Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 62 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3650
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 03:46:00 -
[91] - Quote
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. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
492
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 03:57:00 -
[92] - Quote
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.
Yeah don't be our elected servant or anything. I am just replying in kind your original reply was full of condescending and insult based reply. I'm sorry babby I thought you would be able to handle back what you dished out. You set the tone with a adversarial approach so uh yea.
mynnna wrote: There are literally no redeeming qualities to your post whatsoever
**** needs changing, I'm happy to admit that, but goddamn am I glad you have no involvement in it.
Yeah don't be our elected servant or anything. I am just replying in kind your original reply was full of condescending and insult based reply. I'm sorry I thought you would be able to handle back what you dished out. I mean you havn't presented a credible alternative at all just stood and shouted " No I don't like it " . Lead follow or get the F out of the way but don't try to stand in the way and act like you are some source on high. I've heard so many times no Manny this idea or that idea won't work. So many times I have proven you naysayers wrong. Because in the end all you can do is say nay. @EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
492
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 04:00:00 -
[93] - Quote
So again do you have a better idea Mynna or is no and insults the extent of you're rebuke? @EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny |
Arronicus
Caldari Navy Reconnaissance
1080
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 04:28:00 -
[94] - Quote
Elusive Panda wrote:I really don't think putting rules on the size of alliances/corp will solve anything, these entities exist outside the game, the only thing this will create is a multiplication of assets holding "alt" alliances controlled by the same people.
GodsWork is pretty thoroughly convinced that the large alliances like PL/BOT, Gewns/PRBLD, and NC./NA. would rather split apart and give up most of their sov, than to use alts to create a pile of compartment alliances, and hold just as much sov as before, but with new added bonuses to counterbalance the increased effort. |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
492
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 04:30:00 -
[95] - Quote
Yeah you can't put arbitrary limits on social paradigms and not expect players to game it. @EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny |
Mashka Cybertrona
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
0
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 05:17:00 -
[96] - Quote
So it boils back down to variables, throw us some dam curve balls CCP!
How about cosmic storms that sometimes accelerate a jump drives range putting them randomly on the other side of the map (or even in unknown space!), make electrical interference screw up your ability to plot a jump correctly so you land in random areas of space, even fail to jump occasionally so you end up with 2-3 capitals that are stranded on the field.
Lets have Star gates malfunction from time to time and leave it up to the players to fix them. Have them fluctuate in destination as a glitch sometimes making travel easier other times making it harder. Turn jump bridges into more reliable gates, sepeate them from POS and have them as an anchorable structure that can be hacked to gain access, how about hacking a jumpbridge to land pilots that jump through it at a different destination? used for a dirty trap or a cunning get away plan.
What about restricting what is visible to you in a system to your ships scanner? change certain ships default scan ranges based on class, suddenly scanning/max scanner range ships become more useful to fleet movement (via fleet warp mechanics), lets get rid of local chat as a broken intel tool in favor of the for-mentioned. Build up more specialist roles within fleets so 1 person can't just login 12 accounts and do it all (like most large scale FC these days).
How about adding bigger critical strike bonuses so you randomly get that sweet shot that actually "wrecks" and enemy vessel? or have ships malfunction so sometimes the MWD will not shutdown, the guns jam, the drones turn on each other, the smartbomb hits your hull, reps and remote reps overload shield (or armor counterparts respectively) causing them to shut down for a cycle due to an error.
Throw some more tactical choices our way so ships are not all one cookie cutter fitting and doesn't have a counter cookie cutter fitting. Hell lets do something crazy like throw out the idea of racial guns that are slowly becoming practically the same weapon systems and give turret ships a generic turret bonus and switch it up with the weapon systems, make laser beams actual beams that slowly increase in damage over time so hitting larger/tankier ships makes them the choice weapon but against fast hard hitting ships less desirable, Artillery actually artillery hitting way out there but having 0 close range ability.
