|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Athryn Bellee
Concordiat
Spaceship Samurai
6
   |
Posted - 2014.08.10 18:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
Lu Ziffer wrote:@ baltec
So we agree on that there are 2 superpowers left and that they will not kill each other.
The question is if this is a failure in game mechanic or is it natural?
I say it is natural.
To make my point let us take a view on the history of humanity.
In the middle of the 19 century we reached the point where we had all continents fully colonized. At the end of this colonization we had 6 nations USA, UK, France, Germany, Russia and Japan who wanted more.
For the next 50 years they fought some smaller wars and in the end it escalated in the 2 biggest and cruelest wars the world has ever seen. After that 2 coalitions were left one around the USSR the other around USA with a few states left in a block of states with no alignment.
At the end none could fight the other, but the critical threshold was the moment when there was enough personal, ressources and technolgy to colonize the world. The rest was just a change in distribution of the territory they had control over.
The same applies for EVE we had a colonization time, then we had smaller wars and it escalated to a number of bigger wars and in the end 2 coalitions are left.
I could tell the same story with companys but this is simpler to understand.
So I say this is the natural it is not the fault of CCP or the game mechanics they created.
We just hit the threshold and then we had 5 years of amazing battles.
@Sara Tosa
What baltec said is right we would lock down all gates to empire like we did when we had the cynojammer screen in 2006-2009.
So you can change the game mechanics which is the technology in this universe but it will not bring you below the escalation threshold. It will probaly make the universe less believable which would be sad.
EVE is full
The difference is that the leading groups in Eve are risk averse and see that they can make more money renting systems to people unwilling or unable to defend systems themselves. This is a game where players are supposed to shoot other players and blow up their ships. Renting whole regions is counter to this idea. Nullsec anomalies should be updated so that they do not reward staying in the same system farming anomalies. Slower anomaly respawn, more escalations, or even Agent missions in sov space are a way to help with this. Making it harder for any entity to project their force across any number of star regions would help with making renting less of a viable option. Less renting, pilot interaction. |
Athryn Bellee
Concordiat
Spaceship Samurai
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 18:55:00 -
[2] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Lu Ziffer wrote:@ baltec
So we agree on that there are 2 superpowers left and that they will not kill each other.
The question is if this is a failure in game mechanic or is it natural?
I say it is natural.
To make my point let us take a view on the history of humanity.
In the middle of the 19 century we reached the point where we had all continents fully colonized. At the end of this colonization we had 6 nations USA, UK, France, Germany, Russia and Japan who wanted more.
For the next 50 years they fought some smaller wars and in the end it escalated in the 2 biggest and cruelest wars the world has ever seen. After that 2 coalitions were left one around the USSR the other around USA with a few states left in a block of states with no alignment.
At the end none could fight the other, but the critical threshold was the moment when there was enough personal, ressources and technolgy to colonize the world. The rest was just a change in distribution of the territory they had control over.
The same applies for EVE we had a colonization time, then we had smaller wars and it escalated to a number of bigger wars and in the end 2 coalitions are left.
I could tell the same story with companys but this is simpler to understand.
So I say this is the natural it is not the fault of CCP or the game mechanics they created.
We just hit the threshold and then we had 5 years of amazing battles.
@Sara Tosa
What baltec said is right we would lock down all gates to empire like we did when we had the cynojammer screen in 2006-2009.
So you can change the game mechanics which is the technology in this universe but it will not bring you below the escalation threshold. It will probaly make the universe less believable which would be sad.
EVE is full No we dont agree. I am saying we CANT kill eachother, the mechanics make it impossible to break the stalemate and also make it impossible for anyone new to take us on.
Stop accepting rent income and let the renters fend for themselves. Slightly in jest, but an idea none the less. |
Athryn Bellee
Concordiat
Spaceship Samurai
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 20:43:00 -
[3] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Lu Ziffer wrote:And how would that end the stagnation?
We lose sov in every system outside of dek because it would be impossible for us to hold it freeing up several thousand systems for smaller alliances.
I think occupancy or user based sov is a step in the right direction, but how does that stop any large group from imposing protection fees on another smaller group?
Let's say this change happens and alliances own the regions they actually operate in. Wouldn't a group like CFC or N3/PL just tell the little guys that they can keep their space so long as they pay protection fees and grant R64s to their overlords. They can't actually take the sov from them, but they can harass the smaller alliances enough that they aren't willing to live in nullsec anymore. Then we have smaller alliances holding sov, but in essence the system is still the same except it is harder to keep track of the various groups since the renters aren't under a large Alliance like PBLRD or B0T.
