The point of any nerf to power projection would be to allow smaller entities to hold sov. The major power blocs have no issues holding vast swathes of territory as it currently stands. What everyone against a nerf to JB's has said thus far seems to indicate that Jump Bridges are merely a convenience and not the main problem (which would be titans). I am all for a titan nerf.

But let me ask you something. Would nerfing jump bridges be inconvenient for you? The answer, quite obviously judging by the responses from certain parties, is yes.

So, holding sov would be slightly less convenient, slightly less rewarding. Since fewer systems would be useful, it might just happen that you will hold fewer systems. Maybe the systems you choose to hold will be closer together. This would free up less valuable space for smaller entities not in your blue ball.

Jump bridges are a form of power projection. They might not be the main form of power projection, but they are a form of it nonetheless. Nerfing jump bridges discourages larger entities from holding as much space as they currently hold. Isn't that the whole point?

Why do people "force project"?
Now, why does force projection need vilifying? You demand even more stagnationation in 0.0?

Yours sincerely bored to death after 10 jumps in empty hostile space.

Bring back super high ways to clusters of active pvpers please. 5 jumps and action. Boom force projection is not the bad guy. Lame travel mechanics is.

Tired of traveling seven regions through system after system after system of blues to find some action?

Well good sir, you're in luck! Contact your CEO and tell them to reset your blue list!!!

You see, the reason for your super long roams looking for targets was in fact your own doing and is still in your power to do something about it.

tl;dr:
The reason you have to move far to get pew pew is because you can move far. See?

If it was more hard to project power through large distances of space, odds are those systems would be occupied by new players giving you more pew pew outside your doorstep.

When large alliances can control areas, rent them out and only show up (after 15 min) newer entities have little incentive to take a chance and own areas for themselves.

Instead they rent and become blue. And when all is blue then you ahve to move great distances.
It is an evil circle making eve smaller. The way i see it it destroys trade & war opportuinites hence lowering the fun factor.

I think there's a subtle but important distinction between the desirability of sov space, and the desirability of holding sov in general. You're saying that if you take away some of the perks, people will desire less sov space, opening it up to other groups, but I'm inclined to think that it would actually make holding sov itself less desirable, meaning people are less likely to want to go to war over it.

All I see are I Can't CCP! Why? *sniff!* WHYYYY?!?!?!? Can't I win! and "Help me CCP! Your my only hope! Beat those ******* into the ground!" because one side can't adapt and wants EVE to become easy mode.

If it was more hard to project power through large distances of space, odds are those systems would be occupied by new players

I believe it has been discussed significantly, but aren't most conflicts induced by grudges/a desire for pew pew? As a specific example, I would cite last year's Deklein coalition invasion of Delve/Querious as a conflict where territory was not the primary motivator. Also A JB nerf won't affect the internal logistics of an entity that only holds 4 or 5 systems. Moreover, there are entities that pay rent for **** poor space. Such entities would very likely be perfectly willing to go into a 'less desirable' sov. Lastly, I specifically mention reducing perks that make holding large swathes of sov convenient, not nerfing individual locales of sov.

...

A JB nerf won't affect the internal logistics of any sov holding entity that has jump freighters, it would just make it more unpleasant to travel. Do you understand what I'm saying here? Nothing about null would change except it would be a lot more tedious, which means people just won't want to play. Eve is a game, you know.

I'm curious what you think the perks of sov are that would make living in a small area of space surrounded by hostiles desirable.

To name a few:

Moons (tech)
CSAA's (only way to produce supercaps/titans)
Better Anom's/Exploration Sites/Profession Sites than Hisec/Lowsec

The point of any nerf to power projection would be to allow smaller entities to hold sov. The major power blocs have no issues holding vast swathes of territory as it currently stands. What everyone against a nerf to JB's has said thus far seems to indicate that Jump Bridges are merely a convenience and not the main problem (which would be titans). I am all for a titan nerf.

But let me ask you something. Would nerfing jump bridges be inconvenient for you? The answer, quite obviously judging by the responses from certain parties, is yes.

Yes, it would be a lot more tedious for an entity that holds hundreds of systems. It would not be at all tedious for an entity that holds a handful of systems. That's the point. You discourage the massive power blocs we have now. If holding vasts amount of space is bad (or "tedious") for the common grunt, entities will hold less space. This leaves more room for smaller entities to come in to the picture. More smaller entities living within close proximity to one another = more conflict.

To name a few:

Moons (tech)
CSAA's (only way to produce supercaps/titans)
Better Anom's/Exploration Sites/Profession Sites than Hisec/Lowsec

Give supercaps a 2 jumps / day limit, and let's see what happens.

tl;dr:
The reason you have to move far to get pew pew is because you can move far. See?

If it was more hard to project power through large distances of space, odds are those systems would be occupied by new players giving you more pew pew outside your doorstep.

When large alliances can control areas, rent them out and only show up (after 15 min) newer entities have little incentive to take a chance and own areas for themselves.

Instead they rent and become blue. And when all is blue then you ahve to move great distances.
It is an evil circle making eve smaller. The way i see it it destroys trade & war opportuinites hence lowering the fun factor.

I'm curious what you think the perks of sov are that would make living in a small area of space surrounded by hostiles desirable.

So I'd suggest to increase the requirement for fuel for all capitals to such levels that they'd have to need tankers and fuel depots to operate (and offcourse design the needed, ships, modules etc). Add some fuels for bombers to to increase the strain on the warmachine. And increase the cargo of ammo so it takes on more space. or make the max jumps shorter. But people won't like that.

Yes, it would be a lot more tedious for an entity that holds hundreds of systems. It would not be at all tedious for an entity that holds a handful of systems. That's the point. You discourage the massive power blocs we have now. If holding vasts amount of space is bad (or "tedious") for the common grunt, entities will hold less space. This leaves more room for smaller entities to come in to the picture. More smaller entities living within close proximity to one another = more conflict.

To name a few:

Moons (tech)
CSAA's (only way to produce supercaps/titans)
Better Anom's/Exploration Sites/Profession Sites than Hisec/Lowsec

0.0 is a different game, it is a political game. All I'm hearing is "A bloo bloo bloo the big meanie alliances have taken all the space. We want some too. MommyCCP, make it so we can have some too." Stop trying to change the game because you're bad at politicking, and can't form a coalition to take space, or broker a deal with a larger alliance for some space.

News flash, if a system has anything of value, it will be taken over by somebody. Moons (ether valuable moon goo, reaction chains, or places to put up science and industry modules), Stations, good true sec status,even convenient mid points for jump freighters/bridges, will be taken by the largest entity that wants to hold them.

I love how the pubbies think if everyone can't project power, their little sandcastle won't get kicked over by the big mean power blocks, and they won't have to play the political game out in 0.0. That if traveling becomes tedious, then all the big boys will shrink down and open up space for the little guys to take, or magically we would set everyone surrounding us red.

Eve online needs more logistics. I don't mean dear god POS logistics that will make people want to kill themselves but "oh damn we need to escort convoys of stuff to areas while being attacked by subs over the Atlantic then transport it into trucks while being airattacked and sabotaged".

But Ciar you'd tell me, that's boring, we only want to do battle and fly the pew pew until we go boom. Granted, but if you want to be a empire, you'll need to learn that logistics is the key to every war. The pew pew is fun and should be easy in battle, but to win a longer draw out war you need logistics. In a (limited) way that is already happening, the empires with the best functioning logistics will by far be able to bring more force to bear during critical engagements. However just plonking alot of ships an modules about takes very little effort in total and can be done in an evening by a corp with enough members to organise scouts, cyno's and some jump freighters.

I myself had the most fun when escorting such flights because the inherent risk and fear of failure when doing something like that was far more satisfying then flying about alphaing (or being alpha'd) in ships in 100+ men fleets. Don't ask me how to solve it though. Or what the logistics would consist of. I'd only know to say, fuel and crew. And we basicly almost don't need those atm.

So I'd suggest to increase the requirement for fuel for all capitals to such levels that they'd have to need tankers and fuel depots to operate (and offcourse design the needed, ships, modules etc). Add some fuels for bombers to to increase the strain on the warmachine. And increase the cargo of ammo so it takes on more space. or make the max jumps shorter. But people won't like that.

Howeverl, you can't have logistics if everything can be carried in your battleships hold/fuel cargobay/dronebay.

0.0 is a different game, it is a political game. All I'm hearing is "A bloo bloo bloo the big meanie alliances have taken all the space. We want some too. MommyCCP, make it so we can have some too." Stop trying to change the game because you're bad at politicking, and can't form a coalition to take space, or broker a deal with a larger alliance for some space.

News flash, if a system has anything of value, it will be taken over by somebody. Moons (ether valuable moon goo, reaction chains, or places to put up science and industry modules), Stations, good true sec status,even convenient mid points for jump freighters/bridges, will be taken by the largest entity that wants to hold them.

I love how the pubbies think if everyone can't project power, their little sandcastle won't get kicked over by the big mean power blocks, and they won't have to play the political game out in 0.0. That if traveling becomes tedious, then all the big boys will shrink down and open up space for the little guys to take, or magically we would set everyone surrounding us red.