Lets have dreads that can shoot broadcasted targets from across a system, like an actual dread would. Lets enable carriers/supers to have multiple pilots that can take control and warp fighter wings around system.
Why not have deployable Titans which can become a kind of private defended star gate, connect two up to establish a link to a warzone from your deployment zone that can extend their shields similar to a POS with the same reinforcement mechanics in place.
Why not allow super-capitals to refuel themselves on energy harvested from stars? make it a finite resources so multiple super-capitals would have to travel to different systems to recharge their fuel bay. Maybe depleating a systems star could cause system wide effects, everything becomes colder as an example. If this refueling system was implemented it would put supers more at risk to gain their benefits, refueling a titan so you can use it to jump a fleet would mean babysitting the titan at the sun prior to the op, putting said titan at risk.
Lets have Ewar back, force multipliers were nerfed because they were "OP" just like speed was "OP" now power projection is "OP". I miss force multipliers, I miss having an ewar wing, you know what if 10 falcon pilots want to jam 4 people from the hostile fleet each essentially tieing up 40 pilots with 10 I guess removing that threat becomes priority rather than an all out turkey shoot of blob a shoots blob b in the kneecaps until one of the blobs can remember what they were fighting over in the first place and goes home.
While we are at it, lets remove Cyno. Instead let everyone use the capital navigation tab to find out were they can jump to and allow them to jump blindly into systems, jumping to the largest celestial in the system (usually the sun). Lets see Star Harvesting combined with Star Camping. Combined with all the variables mentioned ealier in the thread, you could accidentally find yourself in the middle of a hostile zone, your alliance could send a fleet to defend you but although 90% would make it, 10% would end up slightly off course and they too could fall prey to awaiting hostile entities.
Oh how eve would be so much more fun I I owned it :D
|
Galphii
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
237
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 06:45:00 -
[97] - Quote
Looking at just the removal of jump drives in their current form, it brings about some interesting changes. Consider sovereign space to be represented by the pacific and Atlantic oceans, and the entity is the US. They maintain naval bases on both coasts and in strategic locations to respond to threats from the surrounding area. If their ships had jump drives, they'd have one base, and simply send their entire fleet where it's needed as required. You could look on them holding the entire pacific as 'buffer' space against hostile fleets.
But as this is reality, navies have to escort cargo ships through hostile waters, and patrol shipping lanes. They have to do surveillance on neighbours to predict possible threats. Jump drives, especially jump freighters, remove the need for all of that. Captains and crews simply sit around and wait for something to happen. Hardly makes for compelling gameplay. Jump drives make nullsec easier, and while there is a concern about too much drudgery with logistics, quick and safe access to all of eve was not the right solution.
There are other factors to consider when fixing so in general, such as reasons to fight, but the OP has the right idea. X |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3650
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 07:16:00 -
[98] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:So again do you have a better idea Mynna
Not so much when it comes to power projection. Criticism could have been more constructive but I certainly don't need an idea of my own to deliver it, no more than a doctor has to catch something to recognize and diagnose it. Far as I'm concerned virtually everything about power projection is wrapped tightly around other mechanics that extensively dictate how and why and to what extent power is projected and I'd rather work from the perspective of revamping those to inform power projection changes, instead of blindly swinging for a 2006 era that never actually existed the way you remember and definitely never will again.
Call it a difference in philosophy.
But hey - it's a starting point, and to be fair here, I do see one tiny, almost insignificant aspect about it that I like, so who can say where that leads.
Manfred Sideous wrote:Yeah you can't put arbitrary limits on social paradigms and not expect players to game it. Least we can unequivocally and reasonably agree on something. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Smugest Sniper
Salient Logistics Inc. Northern Associates.
15
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 08:01:00 -
[99] - Quote
Actually I'll tell you pretty much entirely why you can not ever have local null production outscale highsec in production levels needed for even some small corporations.
-Tritanium Pyrite and Mexalon shortage Holes -Volume output differences -"chinese labor syndrome"
I've been a miner in null for 6 years, I've operated in almost every ******* space in the game, and I can tell you bar none why you can't get most of what you need out of null operations entirely.
Tritanium requirements of Stations, Capitals, and anything really done en mass are so staggeringly huge, that given the lack of veldspar in null belts, it takes you far too long to even reasonably aquire the trit you need efficiently.
Even when you do, you can run into regional holes for Pyrite and Mex,
To quote for scale on a Niddahoger you need 57,938,273 trit (me 3) compared to 13,991,433 pyrite(also me3)
To mine the trit alone, you need to spend almost 65% of your mining hours on Spud or cherry picking veld which is godawful to do.
If you wanted to make local production better, give us a bigger Tritanium haul on top of the other changes to ABC's so it's actually practical to mine them.
Also a better spread and refresh time on industrial upgraded belts would be a major help on it too.
As it stands the Bloodtear industial report from back in 2012 is still the holy bible of null mining.
As to force projection issues, all it would take is making it so a cyno jammed system would stop all cyno's Black-ops or not, and make the system uncyclable, if it's jammed you can't turn it off except blowing up the expensive IHUB upgrade inside it.
Since blops fleets are almost worse than capitals for basic infrastructure and just trying to fly around and have fun making isk in null.
Capitals are fine, so are all that other ****, the problem is in the extent at which it becomes harder and harder to obtain, build, and use them for anything.
As it stands in 3 days of 16 hour operation times(or more) I could build a carrier by mining with 1 character. Prints etc not withstanding.
Double that or so for a freighter or a dread.
There is a discrepancy in that fact, I can build a carrier the omni-tool of power, for less than a giant cargo ship, or a combat exclusive power house.
Then of course, it would take a month or so to build a super given the same parameters, and maybe 2-3 for a titan.
Divide this time over more toons (N+1) and you can crap out any ship you want in days.
That is the fundamental disadvantage of null over high-sec. Because noobs will sell hours of labor at chinese sweatshop prices compared to what it's actually worth for work done.
Highsec has a higher N+ and generally always will than null unless you can make it reasonably safer, and more freindly for someone who's running mining operations to do so.
In short, if null alliances could get past the culture of abhoring rock touching filth wizards and Hulkageddons, null could see a proliferation of massive scaled industrial improvements and make high-sec a ghost town of noobs and stubborn cowards.
Culturally we've done more to harm this game than help, and if we don't stop ******* **** up for logistical and support structures. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3650
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 08:28:00 -
[100] - Quote
Smugest Sniper wrote:words
tl;dr: Importing from highsec means drawing on the mining power of "every miner in highsec", and (based on old diagoras numbers) there are something like three times as many of them as there are miners in all of nullsec, but any given corp or alliance obviously only gets a tiny fraction of that and trit production in nullsec is (from the best trit/m3 ratio ore) about 6-7 times what you get in highsec, with the end result being that local production means having a miniscule fraction of the output that you have available to you by importing.
Is that about the gist of what you're saying?
To be fair, the fact that CCP buffed compressed ore so as to leave compression/importation mechanisms available despite the refining nerf means they realize and acknowledge this. I think.
I don't think there's anything to be concerned with around your point about looking down on miners and so forth. If it's worth the time and effort people in nullsec will mine and do industry and so forth and just look down on those doing the same in empire. It's not exactly a large culture shift for the common "Industrial players are a bunch of whiny entitled carebears who contribute nothing and expect everything" attitude to become "Most industrial players are a bunch of whiny entitled carebears who contribute nothing and expect everything but I'm a valued member overcoming the challenges for the betterment of my alliance" Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1199
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 09:27:00 -
[101] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:7 minutes across the universe sure is kind of stupid for a ship like an archon when an interceptor need an hour. Yeah, pretty much this. New Eden is far too small with the current mechanics.
