Make the resources finite...

OP want a war. If you know of a better way for someone I assume is not in leadership position to start something, then I am all ears. If fighting over timers for "worthless" space stupid? Yes it is but at the end of the day, if you want a war in the sandbox, you have to play with the toys the sandbox contain. OP want a sandcastle kicking contest so I proposed a way to start one. No castle will really gets destroyed but it's that much more close to sand castle kicking than sitting on her arse waiting for people to start a war for her.

Personally, I expect that the major blocs are waiting until whatever announcements are made at Fanfest (if any) before they commit to any course of action. The smaller powers are waiting for one of the big boys to make a mistake so they can capitilize on it.

Ball's in CCP's court at this point.

lol. I start a topic just to make smalltalk and all the grr goonies come out of the woodwork.

Am I the only one around here who enjoys structure bashing?

Appearing on structure killmails with carbon copies of perfect Ishtar characters amuses me.

The one simple solution that would solve so many of the problems plaguing this game right now. If I had the power to change one thing, and one thing only with EVE, this would be it.

Keep up the good fight, Herzog.

Mr Epeen

The one simple solution that would solve so many of the problems plaguing this game right now. If I had the power to change one thing, and one thing only with EVE, this would be it.

Keep up the good fight, Herzog.

Mr Epeen

Has jump fatigue made everyone gun-shy?

Expected consequences

Some alliances will immediately start wanting to look for better space
In the longer run, there'll be more conflicts going on, with more localized goals
Newer alliances will have an easier time getting a foothold in nullsec
Coalitions will be marginally less stable
Alliances will have to choose more carefully what space they develop, where their staging systems are, and so on (low truesec systems generally tend to be in strategically inconvenient places)

The one simple solution that would solve so many of the problems plaguing this game right now. If I had the power to change one thing, and one thing only with EVE, this would be it.

Keep up the good fight, Herzog.

Mr Epeen

Nothing stopping you from starting one.



Didn't someone insult someone's significant other once and set off some kind of slap fight in null? I think I remember that being a thing. Maybe it wasn't. Pretty sure that happened though.. like 82% sure.

Another exmaple of not understanidng human nature. The whole idea behind 'finite resources" is to 'drive' people into conflict over resources. The idea is false (and every zombie show is wrong, people wouldn't be fighting each other AND zombies, they'd be combining forces to eliminate zombies and THEN fight each other after the zombie threat is gone...history 101).

Another exmaple of not understanidng human nature. The whole idea behind 'finite resources" is to 'drive' people into conflict over resources. The idea is false (and every zombie show is wrong, people wouldn't be fighting each other AND zombies, they'd be combining forces to eliminate zombies and THEN fight each other after the zombie threat is gone...history 101).

making resources finite would result in more stagnation as the mega groups filled with people who are already cooperatiing with each other would just cooperate more to keep everyone else away from trhe finite resources. In the same way that the 'new sov syste' that eliminated pos grinding actually greated mega coalations that could bring enough DPS to make short work of the new SOV strcutures like IHUBs.

'Malcanis' Law' don'esn't jsut appy to new players, it applys to ANY attempt to destabalize established groups. This is because people think human nature is greed and conflict when it fact it's CALCULATION (and if cooperating offers better returns than conflict, people will cooperate, even in a video game about conflict).

The phoebe changes didn't allow new entities to magically take up new sov space, didn't force anyone to contract, entrenched existing alliances...

Another exmaple of not understanidng human nature. The whole idea behind 'finite resources" is to 'drive' people into conflict over resources. The idea is false (and every zombie show is wrong, people wouldn't be fighting each other AND zombies, they'd be combining forces to eliminate zombies and THEN fight each other after the zombie threat is gone...history 101).

Nothing will ever make people magically have the balls or ability to actually DO things they talk about.

Exactly. If a group can't do it under an existing system (where it's doable but hard), NO system is going to work for them,

Eh, this is demonstrably false. There are groups that have a strong effect in fac war sovereignty that couldn't have an effect on null sec sov. If the null sec sov system were changed to resemble the fac war system, those fac war groups would have a stronger effect.

We can even narrow the scope further: There were/are many groups who were less effective (or ineffective entirely) under the old fac war system who are thriving under the new one.

If we approach the limiting case were a single pilot can take sov in a system in 10 seconds, then such a system would certainly allow your proposed group to "take" sov.

My point is not to suggest such a sov system, but simply to point out that the train of thought that goes "If you can't do it under an existing system, you can't do it under any system" is utterly and completely flawed, wrong in every way.

Maybe EVE is getting old. The point about calculation is a good one, and it's accurate for me.

I'm in the middle of a high sec PVE test with a Golem, and I'm finding the rate of ISK income from vanilla level 4 missions to be around... I don't know, 75 mil for a couple hours of lazy F1 spam? So it's still true a high sec marauder character can easily earn its own subscription... and then have a couple bil per month left over to blow on bling fits.

This is even after a lot of mission values have been slashed by 90%, to a pittance compared to 2012 and earlier.

Change hats out to null, and assuming players aren't in totally **** organizations, and ignoring PVE income in null due to risk (compared to high sec), there's not much incentive for PVP. Maybe I'm getting old, but I don't think that's it. I've never been a PVP type of gamer.

Structure bashing, yes, that's part of group maintenance, and the narrative is fun. But we're not even seeing that. Then of course there's the departure of Greyscale at a very high profile time in his tenure at CCP. On the Meta Show, Mittens and the personality formerly known as CCP Sreegs said they wouldn't discuss Greyscale's departure, but I'm not above it.

The timing of it suggests there were some expectations that were not met.

I won't pass any judgments on whether game mechanics are ethically correct, or even logically sound. I will say, though, that based on the complete lack of a great war (or even talk of conflict) probably means something needs to be changed.

Just prior to Jump Fatigue, a Goonswarm Federation group of Ishtar guerrillas was formed, and I recognized the look of it right away: these guerrillas were a harassing force that would instill even more cause for hesitation--on top of jump fatigue.

I don't know **** about sov but I know every suggestion for fixes has been rebutted with a likely scenario for being gamed, with the calculating reality of player behavior applied. And so far it all sounds far more plausible than any proposed change.

I know you want your conventional wisdom to work (people hold on to it like a crutch, because without this conventional wisdom, the world doesn't make sense, uncertainty is scary), but it just doesn't work that way.

... big blue doughnut!

The one simple solution that would solve so many of the problems plaguing this game right now. If I had the power to change one thing, and one thing only with EVE, this would be it.

Keep up the good fight, Herzog.

Mr Epeen