As long as there is functionally no cost for large groups to throw their capitals across the cluster the system will remain the same in function regardless of how it is delineated through in game alliances. We saw how easy it was for CFC to take out those titans that were incubating in their region. |
Athryn Bellee
Concordiat
Spaceship Samurai
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.10 21:05:00 -
[4] - Quote
Falin Whalen wrote:Athryn Bellee wrote:baltec1 wrote:Lu Ziffer wrote:And how would that end the stagnation?
We lose sov in every system outside of dek because it would be impossible for us to hold it freeing up several thousand systems for smaller alliances. I think occupancy or user based sov is a step in the right direction, but how does that stop any large group from imposing protection fees on another smaller group? Let's say this change happens and alliances own the regions they actually operate in. Wouldn't a group like CFC or N3/PL just tell the little guys that they can keep their space so long as they pay protection fees and grant R64s to their overlords. They can't actually take the sov from them, but they can harass the smaller alliances enough that they aren't willing to live in nullsec anymore. Then we have smaller alliances holding sov, but in essence the system is still the same except it is harder to keep track of the various groups since the renters aren't under a large Alliance like PBLRD or B0T. As long as there is functionally no cost for large groups to throw their capitals across the cluster the system will remain the same in function regardless of how it is delineated through in game alliances. We saw how easy it was for CFC to take out those titans that were incubating in their region. The word you are looking for is CONTENT. CONTENT is being created by N2/PL and CFC, also fights.
Super blobs are not content if the subcaps can't do anything about them. Then it is just bullying, plain and simple. |
Athryn Bellee
Concordiat
Spaceship Samurai
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.11 14:03:00 -
[5] - Quote
Lu Ziffer wrote:That is why I say more space
We can not fight human nature with game mechanics without breaking the game.
We would have to create unreasonable boundarys which would ruin the game.
I would advise you to travel a bit more around nullsec that isn't with your fleet. I roam all over the cluster and find 90% of the systems are empty or just the occasional passerby. More space will just mean more empty space until CCP gives more of an incentive to venture outside of the good ratting system. Even then without more players more space would just go unused. |
Athryn Bellee
Concordiat
Spaceship Samurai
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 14:50:00 -
[6] - Quote
Skia Aumer wrote:Kira Hizu wrote:Topic Moon GOOOO
Moon goo changes are needed? Why? Because we live in none passive game and we would like no more AFK empires. Moon goo changes are live, please log in and find and item called "Small Mobile Siphon Unit". Anchor it to your nearest R64 moon and purge that passive AFK player from our beloved EVE!
Except you have to return nearly every day to empty the siphon and they are pretty easy for the POS owner to kill whenever they come by to refuel or just to check on he starbase. |
Athryn Bellee
Concordiat
Spaceship Samurai
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 16:45:00 -
[7] - Quote
Lu Ziffer wrote:Is this the thread about siphon units ? @Kira Hizu I really don't understand how that will end stagnation. @baltec1 The only differance with activty based sov would be that we would lose some pipe systems. The interesting constellations with -1.0 -0.6 would still not change hands same goes for systems with r64 or systems needed for cynoroutes and jumpbridges. It would look like this http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/verite/20080207.png yes it is a really old map. Ahe time was based on towers and they were only put up if they were needed. What would happen is that some players would come into 0.0 with the wrong assumption that if a coalition has no SOV in the system they do not have control over it. And then they would be angry because they get killed by a 200people roaming or a 50supercapital fleet which jumped 30ly just to hotdrop them. Activity based sov is a good idea but it does not solve the issue that EVE is to small. We can control everythink within 25stargates or 25ly by jumping there within minutes and activity based sov will not change that at all.
Please open the star map in game, go to Statistics under the Stars tab and then click Average Pilots in Space in the Last 30 Minutes. Now zoom out all the way so that you can see the whole cluster. After looking at this for a little bit tell me if you think there need to be more stars still. I know it's not a perfect measurement, but it gives you an idea for how active the regions are.
I know this is a bit off topic, but I wish CCP would release a similar star map for the wormhole regions so that we can see just how empty wormhole space is.
An idea for occupancy based sov that might solve the pipe systems problem (if it is a problem) would be to move sov to constellations instead of individual systems. For example if you have occupancy in 51% (or some other number) of the systems you own the constellation. |
|
|
| |
|