EVE Search - Shrinking Null Blocs - acknowledge coalitions.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Shrinking Null Blocs - acknowledge coalitions.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Jenshae Chiroptera 615	Posted - 2014.12.18 15:37:13 - [1] - Quote Right, so Phoebe. Okay, force projection is now limited. You still have an artificial force that makes people keeps more space than they need. SOV and stations. Please recognise coalitions in the mechanics so we can build a station on every planet and have one per alliance. One alliance can control the initial setup or in other words govern the system but if we can consolodate our space then we can use it more effectively and not try to grab so much of it. I see it working out like this in a coalition: Alliances would hold 1-2 systems as "home bases" / staging systems with only them in it. Other systems would have the more powerful alliances mixed in The lowest value systems and possibly border systems would have renters or new alliances. Over all though, it would mean less systems per bloc and more blocs. It would mean a greater concentration of pilots, which would mean that the smaller you are the more you can defend your space. Another thing that would be good is if we could mix our fleets in the coalitions and go through high sec. Have logi from alliance A being able to repp alliance B ship that was attacked. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
Agondray Avenger Mercenaries VOID Intergalactic Forces 172	Posted - 2014.12.18 17:47:38 - [2] - Quote Outpost are only in a number of systems because the 30 plus billion needed for them has become a small cost compared to the capship fleets that fielded, same with the 500m a system, just a small fee is all its become. Much of null sec is just held waiting for renters rather then being used because its more then what's needed. I am not in null due to multiple reasons, but I have seen the problems all over eve To take null by force you would need to build a major power to compete with the null powers or they will just stomp you "Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 616	Posted - 2014.12.18 20:00:43 - [3] - Quote http://evenews24.com/2014/12/08/matt-greyscale-woodward-leaves-ccp/ Quote: Greyscale feels that reduction in mobility will decrease need for big coalitions, because huge coalition blobs wonGÇÖt be able to move as fast; result should be smaller local wars. It is noted that the cost of supporting coalition allies will increase, which will increase friction; coalitions may fragment so reds are easier to find. This may make it easier for small alliances to set up shop, with less supercapital curb stomping. Greyscale warns, however, that during the transition period GÇ£everything will go to sh-.GÇ¥ We are still in the transition period. My point being that we could have smaller tougher nuts to crack but many more of them. Have a look around, a lot of coalitions and alliances are pulling back. CFC was withdrawing from the south west, if I remember correctly, as an example. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
Lugh Crow-Slave 283	Posted - 2014.12.20 07:19:43 - [4] - Quote more outposts per system would be nice but only after they can be popped
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 1803	Posted - 2014.12.20 08:11:20 - [5] - Quote You only need 4 systems to have all the outposts you want. The actual issue with Null Density is the number of players who can live in a system doing anything other than mining. Average accepted number is about 10 people in an average system across every single time zone occupy all the PvE content a single system can provide. While this number remains at this level, you will not see significant compression of members. Null needs to be able to support a great many more per system, without significantly affecting max income per player.
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 622	Posted - 2014.12.20 14:18:13 - [6] - Quote 5/5/5 system supports more than that easily and isn't even being used effieciently. Teams, tear through sites so fast noctises are leap frogging and a hauler is needed to pick up the loot. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
Nariya Kentaya Ministry of War Amarr Empire 1651	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:26:07 - [7] - Quote Lugh Crow-Slave wrote: more outposts per system would be nice but only after they can be popped make outright destroying them easier than capturing them, afterall, capturing one should be a GOAL of an invasion, its an important asset with extreme military utility, destroying it should be the easy path to system domination, capturing it should be difficult, maybe later on with LEGION integration for fun times. also make defenders able to enact scorched earth protocols to deny aforementioned military asset from the enemy (and ALL assets currently held inside it destroyed with a 10% drop chance)
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 622	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:42:12 - [8] - Quote I can agree on destruction but not easy destruction. This is EVE, with groups like Pandem Legion in them. If there is something to fight for to regain there will be more good fights otherwise the next big thing from Titan ganks is Station ganks. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
Bl1SkR1N Euphoria Released Triumvirate. 54	Posted - 2014.12.20 17:54:15 - [9] - Quote How about, instead of making destructable stations...which is imo super hard to implement without ruining game, you remove abilitiy to build stations at all. Regions would be stuck with what they have, give them whole new meaning, maybe change how upgrades work.
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10866	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:06:43 - [10] - Quote Wow, no. First, how about we make it so that alliances actually exist? You know, instead of being a slapdash hotfix that has held for years and years? Alliance bookmarks first and foremost, obviously, but nonetheless, you don't just build bad on top of bad. Yeesh. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 622	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:06:54 - [11] - Quote I think the over all plan is to have null sec running as a player driven high sec with its own law enforcements, markets, etc. Probably a dream but the waste land of systems can't be what they are hoping for or trying to make happen. Edit: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Alliance bookmarks first and foremost, obviously, but nonetheless, you don't just build bad on top of bad. Check into that. I think I read in a dev post or blog that it will never happen. Too many book marks bursting the download when you change systems. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 249	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:20:13 - [12] - Quote I'm hoping CCP will do the exact opposite of what OP wants, and instead forces localization on null. Remove all timers on sov structures and outposts. Make it so the only people that can hold and defend a system, are those that live there. No more coalitions sending a thousand f1 scrubs to make a timer and prevent any change or growth in null. Sure, at first you'll see exactly that. Coalitions desperately clinging to their old meta and flipping some systems...but with no more timers, the original inhabitants of those systems can literally take them back right after the aggressors leave. Maybe this could make coalitions irrelevant, which would be the best thing for Eve since sliced bread and jump fatigue. And as for destroyable stations....the only people that REALLY want this are those that are currently members of those large coalitions. They would absolutely love to go from system to system and pop every station that is not their own. Perhaps this mechanic could work a long time in the future, but not so long as the coalitions of today exist. It would just be exploited, which is what they always do.
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 622	Posted - 2014.12.20 18:57:46 - [13] - Quote Timers are vital. Getting a large alliance organised to do something takes time. There are also weaknesses in time zones. The large alliances can't be bothered to build stations half the time. Just control it and rent out POSes. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
admiral root Red Galaxy 2051	Posted - 2014.12.20 20:34:02 - [14] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Check into that. I think I read in a dev post or blog that it will never happen. Too many book marks bursting the download when you change systems. Wouldn't this new on-demand gizmo thingy mean that they wouldn't need to download until you right clicked in space or opened people & places? No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff \| No-one hates you, none of us care enough for that. Sabriz for CSM
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 2614	Posted - 2014.12.20 21:06:58 - [15] - Quote An alliance of alliances, how long before these groups demand that alliances of alliances of alliances becomes a recognized group?
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 622	Posted - 2014.12.20 22:43:49 - [16] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: An alliance of alliances, how long before these groups demand that alliances of alliances of alliances becomes a recognized group? Then we adapt and coalitions can only have one station per system going forward, devaluing the alliance to corp levels. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14304	Posted - 2014.12.21 04:49:55 - [17] - Quote Under your plan how would we support tens of thousands of pilots with just one system when currently a single system can support at most 10 pilots at a time? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 627	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:17:48 - [18] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Under your plan how would we support tens of thousands of pilots with just one system when currently a single system can support at most 10 pilots at a time? Not trying to herd 10 thousand into one system. I know that one system that is being used quiet inefficiently can support about 80 online at a time. Are you talking about 10 solo ratters taking their sweet time to clear a site? CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10888	Posted - 2014.12.21 18:32:00 - [19] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Omnathious Deninard wrote: An alliance of alliances, how long before these groups demand that alliances of alliances of alliances becomes a recognized group? Then we adapt and coalitions can only have one station per system going forward, devaluing the alliance to corp levels. ...wow. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 627	Posted - 2014.12.21 19:23:21 - [20] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: ...wow. ... because being the same as now, where they can have only one alliance station per coalition in there would be so bad? Oh hang on, there would still be more stations with more blues .... wow! CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog

baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14318	Posted - 2014.12.21 20:01:27 - [21] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: baltec1 wrote: Under your plan how would we support tens of thousands of pilots with just one system when currently a single system can support at most 10 pilots at a time? Not trying to herd 10 thousand into one system. I know that one system that is being used quiet inefficiently can support about 80 online at a time. Are you talking about 10 solo ratters taking their sweet time to clear a site? No, Im talking about people using the best ratting ships in the game. 10 people is the max you can host in the very best truesec system. It is impossible to support 80 people let alone the thirty thousand in our empire on a single system. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 628	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:41:24 - [22] - Quote baltec1 wrote: No, Im talking about people using the best ratting ships in the game. 10 people is the max you can host in the very best truesec system. It is impossible to support 80 people let alone the thirty thousand in our empire on a single system. I repeat. I know it can support 80 I do not expect thousands confined to one system. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10889	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:45:09 - [23] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: ...wow. ... because being the same as now, where they can have only one alliance station per coalition in there would be so bad? Oh hang on, there would still be more stations with more blues .... wow! You fail to understand. I'm talking about how you literally admit that you don't have a permanent solution, and just want iterative change after iterative change, all to spite people living in nullsec. If you can't see what's wrong with that... then you are beyond redemption. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 628	Posted - 2014.12.21 23:59:36 - [24] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: You fail to understand. I'm talking about how you literally admit that you don't have a permanent solution, and just want iterative change after iterative change, all to spite people living in nullsec. If you can't see what's wrong with that... then you are beyond redemption. Is this more of your attempts to "bury" me like you have done to "better forumites" Oh, mighty forum warrior? Kaarous Aldurald wrote: I've buried better forumites than you, and to Falcon you won't even be a speed bump, even if you make it past Ezwal and Barstorlode. I do not think there are any permanent solutions. That is why there is balancing and re-balancing. The game is in constant flux. If you think I am trying to spite null sec, you are sorely mistaken. I live in null sec. Now can you, stop following me around like a bad smell just because you couldn't keep my CSM thread locked? It looks rather sulky. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14319	Posted - 2014.12.22 04:43:32 - [25] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: I repeat. I know it can support 80 Repeat it all you want, you are still wrong. Anyone who has done any kind of research into this subject can see that you cannot support 80 people in one system. The number is 10 per system before you start getting issues with overcrowding. Why do you think most null powerblocks want to move away from anoms being the primary way of making isk in sov null? Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 628	Posted - 2014.12.22 04:48:28 - [26] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Repeat it all you want, you are still wrong. Anyone who has done any kind of research into this subject can see that you cannot support 80 people in one system. The number is 10 per system 10 guys running solo and taking their sweet time. Edit: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/those-anomaly-changes-in-full/ It comes down to rate. The quicker you clear sites the quicker you spawn more. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14319	Posted - 2014.12.22 04:55:39 - [27] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: baltec1 wrote: Repeat it all you want, you are still wrong. Anyone who has done any kind of research into this subject can see that you cannot support 80 people in one system. The number is 10 per system 10 guys running solo and taking their sweet time. Wrong again. We finish them so fast we have to wait for them to respawn. We have been over this time after time for years now with bears such as yourself who have no idea what they are talking about. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 628	Posted - 2014.12.22 05:04:13 - [28] - Quote baltec1 wrote: We finish them so fast we have to wait for them to respawn. We have been over this time after time for years now with bears such as yourself who have no idea what they are talking about. Don't know what you are doing wrong. There is a change in OP before this page of threads saying that there probably needs to be a change to it anyway. Shrugs Edit: Wait. Are you clearing absolutely every site? Might like worm holes that you need to leave two junk anomolies to spawn others faster. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 14319	Posted - 2014.12.22 05:27:07 - [29] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: baltec1 wrote: We finish them so fast we have to wait for them to respawn. We have been over this time after time for years now with bears such as yourself who have no idea what they are talking about. Don't know what you are doing wrong. There is a change in OP before this page of threads saying that there probably needs to be a change to it anyway. Shrugs Edit: Wait. Are you clearing absolutely every site? Might like worm holes that you need to leave two junk anomolies to spawn others faster. Doesn't work like that. There is a fixed number of spawns that respawn on a fixed time. A max upgraded, best truesec system will host 10 people before they start stepping on eachothers toes. Next step in this thread is someone will say "well then run plexes" to which the response is they will support at the very most 100 per region. Inevitably someone will say something about faction/officer spawns to which the response is that they are rare, hence why they cost what they do. Long story short, if you don't own a personal carrier fleet for ratting and just have the one ratting character you are better off running SOE level 4 missions in high sec. Your plan can't work because it doesn't address the real issue for empire sprawl. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Jenshae Chiroptera The Volition Cult 628	Posted - 2014.12.22 05:32:48 - [30] - Quote Although I disagree with you, I shall quote you to the OP. I do agree that it needs an increase, especially if this thread's change were to be implemented. Edit: It seems to be a running concern, shared by quite a few. So if the average need it improved quite drastically then there we have it. CSM Ten movement for change. EVE - the only MMO that not so subtly serves up victims. Status: Rabid carebear Blog



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.