EVE Search - The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

The Null Deal: A Statement from Sovereign Nullsec

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 8 post(s)
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 426	Posted - 2014.09.29 07:26:00 - [1] - Quote +1
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 426	Posted - 2014.09.29 09:33:00 - [2] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: Capt Robertson wrote: +1 We Want Fights Just reset all your blues and have all the fights you want. That is treating the symptom, not the cause. Look at your current situation in Catch. CVA and Hero are just being toyed with to provide fun for PL and NCDOT because that's all there is to be had right now. A wargame between two strategic allies. This war is a complete farce.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 427	Posted - 2014.09.29 11:53:00 - [3] - Quote Antihrist Pripravnik wrote: Stuff You worry to much about the use of NPC stations. They're pretty important for staging when invading but they have their own weaknesses. I guess you've never been hellcamped into one.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 428	Posted - 2014.09.29 15:08:00 - [4] - Quote Heavypredator Singh wrote: baltec1 wrote: Heavypredator Singh wrote: So that is why most of Your sov is empty ? This is why it is rented out? Most of our space is more or less useless as you will earn a good deal more isk blitzing level 4s in high sec. Renting out our space is only a thing because we had to replace the moon goo income when they nerfed tech. What we need is bottom up income you can earn in null and that allows for an alliance to actually be able to live in the space it owns and supports all of its members. Want to kill of the rental empires? The get behind occupancy sov as that makes it impossible to hold vast areas of space to rent out. Sorry for not feeling Your pain - my alliance can't afford double srp. Are You afraid goonswarm will break when there is no income to buy players? When they will need to buy their own ships? When they will ask where are the resources? Welcome to the real world where players play and don't get bought. They actually login to have something and risk something so others can have fun too. All that renting, crazy srp, massive coalitions must be nerfed so ppl start playing the game like it is designed to be played. When you bypass rules of the game it kills it. If goons need to break for it to happen then well **** happens. Noone guarantee that You will always be able to buy players. they should want to play for fun not for someone that just buys them and commands them. You ask for these things but provide no solutions. What you fail to understand is these three items suggested are the solution. You just don't like the messenger. Maybe Grath or PGL should have posted it, the reaction by the -1's and naysayers would have been different.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 428	Posted - 2014.09.29 15:21:00 - [5] - 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 cap 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. The index would be linked to activity in a system like mining, ratting, kills or some other industry metric. It could be grown over a period of time. This in turn would affect how easy it is for them to defend and how hard it would be for opponents to take. You could directly link it to structure EHP or timers for instance. This method would mean a dead system, with no activity would be very easy to conquer and a used system, with plenty of activity across the spectrum would be difficult to take.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 429	Posted - 2014.09.29 16:31:00 - [6] - Quote Dave Stark wrote: knobber Jobbler wrote: 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 cap 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. The index would be linked to activity in a system like mining, ratting, kills or some other industry metric. It could be grown over a period of time. This in turn would affect how easy it is for them to defend and how hard it would be for opponents to take. You could directly link it to structure EHP or timers for instance. This method would mean a dead system, with no activity would be very easy to conquer and a used system, with plenty of activity across the spectrum would be difficult to take. 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. If you build a system which requires certain activity to take place in said system, it won't be a problem. That and if your 1000 guys are in system X, they are not in system Y. System Y is now vulnerable. Even a coalition of 40,000 will contract and can't be everywhere at once but CCP isn't going to give people a free ticket to just take any space they want without some kind of fight.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 429	Posted - 2014.09.30 10:34:00 - [7] - Quote KatanTharkay wrote: Enaris Kerle wrote: KatanTharkay wrote: I'm not in any way affiliated to TEST, but when they didn't wanted this type of gameplay (mega-coalitions) and tried to do something else, you crushed them, the "our way or the highway" style. Just saying. you'll have to explain to me how forming a mega-coalition from all of the people we threw out of their space over the years (Honeybadger Coalition) is TEST trying "something else" than mega-coalitions Creating a 3-rd party, 4-th party, n-th party instead of 2 giant gravity wells to polarize null-sec. Sadly, EVE is too much of a game that promotes "big is better" and no matter what CCP will do, they won't be able to nerf friendship. TEST tried to form their own mega coalition and failed. To claim they did anything else is naive. What some of you simply do not get it is people will gravitate towards each other for mutual benefit. Unless CCP gets rid of standings entirely - which they simply will never do - you will always have coalitions. It's just human nature showing up in a sandbox game. The ideas suggested as the Null Deal will simply mean those coalitions contract leaving empty space to be taken by smaller entities (who will no doubt have alliances and agreements between them, it's the meta game which is in fact what makes EVE, EVE) and it will not serve the purpose of the large coalitions to gas them out of existence.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 429	Posted - 2014.09.30 13:36:00 - [8] - Quote KatanTharkay wrote: Well, you just said what I was saying, only using more words. And ad-hominems are not something desirable in a debate, they will just make people ignore your input. There are big issues with the Null Deal proposals (occupancy and NRDS comes first to my mind) and as long as those issues are not addressed those proposals won't get much support. Well if a claim is made to support an opinion on how something worked, and that claim is incorrect it's only fair to point that out. NRDS is the personal choice of a single Bloc. It's up to them if they want to use NRDS, NBSI or NPSI. These are all fairly minor concerns, if at all. It's part of the meta game. Regatto wrote: Yes thats exactly how mittens wanted it to sound. Looking at it from more perspectives shows that it will hurt empires in no way, allows them to lessen their space and effort. I'm not saying some of those changes arent good for null, but decreasing null vulnarability, even in used systems and making power projection harder are way more important. Look at it like this - and you have to assume CCP will do this right: If the CFC was to contract to say just Deklein, all that empty space currently owned by the CFC will fill up with new blood. Those guys will form groups and coalitions. One day they may have the numbers or the will to take on the CFC. If the CFC alliances chose to remain in far flung regions of space they won't have the support of the greater CFC. If the greater CFC comes to their aid, they risk lowering any defensive index on their home systems. The principles of what has been suggested are sound. It remains to be seen in CCP can do something with them.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 429	Posted - 2014.09.30 18:09:00 - [9] - Quote KatanTharkay wrote: knobber Jobbler wrote: NRDS is the personal choice of a single Bloc. It's up to them if they want to use NRDS, NBSI or NPSI. These are all fairly minor concerns, if at all. It's part of the meta game. Got it, my way or the highway. Well, we don't have CCP's directions on how they are going to change null-sec, so until then, this thread is pure speculation and rumor mongering. Ok, so you're being truculent because of who I fly with. Or you don't understand that NRDS or whatever is nothing to do with these changes.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 431	Posted - 2014.10.01 08:50:00 - [10] - Quote The economy is largely based on stuff getting blown up. If stuff doesn't get blown up, people won't buy new stuff.

knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 432	Posted - 2014.10.01 15:49:00 - [11] - Quote DeadDuck wrote: So since the 0.0 players seem to not being able to get out of theis stagnant situation that their leadership condemned them, they turn on CCP to do something about it, including some of the same leaders that signed and maintain the stupid agreements So people can't play the metagame? The thing that keeps EVE actually alive and the only thing that has ever got EVE in the news? It's fairly depressing that what you suggest - and some others here - is players have to be self regulating in a game which says it's a sandbox and even advertises itself as one where the metagame is a core element. DeadDuck wrote: TBH, to deal with the current 0.0 joke that we live in, CCP has to make a total revamp of the roles performed by super caps or by the boost of some of existing ships in order to counter the absurd power the super caps present when working in huge groups. Probably both. The power projection limitation seems to be a good idea, like the end of EW invulnerability seems also a good idead, but TBH CCP has to go further, besides enhancing a new sov mechanic, it has to boost Dreads the existing ship with potentai to really hurt the super cap blobs. They can do it by simply eliminating the 0 m/s when a Dread is in siege and allowing on the same type the remote repping. Siege will pretty much be the boost the ship fire power, but still preventing the ship from jumping out. With this small tweak, the small, medium enthities, will have a weapon to fight the super cap blobs, they can have a chance since their cap fleets will have the power to hurt super cap fleets. Power creep of dreads won't work especially if you add remote reps, not unless you want to see 256 man Dread Fleets replacing battleship fleets. It would be fun for us, but not for the small guy who's worried about supers. Supercaps and Titans themselves need addressing directly as they are part of the problem and the reason for the numerically large coalitions. The occupation based Sov, if done correctly will invalidate some of the threat supercaps pose to smaller groups as you're not just talking about grinding out hit points when you want to take Sov.
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 432	Posted - 2014.10.01 16:29:00 - [12] - Quote JIeoH Mocc wrote: And yeah, i don't give a flying duck about how goons play, but when goons start to suggest self-serving mechanics changes ... I'd say it's a bit different from what you're presenting. It's not just Goons though, it's practically everyone who lives in null. The only naysayers are a few high sec guys wearing tin foil and some CVA guys. If you know about the history of CVA, the fact they want the status quo comes as no shock. Now when will you, Gevlon and the other drivers of the south american bauxite trade suggest an alternative, let alone a constructive criticism rather than a tirade of vitriol which is frankly helpful to no one?
knobber Jobbler Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 432	Posted - 2014.10.01 17:21:00 - [13] - Quote JIeoH Mocc wrote: knobber Jobbler wrote: JIeoH Mocc wrote: And yeah, i don't give a flying duck about how goons play, but when goons start to suggest self-serving mechanics changes ... I'd say it's a bit different from what you're presenting. It's not just Goons though, it's practically everyone who lives in null. As I said, the doughnut. knobber Jobbler wrote: The only naysayers are a few high sec guys wearing tin foil and some CVA guys. If you know about the history of CVA, the fact they want the status quo comes as no shock. Now when will you, Gevlon and the other drivers of the south american bauxite trade suggest an alternative, let alone a constructive criticism rather than a tirade of vitriol which is frankly helpful to no one? Sure, don't touch any of it for another couple of years, the cancer might just die out. Oh wait... the doughnut wants content, but it wants to be forced into content... Oh well - let's change the mechanics then, why shan't we? \o/ So that'll be a no then.

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,05s, ref 20250728/0214
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.