EVE Search - Big 0.0 Revamp Thread - Incentivizing 0.0 and stuff

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

Big 0.0 Revamp Thread - Incentivizing 0.0 and stuff

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:13:00 - [1] This post is essentially extracted from our conversations in Iceland regarding 0.0. I'm not going to get too into detail regarding mechanics as that's really the dev's jobs, but I think we can all agree that 0.0 needs some love and it needs it now. There's a few pieces to this proposal and I'll update it as necessary with any good ideas. I'm in a bit of a rush as today's the deadline to get topics posted for Iceland so I'll be editing this with things I think of or your non terrible ideas as we progress. In simple bullet form: CCP has expressed a desire, and I agree kinda, to move away from POS's as the sov claiming mechanic. I don't believe a good replacement has been conceived. In the interim what could go a long way is reducing the quantity required to hold sov. My favorite proposal was made at the 0.0 roundtable in Iceland. This would have sovreignty claims moved from moons to planets, with industrial POS aspects moved to moons and decoupled from sov. This would serve to reduce the number of posses required to claim and give smaller groups a target to hit to disrupt industrial operations alone. Industrial structures should be easier to attack and should not require the large amount of people a sov pos requires to engage. This will also serve to address the problem of people "claiming more space than they can defend". Right now as it stands the risk versus reward equation is completely skewed in Eve. 0.0 is completely stagnant and the reason for this is that conquering space is simply not worth it. There's no "massive riches" to be gained. In truth with the way truesec works NPC 0.0 is actually FAR more profitable. What I'd recommend is not to reduce the value of NPC and Empire/lowsec space but to BUFF 0.0. There are a number of ways to accomplish this, one that I've proposed involves giving spaceholding alliances the ability to upgrade their space over time, increasing the sec rating or seeding asteroids or even a mechanic to add agents, perhaps via station upgrades. The possibilities for this are endless but at the end of the day the big picture desired end result is to make conquering space worth it. You should not be able to get richer in Eve doing less work. These are the big two and I realize they're VERY high level. I'll post more/refine as things are added to this thread. That is what this forum is for. Originally by: Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
Vuk Lau	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:19:00 - [2] This is something which is discussed in CSM for quite some time. It is not a simple issue so we will give our best to present this during our meeting in Iceland. This is some of my ideas based on draft Darius made for current 0.0 situation SOV mechanics All moon structures (current POSes) would lose their ability to count for sovereignity. SOV holding structures would be moved to planets. POSes will remain as they are currently but they will lose all structures connected to sovereignty as: -Cynosural Generator Array -Cynosural System Jammer -Jump Bridge -System Scannin Array Planet orbiting structures should have much more HP then current POSes and they should have ability to anchor and online following modules: -Turret Batteries -Electronic Warfare Batteries -Energy Neutralizing Batteries -Missile Batteries -Shield Hardening Arrays -Corporate Hangar Array As well as modules connected to sovereignty mentioned above. Precise amount of HP (shield, armor and structure) as well as PG/CPU should be carefully increased, but with current number of capital ship ingame it needs to be a bit more then current Control towers. That will significantly decrease amount of POSes we have atm and it would limit SOV holding structures strictly to the planets. Planets I would refer to the issue already raised by CSM http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=859419 . Every planet in system where alliances have sovereignty could be teraformed. Each planet would produce certain amount of NPC goods (or moon products) and it should be stored in some new structure which will be present on different warpin points around the planet (current mechanic where you warp from any direction to the planet and always end up on same spot needs to be changed). Those structures should be guarded by some light defenses simply to prevent lonely frigate to be able to pop it. 10 man HAC gang should be optimum to take one of this silos pretty much quickly and to loot the stuff from it. It will give a new goal to small roaming gangs which are at this moment pretty much useless in 0.0 alliance warfare. NPC agents in Conquerable outposts There should be introduced NPC standings towards Alliances. We have at this moment NPC toward corp standings but it is easily exploitable by making one man corps who will be owner of outposts. If counting only NPC towards alliance standings it will give huge role-play impact to 0.0 alliances which I am sure many will accept it with joy (hi CVA brothers). Anyway with hitting 1.0 standing towards NPC faction alliances should get ability to invite level 1 agents into their outposts (maybe after some event with AURORA team – yes we want AURORA back) or by paying certain fee. Later on with eventual increasing of standings alliances can invite lvl2 and later on level 3, level 4 and in the end level 5 agents (maybe end game would be cosmos agents or something connected with tech3). Ultimately it can be connected with planets structures and adding more roleplaying like, as higher standing is, more goods will planet colonies produce. Or opposite, hostile attacks on planet could decrease NPC standing toward Alliance. Basicly there is lot of good ideas floating around and we would like to hear your thoughts about it.
Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:22:00 - [3] Postin to support dis Originally by: Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
Elohe	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:26:00 - [4] Edited by: Elohe on 28/12/2008 23:28:25 good ideas! hopefully ccp will listen to you guys!
Ankhesentapemkah	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:26:00 - [5] Edited by: Ankhesentapemkah on 28/12/2008 23:25:59 Summary of what I understand of the problems in 0.0, overlaps a lot of the things Darius and Vuk already stated in their posts though! Boring POS warfare * Currently the only way to conquer space is through the destruction of the POSes in the system. * POS warfare is repetetive. * No direct reward for those participating in POS warfare. Solutions * Detach sov from POS. * Different objectives for different types/sizes of gangs. * More stuff to destroy and plunder for instant loot! Useless 0.0 space * Many systems that lack valuable rats, ore and moon materials. * Sov holders have much space they have no use for, but have to occupy for tactical reasons. * No way to improve or develop space over time. Solutions * Ways to discover new belts. * Dynamic rat spawns, based on player actions. * Prospecting for more/better materials at moons (uncovered veins get lower yield over time?) * Construction of POS/Outpost modules or small anchorables that bestow benefits upon the system. * POS or small anchorables that produce consumer goods, etc. Lack of Income sources for individuals 0.0 * Individuals can only gain income through mining, ratting and exploration. * Complaint about missioning being exclusive to Empire/Faction space. * Income sources are controlled by system, not players. Solutions * NPC factions respond to player action and establish themselves in alliance territory (or not), eventually handing out missions. * Implement a player driven economy of trade goods (produced at small anchorables, consumed by outposts/stations). * Add new professions and activities. Lack of quick small gang PVP, lack of objectives * Firepower is more important than mobility. * Blobbing. * Difficult if not impossible to take on capital ships without bringing your own. * Small gangs cannot inflict damage or influence sov. * Supply lines are not very exposed due to jumpbridges, etc. Solutions * More objectives besides POS warfare. * Add small anchorables to destroy and loot. * Add game mechanics that favor quick hit-and-run tactics. * Make it beneficial for small gangs to roam and patrol own space. POS fuelling is tedious * Ice mining process is extremely boring. * Distributing materials is repetetive. * Trade goods cannot be produced in the general area. * Administrative nightmare for large alliances. Solutions * Detach sov from POS so that less POS are required. * ? Open to suggestions --- NEW MOVIE!
ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:26:00 - [6] Edited by: ardik on 28/12/2008 23:26:47 Who gives a ** about pos and outposts, outside of moon mining or perhaps having some refinery station in the middle of nowhere to mine into then they're useless, a drain on isk and not an incentive to do in 0.0. What's needed is that's actually worth fighting over, and can be fought over, for the average got, like, i don't know, static complexes? Buhu they get farmed, EVERYTHING YOU DO IN EVE IS FARMING YOU DUMB ***S SHUT UP
Kiko Goatbiter GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:26:00 - [7] I like these ideas, 0.0 could use some love.
Hinata	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:26:00 - [8] some very good idea's /signed
Dieter Schmidt Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:27:00 - [9] Edited by: Dieter Schmidt on 28/12/2008 23:27:46 Edited by: Dieter Schmidt on 28/12/2008 23:27:39 I SUPPORT THIS
Hell Commander 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:28:00 - [10] Excelent idea

Frocke GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:28:00 - [11] I support this.
x psy	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:29:00 - [12] Good ideas! /signed
ElvenLord 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:30:00 - [13] I support this idea, seems better then the mechanics we have now
Corsa Grane	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:30:00 - [14] Supporting this because currently Originally by: ardik EVERYTHING YOU DO IN EVE IS FARMING YOU DUMB ****S SHUT UP
GashaSerb	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:31:00 - [15]
DaiTengu GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:31:00 - [16] Edited by: DaiTengu on 28/12/2008 23:32:29 0.0 desperately needs some love. I can't say I disagree with anything that's been said in this thread thus far, or any of the ideas presented. Also, supporting this because Kiko, my e-lover has also supported it. (I too, am gay)
klassasin Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:32:00 - [17] I support this idea and I hope to see it implemented.
Soul Raven 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:32:00 - [18] Signed, About time 0.0 was looked at...
SoulOfAnnihilation 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:33:00 - [19] /Signed on Vuk's Post, Great stuff boss!
Dak Torin The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:33:00 - [20] I support this.

Zi'a Baptism oF Fire B.L.A.C.K.	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:34:00 - [21] anything to move away from the current grind.
Schlauke Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:34:00 - [22] Looking Good!
Heknom	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:35:00 - [23] supportin dis
Apeltuut Caldari Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:35:00 - [24] I along with many others agree 0.0 needing some major TLC so I'm in full support. cheers Ape
Nigggle GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:36:00 - [25] Sounds good
Killer2 The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:36:00 - [26] The concept is good, however I think a few things need to be refined. I imagine this is CCP's role though.
MasterTom hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:36:00 - [27] good suggestions! -------------------- "Ow boy..."
Katini Ellegahn The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:37:00 - [28]
Vladimir Antlerkov GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:37:00 - [29] Giving my endorsement.
Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:38:00 - [30] Originally by: Killer2 The concept is good, however I think a few things need to be refined. I imagine this is CCP's role though. I believe the details can be hammered out in Iceland. I prefer to give CCP some high level items and challenge them to come up with creative solutions. That's what they get paid for. Originally by: Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!

Cedori Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:38:00 - [31] I support this message and/or service! This post represents the views of me, myself, and I. Nothing said should be attributed to my corp or alliance, otherwise I might be whipped with a strand of wet-spaghetti!
Ioan Metorsky GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:38:00 - [32] I support improving the game mechanics in 0.0, and I support most of the ideas proposed in this thread.
Retsil Evad The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:38:00 - [33] /signed ============== Office use ONLY ============== BRING BACK EVE TV!!!!!!!
TimGascoigne The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:38:00 - [34] In all actuality there needs to be two kinds of towers. ---Industrial POSs that are able to moon mine and performing industrial activities. these towers would be unable to contribute to sovereignty. ---The second sovereignty towers. POSs that cannot moon mine or perform industry. However they do contribute to sovereignty. only sovereignty POSs can anchor cyno jammers and cyno generators. this will mean that less tower destruction is required in order to take a system and that alliances are going to have to choose a balance between economics and defence. finally the cyno jammer must stay whatever the solution. Otherwise return to the death of small gang warfare because everybody is afraid of a carrier being hot dropped.
Shinma Apollo Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:38:00 - [35] wholeheartedly supporting this. Removing moons as a means of Sov contesting largely reduces the threshold for people to enter 0.0. Though I'd think that small and med POS would have to suffer an HP nerf so that people couldn't get 'raiding points' so easily.
Ekaterine Murrat	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:40:00 - [36] I support this
leboe Dark Star Cartel Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:40:00 - [37] agreeing with the idea of moving sov POSs to planets makes sov war simpler (fewer towers to consider) without completely destroying the POS infrastructure in place. But going down that road, would we need restrictions on numbers of POSs on planets?
PyroChemist	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:41:00 - [38] Edited by: PyroChemist on 28/12/2008 23:44:25 Vuk, get back in my bed. Changes like this will mean a lot more small gangs going around and pew pewing in alliance 0.0 warfare.
Ankhesentapemkah	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:41:00 - [39] Originally by: Killer2 The concept is good, however I think a few things need to be refined. I imagine this is CCP's role though. If you have ideas, criticism or suggestions, do post them! If its any good we can add it to the final document. This is democracy as it's supposed to be, we listen to you. --- NEW MOVIE!
Blazde 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:41:00 - [40] I'm concerned moving sov claiming to planets only would return us to 2005/2006 days when alliances' soverign space was tiny. The current situation with >50% 0.0 systems held makes for a colorful map and accurate reflection of who controls what space. It feels like we've built empires. I'd suggest introducing an XL Control Tower, for planets, which would override Large towers (at moons) just as Large overrides Medium etc.. Moon starbases would still be able to claim sov level 1 but XL planet towers would be needed for sov 2,3,4 and would of course be the weapon of choice for sov warfare just as Large are now. Sov 1 should still get the associated fuel bonus because it's industrial related and some incentive to claim is needed (or rather a penalty for hiding your starbase is needed) but perhaps remove the notification of new towers being anchored as that's a strategic/space control advantage. _

Major Danger	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:42:00 - [41] Never before have I felt a vote to be as inconsequential as this one.
LegendaryFrog GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:42:00 - [42] Supporting this. It is crucial for the endgame to be a desirable target to work toward for an mmo to have the best chance possible of retaining its membership's interest. 0.0 space is a huge part of that endgame for EVE, and right now it is severely lacking in several regards brought up in the original few posts. I know personally that the addition of tactical goals able to be achieved by smaller roaming games would literally turn the game around for me and be the best possible addition to eve in my eyes. Please CCP, make this a priority. -Master Your Mind-
Brilf	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:43:00 - [43] Great ideas here. POS shooting and POS upkeep are by far the most boring aspect of eve IMO. One thing I'd like to see if the ideas of system upgrades are implemented is some kind of degradation over time aspect to remove the possibility of most systems simply being fully upgraded. There needs to ALWAYS be the possibly for forward motion. Statis = boring!
Redplayer X Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:43:00 - [44] Nice Stuff & many great ideas - I'm supporting this. Time to change 0.0-warfare againg to bring new energy into it and make it more attractive.
NereSky Domination. Sc0rched Earth	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:45:00 - [45] Some good suggestions there
ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:46:00 - [46] Originally by: Shinma Apollo wholeheartedly supporting this. Removing moons as a means of Sov contesting largely reduces the threshold for people to enter 0.0. Though I'd think that small and med POS would have to suffer an HP nerf so that people couldn't get 'raiding points' so easily. RADING POINTS WHAT THE **?º! What we need to be looking at here is ISK POINTS and you can raid the out of and get MAD RICHES while doing it, if people don't defend their **
Mistress Althea Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:46:00 - [47] /signed
Tyrrhena Maxus Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:46:00 - [48] Risk vs Reward ratio in 0.0 is terrible. I agree with the above suggestions and I think you should have gold rush situations where a NPC corp 'strikes gold' and there is temporarily more of a certain type of resource in one particular (pref remote) area. This could be announced as a news item which would drive the rush aspect as people race to this area to claim some space gold. This will lead to pvp as well as industrial activities. Being able to disrupt and loot hostile industrial operations with a small to medium gang is a great idea, and will reduce the situation where you cannot disrupt the enemies without a massive bs blob. Planets should have populations and you should be able to seige them aswell as the space base orbiting it to screw with the resources that that planet produces. Space base holds the sov though, not the planet. Remove the current function of the local chat channel. Make constellation chat auto update rather than local. Interdictor bubbles should pull ships out of warp regardless of when they initialized it. If a ships warp path passes through a interdictors bubble, this should instantly pull them out of warp.
Treelox Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:47:00 - [49] Got to agree with the ideas behind both Darius's and Vuk Lau's post. Not agreeing with Ankhesentapemkah's post though. Some of her "Useless" and "Income" changes are a bit too much. --
Virtuoso DeToure GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:48:00 - [50]

CKKO Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:48:00 - [51] i give my support to these ideas they sound like the start of something good... TSP Recruitment Thread
Nymblar GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:49:00 - [52]
Jamin Berry GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:49:00 - [53]
SkiLLzThaTKiLLz X Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:49:00 - [54] This really sounds good i support it -- SkiLLzThaTKiLLz X \| DarkArch0n X
ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:50:00 - [55] Originally by: ardik Originally by: Shinma Apollo wholeheartedly supporting this. Removing moons as a means of Sov contesting largely reduces the threshold for people to enter 0.0. Though I'd think that small and med POS would have to suffer an HP nerf so that people couldn't get 'raiding points' so easily. RADING POINTS WHAT THE **?º! What we need to be looking at here is ISK POINTS and you can raid the out of and get MAD RICHES while doing it, if people don't defend their Perhaps, sensei...a static, gated NPC plex that spawn a couple times a day and drop worthwhile loots. This way, you'll both have something profitable and worthwhile in your system and something that can easily be contested by just about anyone. And since it's gated in the middle of deadspace you can't gay it the ** up with docking games and 15 billion titans popping off doomsdays every 5 secs. Good suggestion m8m8 ....
Alkad Mzu hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:51:00 - [56] /signed Will sing for funny sig
ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:53:00 - [57] Oh yeah and give 0.0 dwellers some decent tools to catch farmer ravens that rat aligned and warps/cloaks the second they see you in local. Just make recons not appear in local and you'll liven **** up.
XorX	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:54:00 - [58] /signed
Lady Thanatos Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:55:00 - [59] I believe that these are some good STARTING POINTS for 0.0, but what about lawless space in general? I think there needs to be a big push for people to get OUT of empire. Something big needs to change, something to attract people out of empire instead of continually grinding in high sec (granted you grind in low sec/0.0 too), but at least make the reward A LOT more promising. As it stands now it seems like the pirates in low sec and the current corps/alliances/players in 0.0 need more competition/population. I honestly wish there were more people out here. It's ****ing empty! To be completely honest, there is no good reason to go into 0.1 to 0.4 systems unless you are doing a couple things: -Traveling to 0.0 -Thinking pirating is a lucrative career -Thinking low sec missions are really worth it There is LESS of a risk being CAUGHT in 0.0 in alot of these regions, it's easier to hide a lot of times, and there aren't as many pirate corporations traveling through it. I really wish that there was a GREATER reward for a single player, or a small corporation to get out into 0.0 or low sec and risk some assets, BUT if they are smart they can gain a LOT more. As it stands now I honestly see no reason to go into low sec/0.0 for any other reason beyond playing the giant conquering chess game. We need some BETTER content out here. The giant alliances (me being in one of them) that hold 0.0 get boring, I really want to see more small guys out here, and I want them to have as much of an advantage as I have for the reward. In short, do not just buff 0.0, buff low sec as well make the reward MUCH better to attract people out of empire. Keep brainstorming/working
gorm secandson Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:56:00 - [60] I especially like the idea of silos at planets that spawn trade goods :D We`d finally be able to actually raid&plunder systems with smallish gangs and thus earn some isks. /signed

Cindy McCain GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:57:00 - [61] Supporting this
Stretchmeat Crotchquake GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:57:00 - [62] Edited by: Stretchmeat Crotchquake on 29/12/2008 00:03:51 Edited by: Stretchmeat Crotchquake on 29/12/2008 00:02:26 Originally by: Darius JOHNSON Postin to support dis Reported for spamming. Other thoughts I've seen on this: - Stacking penalty to reinforced timers, i.e. 25% penalty to the reinforced timer every time it's reinforced, which goes down by 25% if it stays above 50% shields for 24 hours. 4 straight reinforces with no let-up = Time to watch the tower burn. Weakening the defensibility of cyno jammers: - Major increase in the fitting requirements for cyno jammers so they can't be mounted on deathstars. - Cyno jammer up = Jump bridge and cyno beacon go offline. - Doomsdays --> Single-target instagib cannon. - Deterioration of sov 3 if neighboring systems are taken.
ArmyOfMe 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.28 23:59:00 - [63] Edited by: ArmyOfMe on 29/12/2008 00:01:01 Glad to see this topic being raised. but i would really love to see a way that makes it harder to hold a large number of regions for a single alliance. As it is now its to hard for small alliances to claim 0,0 space, so whatever work that gets done to 0,0 i hope will be made to help smaller alliances as well. Imo ccp should have removed moon mining and all forms of static income from 0,0 as thats the main reason alliances claim as much space as they do. an alliances income should come from taxes, not moon mining Originally by: deadmaus Because by the time we had calmed Plague down after he heard BoB were back in the vicinity it was too late to do anything
Thingul Sindacolla GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:01:00 - [64]
Avulsion Duragon Pioneer Group GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:03:00 - [65] Right now, I make my isk in empire and spend it on 0.0 warfare. The 0.0 pvp is fun, but not very financially rewarding. ______________ \| Too Damn Big \|
Talzaris GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:05:00 - [66] Edited by: Talzaris on 29/12/2008 00:04:55 The fact that you can make more money in empire by running missions where there's practically no risk versus anything else in 0.0 other than high-end moon mining (which most individual players don't do, only their alliances) is idiotic. CCP desperately needs to make 0.0 more profitable to the average space-holding player, which will in turn encourage more people to want to inhabit 0.0 and create more pvp interaction.
jm24 GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:06:00 - [67]
Frabba GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:06:00 - [68] I, too, support this topic.
Danny Centurai hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:06:00 - [69] Sounds good to me.
Cailais Amarr 0utbreak	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:06:00 - [70] The way I see it at the moment its a fairly transparent problem; The 'wealth' of .0 and the Soveriegnty (read: ownership) of .0 are both tied up with the POS - which itself is a static, "bunker'esq" mechanic. Decouple Sov from the POS, and shift the wealth off the moons and into 'open space' (i.e the belts, or similar open environment) and bingo: problem solved. The POS will still remain a industrial cog, and moon mining might be a part of that - but if you could get moon minerals from the belts themselves... C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.

ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:06:00 - [71] Originally by: ArmyOfMe Imo ccp should have removed moon mining and all forms of static income from 0,0 as thats the main reason alliances claim as much space as they do. Oh yeah that sounds **ing ace, let's remove everything that can be fought over and just run around in pseudo missions in deadspaces that can only be probed out if you have an hour or two to spare. That's the shot of adrenaline 0.0 needs, oh yeah, right in the **ing eye bro
The German	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:07:00 - [72] I SUPPORT THIS
Mikel Banks	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:07:00 - [73] change is good
TheFrabbot	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:07:00 - [74] I, too, support this topic.
Sett AtOn 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:08:00 - [75] Spot on, thumbs up. Glad to see certain questions are being answered.
Insurance Risk Duragon Pioneer Group GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:09:00 - [76] Anything is better than the current system.
Althair Erin GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:10:00 - [77] This has my full support -------------- The Hope of the younger generation Come help build a better, more civil EVE!
Kahlan Draith	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:10:00 - [78] thumbs up
Felonious Pirate The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:11:00 - [79] Edited by: Felonious Pirate on 29/12/2008 00:12:33 It's a good start, but believe me there is a lot more that could be changed in EVE especially in 0.0 circumstances, the current pos changes are a step in the right direct; however, that is one element to 0.0 and you should consider all angles to this, ratting, PVP, game mechanics, outposts, mining etc....
Ji Jiang	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:12:00 - [80] Edited by: Ji Jiang on 29/12/2008 00:11:45 I endorse this idea.

Marzzola Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:13:00 - [81]
Telemedia Superhero	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:13:00 - [82] As things stand, a NPC corp raven ratting alt makes more isk/hr than most of the people who actually fight for 0.0 territory. Sov is a tremendous time and isk sink with little advantage compared to the isk farmers' tactics of simply squatting in someone else's space with a cloaking raven.
TakeTheDoom Fate of Norns	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:14:00 - [83] I support this
StaticW Fate of Norns	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:15:00 - [84] Great Stuff!
Reapeat Offender GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:15:00 - [85] 0.0 life needs some attention from CCP. What has been proposed here is a great place to start.
Thorin Green	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:15:00 - [86] Definitely need changes. And don't forget Empire lowsec.
Duran Bolivar Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:15:00 - [87] I support this!
Serenity Gent	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:16:00 - [88] i support this idea
Trzzbk GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:16:00 - [89] I supported this at the roundtable in Iceland and I support it now. DARIUS JOHNSON MY CEO
Ugor Batarr Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:17:00 - [90] Supporting the suggestions 'cause Vuk said I have to bend ova if I don't Nah, seriously, I like it. It's time things change in 0.0.

Ogla Khan	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:17:00 - [91] Edited by: Ogla Khan on 29/12/2008 00:17:11 I support this!
Ym'ir Fate of Norns	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:18:00 - [92] I support this
dookes The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:18:00 - [93] Signed. o7
Vampirasu	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:18:00 - [94] I support this! Great idea!
Taedron Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:18:00 - [95] supporting this
Marissja	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:19:00 - [96] i fully support this
Geltan sakimuir Shiva	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:19:00 - [97] Edited by: Geltan sakimuir on 29/12/2008 00:19:49 support this , great ideas
Lady'In'Red Fortunes of The Sebiestor Republic	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:19:00 - [98] supporting this
PCP Houk	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:19:00 - [99] I, too, support this.
Alitar Semiramis	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:20:00 - [100] I support this, it's great to see the CSM coming with these ideas.

Han Shuu GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:20:00 - [101] This gets my support
Sala Cameron Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:21:00 - [102] I support this.
Dealer Dan	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:21:00 - [103] I've tried to make money in 0.0, I've done everything from ratting with fighters assigned to mining high-end ores with a maxed out hulk or moon mining. When you figure in the logistics, the skillpoints, the capital investment and the inherent risk of any 0.0 activity, none of it can compare to the money that one can make in highsec. There is no reason to live in 0.0 unless you enjoy the pvp, which is more often decided by lag or timezones than skill or organization. There need to be more incentives for people to move into 0.0, and more limitations to growth of alliances to make room for new organizations.
Nippy Jap	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:21:00 - [104] i like it, gets my vote :P
Malkai Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:21:00 - [105] supporting this
An Anarchyyt Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:21:00 - [106] Yay Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Itzena GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:21:00 - [107] \/
Rahab Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:22:00 - [108] nice idea
Drave McClay GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:26:00 - [109] Yes.
Unimportant Target	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:26:00 - [110] The current reliance on capital ships to effect sov mechanics leaves many new players feeling helpless. I'm not just talking about the dreads needed to siege properly configured POSes, but the carriers and jump freighters needed to keep sov holding towers fueled and defended. With all the effort CCP is going through to attract new players, there should be more things to keep them interested once they've downloaded the trial. Small, meaningful pvp objectives for subcapital pilots would go a long way towards keeping new players happy.

Erinyen Guerilla Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:26:00 - [111] /signed 4 letters: d o i t !!!
GenericAchuraFemale26527	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:28:00 - [112] 0.0 is boring and tedious, please try and fix that. Thanks.
Captain Blackbeard Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:29:00 - [113]
Ex2 Wombat GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:30:00 - [114] The idea of being able to upgrade 0.0 stations with agents is a good one, and should be relatively easy to organize.
Scarnhorst	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:31:00 - [115] Supporting this
Utari G'Denoik Gallente Rogue Knights of Eve	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:33:00 - [116] Faction warfare bunkers should be employed in 0.0 for sovereignty. The 0.0 bunker might be something akin to a stripped down station, no where near the size, yet larger than a POS. This docking solution should support modules such as hangar, maintenance and repair ... and that's it. This type of setup should require Anchoring 5 and Starbase Defense 5 with a long anchoring delay. As a sovereign military installation, it would also be cool to see a series of bunkers communicate with each other so you could see the number of people in those system ... maybe not 'who' but some type of available intel from anchored (and unprotected) radio beacons or something like we see in the missions. Maybe it's just a case of bringing more of the mission functionality the story lines have for NPCs to the actual game in 0.0.
Chin LoPan The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:39:00 - [117] Agree that 0.0 needs some love, and like the ideas about being able to upgrade your sov space by better rats and minerals. However, I urge caution on some of the ideas about allowing small "roaming HAC" gangs to be able to relatively easily destroy static infrastructure. The ability of light hitters to be able to easily damage infrastucture structures is unrealistic and outside the role of these ships...their job is to disrupt infrasture by attacking ships, namely miners and ratters. The Doolittle Raid on Imperial Japan in WWII, as a similar "hit and run", was insignificant in terms of its effect on the infrastructure it targeted. Second, there comes the risk that this creates a whole new headache, trying to defend static structures that are easily popped by any 10-man HAC gang in 5 minutes. There is a whole new risk/reward issue here. Third, this sort of takes away a role for Battleships. They can't hit fast movers for defense, and now they wouldn't be needed to attack infrastructure...so what would they be good for?? I guess what I am getting at is, why is it so bad that "small groups" are not able to do much against a stronger numerically superior foe that is entrenched with sovereignity? Yeah, changing mechanics to minimize the need for monster capital and sub-capital blobs is a good thing, and should be pursued. But don't throw out the baby with the bath-water and make holding 0.0 space more of a headache than it is worth by swinging the pendulum so far over that non-sov-holding "roaming" corp/alliances get all the fun and the defenders are left guarding easily popped static structures.
boeses frettchen 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:41:00 - [118] supporting that
Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:42:00 - [119] Originally by: Utari G'Denoik Faction warfare bunkers should be employed in 0.0 for sovereignty. The 0.0 bunker might be something akin to a stripped down station, no where near the size, yet larger than a POS. This docking solution should support modules such as hangar, maintenance and repair ... and that's it. This type of setup should require Anchoring 5 and Starbase Defense 5 with a long anchoring delay. As a sovereign military installation, it would also be cool to see a series of bunkers communicate with each other so you could see the number of people in those system ... maybe not 'who' but some type of available intel from anchored (and unprotected) radio beacons or something like we see in the missions. Maybe it's just a case of bringing more of the mission functionality the story lines have for NPCs to the actual game in 0.0. I have never and will never ever ever support turning 0.0 into faction warfare. The people who want to engage in faction warfare can do so by... ENGAGING IN FACTION WARFARE Originally by: Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
sinsation Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:45:00 - [120] hai, a step in the right direction, I guess P.S. Static Plex, bring em back, give people something to fight for.