More broadly, I WANT to want to go to null. But the current options of join the blob, bow the knee or rent have zero appeal for me. And no, I don't know how to fix it :) Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
592
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 09:32:00 -
[102] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:7 minutes across the universe sure is kind of stupid for a ship like an archon when an interceptor need an hour. Yeah, pretty much this. New Eden is far too small with the current mechanics. More broadly, I WANT to want to go to null. But the current options of join the blob, bow the knee or rent have zero appeal for me. And no, I don't know how to fix it :)
Completely agree with this, the current options are very unpalatable to many I think hence the 80/20 split between other areas and null. WH space has much more appeal to me as it limits the blob/renting mechanics. |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Rim Worlds Protectorate
142
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 10:10:00 -
[103] - Quote
Let us not also forget the nerfs to Capital industry that have occurred multiple times to make mineral moving more cumbersome.. Drone alloys vanished which we were able to move massive amounts of minerals with to build Capitals.. and as of the 22nd Module compression gets Burned. While they are adding POS compressing to everything and turning the rorqual to an overpriced Booster. Instant Refining, Instant Compression. In order for PL, CFC, N3 to maintain Capital superiority it needs logistical supplies to maintain building Capitals. By nerfing down the Logistical aspect of EVE, you are killing Null Industry that CCP has been working so hard to get established.
I love combat as much as the next guy.. Hate Tidi, but love super battles. But If Industry gets Nerfed all the way down, so does replacement lines for Titans, Carriers, dreads, supercaps. While we all Scream Thank F'n god.. Death to all Supers.. you are also now slaughtering all the Capsuleers spent years on creating the perfect titan or supercap pilots. Why keep that titan alt Subbed.. his titan Died and since Supply trains got nerfed.. there isnt even a supercap available to put him in. While power projection does need a fix, I won't argue that. This would not be a good way to do it.
Many players have mentioned forcing Alliances to actually use all that empty space. I think that Idea tends to work out best. If alliances actually have to remain in their space and keep it farmed, that forces them to stay at home more often and to hold less space. If suddenly your Ihub itself or TCU had requirements to meet then having forces in that system to use it would be more of a requirement. Renters are one way to look at it now. But say if there is space not being used.. It might degrade and the longer it's left alone.. start degrading quicker to the point the System Drops as the Populace revolts from the Sov holder. Things like EVE LEGION/Dust 514 could be used to throw further monkey wrenches in unused systems to cause them to revolt from the Sov holder, forcing them to return to the system to grab it back. I would say drop the Sov Costs of holding the aspect since now you actually have to tend to the system. This makes All that massive space suddenly have to be used, it's not easily handleable to keep all areas of Null farmed. Just make it to the point that it's doable to maintain decent Sov systems, But also a hassle if you want to own the world. That lets small and large blocs hold space Or fight over it etc.
With the amount of Nullbears out there, this type of a system wouldn't be that hard to maintain while not also owning everything due to having to move to those empty systems more often to maintain them. Systems drop to low services can be effected, instead of just... I owned X system deep behind the blue wall.. havent visited it for months.. but its still sov 5..
Just my 30 cents. |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3529
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 10:18:00 -
[104] - Quote
Zappity wrote:More broadly, I WANT to want to go to null. But the current options of join the blob, bow the knee or rent have zero appeal for me. And no, I don't know how to fix it :) you don't want to go to sov null, then. what's to fix? |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Hello-There
592
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 11:08:00 -
[105] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:Zappity wrote:More broadly, I WANT to want to go to null. But the current options of join the blob, bow the knee or rent have zero appeal for me. And no, I don't know how to fix it :) you don't want to go to sov null, then. what's to fix?
What's to fix is the current system where there is no point going to null without joining one of the existing coalitions. People want to be able to try to carve out their own chunk of space but it is currently in a choke hold of the existing groups so there is no point. It's fair enough that the greatest power can exert the greatest control but when this impacts the game by putting people off even bothering with null (about 80% of the players I think?) then it is an issue. CCP want more people in null so there needs to be incentives to do so. |
Shallazar
Biohazard. WINMATAR.
