it over. each 2weeks that a aliance holds the station the sec status goes up 0.1 ontill it gets to 0.6 at this point concord starts patrolling this system. and any player build outpost that is in a avacent system starts building faction to 0.5. and so on untill the entire constilation is claimed. At this point the Aliance becomes a nation. A nation collects sales tax just like empires space. This sounds like a big money maker for the aliance, but if you want to have your own navy patrolling a system it costs. you rent naval assets, and gate guns on a system by system basis. as long as rent is paid anyone wiht a positive standing with this new nation is protected. If another aliance or nation invades then they need to fight not only the the nations members, but also the rented troops, catch is the rented troups don't respawn, they have to be bought again. this way empires will grow out of the nothing that is out there, wars between nataions would erupt.. but those with good standing to that nation would be able to pass, killing players with bad standing in a nations space would up your standing, killing other player with good standing would lower yours. this way you can prove your alegiance, the nations can set there standing with all other nations and aliances to reflect the poiltics. i think this would make the 0.0 space a more intresting place, and a place i might be willing to risk all to visit. This would let a neutra player to gein faction with a nation by he;lping to defend it. Spys could be found and there standing lowered by a corp officer of the nation. a nation can be concoured by taking out all the outposts and captuing the concrobal staion. this is how empires form from nothing, lets do it in eve. - Sarf CEO, Director of Freighter construction. Miner of small balls of dirt. |
Sarf |
Posted - 2005.10.15 18:50:00 -
[117] This would let a neutra player to gein faction with a nation by he;lping to defend it. Spys could be found and there standing lowered by a corp officer of the nation. a nation can be concoured by taking out all the outposts and captuing the concrobal staion. this is how empires form from nothing, lets do it in eve. |
Sarf Asgard Industries Safe And Fun Environment |
Posted - 2005.10.15 18:50:00 -
[118] This would let a neutra player to gein faction with a nation by he;lping to defend it. Spys could be found and there standing lowered by a corp officer of the nation. a nation can be concoured by taking out all the outposts and captuing the concrobal staion. this is how empires form from nothing, lets do it in eve. - Sarf CEO, Director of Freighter construction. Miner of small balls of dirt. |
 Aralon |
Posted - 2005.10.15 19:33:00 -
[119] To Nyram: All sarcasm aside, I don't think that you see the real problem. Gate ganking in 0.0 has no downside for larger groups. Therefore, why even try to figure out decent ways to deal with most of the population? Now almost every alliance has become a mafia due to this wonderful tool. The rest of us are left with the decision that we are either with them or against them... no middle ground. I was led to believe this game was about choice. Choose good/bad, gracious/selfish, etc. Where is the choice for the alliances? We get to be glorified pirates if we want to hold our vast territory that we can't possibly use for anything constructive? By the way---if you don't have the manpower to hold your systems in check you shouldn't have the system. To Everyone: The problems don't lie in access points, implants, risk/reward imbalances. Open all the access points you want... alliances will start tracking down individuals using the map and scanners. Implants mean squat to 0.0 living so get use to it or stay in Empire... that choice is yours. Disable all the rewards in Empire and people will still grind it out in safety over taking risks... that's how people generally are. But, consider if you take everything out of Empire people will get bored and leave the game which CCP doesn't want. The Alliances are the key to the Exodus that CCP is so desprately looking for a solution to. Give them a reason to be good and some will chose that path. Some will stay bad and gank everything in thier path. Either way lines will begin to be drawn between alliances. |
Aralon |
Posted - 2005.10.15 19:33:00 -
[120] To Nyram: All sarcasm aside, I don't think that you see the real problem. Gate ganking in 0.0 has no downside for larger groups. Therefore, why even try to figure out decent ways to deal with most of the population? Now almost every alliance has become a mafia due to this wonderful tool. The rest of us are left with the decision that we are either with them or against them... no middle ground. I was led to believe this game was about choice. Choose good/bad, gracious/selfish, etc. Where is the choice for the alliances? We get to be glorified pirates if we want to hold our vast territory that we can't possibly use for anything constructive? By the way---if you don't have the manpower to hold your systems in check you shouldn't have the system. To Everyone: The problems don't lie in access points, implants, risk/reward imbalances. Open all the access points you want... alliances will start tracking down individuals using the map and scanners. Implants mean squat to 0.0 living so get use to it or stay in Empire... that choice is yours. Disable all the rewards in Empire and people will still grind it out in safety over taking risks... that's how people generally are. But, consider if you take everything out of Empire people will get bored and leave the game which CCP doesn't want. The Alliances are the key to the Exodus that CCP is so desprately looking for a solution to. Give them a reason to be good and some will chose that path. Some will stay bad and gank everything in thier path. Either way lines will begin to be drawn between alliances. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 :: one page | |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page | |
Originally by: Aralon
| Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,06s, ref 20250913/1243 EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP. |
| 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. |