| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise
Northern Coalition.
210
   |
Posted - 2014.07.22 08:10:00 -
[1] - Quote
(This is a repost of my contribution to the developing thread over on FHC which started as a discussion of the Mittani's latest Traffic Control article.)
Well everyone's got an idea so here's mine.
Right now it's all about numbers. The side with more is always going to win. Nerf tracking titans? Ok now supercarriers and wrecking balls are the problem. Nerf those and swarms of BS will be the problem. Nerf those and whoever can bring the most BC/cruisers will be the problem. And so on and so forth.
To reverse the calcification of nullsec the game mechanics need to somehow de-incentivize the formation of super blocs of players. Sov null needs to be smaller - not in terms of actual area or number of systems but rather the sphere of concern of nullsec entities needs to shrink.
If a corp or alliance controls Cobalt Edge they should be primarily concerned with what's happening in Outer Passage, Perrigan Falls or Tenal. At an extreme maybe they need to be concerned about Geminate or Insmother, but they shouldn't have to give a damn what's happening in Delve or Period Basis.
Jump drives, titan bridges and jump bridges "shrink" nullsec allowing this sphere of concern to balloon and cover essentially the entirety of sov null. When you're worried about what people are doing on literally the opposite side of nullsec then you're more likely to seek friends close to home. I think this polarisation of nullsec into two massive blocs is the natural conclusion of this combination of game world mechanics and human nature.
So, how do we shrink that sphere?
Every corp in Eve can designate a headquarters. It's been in the game forever but it's largely meaningless. What if we make where a corp puts its headquarters mean something? What if we make where a corp puts its headquarters mean everything?
- What if a corp could only join an alliance if it's HQ was within X jumps/lightyears of the HQ of the executor corp of that alliance?
- What if a corp could only anchor TCUs within X jumps/lightyears of their own HQ?
- What if a corp could only put certain POS modules, like jump bridges and moon mining arrays within X jumps/lightyears of their own HQ?
Suddenly your world just got a lot smaller. Your neighbours are no longer your most obvious allies against the threat from the other side of the map but rather the biggest rivals for control of space in your vicinity. A single alliance may only be able to control one or two regions with the member corps spread around among its space. It would be undesirable to grow too large because there would only be so many local resources to go around to provide your members with ISK. Fights would occur on the borders of your territory with your neighbours as alliances vied for access to moons, ratting space, ice belts and so on.
Benefits may include:
- Reduction in the scale of fights, reducing TIDI and making the experience more enjoyable for all.
- Upstarts who wanted to enter into the sov game would only need to contend with one or two alliances when trying to carve out some space instead of being set upon by half of nullsec for invading their blues.
- A greater sense of identity and purpose stemming from a closer tie to your home in sov null and smaller groups means your contribution is more valuable rather than just being "expendable F1 drone no. 1,436" in a massive bloc-level strat fleet.
- Exponentially more friction points around sov null leading to more content overall.
- An actual role for mercenary corps? In a conflict between two groups of several hundred players, a 30 - 40 man mercenary corp in subcaps might actually make a difference.
- Wouldn't actually require any changes to the range or functionality of capitals or their jump drives/bridges which would otherwise be difficult and divisive topic to approach.
TL;DR - turn nullsec into a a bunch of warring city-states who fully utilise their space instead of two gigantic empires with vast holdings to protect.
Straight off the top of my head I can think of a few ways to game or work around a change like this to maintain the status quo so this would have to be something that was done in the context of a broader change to sov mechanics. I'd like the develop the idea more. What do you guys think?
EVE Down Under 2014 (Australia's very own fanfest)
21st to 23rd November 2014 in Sydney, Australia
www.evedownunder.com |
Christopher Tsutola
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 08:20:00 -
[2] - Quote
all this would do is make it so the maga blocks form more holding alliances |
Jak Morris
Van Diemen's Demise
Northern Coalition.
8
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 08:32:00 -
[3] - Quote
+1 To get around the Mega Coalitions having more holding corps you could make the holding corps less AFK and hold X number of members. |
Anthar Thebess
600
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 08:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
Already suggested.
More than once.
The only thing that will fix this by :
A. Ship movements
- reducing jump range of capitals and supers , not allow them to jump between regions
- reduce/remove Jump bridges , titan bridges in the same way
- capitals and supers can cross between regions using XL size regional gates.
- binding jump drives to system distance along the way - at any point path cannot be more than 2.5 LY away from the nearest sun.
B. Sov Changes
- cost scaling connected to usage of sov , if alliance members not using certain system, it degrades , indexes are dropping, upgrades are going off , defensive ehp and timers are reduced , and even after some time sov drops by itself
- alliances designate capitol . This capitol have extra upgrades, extra ehp, etc.. , all sov that is not connected directly to this system by gates , cost few times more in sov bills, and degrades much faster.
C. Clones
- no more death cloning , you can change your cloning station to a remote higsec station, and only to a station you are currently sitting in low/nullsec
- you can store more than 1 clone on a station
- you can change between clones on a station , and you have possibility to change to any of those clones without using jump clone timer , paying isk.
D. More gate connections
- Introducing gate sizes, allowing certain ship class to pass:
- XL size regional gates, capable of moving supers and capitals - only to the direction of nearest NPC space , not to all connected regions
- L normal gates
- M gates that do not allow any capital movements , including capital industrial ships
- S gates ( smuggler gates ) - each region have this kind of gates to nearest NPC space , and remote NPC null regions have this gates to nearest LOW space. Max Cruisers and non capital industrial ships can use them.
E. Random Events , binding you to your sov.
- Sansha incursion, that will not be "killed" will lead to fast sov degradation and eventually loosing this sov
- Local Pirate Uprisings
- etc
and many , many more , here:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=356024
Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption |
Christopher Tsutola
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
14
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 08:43:00 -
[5] - Quote
Jak Morris wrote:+1 To get around the Mega Coalitions having more holding corps you could make the holding corps less AFK and hold X number of members.
How do you mean make them less afk? and what would you say is a good x number of members because the higher you make this number the harder it is on new alliances trying to form
I don't feel null sec is in all that dire need of power projection re balance but i'm always a fan of mixing up the metta and sending players scattering those times tend to have the most content |
Bam Stroker
Van Diemen's Demise
Northern Coalition.
211
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 08:47:00 -
[6] - Quote
Christopher Tsutola wrote:all this would do is make it so the maga blocks form more holding alliances
Like I say in the TL;DR it's not the silver bullet and would have to be part of a swag of changes but I like the idea of using changes to sov mechanics to redefine the concept of success in sov null.
EVE Down Under 2014 (Australia's very own fanfest)
21st to 23rd November 2014 in Sydney, Australia
www.evedownunder.com |
Korthan
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
2
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 10:23:00 -
[7] - Quote
In principle this is a good idea but you also need to create a reason for them not to be as 'co-operative' with one another. Make them compete for resources, make it not be in their interest to have NIP / NAP arrangements, because by doing so you are screwing over your own dudes...
Make it a competition between regions for isk, reasources as well as space, make regions affect one another as well to encourage people to make thier space more concentrated and better rather than larger and just average. |
Thorr VonAsgard
Never Surrender.
42
|
Posted - 2014.07.22 12:33:00 -
[8] - Quote
+10000 to the whole idiea.
One idea that's not result to the "noobany.com propaganda". Thanks for not beeing a sheep. |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |