1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.

1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.

When you scan down a hurricane and its sitting in a gas cloud, harvetsing gas, its probably not a PvP hurricane...

Also your dislike of gate camps amuses me, this game is easy enough as it is, changing mechanics to make it even easier is a stupid idea.

Well, that's one idea. It's a good start I guess. Any others? And any reasons why?

1. Remove local entirely: I never understood how local makes that much sense, in a scifi-space opera setting. In movies and other scifi games, one ship commander usually has to initiate direct contact with someone in order to hold any sort of conversation.

2. High-Sec not always "safe": We're in Space. So why can't our technology and communication systems fail, at times? Have entire solar systems drop their security for a set period of time, at random. Concord can't respond and stations are locked "until further notice."

3. Less brightness: I enjoy a lot of the visuals in EVE, but I also think that Space should be, mostly, dark.

I like your randomness idea. I do think that EVE needs more of that. Right now, you do a mission, it is essentially the same every time you run it. What if you didn't know what you were going to face, or if there was a chance you would face stronger or weaker enemies?

What if there were cosmic dust storms that could affect your firing rate, or your shields? Or interference affecting your warp drive? Random malfunctions if you don't "take care"" of your modules and such?

1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.

Remove gates.

The entire concept of outer space being 95% about going through gates is horrible game design.

My only problem with gate camps is that they are essentially "save or die" mechanics. If you go through the gate and there is a camp there, you are dead. If there is not, you have a chance at living. Barring going through with a ship designed to run of course. It's just silly. Low sec has problems because no one comes to visit it. Why? Because people "could" die simply poking their noses across. However, if they could get across and have a reasonable chance of running around there, more people would visit, which means more targets, which means more fights. I don't see how that's bad.

The scanning thing is more of a if you see a [insert specific non-combat ship] you essentially know you have an easy target. Why not have more of a chance for the unknown, where the fight could go either way? I would much rather have an exciting battle that I "almost" won than a battle that was lost as soon as someone showed up on grid.

1) I would manually aim my guns and manually pilot my ship. I hate point and click with a fiery passion.


2) Remove local in null (and possibly even low sec). In some ways, the entire purpose of cov ops and T3 cloaky's are pretty much pointless with something that broadcasts the fact that you've entered the system to the entire population in said system.


3) I dunno about other people, but I think it would be pretty cool to be able to build my own little space outpost that I could dock in and layout the floor plan of. Not like POS's or outposts which are expensive, but just a space of my own. In some ways, I would like to have it where we have these stations as our "house" like in SWG, and then have actual stations be like major cities.

And gates also act as a hot spot for fights, most of the decent small gang fights I've seen happen when someone tries to crash a gate camp. Without gates all we'd have to fall back on is blue balling, sniper gangs warping to the sun at range and bait cyno drakes sitting in anoms all day.

My only problem with gate camps is that they are essentially "save or die" mechanics. If you go through the gate and there is a camp there, you are dead. If there is not, you have a chance at living. Barring going through with a ship designed to run of course. It's just silly. Low sec has problems because no one comes to visit it. Why? Because people "could" die simply poking their noses across. However, if they could get across and have a reasonable chance of running around there, more people would visit, which means more targets, which means more fights. I don't see how that's bad.

The scanning thing is more of a if you see a [insert specific non-combat ship] you essentially know you have an easy target. Why not have more of a chance for the unknown, where the fight could go either way? I would much rather have an exciting battle that I "almost" won than a battle that was lost as soon as someone showed up on grid.

Every single good small gang fight that I've ever had has been nowhere near the gates. In fact, nearly all of them have been in a belt, at a station, or at some other anomaly.

I hate gate camps too, and I think there should be a better way to blockade systems rather than just having everyone wait at one spot for someone to come through, personally. Probably won't change any time soon though.

Hmm, well you see I would contend that gate camps are already very easily avoided. Even completely ignoring the use of a scout T2 transports, T3s, carriers, jump freighters... all these ships bypass gate camps perfectly.

And gates also act as a hot spot for fights, most of the decent small gang fights I've seen happen when someone tries to crash a gate camp. Without gates all we'd have to fall back on is blue balling, sniper gangs warping to the sun at range and bait cyno drakes sitting in anoms all day.

Basically, bottle necks are a necessity for combat to occur frequently :)

Hmm, well you see the challenge with the example you used isn't in fighting the mining ship, it is in catching the mining ship. There's also the fact that if mining ships could refit in space and fight back, people would just use bigger/more ships to kill them.

OP wants risk-free low sec. I don't get it.

From a lore view-point, why would you have random jump-in spots? That is an unreliable gate mechanic that no one would use on a regular basis. No one would want to take the chance of rematerializing inside the sun or a planet, or whatever, unless sorely pressed. Makes no sense.

May as well just have the jump in beacon on an already existing structure.

Also, your view of gatecamps is rather narrow. tbh, the last time I died in losec on a gate was because I was followed through the gate, not because of a camp on the other unseen side. If you are flying around alone in losec and get killed by jumping into a gate camp, you did it wrong.

Solution: use (cloaky or fast) scouts.

I'm shocked that ECM hasn't been brought up yet. Guess its not so broken after all.

I can understand that. But the problem is a scout requires a second account or information from someone else that you need to obtain. the others are specific ships that are made to ignore gate camps, and none are combat viable (barring T3's). As well, all of those ships are made to "avoid" combat anyway.

Thus the only "fights" you generally see are those that essentially dog-pile the first ship they see that pokes their nose across that they can catch.

That's why I say to remove "mining" ships in general, and enable swapping of modules. The point is to give an existence to playing beyond "mob mentality" If you had a chance to survive fights alone or to win fights alone, you wouldn't have this incessant need to fight in a pack. Of course the mob fighting would still happen, but I think you would find more people willing to take risks and go it alone if they weren't tied to a specific ship for every different thing they wanted to do...

Removing the ability to camp a gate would make for safer travel, sure, which might open up some parts of the game to those afraid of losing a ship, but it cuts down on the complexity in the game. When you know you might land in a camped system there are a couple ways to deal with it:

A) Assume there is a camp. This is the safest option. Either avoid low-sec altogether (boring) and avoid this risk or only take ships/fits that have a reasonable risk/cost for what you are trying to do. This forces you to consider what you are flying, how it's fit, what your trying to accomplish, whether it's worth the risk, and what to do in case there is a camp.

B) Cross your fingers and hope there isn't a camp. Do whatever cuz you don't give a ****.

If ships jumped into random location, all these options would be reduced to: Jump into the system with whatever you want because there's no risk of immediate pvp on the other side.

- This reduces all the scenarios to a single boring one. How droll.

Heh, that is often the case, but not always. Quite a few times I've surprised a gate camp when they realize they can't break my maelstroms tank, and that suddenly they are exploding left right and center. Similarly a lot of other ships are capable of breaking up a small gate camp solo, like vagas/cynabals/machariels/vindicators.

As for larger gate camps, hot dropping/baiting them is always fun :) But the last few days I've mostly just been watching them cloaked, then attacking them when they get in a fight. Managed to kill a large camp's rapier with my two bombers earlier which amused me.


You mean make all ships modular in design, akin to T3s? I'm not entirely sure how that would fix the mob mentality to be honest, it would certainly make logistics easier but beyond that I'm not certain it would have any impact at all.

If anything, it would probably make people blob more, if there's a chance that mining fleet could actually be some crazy spider tanking PvP bait fleet... why risk it by attacking with a small force?

Except that now a person can jump into a lowsec system with his ship in the hopes of performing some activity (either mining, exploration, ratting, etc.) without the thought of immediately dieing. However it doesn't stop him from being scanned down while doing said activity. Now you are allowing more ships into the system. More targets = more fun. Hunting said target = fun. Or do you just want "easy" targets?

1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.

I think that gate camps in low-sec are fairly ineffectual against players who have prepared for the possibility.

Your number two idea i disagree with..the "no more role specific ships" . that smacks all to much of a uni-ship. when you get a uni-ship everyone flys the uniship, using the same setup, which is not good for the Eve economy, fun gaming,or anything else.

I don't want to be cruel here but i suggest you put more research and thought into game mechanichs..or however you spell it before sounding off on what seems like an idea.

As for an idea of my own i came up with only one - less time differential between what the Eve map info shows and what is real.
While screwing with nullsec alliances I relie heavy on the Eve map and the time lag between reported info and real conditions can get you killed.