5
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 12:00:00 -
[106] - Quote
Manfred Sideous wrote:CHANGES
Maybe PL can take the initiative and drive some player initiated projection changes and stop dropping Aeon/Nyx fleets and anything and everything in lowsec space! |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
4030
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 12:05:00 -
[107] - Quote
IMHO the main problem with sov is the grind and rigidity of the current system. You grind indexes, or structures and have to keep grinding indexes just for maintenance and not grinding them is not an option else your system is worthless. To take a system you need to grind structures, then grind them again and it's a binary system where you either fail or completely break the opposition and grind some more structures.
It's not malleable. It offers no access point for smaller fleets. It is a must, not a can. It's an imperative, not a choice. That's where my ideas are coming from. To smash the big rigid structures and have the sov holders assemble them to their needs and allow smaller entities to bite at the giant's heels when they can't get to the balls. Sovereignty and Population New Mining Mechanics |
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
3529
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 12:31:00 -
[108] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:What's to fix is the current system where there is no point going to null without joining one of the existing coalitions. that's not what zap said and i don't care what ccp want |
GodsWork
Realm of God
1
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 13:37:00 -
[109] - Quote
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.... |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
7593
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 13:49:00 -
[110] - 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....
Do it yourself, then. Quit crying for CCP to do it for you. At least have the intestinal fortitude to do your own dirty work.
Because if you aren't willing to actually play the game unless CCP stacks the deck in your favor, do us all a favor and quit the game. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
Clean Up Local 2014.-á |
|
KanashiiKami
105
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 14:13:00 -
[111] - Quote
read and see what is fun to implement
key is make TCU the focus, no more need of other sov flipping structures like SBU
TCU enables upgrade of system resource architectures directly and it must be anchored inside a POS. TCU onlining and offlining requires 72 hours, TCU upgrade paths requires 72hours per cycle. each alliance/corp can hold on to a maximum of 10 TCUs (so in effect 10 systems max). this can be a new skill branch under leadership, or a flip over of
in order to hold 10 TCUs, each TCU in use need to be upgraded to level 10. a level 2 TCU enables the alliance to hold 2 TCU in operation max, until both TCU is upgraded to 3, then they are allowed to operate a 3rd TCU. each level of TCU upgrade also allows a system fleet wide passive buff (like the incursion debuff), shield resistance, damage etc. 10 upgrades, 10 buffs selectable, each system can be a different mix of buff.
and based on this TCU mechanism, it can be expanded into ship "license" granting roles. bare individuals can by themselves pilot a single ship, corp/alliance fleet ops have a piloting limiting factor, maximum number of cap units allowed undocked universe wide starts at 3 capital units. each TCU level upgraded adds 1 more cap piloting slots, maxing out at 13 (including freightors, roqs, orca, etc, as 1 cap unit, supercap could count as 1.5 units, a titan is maybe 3units). piloting license can be set by the generic corp leadership skill level 5, and cap piloting can be a corp level flag bestowed on pilots deemed fit to fly capital level ships (which could be added bonus to corp hangar security
a TCU-ed POS can field the option of a jump portal structure, this structure features POS to POS jumping w/o distance limits (a POS is powerful after all). the said jump modules can have a 72hr timer (so larger freightor corps will find this a nice feature)
the alliance can choose to have only 1 sov system and have only 1 TCU at level 10 and still field the max number of 13 cap ships if he has all 13 cap pilots under him.
onlining a TCU will create an auto system wide alliance fleet and system wide buffing countdown bar (opposite of incursion debuff), which after 72 hrs will give the full blown buff of whatever the alliance chief has trained for or chosen (cyno jam? mining yield? anomalies bonus? shield resistance?). pilots joining system wide fleet will need 72hrs to move from holding wing to fully buffed wings, only alliance members can join this fleet. consequently, attacking fleets must field a command ship armed with counter-TCU mod, and same rule applies, 72hrs in fleet to achieve full buff benefit.
in the actual warring system, only TCU buffed fleets will exact full damage on each other (subject to extra buffs so any ship/structure is effectively 4x more in EHP). pilots not under TCU buff of either side gets a 90% debuff inside a TCU-ed system (extent of debuff may vary). a TCU POS in the process of going online cycling a full 72hrs only get hit at a debuffed rate of damage.
addition to maxed level 10 TCU in the POS, a last final unlock can be achieve to unlock capital POS status. this enables cyno and warp gate lock for said system and enables a 2nd POS to be anchored 100km of capital POS. such an unlock can only be done at 1 POS per corp/alliance. a capital POS also enables ability to use additional capital sized POS weaponry at reduced PG/CPU costs. the said special capital POS defense module will be special, as normal ship armaments can be inserted into said structure, and it will be amplified into a capital sized weapon. eg : large nos --> capital nos, large hybrid --> capital hybrid, item stats are multiplied accordingly to reflect slower traversal and higher damage etc.
in TCU enabled fleet vs fleet war, only 1 each of opposing fleet can effectively fight each other in a single system. max pilots 50 + 50. non TCU-buffed fleets may interfere but with strong debuff, it will take over 2500 pilots to have same effect, by which time, latency will make any play very unpleassant. POS defensive guns and other operable structures like ECM are now also listed in the system fleet view for direct access and to effectively control maximum pilot limit.
a counter-TCU buffed fleet will feature vastly buffed stats for logistics groups (yes groups, long drawn war, you need more than a few of these pilots)
now with the above - rate of flipping sov is broken up into a longer than 24hr affair - a TCU unit is now the main focus structure to "manage" sov/system control and effects - a TCU can have 10 levels of upgrades and finally a capital tier. - a TCU will occupy approx 33% of a single large POS, but a capital TCU gives a double POS anchoring expansion - limit number of sovs per alliance/corp - limit number of cap/super cap deplyable. reduce capital swarms - improve defensive capability of POSs, with maximum TCU able to addon capital armaments. - TCU resistance buffs and reduced max ship count on both sides to the extent it is impossible to single volley any sub-cap ship let alone capital ships. - to completely wipe 10 TCUs will mean the losing side will have to restart buidling sov from square 1 totally starting from TCU level 1. so apart from TCU mechanics in play, large fleets swarming over each other are still possible, but now are limited to active TCU level limits maxing at 13 capital units per alliance fleet. - smaller POS operator can choose to expend 10 units of this cap limitation to online a concord protection module. yes pay concord to actively protect your POS in any sec space. - in non-null space. TCU will only affect a radius up to 300km. and running TCU is not cheap - there is now reason to form active smaller corps and hold active sov space, AND have some variety in null space - POS onlined defensive modules appear as units in fleet panel, including hired concord SWAT units. WUT ??? |
KanashiiKami
105
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 14:49:00 -
[112] - Quote
... continued
so the above format, allows for a single entity to field max 4 titans? (or maybe titan unit count can be 8, so max titans fielded per alliance is now only 1, plus other misc cap ships. then freightors / indy cap ships could count as 0.5 units?) WUT ??? |
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
841
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 15:49:00 -
[113] - Quote
removing the OP mechanic that jumpbridges/jumpdrives are would mostly fix power projection and would immediately create far more gameplay in general .. the things people actually want .. pretty simple solution CCP just be brave enough too do it Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
WarFireV
Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion
362
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 15:56:00 -
[114] - Quote
There are really thousands of different SOV systems you could come up with that might or might not be better then the current. Some of these would most likely just not be possible, but talking about what would make for a better system can lead to some general ideas of what everyone is looking for. Here are just a few points I see in common with everyone mostly.
1) SOV that is not being actively defended should be able to be taken much more easily then SOV that is being defended.
2) People actually defending their SOV should get some sort of advantage besides timezone advantage and docking rights.
