|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Draahkness
The Oasis Group
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
0
   |
Posted - 2014.07.06 10:47:00 -
[1] - Quote
I have been gone from game some 3 years now and I just got back. If my suggestions are outdated please have some understanding. Constructive critisism appreciated.
1. Remove AFK income for alliances. Remove the r16, r32 and r64 minerals from moons all together. Insert them again in PI, Hacking and deadspace mining sites. And obviously they can still be refined from lesser materials.
2. Reduce the usefullness of supers in sov-war by making sov-structures invunurabe to the supers-only weapons.
3. Make system cyno-jamming part of the sov system. When sov drops, only then does cyno jamming go down.
4. Make titan jump bridges work like pos or covert jump bridges. Fuel consuption per weight jumping through.
5. Make sov in a system dependant on a number of node structures placed around the constellation. Say 3 or 4. If one of them is active the sov structure in invunurable. Nodes can be hacked (inactive for 10 mins) or reinforced (inactive until repaired). Nodes can be scooped or destroyed if sov in the "mother" system drops or changes.
6. Ramp up the cost of having more then 3 or 4 sov systems by ALOT. As promised some 15 expansions ago. |
Draahkness
The Oasis Group
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.07 16:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
Some more random ideas:
1. Make pos-jump bridges only take industrial ships. IE any ship made by ORE or any ship that requires the racial Industrial skill.
2. Make titan jump bridges use fuel and also make the titan fuel bay really small. Bridging tons of players would be possible but only in waves between refuelling.
3. Limit station docking rights to the alliance owning it rather then the blue-list. Bit unfair againnst people trying to be 0.0-traders I agree but common good...
4. Increase sov cost per system beyond 4-5 by alot. I'm talking BILLIONS and rising.
5. Reduce hitpoints of station services to a few thousand. If a system is lived in and a random roam pops in and destroy services it shouldnt take more then a few minutes to rep. If no one lives there services may be down for weeks.
6. Make supers weapons not work on anything but ships.
7. Remove carriers remote rep bonus and triage module. Make a new capital with no fighters and bonus to rep drones only to give capital reps and triage to.
Finally I just wanted to say to the people using the argument "This will only cause more alt alliances and renters" that renters and alt-alliances have turned on their masters many many times. RAT is a good example. RA pirate corp who formed their own alliance and went to war agaisnt RA. |
Draahkness
The Oasis Group
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 09:38:00 -
[3] - Quote
I am liking the idea of lived-in-sov. So how about something like this:
Anyone who does (pretty much) anything in a system pushes his/her corp/alliance sov uppwards in the form of sov-points. The corp/alliance with the highest sov-points will be the sov owner after DT. Set a maximum points at say 1000 to ensure it will not take 50 months to get rid of someone who has been entrenched a while.
Examples of things to affect sov:
Kill a rat: 1 point
Sell an item on the market: 5 points per transaction (ammo, charges and shuttles excepted to minimise abuse)
"Pop" a roid: 1 point
Sov structure of some sort (few hitpoints, short reinforce timer and hackable): 200 points, lost if reinforced or hacked, lost permanently if destroyed.
Destroy a piloted ship that belongs to different alliance/corp: 5 points (shuttles and noob ships excepted)
Destroy a capsule belongs to different alliance/corp: 10 points
Successfully complete a hacking site: 10 points
PI: 1 point per 1000 units moved off planet. Owning the customs office 25 points/office, lost if CO is reinf
A few examples and the numbers may be stupid but you get my point. This means A/ Renters will be the sov owners within a week or two. B/ Taking systems require some effort apart from blowing the sov-strucure. C/ The more a system is "lived in" the more work is required to dislodge the owners even for a hugely superior force. D/ Less or not at all "lived in" systems can be taken quite easily. E/ Everyone, from the JF "import" guy to the grizzled combat pilot contributes daily.
Thoughts? |
Draahkness
The Oasis Group
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.08 11:18:00 -
[4] - Quote
Lucas Quaan wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:A small group enters null in the current situation. Boom! 1,100 warm bodies show up from all over the north, west and south side of the coalition block to engage in glorious battle with the 150 newbros. The small group has no choice due the impossible odds they could win against that.
Now if those 1,100 had to make a strategic choice on amassing everyone into one system and abandoning their assets from all those distant regions away...
Do you honestly think they will still burn 1,100 from three corners of the game to deal with 150 guys? Considering that some will have to engage in combat along the way. Things that will slow them down and possibly kill them, thus forcing them to start over. Also not to be ignored is while they are out, their territory and assets are left undefended and ripe for the taking?
Unless of course, you like the current situation where they can zip (almost completely immune to any danger) to anywhere, camp in a fraction of their force (netting little to no fights) and zip back home in time for lunch. All the while their territory and assets were in no danger what so ever... just like the way things are right now. The thing is, those 1100 nerds (who by the way are burning to their BS cache in interceptors, so they can cross the galaxy in ~30min without risk) are still leaving 10k nerds at home to defend if needed. Besides, where do you think these magical homeland invaders are coming from anyway? The point is that there is no proposal regarding artificial limitations on movement that are going to tell 11k goons, or 2k PL for that matter, to split into these smaller entities that would battle it out one constellation at a time with rainbows and unicorn roaming on a daily basis. Those with power can still project it on those who have none. Yes, there will be a different name in the top left corner, but you are still living there on my terms. Renters by any other name... There are suggestions in here that give options for the little guy (hacking, POS disruption, activity indexes), but most seem stuck on the wrong part of power projection. You are certainly not helping them by taking away jumpdrives.
The thing is. With my doctrine found on page 20 that 1100 man bs fleet would in the end not acomplish anything really. Destroy a few poses, sov-structures and customs offices perhaps, hellcamp the station for 4-5 days until sov switches due to decay or whatever. Then what? Go back home? Then Mom and Pop alliance will just creap back out of the station and get back to work, retaking sov in a few days. |
Draahkness
The Oasis Group
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.09 04:36:00 -
[5] - Quote
Well. How about making blops the exeption to the rule? Give them the range carriers have today and let them jump between regions.
Pros: Small alliances that needs less volume of supplies and also has less people/skills to run escort fleets can use blockade runners. Hot dropping with bombers or recons becomes a thing. Fuel consumption per mass of bridger prevents huge blob-hotdrops.
Cons: The biggest gamers, like PL, can hotdrop with 300 blops rather then bombers thus cirkomnavigating the fuel problem. |
Draahkness
The Oasis Group
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.10 05:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
Nidhoggurs: Nerf warp speed. Wanna use 1000 nids 60 jumps away, have fun travelling for 12 hours, call it 8 hours with rigs.
Suppies for little guy: I already posted this idea but apperanlty in invisible ink. Don't make this nerf to blops, rather increase their bridge range even more. Then the little guy can bring in T2 cruisers and mining barges one at the time with blockade runners.
Moon goo: Remove moon goo, seriosly, let passive income die in fire. Make those materials come from PI, hacking and mining anoms so that eveyone can do it.
Depleting resources: Sounds good on paper but how would it affect 1-station alliances? They work their space for weeks to make their sov as strong as possible and just as it becomes strong enough that a larger entity might not bother, then you get nothing but frig spawns in your anoms and have to go take new sov and start over? |
Draahkness
The Oasis Group
TOG - The Older Gamers Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.11 06:49:00 -
[7] - Quote
It feels as if the discussion is now somewhat cirkular. I am going to end my involmenet in the thread by condensing the message we want to send to CCP.
1. Power projection in all it's forms needs a major nerf. EVE should be big and attacks very far from home should take many hours just in travel time. Some sort of revamp needs to be done to jump bridges, jump drives and clones. A new system, or an extension of an old system, is needed to allow small enteties to resupply even if they are far from empire.
2. In addition to allowing small amounts of supplies to be moved long distance more systems need to be in place to facilitate local production. More low-ends per hour in the belts. Dispersed tech2 materials rather then a few ultra-valuable moons. "Alchemy" to transform local ice products to other racial fuels.
3. Sovereignty needs a major overhaul. "Blocks of EHP" needs to be gone. Replaced by a system of "lived in sovereignty" - if you use the space you own it. Any rule that changes the amount of stars you can own however is bad, if people wants to have 11k big alliances it is their right.
I am ending with the note that the people I played with as a child managed to stomp FIX (before BoB helped them) and take space from the original NC despite severe numerical disadvantage - and barely any caps. I want a version of those days back too. |
|
|
| |
|