| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Sean Crees
Repercussus
RAZOR Alliance
0
   |
Posted - 2014.09.28 22:58:00 -
[151] - Quote
+1 |
Adrie Atticus
the shadow plague
The Bastion
388
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 22:59:00 -
[152] - Quote
In b4 Gevlon Goblin declares that he caused CFC to drop sov or accuses goons of storng-arming PL and NC. to sign this or they take all of nullsec. |
Skyy Dracon
Repercussus
RAZOR Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:04:00 -
[153] - Quote
I support this idea. And any idea that leads to breaking up the stagnant state of null warfare as it currently stands.
"If you own in, live in it."
I do think however that there are several other changes that need to happen along with the three core principles outlined in this letter.
NPC's need to be more dangerous and not solely restricted to anoms/sites and 2-5 ships sitting on gates.
Roaming gangs need to happen. Gate gangs need to employ bubbles and tackle as well as other additonal forms of disruption. |
Sirhan Blixt
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
73
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:06:00 -
[154] - Quote
I am Sirhan Blixt and I endorse this product and/or service. Brought to you by Carl's Jr.! |
Lord Purifier
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
1
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:06:00 -
[155] - Quote
1. OCCUPANCY-BASED SOVEREIGNTY
2. NPC 0.0 IN EVERY SOV REGION &
3. INCREASED PLAYER DENSITY
Agree its a start, but seriously, that was all these people could agree on ?
Sorry but expected more from these people.
Where was their united thoughts on addressing;
1. Corp, Alliance mechanics + coalitions & taxation there of / also the passive income derived from moon mining by them,
2. Stations, outposts & starbase's - changes needed / destructability of these structures.
3. The introduction of incentives or forced timers, so people become limited in how long they can stay in empire, in order to increase the popluation of low and nul sec.
4. Warfare - adequate conflict drivers.
5. Capital ship balancing & projection.
|
HarlyQ
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:07:00 -
[156] - Quote
I am totally down with these ideas please make my space more involving other than undocking my 10 carriers and ratting thanks |
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation
Goonswarm Federation
67
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:11:00 -
[157] - Quote
Lord Purifier wrote:1. OCCUPANCY-BASED SOVEREIGNTY
2. NPC 0.0 IN EVERY SOV REGION &
3. INCREASED PLAYER DENSITY
Agree its a start, but seriously, that was all these people could agree on ?
Sorry but expected more from these people.
Where was their united thoughts on addressing;
1. Corp, Alliance mechanics + coalitions & taxation there of / also the passive income derived from moon mining by them,
2. Stations, outposts & starbase's - changes needed / destructability of these structures.
3. The introduction of incentives or forced timers, so people become limited in how long they can stay in empire, in order to increase the popluation of low and nul sec.
4. Warfare - adequate conflict drivers.
5. Capital ship balancing & projection.
I imagine they wanted to focus on a few simple, key objectives to get CCP's attention. The details can be hammered out later.
Alt of [redacted on advice from a reputable internet spaceships lawyer] |
HarlyQ
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:13:00 -
[158] - Quote
Lord Purifier wrote:1. OCCUPANCY-BASED SOVEREIGNTY
2. NPC 0.0 IN EVERY SOV REGION &
3. INCREASED PLAYER DENSITY
Agree its a start, but seriously, that was all these people could agree on ?
Sorry but expected more from these people.
Where was their united thoughts on addressing;
1. Corp, Alliance mechanics + coalitions & taxation there of / also the passive income derived from moon mining by them,
2. Stations, outposts & starbase's - changes needed / destructability of these structures.
3. The introduction of incentives or forced timers, so people become limited in how long they can stay in empire, in order to increase the popluation of low and nul sec.
4. Warfare - adequate conflict drivers.
5. Capital ship balancing & projection.
you know they probably thought about adding those in but this is a great start. Which is what we need a start not a huge blob of stuff at one time. |
Migui X'hyrrn
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
118
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:13:00 -
[159] - Quote
Lord Purifier wrote:1. OCCUPANCY-BASED SOVEREIGNTY
2. NPC 0.0 IN EVERY SOV REGION &
3. INCREASED PLAYER DENSITY
Agree its a start, but seriously, that was all these people could agree on ?
Sorry but expected more from these people.
Where was their united thoughts on addressing;
1. Corp, Alliance mechanics + coalitions & taxation there of / also the passive income derived from moon mining by them,
2. Stations, outposts & starbase's - changes needed / destructability of these structures.
3. The introduction of incentives or forced timers, so people become limited in how long they can stay in empire, in order to increase the popluation of low and nul sec.
4. Warfare - adequate conflict drivers.
5. Capital ship balancing & projection.
We agreed on those 3 small points as a point of start. |
Lysa Shardani
Twisp and Catsby's Moonvestments
Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:14:00 -
[160] - Quote
Posting in support of this. |
Snot Shot
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
861
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:15:00 -
[161] - Quote
So the leaders of Null Sec SOV holding Alliances are tired of playing naked diplomacy Twister? Have you decided who's going to pull out of whos bum first?
CCP can change null SOV to this but at the end of the day its the diplomatic meta circle jerk thats the real issue with Null. CCP needs to go bigger and get rid of SOV structures and timers like SBUs, TCUs, Station Timers and docking rights. Then diplomacy can happen on a granular/local level and will be much more fluid.
If you occupy the system etc then with the IHUB upgrades you get more and more benefits from the station like Agents, Services, etc and your docking radius gets bigger as you use the system etc. Tip of the iceberg stuff but you get the point.
Anywhoo.....great idea with the NPC space... ...but please make sure the new SOV system you promote can also be gamed into another diplomatic pretzel. It would be a shame if we didn't see The Martini pretending year after year the its not his fault for Null Sec being a stagnant puppet show...
.
Twitter = @Snot_Shot-á - GÇ£If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything"
evesnotshot.blogspot.com |
Jandice Ymladris
Aurora Arcology
879
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:17:00 -
[162] - Quote
Supporting this double, because nullsec needs more love. It's the place that generates stories to draw in more players! remember the great nullsec wars? Or all the stories of the smaller groups pulling off successful stunts against the big boys? That's what draws in a more positive & PvP oriented crowd!
The Yulai Incident, when Zombies defied Concord
-áNew Eden Capsuleer writing contest! Deadline 15 october! |
Grainsalt
PubSwarm Federation
Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
217
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:25:00 -
[163] - Quote
Git 'er done CCP! |
Renegade Heart
Smack My Ship Up
205
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:25:00 -
[164] - Quote
I logged in to like the OP. These kind of posts need more likes.
Brilliant idea null sec leaders! |
Thercon Jair
Nex Exercitus
Northern Coalition.
4
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:32:00 -
[165] - Quote
I support this motion.
o7 |
Andski
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
11385
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:40:00 -
[166] - Quote
Snot Shot wrote:So the leaders of Null Sec SOV holding Alliances are tired of playing naked diplomacy Twister? Have you decided who's going to pull out of whos bum first? CCP can change null SOV to this but at the end of the day its the diplomatic meta circle jerk thats the real issue with Null. CCP needs to go bigger and get rid of SOV structures and timers like SBUs, TCUs, Station Timers and docking rights. Then diplomacy can happen on a granular/local level and will be much more fluid. If you occupy the system etc then with the IHUB upgrades you get more and more benefits from the station like Agents, Services, etc and your docking radius gets bigger as you use the system etc. Tip of the iceberg stuff but you get the point. Anywhoo.....great idea with the NPC space... ...but please make sure the new SOV system you promote can also be gamed into another diplomatic pretzel. It would be a shame if we didn't see The Martini pretending year after year the its not his fault for Null Sec being a stagnant puppet show... .
Can you expand on your ideas with anecdotes from your storied history of leading coalitions in wars contesting sovereignty?
Twitter: @EVEAndski
"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."
-á-á - Abrazzar |
DarkPanther
hirr
Northern Coalition.
0
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:41:00 -
[167] - Quote
+1 OP
This needs to happen sooner, rather than later. |
WhiteHalo117
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:43:00 -
[168] - Quote
Snot Shot wrote:So the leaders of Null Sec SOV holding Alliances are tired of playing naked diplomacy Twister? Have you decided who's going to pull out of whos bum first? CCP can change null SOV to this but at the end of the day its the diplomatic meta circle jerk thats the real issue with Null. CCP needs to go bigger and get rid of SOV structures and timers like SBUs, TCUs, Station Timers and docking rights. Then diplomacy can happen on a granular/local level and will be much more fluid. If you occupy the system etc then with the IHUB upgrades you get more and more benefits from the station like Agents, Services, etc and your docking radius gets bigger as you use the system etc. Tip of the iceberg stuff but you get the point. Anywhoo.....great idea with the NPC space... ...but please make sure the new SOV system you promote can also be gamed into another diplomatic pretzel. It would be a shame if we didn't see The Martini pretending year after year the its not his fault for Null Sec being a stagnant puppet show... .
Like always one giant grrr goons wall, 10/10 will read again. |
Migui X'hyrrn
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
118
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:45:00 -
[169] - Quote
Snot Shot wrote:So the leaders of Null Sec SOV holding Alliances are tired of playing naked diplomacy Twister? Have you decided who's going to pull out of whos bum first? CCP can change null SOV to this but at the end of the day its the diplomatic meta circle jerk thats the real issue with Null. CCP needs to go bigger and get rid of SOV structures and timers like SBUs, TCUs, Station Timers and docking rights. Then diplomacy can happen on a granular/local level and will be much more fluid. If you occupy the system etc then with the IHUB upgrades you get more and more benefits from the station like Agents, Services, etc and your docking radius gets bigger as you use the system etc. Tip of the iceberg stuff but you get the point. Anywhoo.....great idea with the NPC space... ...but please make sure the new SOV system you promote can also be gamed into another diplomatic pretzel. It would be a shame if we didn't see The Martini pretending year after year the its not his fault for Null Sec being a stagnant puppet show... .
Do you think that people makes coalitions of 40k dudes because they love friendship?
Blue donuts are a consequence of a horrible gameplay and lack of solutions. You cannot have a good income to support your activities and shoot at everyone at the same time on the current sov iteration. If you want the big guys to risk their big guns give them a good reason to do that because crashing nodes after a tidifest is not a very convincing reason.
|
Tetsel
Heretic Army
130
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:46:00 -
[170] - Quote
Link Moon mining to Sov holding, and it will be even more fun. Grrrr PL
Loyal servent to Mother Amamake.
@EVE_Tetsel |
Brain Gehirn
Reikoku
Pandemic Legion
60
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:53:00 -
[171] - Quote
+1
What is a signature? |
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
2390
|
Posted - 2014.09.28 23:56:00 -
[172] - Quote
I have taken the liberty of pointing CCP at this thread.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department |
|
Ryan526
Nex Exercitus
Northern Coalition.
13
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 00:07:00 -
[173] - Quote
+1
Fully support this. |
KuroVolt
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
2056
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 00:11:00 -
[174] - Quote
Don't see the signature of any of my coalitions leadership.
I reject this agreement by default!
BoBwins Law: As a discussion/war between two large nullsec entities grows longer, the probability of one comparing the other to BoB aproaches near certainty. |
Vendictus Prime
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 00:11:00 -
[175] - Quote
"Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational battle station." |
Regnag Leppod
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
42
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 00:15:00 -
[176] - Quote
ISD Ezwal wrote:..
This thread has also been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.
Phew.. that was close! Any longer in GD and it might have gotten a lot more attention from even more people!
|
Veinnail
FinFleet
Northern Coalition.
102
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 00:20:00 -
[177] - Quote
+1 because dominion wasn't that great. |
Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
126
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 00:21:00 -
[178] - Quote
ISD Ezwal wrote:I have taken the liberty of pointing CCP at this thread.
This thread has also been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.
How about putting a sticky in GD linking to the thread so that people know of it's existence before it disappears of of the front page?
|
Venetian Tar
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
105
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 00:23:00 -
[179] - Quote
ISD Ezwal wrote:I have taken the liberty of pointing CCP at this thread.
This thread has also been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.
more like isd dumb, why would you move this?
I don't hate you, I'm just not necessarily excited about your existance. |
Venetian Tar
Wildly Inappropriate
Goonswarm Federation
105
|
Posted - 2014.09.29 00:24:00 -
[180] - Quote
+1 for this thread by the way
good show gents
I don't hate you, I'm just not necessarily excited about your existance. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |