EVE Search - Battleship overpopulation Solution

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Battleship overpopulation Solution

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Zeus	Posted - 2003.11.29 01:03:00 - [1] Perhaps Tomb or the appropriate Dev might want to consider raising the construction time of a battleship to something like 6 days. From the start I always thought that 6 hours in and around seemed a little unrealistic to construct a massive ship such as they are in eve. Perhaps if it took so long to make them, we would see less of them :) Probably already considered, just an idea Shrug
Gunther Maxx	Posted - 2003.11.30 18:30:00 - [2] Agreed. There was another thread on this subject recently. Dont remeber where though. - To Be or Not To Be ? It's hardly a question.
CLONE 9	Posted - 2003.11.30 19:14:00 - [3] Hmm - not sure this will dent the 'overall' population Zeus. Think about it - if 30 Battleships are put in to production - 30 will roll off the end of the production line. You'll introduce a delay, but not a reduction. The trick is to get people to 'lose' their battleships by giving them reason to fight. How about this for an idea: Currently lots of people are moaning about battleships mining the hell out of Empire space with no risk. In snug warm 1.0 sec belts, the cotton wool wrapped BS miner clans greedily hoard vast mountains of ore, ready to sell the sparkling minerals so they can inflate their gargantuan profits. And all the time, no tribute is offered to the Empires who's space they disrespectfully plunder. Perhaps we can kill two birds with one proverbial stone here (and wait for it - I will get to the BS numbers aspect shortly). Yes, let them mine - but at a price. Let the Empire impose huge levies on corporations and their members for the luxury of the protection they are granted in Empire space. A Tariff of 50% perhaps. Alternatively, they could agree a factional/racial contract with an agent. In order to reduce or eliminate the tariff, the player concedes to undertaking missions / tasks for the faction or sovereign of the region which are relevant to the amount of ore they want to mine in a week. The greater the volume of ore - the greater the risk of the missions. So then, in order to strip mine the belts of Tash Murkon and not pay heavily in taxation, someone may need to venture in to deepest 0.0 space and undertake a combat mission to the satisfaction of the regional controller. Of course, this would force them to also run the risk of encountering PC pirate corps etc .... and if they come together (regardless of who wins) someone is going to come out an ex-battleship pilot. Just a thought ... I'll probably re post it in a separate thread if this sinks.
Xtreem	Posted - 2003.11.30 23:03:00 - [4] all npc production of bs should be stopped, user made only making them either alot harder to find or much more expensive seeing as it will be player controlled prices, if a few got together and set a min price for thereships, they could rake it in and make bs's more valuble
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.11.30 23:55:00 - [5] Quote: all npc production of bs should be stopped, user made only making them either alot harder to find or much more expensive seeing as it will be player controlled prices, if a few got together and set a min price for thereships, they could rake it in and make bs's more valuble problem is there is already to many BS BP's on thne market there would still be a lot of peoble building them Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Danton Marcellus	Posted - 2003.12.01 06:37:00 - [6] Cancel all unlimited copies, problem solved. Convert Stations
Admiral IceBlock	Posted - 2003.12.01 09:50:00 - [7] BLAME XANADU!!! Quote: <<<Battleship Blueprint Copies:>>> Armageddon bpc ME10 1 run..........5 mil isk Apoc bpc ME10 1 run ...................10 mil isk Scorp bpc ME10 1 run ..................5 mil isk Raven bpc ME10 1 run..................10 mil isk Megathron bpc ME10 1 run...........10 mil isk Tempest bpc ME10 1 run...............10 mil isk "We brake for nobody"
Dukath	Posted - 2003.12.01 10:08:00 - [8] I do think that increasing build time would help a lot. Suppose you have 10 people who can produce battleships, and you lose 15 battleships a day. With the current times i think its 6 hours for a battleship? So you can build 40 battleships a day while losing only 15 (assuming you have enough minerals). So there is no problem keeping everyone in a battleship, prices drop and the market collapses. Now if the production time would be increased to 72 hours then you can only build about 3 battleships a day. And then you will lose more battleships than you build and the number of battleships in the galaxy will go down. I do agree that the unlimited BPcopies are a problem but at least this problem will not exist with the new blueprints since you can't make unlimited copies anymore. Besides with increased build time factory slots will be used a lot longer and thus competition for factoryslots will increase again :)
wamingo	Posted - 2003.12.01 15:59:00 - [9] You presume people lose a lot of battleships, the truth is they don't, averagely people keep their battleships far longer than 72 hours... The solution lies somewhere else. -- I won't not promise to avoid refraining from harming you! .... What?
Cattraknoff	Posted - 2003.12.01 19:16:00 - [10] all terrible ideas IMO, people barely lose their bs cuz of their bookmarks and mwds, nerf the bookmarks, cause mwds not to stack, and there u go, problem solved, less battleships around!
Dukath	Posted - 2003.12.01 20:09:00 - [11] Of course bookmarks, instajumps/docks, dual MWDs need to be fixed, but TOGETHER with this build speed thingy. 6 hours for a battleship is simply not enough.
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.01 22:42:00 - [12] Quote: Of course bookmarks, instajumps/docks, dual MWDs need to be fixed, but TOGETHER with this build speed thingy. 6 hours for a battleship is simply not enough. i agree there has been so many posts on these topics it would be nice to see some CCP response Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Ruffles	Posted - 2003.12.02 17:45:00 - [13] You are talking 26 thousand years in the future, and more importantly A GAME! People aren't going to buy a ship off you if it takes 6 days to build! They will say they will buy from you, then buy one thats available already at the same price Geezzz... I tell you what. You want people getting out of one destroyed ship and YOU TELL them they can wait 6 days for a new ship. Its a game, and I hate to break it to you but its not going to keep peoples attention for that long in that manner. Build times isn't an issue, lack of ability to actively engage, and sustain a fight is hard. Make battleships have more vulnerabilities to smaller vessels, and have them destroyed by said smaller vessels if they aren't protected by buddies in similar smaller escourting vessels, and yes perhaps you will see more built/destroyed/etc... Build times will have nothing to do with it but further put people off waiting for things to be built to return to pvp.
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.02 18:53:00 - [14] Edited by: Paw Sandberg on 02/12/2003 18:54:02 i think we are several on here that DO think build times is part of the problem again a part not the whole problem Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Lucas Bowman	Posted - 2003.12.02 19:20:00 - [15] So what's the problem with so many people in battleships? What's the difference between 1000 people flying a BS vs 1000 flying a frigate? I think perhaps some players (who are obviously already flying BS's) want to remain king of the hill by preventing others from flying a like class vessel. If you want to thin out the herd, I'd suggest dropping the insurance coverage to only cover frigate and industrial class ships. Cruisers and BS's could be considered machines of war and therefore undesirable for coverage by insurance companies. Limiting the progression of a player I don't think is the real issue in this game, I feel the lack of loss for a character in this game is what is missing. You've got clones, so no loss of training; insurance prevents the total loss of your ship, though your items are usually lost. Items in storage are protected as they are untouchable by anyone. Maybe some real loss in the game? Podkill someone, and get to pick one of any item that person owns? Basically, why second guess if you want to mix it up in battle if 5 minutes after you've been blasted you are back up and running as if nothing happened?
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.02 19:49:00 - [16] Quote: So what's the problem with so many people in battleships? What's the difference between 1000 people flying a BS vs 1000 flying a frigate? I think perhaps some players (who are obviously already flying BS's) want to remain king of the hill by preventing others from flying a like class vessel. If you want to thin out the herd, I'd suggest dropping the insurance coverage to only cover frigate and industrial class ships. Cruisers and BS's could be considered machines of war and therefore undesirable for coverage by insurance companies. Limiting the progression of a player I don't think is the real issue in this game, I feel the lack of loss for a character in this game is what is missing. You've got clones, so no loss of training; insurance prevents the total loss of your ship, though your items are usually lost. Items in storage are protected as they are untouchable by anyone. Maybe some real loss in the game? Podkill someone, and get to pick one of any item that person owns? Basically, why second guess if you want to mix it up in battle if 5 minutes after you've been blasted you are back up and running as if nothing happened? problem is no one other than a BS can kill a BS and they are the jack of all trades they can do anything better then a Cruiser or Frigate read the forums this is what many other ppl then me say also just for the record i am NOT flying a BS but a cruiser on the insurance you are right real life insurance would not cover a War ship but would the miner or the trader also real life insurance would go up if you did lose a ship and down if you did not the insurance change alone would reduce the number of BS in the game bacause of the increased fear of losing them Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Lucas Bowman	Posted - 2003.12.02 20:15:00 - [17] You are incorrect sir, one of my corp mates took out a pirate camping BS with but a cruiser. BS's are big ships, but lack of skills and experience will not prevent the loss of such a massive ship.
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.02 20:26:00 - [18] Quote: You are incorrect sir, one of my corp mates took out a pirate camping BS with but a cruiser. BS's are big ships, but lack of skills and experience will not prevent the loss of such a massive ship. well i am glad to have been wrong i should however proberly have ssaid near imposible and it does not change the fact that the BS is a do all Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
CLONE 9	Posted - 2003.12.02 20:35:00 - [19] Quote: If you want to thin out the herd, I'd suggest dropping the insurance coverage to only cover frigate and industrial class ships. Cruisers and BS's could be considered machines of war and therefore undesirable for coverage by insurance companies. And that is supposed to thin out the BS population? The first thing that will do is persuade people who are already reluctant to travel beyond 0.5 space that they should stay safe and stay put.
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.02 20:40:00 - [20] that would mean fewer peoble flying them and gate campers would not be able to use them Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Lucas Bowman	Posted - 2003.12.03 04:43:00 - [21] It will also weigh heavy on the minds of pirates, I imagine, on just how profitable pirating might be without being able to insure a combat vessel.
Dukath	Posted - 2003.12.03 11:09:00 - [22] Quote: You are talking 26 thousand years in the future, and more importantly A GAME! People aren't going to buy a ship off you if it takes 6 days to build! They will say they will buy from you, then buy one thats available already at the same price Geezzz... I tell you what. You want people getting out of one destroyed ship and YOU TELL them they can wait 6 days for a new ship. Its a game, and I hate to break it to you but its not going to keep peoples attention for that long in that manner. Build times isn't an issue, lack of ability to actively engage, and sustain a fight is hard. Make battleships have more vulnerabilities to smaller vessels, and have them destroyed by said smaller vessels if they aren't protected by buddies in similar smaller escourting vessels, and yes perhaps you will see more built/destroyed/etc... Build times will have nothing to do with it but further put people off waiting for things to be built to return to pvp. Errrm ruffles, never heard of having stuff in stock? If you specialise in building things then you can have a stock of them available to sell. If you go buy a car you don't expect that the car still needs to be built in the factory, you expect to buy one that is in stock, just like anything else.
Cell Satimo	Posted - 2003.12.03 12:08:00 - [23] Quote: Yes, let them mine - but at a price. Let the Empire impose huge levies on corporations and their members for the luxury of the protection they are granted in Empire space. A Tariff of 50% perhaps. This could be achieved very easily by increasing the station costs for refining minerals in empires space, however it would just create a greater gap betweeen the have and have-nots, as the people already in BS's in 0.0 would have a cost advantage. \| Join eve-webring.com to promote your site.
Pelias	Posted - 2003.12.03 12:28:00 - [24] Will anwser to your idea as new BS owner: I mined for my apoc 2 months, what is the problem to do wait mere 6 days to build it? And from eyes of vet: I put hi-end fighter - I *don't want to die, so I use expensive stuff and best ships. Whats the problem with waiting 6 days more, if it can save me from numerous pods (implant losses, etc). Simply use my controversial, but imo effective idea from topic: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=45265
Ruffles	Posted - 2003.12.03 15:50:00 - [25] Quote: Errrm ruffles, never heard of having stuff in stock? If you specialise in building things then you can have a stock of them available to sell. If you go buy a car you don't expect that the car still needs to be built in the factory, you expect to buy one that is in stock, just like anything else. You never sold something you haven't built yet? Interesting... Yes we keep stock, but we also are fans of JIT. Its a nice thing to not tie up all your assets ;) Very flexible cashflow. You honestly say that for 1-10 minutes of great fighting, you may well be happy to wait 6 days to play again? I feel somewhat lacking in contentment :) Personally, I would want to be out there again as soon as possible. I do tend to agree more with our friend Lucas. He has a very much more valid point. Almost no one will insure something like a warship, whilst industrials and frigates, perhaps some cruisers used for hauling duties, but why insure a battleship? Deliberatley pay out heaps of cash for something that big being destroyed when it was built to go and destroy other things. That may very well be more of an active solution then many have previously thought. If you couldn't insure them, you may be tempted to use them more tactically and not all the time... Very nice thought :D
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.04 03:34:00 - [26] Quote: Quote: Errrm ruffles, never heard of having stuff in stock? If you specialise in building things then you can have a stock of them available to sell. If you go buy a car you don't expect that the car still needs to be built in the factory, you expect to buy one that is in stock, just like anything else. You never sold something you haven't built yet? Interesting... Yes we keep stock, but we also are fans of JIT. Its a nice thing to not tie up all your assets ;) Very flexible cashflow. You honestly say that for 1-10 minutes of great fighting, you may well be happy to wait 6 days to play again? I feel somewhat lacking in contentment :) Personally, I would want to be out there again as soon as possible. I do tend to agree more with our friend Lucas. He has a very much more valid point. Almost no one will insure something like a warship, whilst industrials and frigates, perhaps some cruisers used for hauling duties, but why insure a battleship? Deliberatley pay out heaps of cash for something that big being destroyed when it was built to go and destroy other things. That may very well be more of an active solution then many have previously thought. If you couldn't insure them, you may be tempted to use them more tactically and not all the time... Very nice thought :D thats the point though there would be more compotition in the market as well again take away the insurance on BS but ALSO increase build times and i am saying all build times i can see you moving ammo of your lines in seconds (maybe 1 (small) ammo a second) this would all help increase the prices in the market in my huble opinion (and proberly make the mineral prices drop ) Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
IZON	Posted - 2003.12.04 08:14:00 - [27] Quote: How about this for an idea: Currently lots of people are moaning about battleships mining the hell out of Empire space with no risk. In snug warm 1.0 sec belts, the cotton wool wrapped BS miner clans greedily hoard vast mountains of ore, ready to sell the sparkling minerals so they can inflate their gargantuan profits. And all the time, no tribute is offered to the Empires who's space they disrespectfully plunder. Battleships shouldn't be able to mine, I say remove the capability to fit mining lasers. "...master! there's a guy in the south village called IZON, he is a Ninja!"
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.04 08:36:00 - [28] mining hardpoints Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Paw Sandberg	Posted - 2003.12.07 17:25:00 - [29] and honestly what would stop BS from using mining drones (i dont have a problem with that) that way a BS or war cruiser would still be able to mine in 0.0 it would just have to use its drones Thank You Paw Sandberg for all your BPC needs see http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=55706&page=1
Arondos	Posted - 2003.12.07 17:48:00 - [30] Put in maintanence and crew costs. You want to fly a bigger ship? It takes more crew and you have to pay more to crew it. Of course an amarrian could use slaves but that could cause a lower performance than a paid crew. Big ships cost more to operate. Charge gate fees based on the mass/tonnage of the ship. This could easily be coupled with empire tarrifs so that you have a choice. If you mine in safe areas you pay tarrifs on the ore you are carrying when you dock or you can gate to sell it in an area where there aren't tarrifs but you will have gate fees to pay to get there. The tarrif could not be applied to docking noobie ships so you don't crimp the ability of a new player to make money. It could only be applied to say cruiser and up (including indies). So someone starting out can remain in sae areas and make cash till they can use a cruiser. Sitting in empire space should be low risk and low reward. Life isn't fair and neither is Eve. Get over it.

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.