Something that has been brought up a few times, but has not been talked about here yet is the idea of better terrain on the Eve map. Most of the North and the South of the map are flat plains with a bunch of forest for people to hind in(NPC nullsec/lowsec). This make them both very easy to invade. It is just down right impossible for someone to not have a foothold some where if they actually invade.
Any place there is actually some type of gap on the map becomes very powerful to those that own it. I can explain, the dronelands is basically a valley surround by a huge mountain range. There are a few paths you can invade with subcaps, but if you want capitals in there, you have only two ways to get in. There are a few more gaps in the map, like the divide between catch and delve, but not a whole lot more.
Adding in more gaps or some sort of blocks for jump drive. Forcing people to have to use certain gates/systems to go into certain regions, this would go along way to helping out in an overall SOV change. Maybe even moving the NPC nullsec pockets so people cant only just base out of them to defend/attack entire regions. Although let me be clear, if that was the only thing done it would be terrible. |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3653
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 16:09:00 -
[115] - 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....
Come out and say what you really feel, because I don't think "you should quit" is it. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
610
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 16:18:00 -
[116] - 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. |
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1742
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 17:02:00 -
[117] - Quote
Thread temporarily locked for some cleaning. ISD Ezwal Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
508
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 21:50:00 -
[118] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Benny Ohu wrote:Zappity wrote:More broadly, I WANT to want to go to null. But the current options of join the blob, bow the knee or rent have zero appeal for me. And no, I don't know how to fix it :) you don't want to go to sov null, then. what's to fix? What's to fix is the current system where there is no point going to null without joining one of the existing coalitions. People want to be able to try to carve out their own chunk of space but it is currently in a choke hold of the existing groups so there is no point. It's fair enough that the greatest power can exert the greatest control but when this impacts the game by putting people off even bothering with null (about 80% of the players I think?) then it is an issue. CCP want more people in null so there needs to be incentives to do so.
I feel for you bro. I think nullsec would be much cooler place if there were many smaller groups. If those smaller groups didn't have to worry about giant monolithic groups swooping in and crushing them. Or for that matter elite pvp groups with high concentrations of supercaps that can just overwhelm small groups. See the problem is when you make it easy for groups to move great distance and easy to hold sov without using it or living in it this state will exist. So we must deal with those 2 things. How we do that is making it so you need to use the space to hold it and make it so you can be self reliant in nullsec so you are not dependant on easy empire logistics.
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
508
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 22:02:00 -
[119] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:removing the OP mechanic that jumpbridges/jumpdrives are would mostly fix power projection and would immediately create far more gameplay in general .. the things people actually want .. pretty simple solution CCP just be brave enough too do it
The catch is to change things so nullsec are not reliant to a tether to empire to survive. That means they need to be able to attract miners and builders to be able to supply them with needed goods and services. I don't think people will mind giving up jumpbridges and jumpdrives as we know them now for a more vibrant and healthy nullsec. I say that if there are mechanics to supplement for how we do things now. Or we can be self reliant in nullsec without the tether to empire.
I personally benefit greatly from the current status quo. My alliance is one of the richest and best oufitted and most powerful in the game. However I love this game and care for its welfare. The current status quo is not conducive to a healthy or vibrant nullsec that encourages player growth. Because the bar for entry is so high and the lack of content drivers is so low. Myself a 10 year veteran and willing to adapt to a whole new way of doing things if it means that we end up with a more vibrant and healthier nullsec and by extension game. @EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny |
Manfred Sideous
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
508
|
Posted - 2014.07.05 22:16:00 -
[120] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:removing the OP mechanic that jumpbridges/jumpdrives are would mostly fix power projection and would immediately create far more gameplay in general .. the things people actually want .. pretty simple solution CCP just be brave enough too do it
It's not about bravery its about offering a credible alternative to why we need jumpdrives ( currently we need them to survive in nullsec because we cannot be self reliant we depend on our tether to empire).
@EveManny
https://twitter.com/EveManny |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 62 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |