EVE Search - Changes to SOV , Power Projection & Nullsec Stagnation

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Changes to SOV , Power Projection & Nullsec Stagnation

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 606	Posted - 2014.07.02 16:39:00 - [1] - Quote New parties into the current state of 00 sec? Why? Are they big? Can they create headlines like the 2 BBB? I doubt it. And since they cannot create headlines nor otherwise meaningful content, they are not needed in the current state of 00 sec. With the current mechanics and, probably more importantly, the very simple-minded meta gaming around Sov 00 sec, you cannot get into Sov 00 without succumbing to one of the blocks or get kicked out. Even with your changes. Your suggestions, especially the JF bubble immunity, is very funny. ^^ If you can only jump to the next system, where's the point of having a jump drive at all? They are expensive, they need a cyno everyone can warp to, they then offer no benefit anymore.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 606	Posted - 2014.07.02 17:22:00 - [2] - Quote Manfred Sideous wrote: Aryndel Vyst wrote: You could have summed this post up by just saying "Hey here's how I want to fix nullsec: Remove jump drives" Because that's pretty much what you are saying. Well yeah but removing jumpdrives messes other things up like logistics and supplies in nullsec. So you need changes to compensate for that so you aren't punishing people you are simply creating a new alternative to a old broken system. Uh... Quote: Jumprdrives limited jumprange to adjacent system only. (lightyear distance is irrelevant) is slightly confused
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 606	Posted - 2014.07.02 17:49:00 - [3] - Quote Retar Aveymone wrote: I haven't finished analyzing the rest of your ideas, but you do yourself no favors by claiming mineral importation didn't exist before jump freighters. Mineral importation existed - and was even more effective - before jump freighters through carrier jumping of passive targeters in iterons stuffed in a carrier SMA, or oversized guns fitted to destroyers in a carrier SMA. It has never been the case that 0.0 alliances supplied themselves trit locally through mining. It almost sounds like you are proud of that. facepalm
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 606	Posted - 2014.07.02 18:13:00 - [4] - Quote Retar Aveymone wrote: Manfred Sideous wrote: Rivr Luzade wrote: Retar Aveymone wrote: I haven't finished analyzing the rest of your ideas, but you do yourself no favors by claiming mineral importation didn't exist before jump freighters. Mineral importation existed - and was even more effective - before jump freighters through carrier jumping of passive targeters in iterons stuffed in a carrier SMA, or oversized guns fitted to destroyers in a carrier SMA. *It has never been the case that 0.0 alliances supplied themselves trit locally through mining.* It almost sounds like you are proud of that. facepalm Not really just stating how it is. I mean I am proud to be part of my alliance I am proud that we are a effective team. In that sense im very proud. He's talking to me, but what point he thinks he's poorly making is unclear to me. I highlighted it. Pardon that I didn't consider your situation more.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 606	Posted - 2014.07.03 10:50:00 - [5] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: Manfred Sideous wrote: Retar Aveymone wrote: Manfred Sideous wrote: So you are arguing about semantics now? I mean now that we have all these outpost and all these other industrial ships that can move much higher volumes than a Iteron what's the problem? Your post begins with your recollection of how great yesteryear was and all of the great things that happened. My point is basically that you remember it completely incorrectly, and that the glories of pre-Cold War EVE are not a thing to use as inspiration. I've always advocated for greater self-sufficiency for 0.0 and I greatly dislike the bipolar cold war nature of current 0.0, where a conflict anywhere is a conflict with everyone. The former we're actually getting somewhat in this patch and I hope CCP continues iterating on it. The latter is a hard problem that is not advanced by pointing to a glorious past that never happened. If you want to argue we should remove jump drives, then you've got to do it by saying how it will make today better tomorrow, not by saying weren't things great as I recall them when your recollection is faulty. Ill concede that perhaps my timeline might be blurred together. But ultimately a more inclusive nullsec with more conflict drivers is for the best. Currently both of our alliances are part of the problem. I honestly can't see any changes CCP can make that would shake up nullsec enough. Other than changing jumpdrives jumpbridges to like I suggest other than adding a ton of new space. But im afraid that would only be a temporary stopgap. CCP could remove sov altogether, or at least from a very significant percentage of null. That. Of course you just crush any small entity that takes a "claim" on a system and cultivates it. However, if you continue doing that, you should ask yourself why you complain about lack of activity and conflict in Sov 00 to begin with and why you constantly post this kind of threads. On the other hand, if there is no sov as