2. High-Sec not always "safe": We're in Space. So why can't our technology and communication systems fail, at times? Have entire solar systems drop their security for a set period of time, at random. Concord can't respond and stations are locked "until further notice."

So if every ship is a uni-ship, everyone flies...every ship? How is this bad?

I don't think you're thinking deep enough, sorry.

I do agree with your idea in theory, but I don't think any intel should be "instant" unless there is a body on site physically reporting it.

What would they be?

Just a simple question, but try to offer reasoning why and what you would change it to.

1) No more "Inbound" gates to systems
[...]
3) No more local as an "Intel source"

What would they be?

Just a simple question, but try to offer reasoning why and what you would change it to.


1) No more "Inbound" gates to systems - I don't find it right that jumping into the next system could lead to your death with no real way to circumvent it -

.... my reply to your point ...if someone has Sov they deserve the right to have inbound - asking them to cover the system is not reasonable and as someone who screws with all the null alliances gatecamps and bubbles don't mean much to an experienced scout. the number of guys who can catch you is small. the current eve setup allows owners some rights and is only a threat to people leeching off them - if you want to screw with them it is no problem


3) No more local as an "Intel source" -

my reply.... totally agree, make it like wormholes and some alt sitting in a station never actually flown or doing anything can't protect the frontiers and the the Nidhogger can't blitz anomolies with immunity - that will fly like the Hindenberg with Nullsec guys so good luck on that.

Those are my ideas. How about yours?

Change mining
Change belts
Change ores

We really need a industrial overhaul and mining is the place to start.

1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.

Most certainly not. I just want fights to not be determined blindly.

I can see that, which is why I said to have them warp in at a spot X AU from the nearest object (sun/planet/moon/station etc.) or simply at the outer edge of the system. There are many ways to work around that idea. The point is now hunters will actually have to "hunt" rather than just wait for someone to pop their head in.

So your solution is to use only one type of ship when flying through low sec? ECM could work, if you could change your modules out in space later so you aren't tied to stations to do any other activities.

It would be great if all NPC corp characters had one single forum section all to their selves. Then they could talk among themselves and not bother anyone else.

The crux is how do you fix that? Especially with EVE's "everybody plays in the same world" mentality?

Basically, bottle necks are a necessity for combat to occur frequently :)

1- make high sec really high sec: you couldn't even target another player \

3- after leaving high sec once you can't return any more. Your assets are all automatically transferred to the closest NPC station in low sec

OP wants risk-free low sec. I don't get it.

From a lore view-point, why would you have random jump-in spots? That is an unreliable gate mechanic that no one would use on a regular basis. No one would want to take the chance of rematerializing inside the sun or a planet, or whatever, unless sorely pressed. Makes no sense.

May as well just have the jump in beacon on an already existing structure.

Also, your view of gatecamps is rather narrow. tbh, the last time I died in losec on a gate was because I was followed through the gate, not because of a camp on the other unseen side. If you are flying around alone in losec and get killed by jumping into a gate camp, you did it wrong.

Solution: use (cloaky or fast) scouts.

I'm shocked that ECM hasn't been brought up yet. Guess its not so broken after all.

I think that gate camps in low-sec are fairly ineffectual against players who have prepared for the possibility. It is still possible to scan/probe down ships mining or exploring, sure, but that is an entirely different topic than that of just entering the system to which gate camps apply. The ability to gate camp does not by any means shut down everyone's ability to enter the system. The idea that you are powerless to save yourself if there is a camp is wrong. You always have a choice, and the more choices we have to make, the more fun it is, imho.

And no, I don't just want "easy" targets. The thought if sitting on a gate for hours waiting for targets seems really damn boring to me but it should be a viable play-choice if someone wants to do it. Random-location entry would completely remove that play-choice.

2) No more "role specific" ships - I posted this in the "Ideas for ships" thread, but I will repost it here:

"I would like to see less ships that are for specific roles, and more that can be used for many roles.

What I mean is, right now, if you scan down mining ship, you know that it is defenceless, more or less. But what if you didn't know that? I scan down a Hurricane and it could be a salvage boat, or an explorer or a gas miner or a PvE fitted ship or a PvP one. I think the now knowing would make EVE more exciting.

I wish they would remove all dedicated mining ships in my mind. If you had to mine using one of the existing "war" ships, wouldn't that make things more interesting?

Hell, I would like to be able to change out modules on the fly, so that I can use one ship for multiple things without having to refit at a station. That way I can go out exploring and if I find a great mining area, I can switch to mining lasers and grab some, and if I get jumped by a pirate that happens by, I can switch back to my guns and have a chance at fighting back. Base it on your "Jury Rigging" skill or some such.

This would also be condusive to more modules getting destroyed as ships get blowed up, and I think it would just add to the feel of EVE more."

1) No more "Inbound" gates to systems - I don't find it right that jumping into the next system could lead to your death with no real way to circumvent it. You can't "see" what's on the other side until you go across, and often that means you are dead if there is a gate camp there. Instead, what if you arrived at a random location in the system? Or a random location X AU from the nearest object? Or a random spot on the "outer sphere" of the system itself? I think this would make lower secs "seem" safer, in that you are less likely to die as soon as you cross the gate. It would mean that low sec would be more of a "track your enemy down" kind of state which would be neat. As well, it would make protecting your interests in 0.0 much more difficult, as someone could come in anywhere.

What I mean is, right now, if you scan down mining ship, you know that it is defenceless, more or less. But what if you didn't know that? I scan down a Hurricane and it could be a salvage boat, or an explorer or a gas miner or a PvE fitted ship or a PvP one. I think the now knowing would make EVE more exciting.

Hell, I would like to be able to change out modules on the fly, so that I can use one ship for multiple things without having to refit at a station. That way I can go out exploring and if I find a great mining area, I can switch to mining lasers and grab some, and if I get jumped by a pirate that happens by, I can switch back to my guns and have a chance at fighting back. Base it on your "Jury Rigging" skill or some such.

3) No more local as an "Intel source"[/b] - I would like to see local changed to be more like wormholes. It would mean less instant intel about who is in your system at any given time, which for 0.0 would make things more interesting, as well as inviting more fighting. It would mean that intel providers (scout ships and such) would be much more valuable, as well as scanners in general. You would probably have to change the basic "spam scanner" to make it less "user controlled" and more automated, or maybe you would need a module to make it more active? Or introduce modules that could let you link ships for "radio" purposes? Or introduce POS modules that could give limited warning of somesort. In essence you are making space more "dangerous unknown" which would be a great thing in my opinion.

So you want single hand be able to carry heavy turrets that is the size of an SUV or larger and reattach not just one but 5-9 of them? just like that right on the spot? And go from cargo space to shield tanking? or armor tanking? I know that one of the trailers tells us we are immortals and we can have the boldest of dreams - this must be one of them. There is a reason you need a station to make those changes.

No offense but if you want 1clickies - go wow please!

I understand your argument that it would make it more interesting, but there is a reason we have tankers, warships, yachts, speedboats, submarines and the works in real life. Each ship serves a purpose.

1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.

That's why I say to remove "mining" ships in general, and enable swapping of modules. The point is to give an existence to playing beyond "mob mentality" If you had a chance to survive fights alone or to win fights alone, you wouldn't have this incessant need to fight in a pack. Of course the mob fighting would still happen, but I think you would find more people willing to take risks and go it alone if they weren't tied to a specific ship for every different thing they wanted todo

1clicky - WOW is that way ->>

Removing the ability to camp a gate would make for safer travel, sure, which might open up some parts of the game to those afraid of losing a ship, but it cuts down on the complexity in the game. When you know you might land in a camped system there are a couple ways to deal with it:

A) Assume there is a camp. This is the safest option. Either avoid low-sec altogether (boring) and avoid this risk or only take ships/fits that have a reasonable risk/cost for what you are trying to do. This forces you to consider what you are flying, how it's fit, what your trying to accomplish, whether it's worth the risk, and what to do in case there is a camp.

B) Cross your fingers and hope there isn't a camp. Do whatever cuz you don't give a ****.

If ships jumped into random location, all these options would be reduced to: Jump into the system with whatever you want because there's no risk of immediate pvp on the other side.

- This reduces all the scenarios to a single boring one. How droll.

Edit: The one mechanic I'd remove: ability to run multiple accounts. I think the game would be better if everyone had a single character to play. Instead of using your 2-15 accounts to "solo" whatever you'd have to rely on other players. But that is unrealistic, I know.

1) No more "Inbound" gates to systems - I don't find it right that jumping into the next system could lead to your death with no real way to circumvent it.

2) No more "role specific" ships - "I would like to see less ships that are for specific roles, and more that can be used for many roles.

3) No more local as an "Intel source" - I would like to see local changed to be more like wormholes. It would mean less instant intel about who is in your system at any given time, which for 0.0 would make things more interesting, as well as inviting more fighting.

I like your EDIT. I'm pretty sure that there would be no chance of that ever happening, but it would be nice. Although how do you prevent multiboxing/multiple accounts to bypass said restriction?

Having died to several gate-camps (Here is looking at you Aunenen) I don't like this idea. There are mechanisms to circumvent gate-camps. You could scout using an alt or one of the intelligence channels. If it is a frequently travelled route for you, keep a shuttle or similar close by for a quick scout before you fly something expensive through. Or, better yet, fly something that can cloak if it meets your goals. Then, you also have the statistics available on the star-map which should be your first stop before deciding if you are going to drop into a low-sec system.

Blockading a choke-point is a perfectly acceptable mechanism for a pirate to try and make a living. From my perspective, you basically die in a low-sec gate-camp only if you are on auto-pilot or too stupid / lazy to scout / check the intel. And in that case, congratulations, you've just been EVE'd.

2) No more "role specific" ships - I posted this in the "Ideas for ships" thread, but I will repost it here:

I both like and dislike this idea.

Like it because the idea of taking any hull and using it for a purpose would make fitting more of an art-form as you would not rely on the inherent bonuses anymore (They wouldn't exist, right?) It would be difficult to balance the ships that are built for a specific purpose though; not sure how you intend to solve that as you've not linked your full formed idea. At the same time, this can act as an enabler for having a bounty hunter hiding in a Mackinaw or a miner hiding in a Hurricane or similar.

I dislike it because there is a certain New Eden flavour to having different types of ships built by different corporations. I know what I'm getting when I pick up a design from Lai Dai or from Ishukone or others. There is a certain level of immersion in that.

Have you considered the idea of cloaking a bit further and having some form of sensory fooling / jamming module instead that would make another pilot see something the ship is not really? E.g. an Iteron can project the sensor / visual output of a Hurricane or similar? Then you could still ... rambling. Sorry.

3) No more local as an "Intel source" - I would like to see local changed to be more like wormholes. It would mean less instant intel about who is in your system at any given time, which for 0.0 would make things more interesting, as well as inviting more fighting.

I would like this too. Passive / Active sensors and the support skills for those arrays would be a great addition and open up a whole profession in-game. It would be a learning curve though.

As to my idea:

I want to see CONCORD replaced with realistic ships (E.g. available to players as well), open up null, low and high-sec so they are all the same with players able to hold their territory anywhere in New Eden. Empires and Corporations would have massive resources to fit a battle fleet and to protect their sovereign space, but enterprising players should be able to take over Jita, for example. Or New Caldari. Or any of the others if they can bring sufficient resources to overwhelm the Empire or Corporation that owns it. But that would need such a significant investment in resources that it will be nigh on impossible for the core areas, including the new player hubs.

But, in general, I am all for removing NPCs from the core services in the game and leaving them in the hands of players.

You pretty much cannot. With the move to virtualisation it is nigh on impossible to block this. Perhaps when the whole word is running IPv6 you may have a snowballs' hope in hell. But until then?

That aside - why? I have an Industrial pilot that I sometimes escort with my combat pilot. Meantime I have a trade alt on a different account that sits in Jita and runs my business empire. That is 3 accounts (Well, was 3 accounts until recent events) that provide CCP with revenue.

I liked giving them money

dont know, i am not an expert on game mechanics.

But so far what i heard.

1.Sov. structure grinding

2.Moon Mining

3.And sniper fleets / aka on grid probing.

Not sure if anything of that has been mentioned or has been changed lately.

I would much rather see better mechanisms for hunting players rather than holding a chokepoint and hoping for a fight against something that is generally not made for it. As well, opening the chokepoints would encourage people to visit the lower sec systems, and when they stop to do any other activities (like mining, ratting or exploring) they can be caught and killed.

Alright, I can see the motivation. Can I suggest then that:

(a) Having an alternative path into a system is a better mechanism. Look at the path from Nonni to Aikantoh - I know this spot well because I was based in Aikantoh for a while and lost a few ships to the gate-camp that sits on Aunenen. My own stupidity, I loaded up and thought to myself: "Yeah, it's late. They won't be there". Famous last words ... In any event, there is one path from Nonni to Aikantoh unless you feel like turning 3 jumps into 23+ and even that won't avoid any low-sec areas where camps are possible. More options would help avoid the camp, while still giving the campers something to strive for.

(b) Creating a set of modules and skills, perhaps related to your local replacement idea, that allows you to launch a drone / probe through a Stargate may be useful. Because it contains active sensors, it would be a valid target for a camp if they could lock it. And because it has to jump back before you get your intel you may or may not know what is going on. Basically, build on the idea of Local intel, scouting, etc. and allow for the other players to corrupt / attack / counter a probe drone flying through.

In general I am against removing something that gives enjoyment to some players, even if that is to the detriment of other players. It would be better to focus on better tools so the war between the two groups can escalate and fluctuate and lead to more dynamic play.

Interesting ideas. I'm still not a fan of blind chokepoints that you don't have any control over. The probe thingy is more interesting, but how do you allow "false" info to come back (ie. If the probe is destroyed, then there is obviously a gate camp and that person won't jump across)?

As far as your "removal" comment, I would in general agree, but if that thing is detrimental to the game (ie. Concord insurance payouts for gankers), it should be removed. If the game becomes healthier (ie more subscriptions while keeping the theme of blowing **** up going) then shouldn't that thing be removed and/or altered?

My only problem with gate camps is that they are essentially "save or die" mechanics. If you go through the gate and there is a camp there, you are dead. If there is not, you have a chance at living. Barring going through with a ship designed to run of course. It's just silly. Low sec has problems because no one comes to visit it. Why? Because people "could" die simply poking their noses across. However, if they could get across and have a reasonable chance of running around there, more people would visit, which means more targets, which means more fights.

1clicky - WOW is that way ->>

And you are free to go there if you want. Myself, I would rather play EVE, and make EVE a better game. Thanks for your input. :)

Interesting ideas. I'm still not a fan of blind chokepoints that you don't have any control over. The probe thingy is more interesting, but how do you allow "false" info to come back (ie. If the probe is destroyed, then there is obviously a gate camp and that person won't jump across)?

Before passing too much judgement on gates and how 'easy' it is to hunt folk. I recommend trying to catch anyone who is more than a 2 week resident in low-sec / null sec who doesn't want to be caught.

What you propose would make almost all opportunities for PvP consensual or pre-scheduled (POS timers etc ).

Seriously, take a shuttle/frigate/nano-cruiser through low sec, make some safes and keep your dscan up. Let me know how many times it takes for you to not warp directly to the smart bomb battleships at the gates and go loss free up until you get bored with living.

No thanks! Been there and came here cause I dislike milk & cookies as I dislike 1clickies :)

Well now we are at it
1) transfer drones from cargo bay to drone bay mid space and even other ships *poof* - there you go.
2) transfer equipment from one ship to another - *poof* there you go - fully gear for you drake in one click.
3) Hell - lets make it so we do not even have to fly anymore, I mean - teleportation right? Lets just be able to teleport everybody and everything around as we see fit. Why even have ships?

Oh and I want macros and addons cause then I REALLY do not have to think anymore. I can just spam 1,2 and 3 on keyboard activating my macros.

Being to able fully switch between 3 different fitting mid space in one click is imho a bad idea and do not serve a purpose. It will take away the team play and cooperation which is essential in this game as will removing role specific ships.

Give PVP a reason to exist as it has none at the moment.


remove the constant information about every system that allows you to see how many people are there from the other side of the galaxy

You pretty much cannot. With the move to virtualisation it is nigh on impossible to block this. Perhaps when the whole word is running IPv6 you may have a snowballs' hope in hell. But until then?

That aside - why? I have an Industrial pilot that I sometimes escort with my combat pilot. Meantime I have a trade alt on a different account that sits in Jita and runs my business empire. That is 3 accounts (Well, was 3 accounts until recent events) that provide CCP with revenue.

I liked giving them money

What proposals do you have as an alternate method of hunting targets? Currently it is literally impossible to catch an aware and experienced pilot, non-consensual PvP in this game is literally down to just picking off the idiots. Removing gate camping as a viable tactic would even further reduce the PvP element of Eve.

1. Remove local
2. Remove Concord
3. Don't care

1) Make it profitable to go into lowsec. As of now, there is no reason to go to lowsec aside from higher PI output and if you actually WANT to tank your sec status. I know CCP "claims" to have buffed the lowsec anomalies earlier this year/late last year...but I went to lowsec immediately after that to start scanning plexes....spent 2 days doing it and they were all horrible...

2) Be able to have either a- multiple Jump Bridges in the same system, or b- multiple destinations for a single jump bridge, making it possible to have larger logistic hubs in nullsec. Some people will call foul that this takes part of the risk out of doing nullsec logistics...when in reality...it doesnt... It would just make the JB's work much in the same way the cyno generators do...It wouldnt make the logi-routes any safer.. If anything, it would make certain systems even more valuable to an alliance and would cause greater harm to take down a JB-hub than just a normal one since you would be losing potentially several JB routes at once. This could also be accomplished by having a single-destination JB and then having a tech1 version that allowed for maybe up to 3 destinations...

3) Ship size/mass should = ship bumping ability

To be fair if you genuinely spent two days doing exploration and found nothing of value, you were probably doing it wrong. The risk free element of plexing in low sec, and the easy logistics, means that running them for a solo player is even more profitable than null sec and in some cases incursions.

Of course, if you genuinely meant you were doing anomalies, and not exploration, you really were doing it wrong :P Anoms are of terrible value wherever you go, the only reason people even run them still in null is because in SoV null they're easy, grind-able and relatively risk free for an attentive player. (They're still pointless in NPC null mind you)


Logistics in null is easy enough already. Allowing for multiple destinations would make it hard to scout if you are camping a JB, and they're already pretty difficult to camp. It would also let people create alternate routes if a JB is camped, further avoiding any danger.

If anything logistics in null needs to be made more difficult, as it stands any expensive ships or loot are moved via JF or carrier. And deploying to a new area for PvP can be done risk free in a matter of hours with enough carriers and a good cyno chain.

Also, what risk in null sec logistics? Camping and roams nowadays literally just pick off the idiots, the vast majority of competent players have never and will never lose anything of value under the current mechanics.


That's a start, but station games and aggression timers need a total rework IMHO.

I was scanning them, not running Anoms. I went out there b/c I was told that lowsec got a buff and people were making stupid isk... I'm notoriously the most unlucky person you'll ever meet when it comes to getting the signatures I'm looking for. If I want a grav site, i'll find everything else but a grav site. If im looking for a mag site, i'll find everything execpt for a mag site. Murphy's Law follows me everywhere I go.

The Hub idea is not made for Freighters, as a JF would use the cyno gen and not the JB. The JB Hub is more for moving fleets around. Why would it be bad to make it more difficult for an enemy to camping your JB? If anything it makes a single JB more profitable b/c you will get more activity. And IMO, I would like the idea of an enemy hitting a certain system b/c that is where a hug was and they knew it. It gives more of a reason to defend it....Unless you are IRC lol....

The trick to running sites in low sec is to only run angel and guristas rated sites ;) There's only one escalation site worth doing, I think it's called "angel pleasure gardens" or something. The thing never fails to escalate for some reason


Freighters use the JB network, jump freighters use cyno gens or their own personal cyno alts. But what does that have to do with my comment on how easy logistics is in null? They've already nerfed the JB network in the past, and with good reason, CCP aren't going to move them back in that direction.

And of course it would be bad to make it more difficult to camp a JB, because null sec is already ridiculously easy to operate in.

1. Remove the ability of NPC corp alts to post.

The crux is how do you fix that? Especially with EVE's "everybody plays in the same world" mentality?

Remove Stargates

Make industry interesting, and not conductive to self-harm

Make resources of all types exhaustible but infinite (Make them disappear in one place, appear in another)