Arbitrary rules are bad game mechanics mmkay!

You seem to fail to understand that coalitions exist outside the game mechanics. All your suggestion would do is increase the number of alt owned alliances in the game. Infinite isk doesn't just mean infinitd ships, it also means infinite plexes.

that's the beauty of this it does not limit your friends it just limits your ability of control. now people will have to trust some one else to do their bidding. more difficulty collecting easy isk from 64/32 moons etc etc.... if that isk driver is limited you remove the supper alliances that can afford a million titans....

You don't seam to understand that the increase on the number of alliances in a coalition will increase internal issues to any coalition. Human nature will break us apart. in todays coalitions one member of the coalition really owns the big moons the rest are just more cannons. in the future coalitions you will either have to collect rent on some one elses moon (people get tired of paying rent to a moon they have sov too eventually) or let them have those precious moons....


Trust me coalitions will trim big time..... I have seen it thats how oldies did it. When they had a good moon but had no industry they would bring a bigger industry ally to do the work... Turns out big industry ally learned how to live on 0.0 and took over the region eventually example from CDC and PURE....

+1
This is fundamentally true.

Large empires should have a risk of crumbling under the weight of corruption, and corruption is always about having intermediaries to controlling the ISK or taxes income.

The current income and tax control for alliance is "too perfect" in the game right now., which is fundamentally what causes the current issues.

Not really. i have occupied 0.0. and 100 man corp can make a living in a single system barely. realistically you need at least 50 active members per system. spread through different timezone to be comfortable.

Say a 10 corp ally has 10 systems then ideal alliance will be 500 man. ideal coalition will stretch a region so say 5-6 of these alliances.

There will be a long incubation period until all the alliances break up they initially will start paying rent to larger guys eventually forming their own coalitions and turning on the BIG 2

No, the internal pressure will remain the same because the number of actual persons involved will remain the same. Remember that the rank and file of these coalitions don't care about this moon or that moon. All they know is that SRPs are funded, so they go out to fight. The systems with the big moons will still go to the coalition coffers, whether those moons are controlled by one or one hundred alts. Since not every system has one of these big moons, there will still be plenty of space for those not mining a big moon.

Oh, and by your suggestion, no one would be able to pay rent on a moon they don't have sov on, so rental contracts will switch to who is allowed sov in a system. Flesh out your idea more and try to spend a bit more time on where the loopholes will be. If I can find loopholes big enough to fly a carrier through, guaranteed someone more experienced than I will find the others.

most of the coalition members dont even hold sov dude. look at the map and their rental agreements they show their own coalition members just go down the list

Okay, so find me one single CFC member who holds no sov.

Okay, so find me one single CFC member who holds no sov.

Just look at this map and weep.....
http://dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Verite/influence.png

count the big uns using your ten fingers.... what % of space is it just the top 10... There is alliances that have more star systems than your highsec npc governments.... skewed much?

Which is not what I asked. You are stating that coalition members hold no sov. I am asking you to prove it.

Li3 disbanded, they're part of the bastion now. Same with Gents.

You do not understand how coalitions work, yet you think you can somehow break them up. Apparently by forcing people to work closer together.

How does forcing an alliance, which lives in one system, to work with it's neighbours in order to get access to three of the four outposts, logistical routes, ice belts and enough space to actually rat in NOT force them to work closer together?

There would also NOT be any of the other things you seem to think would happen, since the same people would lean multiple holding alliances...

How does forcing an alliance, which lives in one system, to work with it's neighbours in order to get access to three of the four outposts, logistical routes, ice belts and enough space to actually rat in NOT force them to work closer together?

There would also NOT be any of the other things you seem to think would happen, since the same people would lean multiple holding alliances...

Yes but now multiple alliances are needed to hold a few constellation instead of one alliance to hold several regions.. Still dont see this??

And yes you are right alts can hold multiple corps... how long will that last? how long ?

Also in the midst of the chaos corps with greed in mind will slip in the bulk of this small alliances and that is where the cracks begin. Short term it will happen as you say. Long term on the other hand it will break up....

PS: one more thing... Also consider the sphere of influence. the sphere of influence will start to shrink as the ability of a mega alliance to move through several regions gets impeded. No more are they able to jump bridge to jump bridge until they are on the fighting front. there is a million things that will get complicated by this the end result is to make it so that more people are in charge of less space in 0.0 hence introducing the possibility of aggression towards once friends soon to be enemies...