we know it, big blocks lose a lot of control over space and especially space they don't use. This allows other people and entities to get a foothold deep inside their territory and spark off conflicts, without the need to directly infiltrate an alliance first and rot it from within (which can be done in addition to make the assault all the more effective). No sov as we know it ~~forces~~ encourages people to own less space, but to cultivate that space to their full potential in order to use fancy structures, bonuses and modules. And it allows more people to do things in Sov 00, who don't want to be part of a big block. But in the end, and as so many people tout day in day out: EVE is just a game; and as in real-life, a situation with many possibilities and lots of choice always and inevitably boils down to only 2 remainders. Black and White. And since humans, and especially EVE players, don't want to change their mentality, because it's difficult, whatever change to mechanics and features are introduced, it will always end back in the initial situation. IT is even surprisingly that we have had so many power blocks for such a long time. If I remember right, it was around 8 in 2011/12, down to 6 in 2012, down to 4 in 2013, down to 3 in 2013/2014 and now down to 2. Go figure...
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 607	Posted - 2014.07.04 07:19:00 - [6] - Quote Tikitina wrote: That in itself would do a lot to limit power projection since only smaller sized ship raiding forces would have the ability to get places quick. How's that? You'd just bridge or jump Alpha Maels 100 km away from a bubbled fleet and kill them. For instance.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 607	Posted - 2014.07.04 07:43:00 - [7] - Quote I am pretty sure that 250 Maels or Megas make a difference. ^^
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 610	Posted - 2014.07.05 16:18:00 - [8] - Quote GodsWork wrote: mynnna wrote: Manfred Sideous wrote: A bunch of condescending bull**** Yeah so that's the last time I come anywhere near apologizing to you or people like you. Call me when you've gotten over the idea that because some things were better (or "better") in 2006, they all were. mynnna we don't like tyrants... you are the problem and we are trying to solve you the problem. Just do us all a favor you and your whole bunch just quit eve.... Actually the game does like tyrants. If it wouldn't, not that many people would hush under the overly protective wings of neither CFC nor N3. However, neither tyrants nor saints should be able to hold systems they don't actively use. No sov, only implied claims. Benefits like current sov depending on your usage. Easily solves the problems. That would also give the term "Influence Map" the proper mechanics in the game and satisfy its definition.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 610	Posted - 2014.07.06 07:21:00 - [9] - Quote KanashiiKami wrote: but i dont think ccp will do it. because they are using EVE as a real life simulator for real world statistics somehow In the real world, we don't have invulnerable structures guaranteeing the sovereignty over a certain area. There are borders and border guards; however, mostly the borders of your influence are agreed upon in treaties and via negotiations, and they can easily be removed, changed or your sovereign space taken over or occupied by a new group. (All happening right now). The same would happen in EVE without sov structures and sov as it is: First of: I am opposed to limiting power projection with capitals. Whatever you do to limit that, you hurt exactly those smaller entities more in the process than big alliances and coalitions. As always.Gäó Secondly, your influence and your sovereignty as an alliance and coalition would stretch as far and wide as you make use of your system and can enforce your claims. With enough usage (PVE (as it is right now) and PVP (something new, I guess), you can solidify the claims on your systems and if you have reached a certain threshold, you can deny docking for non-blues, with a little bit more, you can upgrade your system in your station (or if there is no station, with some kind of marker) and use fancy POS modules. If you don't use your claimed space, your claim decays and everyone else can do thingsGäó in that system. If you don't have used that system to begin with, you have no right to claim it to begin with. Moreover, until you have reached that threshold of activity, the whole world can dock in stations in 00. And don't start complaining about that PVE is the hinge on where your claims dangle round. This is already the case, has been for many years, and is a good and easily quantifiable measurement. Giving you the opportunity to use PVP as well in order to solidify your, is a risk as some people have nothing better to do to exploit it right from the start -- By trying to kill thousands of rookie ships or dozens of battleships to keep their claim. If it's that what you want to do in the game, you should surely have the freedom to do so.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 610	Posted - 2014.07.06 08:40:00 - [10] - Quote I guess Ezwal's sweeping was a little bit to throughout. CCP Fozzie had posted in this thread, that even though there's no dev response, they would still read topics. Guess, Ezwal forgot to untick the check box. Or Fozzie remove the post himself ...

Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 610	Posted - 2014.07.07 07:17:00 - [11] - Quote Manfred Sideous wrote: Most of the fun of freighter ops back in the day was the content it created. More content drivers! You mean the nowadays 100% assured drop on your freighter protection fleet, which instablaps the freighter and smokes the rest of the fleet? ^^ That's not really content... that's shallow entertainment because the opposing party is incapable of creating meaningful content on their own. Instead, the dire need for easy targets to fix killboards or have something green show up killboards at all prohibits such activities in most cases these days.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 634	Posted - 2014.07.19 18:18:00 - [12] - Quote Dhaq wrote: Axe Coldon wrote: To me its simple. Expansion. More space to fight over. Much more. Make Eve Bigger! Simply adding more systems would just result in the number of systems held by the current blocs being incremented by X. Maybe some small skirmishes to begin with, and then we are right back to where we are today. Especially since you need to go through their space in the most likely case to get from High/Low sec to that kind of remote space.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 635	Posted - 2014.07.21 08:15:00 - [13] - Quote Arknos III wrote: Anthar Thebess wrote: Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: I posted a simple idea in another thread along these lines. How about simply removing sov structures and making system control actually come from controlling the system with players and ships? Perhaps gate control system plexes similar to FW plexes could be used to provide a corp governance over a gate. Control all gates and you control the system. Make it a plex like a deaspace plex and aggressors then need to fight their way through defenses (and can in turn defend their rearguard) to gain control. In addition some kind of structure or module would be required to prevent forces bridging into a system. Make them fight their way in with beachheads at gates etc. Spread the combat across multiple fleets hitting several gates to spread TiDi. Just a few ideas... Sorry nothing will change for next 17 months. CCP Please tell me if i'm wrong. It's unfortunate but we have to accept that. There are a lot of issues in the game as important as SOV that need addressing. For instance the anti-social culture in highsec likely causes more boredom and subscription losses than the annoying SOV mechanics. And how do you suggest, CCP should resolve the "anti-social culture" in High sec? It's not like they are doing anything to improve that with Crius; in fact, they make it worse. And to be quite frank: Everything that ~~forces~~ encourages people into more cooperation without any benefits and only increased risk (or in my case even if there were more benefits), is only going to drive people away instead of making them engage in more cooperation. There is already a great deal of cooperation possible, if players desire to do that; ~~forcing~~ encouraging then to cooperate more against their will is a poor approach.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 637	Posted - 2014.07.22 06:45:00 - [14] - Quote Madbuster73 wrote: Everybody is looking for a better SOV system, while there is already one right under their nose. Use the Faction Warfare SOV mechanics, but only bigger... Instead of novice, small, medium and large plexes, go for: Medium, Large and Extra Large Plexes. Everybody can see how Faction Warfare mechanics drive good conflicts and brings a lot of players in space. That is exactly what 0.0 needs. You mean the farming in T1 ships with stabs?
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 637	Posted - 2014.07.22 08:26:00 - [15] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Rivr Luzade wrote: Madbuster73 wrote: Everybody is looking for a better SOV system, while there is already one right under their nose. Use the Faction Warfare SOV mechanics, but only bigger... Instead of novice, small, medium and large plexes, go for: Medium, Large and Extra Large Plexes. Everybody can see how Faction Warfare mechanics drive good conflicts and brings a lot of players in space. That is exactly what 0.0 needs. You mean the farming in T1 ships with stabs? In nullsec stabs , don't help to much, or 2 years waiting for change. I was rather referring to the general practice of mindless farming practices that FW really is.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 637	Posted - 2014.07.24 07:06:00 - [16] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: Erutpar Ambient wrote: I want to own a piece of space. So basically you want to online a TCU, right? That, or you want to be recognized as a power to deal with? About a couple of weeks ago I personally have "claimed" a system in nullsec. I didnt online a TCU there, mind you. But if carebears in that system wouldn't pay a rent to me, they will suffer consequences. And they know that, so they pay. You see the difference? When I want a piece of space - I go and take it. So you are proving his point that you cannot have space in Sov 00 without renting it?
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 637	Posted - 2014.07.24 07:37:00 - [17] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: Rivr Luzade wrote: So you are proving his point that you cannot have space in Sov 00 without renting it? :facepalm: That is me who gets money. I dont pay the rent, I take it. Oh, and I'm not a goon or n3. Exactly.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 637	Posted - 2014.07.24 18:09:00 - [18] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: Fourteen Maken wrote: We'd like to go out there, set up in an empty system and build something for ourselves Could you explain, what is the exact obstacle that prevents you from doing this? I seriously dont understand that. I am not a part of CFC or N3, nor do I pay the rent, yet I live in nullsec. Why cannot you do the same? Where're your ships and your equipment? Low sec or NPC 00?
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 637	Posted - 2014.07.24 20:27:00 - [19] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: NPC null So you are not living in that 00 sec, you demand rent from Sov 00 holders and henceforth Eruptar's point stands: You either need to be part of a big blob, or you rent to live in Sov 00 sec. How about you try to live in Sov 00 without being part of their gang for a change to see how your statement works out?
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 638	Posted - 2014.07.25 06:48:00 - [20] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: Text Our definitions of living somewhere are clearly very different. For me, it implies that you have your ships, equipment and in-space assets around your base of operations. What you do, however, is storing them away in a random area or space and then roam around far away from that area. That's not living in the operation area, With the rest of the harassing people who support big blocks, however, I agree completely. More people should do it. But I am afraid that the big blocks then find ways to impeded that by influencing CCP... vOv

Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 658	Posted - 2014.08.10 21:35:00 - [21] - Quote Lu Ziffer wrote: Yes the old blocks will claim some of the systems. But if there are enough systems so they can not claim them all in 2years, then there is space for a new coalition to rise. There are a lot of bored players in these coalitions who would leave them if there was a new challange. These players who go away will be the reason for some alliances to disband. You forget that you then have to go through the old blocks' space to reach that new space - which is about as possible as making a worm walk on 2 legs. If you have to go through CFC or N3 space to reach your home beyond their space, you need to be blue to them and nothing is going to change. Besides, CFC and N3 are very well capable of claiming as much new space as they want, simply because of the above reason. Whoever snacks space first can just be starved to death in the outer reaches.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 677	Posted - 2014.08.20 08:57:00 - [22] - Quote Whoever sees EVE as a game is a fool. When you consider the amount of time and effort that you need to put into the game, EVE is a hobby and not just a mere game. Thus, it is necessary to go to great lengths to protect what you create in your hobby; especially when the rest of the other people in this hobby have nothing better to do than to make your time miserable.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 677	Posted - 2014.08.20 10:43:00 - [23] - Quote If you nerf logi, the game just reverts back to the previous Alpha over sustained DPS crap. I doubt that this is any better.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 677	Posted - 2014.08.20 11:05:00 - [24] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Rivr Luzade wrote: If you nerf logi, the game just reverts back to the previous Alpha over sustained DPS crap. I doubt that this is any better. It is a lot better than having smaller fleets completely unable to even cause any damage to a larger one. You mean sniper tornadoes? Because smaller fleets in closer combat would get blapped off the field with a couple of Maels. Or Tengus, Apocs, Mega, Ishtars, Muninns, ...
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 677	Posted - 2014.08.20 15:57:00 - [25] - Quote Gavin Dax wrote: To partially fix this, logi (and IMO also EWAR ships) should not have range safety. They should be forced to stay fairly close to the rest of the fleet. In addition, logistics ships should not be able to receive remote reps (some sort of triage equivalent?). That way, at the very least a smaller fleet engaging a large one could still inflict damage by targeting logistics ships. Perhaps they can still rep at long range, but at a severe penalty to what they rep now. Some sort of steep falloff as has been suggested before. Already in the game and called Damps.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 687	Posted - 2014.09.01 08:08:00 - [26] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: Just by ratting you would get a lot of minerals for new ship hulls. Minerals that are quite hard to move , but can easily fuel hulls for local PVP. That is exactly why CCP effectively removed it from the game.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 687	Posted - 2014.09.01 08:39:00 - [27] - Quote We certainly have different opinions on Fun. I rather have the expensive ships stay expensive so that people are getting a bit more wary about using them. Less expensive ships in battles means more smaller ships and in turn means more fun. Unfortunately this isn't really working either because mineral prices have dropped significantly. Another thing is that EVE ought not to be considered a mere game, it should be considered a hobby, a life simulation in space. Short term, henceforth, should play a minor role and long term motivation should play a big role. Concentrating on this thick idea of providing quick fun and quick dumb PVP for the sake of it, is not what I think is good for the game. It should be possible, but concentrating the entire game's activities around it -- or quick and easy PVE for that matter -- is detrimental for the game.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 687	Posted - 2014.09.01 08:54:00 - [28] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: What I'm suggesting? Cheep T1 Hulls. Influence of T1 minerals on T2 hulls is small, the same goes for the Faction/Pirate ships. No, what you suggest is that everything becomes cheaper, which in turn means that with ever bigger numbers there is ever less need for small ships. Why should I bring a BS if a carrier costs 500M, why bring a carrier if an Scap costs a mere 5B. In such an environment there is no place for smaller ships. At all.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 718	Posted - 2014.09.22 07:41:00 - [29] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: But how hard is to create XL size gates that allow for supers and capital to pass. How hard is to add to JB , jumpdrive and titan/BO bridge 1 line of code : IF my.region <> destination.region THEN DenyJump. If you exclude BO and JF from that, I can live with it. Sort of. Would make it a whole lot easier to kill small people's carriers, Supers and Titans by the hands of big players, but I guess that's the price of less mobility. (semi-sarcastic)
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 718	Posted - 2014.09.22 10:22:00 - [30] - Quote Quote: Capitals will be killed only when they will not scout them self. Small people usually do not move their capital fleets few times a week around the map. Current state moving of capitals : I move my JFs around at least 1 time a week, I use my carrier at least 1 time per week/couple of times per month, we BLOPS drop a couple of times per month, we drop dreads a couple of times per month. Across several regions, especially the JF to stock our market and carriers to deploy to different areas of interest outside of Syndicate, so there is any to begin with. With my JF, I cross at least 4 regions with 1 jump. With your suggestion, I would have to jump the JF to a region/border gate, jump through and jump again. This would render logistics for me and the rest of my alliance and a lot of small entities, especially in remote areas like Delve, Stain or Outer Ring or fiercely contested areas like Curse or Core Fountain, into a task that's nearly impossible to achieve. That can't be the goal of such a mechanic. BLOPS dropping would be hampered as well, as BLOPs would have to jump to several border/region gates to get into the target region, rendering their already limited usefulness even less useful.

Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 718	Posted - 2014.09.22 11:03:00 - [31] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: [1]Sorry but the same rules have to be for every one. [2]So in order to move from Paragon soul to nearest lowsec you WILL have to move your super or capital in this manner : 1. Paragon Soul 2. Esoteria 3. Stain 4.Catch 5. Curse/Providence 6. Lowsec 6 gates to cross , 6 places that someone could , do something to you. At the same time when you want to move using S size gates : 1. Paragon Soul 2. Stain 3. Lowsec (Yes you have to fly in stain between systems that are exit point from Paragon Soul and entry point for lowsec connection) [1] This is exactly the problem. The same rules may apply, but their consequences differ extremely for different number scenarios. A 500 people alliance cannot protect its moving assets against a 10,000 people alliance, yet a 10,000 people alliance can protect its moving assets against a 500 people as well as a 10,000 people alliance/coalition. The shield of sheer numbers protects a 10,000 people alliance's assets from hotdrops by smaller entities, but smaller entities do not have such shielding. Same rules does not level the field at all, as consequences are not the same. [2] Wrong. You would move in the following way. 01. Paragon Soul 02. Esoteria 03. (Esoteria (midpoint station/system, especially in large regions like Feyth) 04. Esoteria 05. Stain 06. Stain 07. Catch 08. Catch 09. Curse/Providence 10. Curse/Providence 11. Lowsec 12. Low sec destination. And this is probably an optimal case. You have to cross at least 6 gates, which means at least 12 places where you can be assaulted and a giant load of work for anyone who does not have enough people to form a cyno/scout army. Again completely ruling out smaller entities from space. I can't really see any benefits here that prevent bigger players from doing what they are doing while enabling smaller groups do anything all.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 718	Posted - 2014.09.22 12:02:00 - [32] - Quote Anthar Thebess wrote: People that will want to hotdrop your logistic op will have to be already on place , and yes logistic op - as you will escort your jump freighters. They are already there. SC., MOROS, TISHU, CFC, PL, NC., BL, Marmite and you name it - they all have sizeable parties in exactly the areas that you want to make impassable for anyone who cannot provide the shielding with numbers. Quote: 1. Less space reachable fast , less possibility for hotdrops, more dedication to holding your sov in the matter of constant moving and not sitting in 1 system that have half of eve in 1-2 station midpoints. More safety for the ratters and mission runners in the least reachable areas of space.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 718	Posted - 2014.09.23 05:51:00 - [33] - Quote Arsine Mayhem wrote: Can't imagine any game developer that took pride in their work would be happy with the present state of null sec, let alone have it go on for so long. Bot lords "RENTING" null, really? So that leaves a big part of this game as a sad joke. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/some-ideas-on-eve/an-influence-sovereignty-system/ Do something. How about you do something? CFC's PBLRD is not better at all. While B0T and NA. at least get people into 00 Sec (as seen by the numerous yellow dots on the map representing Players in Space in the last 30 Minutes), PBLRD mostly holds empty space. Infiltrate CFC and PL/N3 and spy around to spark war. Make them attack each other. Support smaller entities like TRI, MOA, Fountain Core or other insurgents (maybe even PASTA). Changes to the Sov System are the ultimate goal, but the Players of the game let it come this far after all because they are the lazy and safety-seeking activity drivers of the game. And while PL/N3. rather play in 00 Sec and pull their shenanigans there, CFC prefers to stay in High sec and gank freighters and miners.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 718	Posted - 2014.09.23 06:53:00 - [34] - Quote This certainly is a problem; however, whatever CCP does, nothing is going to change if the same mindset, attitude and way of thinking and acting of the players continues to prevail. If no one is willing to take risks or sparks of a war (this is after all what most players seem to want and don't want at the same time) and continue farming Providence and Brave instead, any mechanics change is bound to change nothing on the state of 00 Sec itself.
Rivr Luzade Coreli Corporation Ineluctable. 721	Posted - 2014.09.26 07:44:00 - [35] - Quote I've heard that the CSM is happy with the changes, so it can't be all that monumental.

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,09s, ref 20250905/1227
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

bitcoin: 1CHRiBBArqpw5Yz7x5KS2RRtN5ubEn5gF

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.