|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2129
   |
Posted - 2014.09.29 08:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
Quote:
Increased Player Density
We believe that vast swathes of conquerable nullsec are essentially worthless to our line members and can only support the activity of a handful of players in each system. We would like to see the value of individual systems increased to support a dense ecosystem of players undocked and interacting within single system.
So.....let me get this straight: Instead of having thirty thousand renters spread over a dozen regions, the blocs can now fit all of them into a couple of systems (or constellations)? Geee, that isn't broken at all.
Currently, lowsec/npc entities can and have harassed renter alliances to the point where they lose thousands of members. Put them all in a single constellation, and it becomes trivial for the blocs to defend them against harassment. I have a great idea guys: Let's buff renter empires! |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2131
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 14:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
This idea is the pinnacle of risk aversion. It is a means to a simple end: a nigh impenetrable city on a hill from which to launch sorties against smaller entities in order to farm easy kills.
Population Density
With this change you could fit the entire CFC + Renters in deklein, probably without using every constellation. And why not? It is far easier to protect your nullbears and renters when there are 200+ dudes per pve system rather than 5-10 dudes per pve system. Perfect safety and easy defense.
NPC Stations
An NPC station 20 gate jumps form any arbitrary point on the map. Has some fledgling alliance in some obscure corner of the galaxy dared use capitals? Stage 200+ dreads in an npc station 1 capital jump out. "Content" for the whole alliance. Best of all, there's no need for B0tlord or the donut, just avoid the other guy's city-constellation and everything else is a farm.
The CFC will have their city in deklein, PL in the drone regions, N3 somewhere in the east. The unused space will empty out and some fledgling alliances may even stake a claim. But the moment they have anything scarcely worthwhile, someone will show up on the NPC doorstep looking for "content," while their own bears are safe as houses. Everyone gets their own personal providence to farm. How quaint. This isn't "conflict," this is easy mode farm for the blob.
|
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2131
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 14:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:I'll be honest, i don't see how occupancy sov really changes anything with respect to the size of things.
throw lots of warm bodies at an area of sov = impossible to take it.
unless you the amount an index can change per time period.... in which case, just stack enough people to cap it daily and you end up with a boring stalemate (which is the whole issue at the moment) or an inevitable slide of the index in one direction that you can't challenge.
i'll be honest; i don't get it. some one explain it to me.
It is the latest in a long line of half baked ideas from the established powers that be; a desperate attempt from said powers to ~create content~ while avoiding the risk of fighting someone that might actually defeat them.
Manny's idea (for example) was to create choke points for freighters farmed by the established power houses. This one is a little more subtle, but the end result is the same: low risk "content" farm. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2131
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 15:19:00 -
[4] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:
so it is both bad for nullsec if we own all of it, but it is also bad for nullsec if we only own part of it and let other people own part of it
have you really thought this brilliant argument all the way through
No one likes to be farm chattel. Point in case. As long as supra entities exist in their current form, they will farm lesser entities. As long as lesser entities are farmed, their members will (sooner or later) join the supra entities. It does not matter whether these supra entities span a single constellation or 12 regions.
Any nullsec change that does not give significant and immediate incentive for PL to literally sh*t down the throats of Nulli or NC. supers is destined to be a dismal failure. Any change which does not motivate Goonswarm to stomp on the face of Razor or FA repeatedly and with great prejudice will result in the same stagnation which we now enjoy.
The fault, dear Retar, is not in our npc stations, but in ourselves. We alone cannot fix ourselves, but perhaps CCP can nudge us along the proper path. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2131
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 15:33:00 -
[5] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
until you throw x+1 warm bodies at the system, and it becomes impossible to take, thus keeping us in the situation of having large coalitions except now you have to put them all under 1 alliance banner. instead of informal coalition banners.
He gets it. 
Don't worry, I think the goons will realizes it before the end.
For many years their standard reply to everything regarding fighting the blob was "sorry I have more friends than you," and even that is now changing. They'll get there, eventually... |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2131
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 15:36:00 -
[6] - Quote
Samahiel Noban wrote:If Mordus Angels are crying it MUST be a good idea. I support this product and or service.
Grrrr Mordus Angels.  |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2131
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 15:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
Will the proponents of the change in this thread do me the kindness of answering a simple question:
Do you see a CFC or an N3PL reset in the immediate aftermath of these changes? If not, what changes in the meta? You still have two super entities that vastly overpower anything else and the only content consists of farming this guy. Once the novelty of the new system wears off, aren't we back to square one: a bipolar eve with two sides refusing to attack each other? |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2132
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 16:02:00 -
[8] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Will the proponents of the change in this thread do me the kindness of answering a simple question:Do you see a CFC or an N3PL reset in the immediate aftermath of these changes? If not, what changes in the meta? You still have two super entities that vastly overpower anything else and the only content consists of farming this guy. Once the novelty of the new system wears off, aren't we back to square one: a bipolar eve with two sides refusing to attack each other? Both empires shrink massively allowing room for new alliances to enter null.
Hero entered null. Now being farmed alongside provi by N3PL. Truth is, anyone can enter null, even now. Most people just don't like being farm chattel.
So the same three choices will be present after your changs:
(1) I can stay in npc 0.0/lowsec/hisec and raid 0.0 to farm afk ishtars
(2) I can try and strike out on my own to be farmed for ~content~ by N3PL/CFC
(3) or I can get on the old SA account and become an "overman" alongside Retar thereby "winning" eve.
That's totally not stagnation. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2133
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 16:27:00 -
[9] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
Sure you want sov changed, but changes that simply result in the same thing... pointless.
 |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2133
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 16:44:00 -
[10] - Quote
Aryndel Vyst wrote:
No you deployed to lowsec because you're a roleplaying PVE alliance trying to masquerade as a nullsec PVP one and when you got put to the test you crumbled like Gen Eve's English skills.
So much Grrrrrrr, do try to stay on topic please.
|
|
|
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2134
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 17:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
Dave Stark wrote:
AND STILL nothing has encouraged coalitions to downsize.
don't get me wrong, i don't think sov is fine as it is. i think it's boring as hell too and that's why i do fun things instead... however the occupancy sov doesn't really address any of the issues you people are perpetually whining about.
The crux of it is that they don't want to downsize. They want to have the same 2 coalitions, each with almost half of the active combat sov pilots, with both coalitions unwilling to fight each other.
At the same time, they want new "content" to materialize out of thin air, in the form of farmable sov-holding non-aligned entities from currently sov-wanting players that don't actually exist. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 20:17:00 -
[12] - Quote
ITT: Established sov alliances want dense, fortified space cities where they and their renters can rat in safety, away from the scary fozzie-ceptor gangs. Also, sprinkling about npc stations literally everywhere to counter any power projection nerf would be greeaaaat.
Oh, and much faux-concern over the hypothetical small, independent sov entity, with little actual change to the existing coalition meta. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 20:25:00 -
[13] - Quote
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
-said randoms have only ever lived in highsec or have never actually held 0.0 space
You're sh*t at checking employment histories mate. FFS, most dudes in npc 0.0, lowsec, and wh's have done the whole sov schtick at some point or another. That's the first place most people go, everyone thinks it's all nice and shiny.
Oddly enough, being facleless f1 monkey #52,341 didn't appeal to a great many people. But hey, I'm glad to hear it's working out for you. And then not being able to shoot at more than half the people that currently live in nullsec is also none too appealing. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 20:30:00 -
[14] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:ITT: Established sov alliances want dense, fortified space cities where they and their renters can rat in safety, away from the scary fozzie-ceptor gangs. Also, sprinkling about npc stations literally everywhere to counter any power projection nerf would be greeaaaat. Oh, and much faux-concern over the hypothetical small, independent sov entity, with little actual change to the existing coalition meta. with strategic thinking like this it's such a shock mordus got flattened by two bored cfc squads as a lark not like the combat squads, the ratting squad and the wannabe EG squad
More Grrrrrrr MoA, yay! Also, fun trivia: the moment the incursion cyno jammer went up in 5zxx, those 2 squads were flattened. The next day they packed their sh*t and left for stain to harass "battlement coalition" (lol). Funny, how losing cyno capability affected "just 2 squads."
But I do agree with you that our over-emphasis on 5zxx is both sub-moronic and wholly counterproductive, but vOv. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 20:38:00 -
[15] - Quote
Enaris Kerle wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:ITT: Established sov alliances want dense, fortified space cities where they and their renters can rat in safety, away from the scary fozzie-ceptor gangs. Also, sprinkling about npc stations literally everywhere to counter any power projection nerf would be greeaaaat. Oh, and much faux-concern over the hypothetical small, independent sov entity, with little actual change to the existing coalition meta. I see you ran out of arguments and have retreated to mud-flinging
What part of that is mud flinging? Allowing any coalition to condense all of it's nullbears and renters into a couple of constellations or less is the definition of dense, fortified space cities. This would give a massive buff to the safety of your nullbears and renters. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 20:48:00 -
[16] - Quote
Heavypredator Singh wrote:Limit fights in system to 1 fleet per side. No broken servers. Actual skill of ppl fighting matters. If coalitions can't limit themselves to have a good time force them :>
duuuuuude...... |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 03:38:00 -
[17] - Quote
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the logic behind these changes seems to be: Condense existing coalitions into handful of systems---> provide room for new sov entities to exist.
There's nothing wrong with this, it will probably work. However, new entities have entered sov within the last 6 months: just look at Hero. And then Hero, to their dissatisfaction, was put on farm by N3PL. Being put on farm is an integral part of the stagnation that we all oppose.
My question is this: How will the new system be any different in this regard? Will N3PL stop farming hero for whatever reason? And if that situation doesn't change, how will the end result of the new sov system be any different then the current stagnation? |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 04:21:00 -
[18] - Quote
Rowells wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but the logic behind these changes seems to be: Condense existing coalitions into handful of systems---> provide room for new sov entities to exist.
There's nothing wrong with this, it will probably work. However, new entities have entered sov within the last 6 months: just look at Hero. And then Hero, to their dissatisfaction, was put on farm by N3PL. Being put on farm is an integral part of the stagnation that we all oppose.
My question is this: How will the new system be any different in this regard? Will N3PL stop farming hero for whatever reason? And if that situation doesn't change, how will the end result of the new sov system be any different then the current stagnation? no. the big will always prey on the small. no change in mechanics or anything is going to stop that.
So, what you're saying is that with current incentives people will keep joining the two largest coalitions so that they too can "win" by being big?
Won't you just be back in 6 months, after the novelty wears off, complaining that nullsec is still stagnant? |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 04:32:00 -
[19] - Quote
Let me put it another way: You're bored shitless right now because 90% of nullsec refuses to shoot each other. That same 90% of nullsec (coalitions and renters) will still refuse to shoot each other after the proposed changes. You'll still be bored shitless. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 04:45:00 -
[20] - Quote
Rowells wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Rowells wrote:
no. the big will always prey on the small. no change in mechanics or anything is going to stop that.
So, what you're saying is that with current incentives people will keep joining the two largest coalitions so that they too can "win" by being big? Won't you just be back in 6 months, after the novelty wears off, complaining that nullsec is still stagnant? "With current incentives" meaning nothing changed just the map layout, yes. And I'm assuming you play to win as well? will we see you in CFC some time soon? Most likely not. For whatever reason you and your alliance decided to literally do the opposite of 'join the two largest coalitions so that they too can "win" by being big'. Winning for some people isn't just being part of the biggest bloc in the game.
See but that isn't true. A casual look at dotlan will show that people have left MoA for the larger coalitions. One of the larger corps, Epsilon Lyr, for example, recently left for nulli secunda. Likewise, I suspect many in the cfc wont be happy if all of the content they get for the next couple years is what remains of MoA.
|
|
|
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 04:48:00 -
[21] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Let me put it another way: You're bored shitless right now because 90% of nullsec refuses to shoot each other. That same 90% of nullsec (coalitions and renters) will still refuse to shoot each other after the proposed changes. You'll still be bored shitless. I get bored shitless when 3 hours of fighting is stretched to a period of 23 hours to be honest. If we just started shooting each other tomorrow, this is literally what we'd be stuck with.
A fair and valid point. But when N3PL crams all their dudes and renters into a handful of systems, you'll have the exact same problem: TiDi practically guarantees a 23 hour fight in these densely populated home systems.
So you have the same problem: You're bored shitless because 90% of nullsec refuses to shoot each other. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 05:12:00 -
[22] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Mallak Azaria wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:Let me put it another way: You're bored shitless right now because 90% of nullsec refuses to shoot each other. That same 90% of nullsec (coalitions and renters) will still refuse to shoot each other after the proposed changes. You'll still be bored shitless. I get bored shitless when 3 hours of fighting is stretched to a period of 23 hours to be honest. If we just started shooting each other tomorrow, this is literally what we'd be stuck with. A fair and valid point. But when N3PL crams all their dudes and renters into a handful of systems, you'll have the exact same problem: TiDi practically guarantees a 23 hour fight in these densely populated home systems. So you have the same problem: You're bored shitless because 90% of nullsec refuses to shoot each other. They won't be forced to cram all of their dudes in to a handful of systems though, that's the entire point. To hold space it will have to be used. Plonking a bunch of people in to a system without actually using it won't allow them to retain sov & as an added bonus, it makes having massive coalitions detrimental to any war effort or skirmish due to the existence of TiDi. Nullsec not shooting each other will cease to be a thing because holding vast areas of space will cease to be a thing.
You lost me. Are you saying that increasing population density won't increase the population density?
Dense "vibrant ecosystems" were proposed and supported. I interpret this to mean that instead of 10 dudes across 200 systems, you have 200 dudes across 10 systems. Which, when combined with standing fleets and so on will lead to a lot of people in system. Am I missing something here?
Dense population --> any attack results in tidi and 23 hour fights --> You're still bored shitless because 90% of nullsec refuses to shoot each other. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 05:34:00 -
[23] - Quote
Rowells wrote:
Thats why this isn't a single dimensional problem. Simply looking at sov and saying "thats your problem there" is not enough. The argument delved down into very specific area of debate in this thread and doesnt seem to be getting out any time soon.
Like for instance the idea to nerf logi. Throw that into the equation and, yes for the first portion of the fight its a tidi slugfest, but as people start dying it becomes less and less crowded until the losers have fled or died to the last man.
We need to keep in mind the other solutions and problems floating around while we disect one subject apart until it is a gory , unrecognizable mess on the table.
A good point, but lets take a look at the article in question. It raises 3 points (occupancy, npc stations, population density) and then provides an impressive list of supporters. Do all of those signatories also support a logi nerf? I suspect not. This is CCP we're dealing with. You handed them a mandate - it's anyone guess if they'll listen. But if they do, given that it is CCP, it's not exactly likely that they'll search out other proposals and heed them as well.
I take and criticize the proposal in a vacuum because it is presented in a vacuum. CCP won't see a logi nerf or any other proposed changes in the document in question. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 21:32:00 -
[24] - Quote
I've given this some thought and I'm actually gonna do a complete 180 on this. CCP should implement the whole population density thing post haste on TQ. I was wrong, I'm sorry.
To anyone opposed to the idea for misguided reasons, two questions to consider:
1) What happens when all the nullbears and renters of a coalition are condensed into ~10 pve systems and the surrounding systems are generally inadequate for pve due to lack of upgrades/activity?
2) What do renters fear most? |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Mordus Angels
2135
|
Posted - 2014.09.30 21:53:00 -
[25] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:PotatoOverdose wrote:I've given this some thought and I'm actually gonna do a complete 180 on this. CCP should implement the whole population density thing post haste on TQ. I was wrong, I'm sorry.
To anyone opposed to the idea for misguided reasons, two questions to consider:
1) What happens when all the nullbears and renters of a coalition are condensed into ~10 pve systems and the surrounding systems are generally inadequate for pve due to lack of upgrades/activity?
2) What do renters fear most? I'm going to answer these rhetorical questions just because I can. 1) Why, local starts looking like highsec and god help you actually notice when someone new has come into a highsec system. 2) Okay, so I'm not going to answer both questions because I'm not a renter.
The answer to (1) and (2) is actually the same: The afk cloaker.
It's also probably the reason why pasta is a signatory of this proposal. |
|
|
| |
|