How would this stop pl/goons from just creating an alliance called goons/pl holding with 10 alts in it all in different corps to hold 10 systems with good moons. rinse and repeat till all systems with good moons are controlled by the same people.


All this would do is have all the bad space that is currently under someone's sov but unoccupied not be owned by anyone. Then you will see how bad most of null is for stuff.

How long will that last?
now its just easier to take down space how often will they find out their sov is being challenged?
once every few weeks they refuel?
Now alts will have to maintain rather then 1 corp... You still don't see this how many towers have you had?
how many of them have you had get reinforced?
would you agree to logging in on your 3 alts every day? or three alts in multiple accounts?
how many accounts will this require?

Again adding to that level of difficulty and increasing the need of support increasing the chain of command....

Danika Princip here is the basic idea.... you work separate long enough that every one is on their own... all of a sudden that alliance 3 regions over is not worth the pain of jumping through the jump bridges of 5 different alliances and jumping through 5 0.0 gates to get there. Now your supper caps cannot concentrate in one alliance that has cynos on every tower on their entire side of the galaxy and they now cannot easily move from tower to tower. You also forget all the alliances that get forged in lowsec or wh space. They will be more likely to challenge a 500 man alliance even one in a very very very large coalition vs now where blob is constant. Also this spreads the benefits even among the existing coalitions...

@Lady Rift Im sure people do that. however you are one of few people that enjoy maintaining 12 alts... What do you do mine? at the end of the day it makes it that much more difficult. no shared corp hangers, no shared ships, now trade windows have to be used. Info system will require api's and forums to mount a defense. Keep in mind how jump portals work too... Multiple alliances cannot have an unbroken link of jump portals and you cannot use some one else cyno tower right?. that in itself will be a pain. Now instead of renting through one alliance you will need to maintain multiple alliances. Every aspect of the game becomes more difficult for 0.0 large alliances.

@Lady Rift Im sure people do that. however you are one of few people that enjoy maintaining 12 alts... What do you do mine? at the end of the day it makes it that much more difficult. no shared corp hangers, no shared ships, now trade windows have to be used. Info system will require api's and forums to mount a defense. Keep in mind how jump portals work too... Multiple alliances cannot have an unbroken link of jump portals and you cannot use some one else cyno tower right?. that in itself will be a pain. Now instead of renting through one alliance you will need to maintain multiple alliances. Every aspect of the game becomes more difficult for 0.0 large alliances.

.
.... the logistic people of null sec are crazy people and the things they do to get things to work is utterly insane so I have no doubt they will carry on.

Too many alts is certainly a part of the problem, as it allows a large control while minimizing the risk of sedition and personal interests.

What the OP is suggesting to do is to spread this action to actual players and not multiple drones of the same will.

One of the solution to the current issues is to make using alts for alliance control more difficult, and to spread large scale logistics , and especially ISK income and tax flux, to more players.

You are correct this is the intent of this post. By spreading not just the logistics but also the banner now people are more tempted to deviate and try and renegotiate or completely betray existing systems. also stretches the chain of command and it will definitely complicate logistics.

But it doesn't do that, it just means alts have to be in different places.

I understand the intent. But in practice all this is going to do is force more alts onto people who already have lots of alts doing this. The number of people as in humans doing the logistics isn't really going to change. Do you really thing a whole lot of people have access to this stuff now?

It does exactly that... Cyno gen now is harder to come by. again using another alliances equipment is not allowed. you have to depend on your alliance and alts solely. JF's dont have as easy a time jumping across space... actual cyno alts or cyno ally members are required.

This forcing more alts to the people that are doing this is the whole point... in hopes that these people finaly crack introduce new blood and that new member base may deviate and betray... at some point help will be needed. the level of difficulty will increase for a small group of people to command this.

It does exactly that... Cyno gen now is harder to come by. again using another alliances equipment is not allowed. you have to depend on your alliance and alts solely. JF's dont have as easy a time jumping across space... actual cyno alts or cyno ally members are required.

You are correct this is the intent of this post. By spreading not just the logistics but also the banner now people are more tempted to deviate and try and renegotiate or completely betray existing systems. also stretches the chain of command and it will definitely complicate logistics.

You still don't get it. This idea you have will just make the problem worse. Welcome to Goonswarm 1, Goonswarm 2, Gonswarm n... all run by alts of The Mittani. Everything will happen in off site forums, teamspeak, jabber, mumble, ventrillo...ect. The problem is the more you force players to organise to get things done, the more organised players force out the less organised entities. This has led to the current state of affairs where 2-3 coalitions have carved up all of null (CFC, PL, N2), and only a few regions that aren't worth much are farmed like some hunting preserve for "content" (Providence).

I see this all the time on F&I, someone comes up with some "briliant" idea that will utterly smash the coalitions, and the coalitions laugh and point out how they would trivially circumvent the "briliant plan" by using the tools outside Eve they already have, with the game mechanics already in Eve.

You still don't get it. This idea you have will just make the problem worse. Welcome to Goonswarm 1, Goonswarm 2, Gonswarm n... all run by alts of The Mittani. Everything will happen in off site forums, teamspeak, jabber, mumble, ventrillo...ect. The problem is the more you force players to organise to get things done, the more organised players force out the less organised entities. This has led to the current state of affairs where 2-3 coalitions have carved up all of null (CFC, PL, N2), and only a few regions that aren't worth much are farmed like some hunting preserve for "content" (Providence).

I see this all the time on F&I, someone comes up with some "briliant" idea that will utterly smash the coalitions, and the coalitions laugh and point out how they would trivially circumvent the "briliant plan" by using the tools outside Eve they already have, with the game mechanics already in Eve.

I welcome Goonswarm 1 through n Its what i would drive with this. and it will be hilarious when Goonswarm k decides to go at it alone because they think they are better then every one else. You forget that original goonswarm had leadership problems and that is just the one entity. imagine now if you had 10, 20, 30 of these... This is the perfect example look at goonswarm history now multiply the number of leaders by N what do you get? N chances of having history repeat...

Thank YOU POINT MADE....

They won't. They would lose access to everything they had in and out of game, some sort of superiority complex would not make up for that.

ESPECIALLY when you consider that, as you have been told by four people now, the leaders would all be the same people. Goonswarm 1-500 would all have the mittani as thier CEO. They would all have the same directors. There is NO multiplication of leadership. there is NO division of responsibility.

Why is that hard for you to understand? All you are doing is forcing people to make more alts and work even closer than ever before with their neighbours.

Your idea does not work.

-Alliances can have sovereignty of some limited number of systems arbitrary... (Say ten)

Arbitrary rules these are not arbitrary. Well thought....

10 = arbitrary number.



Gotcha

There should be incentives not to blob and it should be difficult (logistically) to maintain a blob.

There shouldn't be actual game mechanics preventing blobbing.

Confirming we need to free nullsec of Supper Coalitions, we have too many damn nullbears eating their evening meal together.

I am all for that 1 person that will try and run goonswarm 1-5000000 again make it so difficult its not enjoyable and maybe the person with superiority complex and the skills to own the entire galaxy will quit eve and leave the rest of the universe duke it out and have some funn... just maybe

So if this makes it harder for you and your own i am all for it...Actually i am sure the whole thread was named Free of supper coalitions it is meant to badmouth you and how eve is solely owned by the giant coalitions degrading the experience of every one else in the universe of eve.

If you try to fix the game by making it really annoying for people to play the way they want to, they'll keep doing it and complain loudly about how annoying it is to do things. The hardcore players will stay, while the rest quit the game completely.

You don't fix the game by making it really annoying to play, you fix it by fixing it.

Edit: Also, you DO know they're mocking you, right? Supper is a meal, you mean super...

Dammit I thought this was a thread about tasty evening snacks...

From what I can tell, this wouldn't do a single thing to change the dynamic of 0.0 except for seeing it being some hard arbitrary requirement that any big alliance splits into more and more 'sub alliances' to hold the additional space they want.

Solution?
Ban the use of alt characters via IP address screening. Multiboxing is no longer allowed and written as such in the EULA.

The issue some are having is thinking that all of goons will own goon space after this change thus they would need lots and lots and lots of alt alliances this isn't true they would only make a number to hold the valuable space and the rest of space be damned cause its not worth anything. goon pets or renters can have that.

>Implying goon renters are run/managed by a separate entity from goons.


Mynnna would just need a lot more accounts. Each new account would be able to lead 3 alliances. Lets say that you went with the 10 systems limit per alliance. PRBLD currently holds 134 systems with sov, so that's 14 alliances, requiring a total of 5 accounts, maximum. 5 accounts, 14 characters, and goons can continue running their rental alliance prettymuch just like they are now.

As for the value of the space, I don't think you quite realize that the valuable space is in pockets, and a large part of its value is the isk that the renters pay to rent it. Sometimes upwards of 11 billion isk for a system, per month. It's all very much worth something, that's why Goons rent it out in the first place.

>Implying goon renters are run/managed by a separate entity from goons.


Mynnna would just need a lot more accounts. Each new account would be able to lead 3 alliances. Lets say that you went with the 10 systems limit per alliance. PRBLD currently holds 134 systems with sov, so that's 14 alliances, requiring a total of 5 accounts, maximum. 5 accounts, 14 characters, and goons can continue running their rental alliance prettymuch just like they are now.

As for the value of the space, I don't think you quite realize that the valuable space is in pockets, and a large part of its value is the isk that the renters pay to rent it. Sometimes upwards of 11 billion isk for a system, per month. It's all very much worth something, that's why Goons rent it out in the first place.

Keep in mind Arronicus... the tower have to be maintained by those 5 accounts now too so you have to get 5 accounts for your indy with 5 extra jf's because the sov alliance owns the moon manufacturing only... you dont think this will lead into an increase of players involved? and maybe a hotbed for arguments?

It's not the CEO running the towers. You have logistics guys for that...

-Corporation can only obtain sovereignty of one system max.
-Alliances can have sovereignty of some limited number of systems arbitrary... (Say ten) to limit the size of an alliance and make extra corps useless and jealous of all the corps with sov...
-Sovereignty shuts down all industry modules that do not belong to the holding alliance.... (so X alliance cannot own the moons in the systems of Y alliance)
-Sovereignty gives a +50% dps bonus to all ally members holding sov vs foreign towers and a -50% effectiveness to all defense foreign towers.


-reduce titan dps or leadership bonuses. having both makes it too powerful even for the insane amount it costs.

I admire your intentions, and I share them, but simply creating in game arbitrary limitations will cause people to set up puppet alliances in the game which are all actually the same "out of game" alliance.

Sorry,

--
Fang

I too like the intent. It's just how he wants to implement it, is easily circumvented by at least a secure forum outside of game. All that would happen is the couloured blobs on the influence map will get smaller, but the people running nulsec won't change at all. SSDD.

Hell, logistics guys would love it. Only ten systems moons to manage with one alt, an hour or two tops and they are done with him for two weeks, doesn't sound to bad.

you still have to log in to make sure that tower was not reinforced. unless you use api and out of game it will be one extra layer of difficulty...

and the potential of 3000 new alts that may be caught with fat ships that will definitely boost pirating.

you can never remove the need to blob up but by limiting movement in 0.0 through jump bridge use restrictions, splitting the indy so that large pipes to 0.0 are not possible but many smaller ones required more places pirates can hit you... more places you have to camp and guard smaller blobs you have to build. eventually people will see an opening to start challenging you. initially just to test you eventually attempting to take sov. Its easier to attack an alliance with 10 members versus an alliance with 11000. also keep in mind there is 3400+ 0.0 systems thats how many new alts and corps it will take make it HARD on the BLUE DOUGHNUT..... YUM YUM YUM

Logistics groups already use tons of alts for cyno and so on, just now we'd have "alt alliance executor corp ceo" (+can light cyno) alts.

The... cyno ibis?

Just look at this map and weep.....
http://dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Verite/influence.png

count the big uns using your ten fingers.... what % of space is it just the top 10... There is alliances that have more star systems than your highsec npc governments.... skewed much?

Goons are coming from the Something Awful.com forums, so they won't break apart since you can't enforce your weird rules on their forum. So they may be forced to jump though your hoops, but they and their coalition won't break apart.

In short, your idea effectively helps every coalition founded and lead by people from outside of Eve, and kills quite effectively every in-game organisation. Except for the really old and large ones, of course. Who have build a large IT-infrastructure separate from Eve by now.