Talis Maan	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:45:00 - [121] Signed o7
Ranger 1 Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:49:00 - [122] ===== * Now I know how George Washington felt when Napoleon bombed him at Pearl Harbor. - Beast Boy
Miya Sitara GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:52:00 - [123] Sounds good.
Jita TradeAlt	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:54:00 - [124] Originally by: sinsation hai, a step in the right direction, I guess P.S. Static Plex, bring em back, give people something to fight for. Interesting idea.
Morgana Lustmord	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:55:00 - [125] Suported!
Darwin's Market	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:55:00 - [126] About local in 0.0, how about making it so that a gang the size of say 5 members doesn't appear in local, while over 5 does. When they form a gang, they can right-click in fleet to chose stealth gang option, and if 5 members or less, it is granted. Makes small scale pvp viable in 0.0 since the nano nerf. Today we only have large 20-40 man gangs running around. Perhaps put a cap of 1 stealth gang per corporation/constellation, and longer re-gang time penalty if leaving a stealth gang...
jmat The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 00:57:00 - [127] agreed
Cayleu GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:03:00 - [128] Supporting
Zaffm GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:04:00 - [129] Edited by: Zaffm on 29/12/2008 01:04:52 Edited by: Zaffm on 29/12/2008 01:04:25 This is a good idea to help make 0.0 worth the time investment so many players put into it. Also Jade Constantine was the worst CSM and just got in the way of progress so anything he wouldn't want is good qtiyd
facialimpediment GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:05:00 - [130] supporting

Anders Kraneled GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:05:00 - [131] Yes.
zAnkr	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:06:00 - [132] Edited by: zAnkr on 29/12/2008 01:06:37 This. A thousand times this.
Deakin Frost GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:07:00 - [133] /signed --- Inappropriate sig image removed -Abdalion
psycho Cain	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:08:00 - [134] There can be no other way.
Col Callahan Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:12:00 - [135] I smell cake...and it smells good
nightrain914	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:12:00 - [136]
Mantra Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:13:00 - [137] Posting to support. ------------ I am a soldier. I fight where I am told, and I win where I fight..
Sworn Redux	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:15:00 - [138] :thumbsup:
Tyffanny	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:15:00 - [139] /Signed
Mister Sulu	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:15:00 - [140] I support the idea of making 0.0 more valuable for the individual. I also agree that we need more static things to fight over. Currently it's either at a gate or a POS. Bring back static plexes, introduce planet and belt structures. Belt structures would go a long way to encourage small gang pvp, instead of warping to a safe and cloaking, people will have a reason to stay in belt and fight. A way to improve system value over time would go a long way to encourage empire dwellers to venture into 0.0.

Fahtim Meidires GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:16:00 - [141] Edited by: Fahtim Meidires on 29/12/2008 01:15:44 Yes - logistics mechanics should have limited overlap with sovereignty claiming mechanics. edit: and supported
Ha'Uler GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:19:00 - [142]
Von Druid Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:21:00 - [143]
Tabare Vazquez Uruguay Forever	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:21:00 - [144]
Ex Mudder Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:23:00 - [145] Would we have to fuel the sov holding planet bases?
Moctobot GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:26:00 - [146] yo
Junkie Beverage GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:27:00 - [147] ship da merch
Ender Darklight Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:29:00 - [148] I agree with what this thread stands for 110%. Awesome ideas everyone. I hope we can make 0.0 life and pvp into what it really should be. /signed
Utari G'Denoik Gallente Rogue Knights of Eve	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:30:00 - [149] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON Originally by: Utari G'Denoik Faction warfare bunkers should be employed in 0.0 for sovereignty. The 0.0 bunker might be something akin to a stripped down station, no where near the size, yet larger than a POS. This docking solution should support modules such as hangar, maintenance and repair ... and that's it. This type of setup should require Anchoring 5 and Starbase Defense 5 with a long anchoring delay. As a sovereign military installation, it would also be cool to see a series of bunkers communicate with each other so you could see the number of people in those system ... maybe not 'who' but some type of available intel from anchored (and unprotected) radio beacons or something like we see in the missions. Maybe it's just a case of bringing more of the mission functionality the story lines have for NPCs to the actual game in 0.0. I have never and will never ever ever support turning 0.0 into faction warfare. The people who want to engage in faction warfare can do so by... ENGAGING IN FACTION WARFARE I'm not suggesting that anyone bring faction warfare to 0.0, I'm suggesting the idea of bunkers be used "as in faction warfare."
Blud Ayngel All For One	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:32:00 - [150] great ideas put forth,i fully support this

Moostang DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:33:00 - [151] I support this! Moostang Darkstar 1 Goonswarm Priceless Necro Thread
Bane Sellante Shiva	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:34:00 - [152] Some great ideas there I put my name to it. Love the agent ideas. It's about time we had that joy in our miserable 0.0 lives ----------------------- Cold Fusion Inc. Website
Weaselior GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:39:00 - [153] I support this.
Sally Bestonge GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:45:00 - [154] empty post
VCBee20XD6	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:46:00 - [155] Edited by: VCBee20XD6 on 29/12/2008 01:46:35 bee post
Dontcheck Availability GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:47:00 - [156] ____________________
Lenny Lowcut GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:48:00 - [157] super bee post
Staplerfahrer Klaus	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:49:00 - [158]
Nigerian Prince	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:50:00 - [159] Another empty post.
Vickey Rockwell	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:51:00 - [160] yes.

Zeturi 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:52:00 - [161]
Batolemaeus Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:53:00 - [162] Make it so ---------------------------------------------- Originally by: CCP Prism X In New Eden, EVE wins you.
VCBee20XD4	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:53:00 - [163] yupp.
Kelly Smith	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:55:00 - [164] yes
Professor Dumbledore GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:55:00 - [165] Yes.
DoomViper	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:56:00 - [166] good idea
dobedoebdoeb	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:57:00 - [167] Yes.
Aprudena Gist GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:57:00 - [168] Yes
VCBee20XD5	Posted - 2008.12.29 01:58:00 - [169] ++
123t74ruagsdkffjhgasdf	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:00:00 - [170] asdf

Isidien Madcap GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:01:00 - [171] I support this; a revamp of 0.0 mechanics would be great for the game across all playstyles.
IngarNT hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:03:00 - [172] Good suggestions.
Scatim Helicon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:11:00 - [173] Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 29/12/2008 02:11:12 Originally by: Darius JOHNSON CCP has expressed a desire, and I agree kinda, to move away from POS's as the sov claiming mechanic. I don't believe a good replacement has been conceived. POSs in themselves aren't the problem, the problem is more the quantity of POSs that need to be shot (shooting a handful of POSs is fine, shooting 30 is boring as hell) and strontium levels leading to defenders playing the timezone metagame so that POSs come out of reinforced at 3am on a weekday morning in the attacker's part of the world. You're right though that every alternate mechanic to POS shooting I've seen has been worse than the mechanic it was supposed to replace. Quote: [*]Right now as it stands the risk versus reward equation is completely skewed in Eve. 0.0 is completely stagnant and the reason for this is that conquering space is simply not worth it. There's no "massive riches" to be gained. In truth with the way truesec works NPC 0.0 is actually FAR more profitable. What I'd recommend is not to reduce the value of NPC and Empire/lowsec space but to BUFF 0.0. There are a number of ways to accomplish this, one that I've proposed involves giving spaceholding alliances the ability to upgrade their space over time, increasing the sec rating or seeding asteroids or even a mechanic to add agents, perhaps via station upgrades. The possibilities for this are endless but at the end of the day the big picture desired end result is to make conquering space worth it. You should not be able to get richer in Eve doing less work. Agreement here, the fact that 80-90% of players are rejecting the endgame of 0.0 warfare and sticking to their highsec L4Q20 missions and their navy ravens is ample evidence that there simply isn't the incentive to take part in lowsec or zerosec activites that there should be. I would actually say that highsec does need a reduction (maybe only a slight one) in its profitability along with an increase in the attractiveness of 0.0 and lowsec. -----------
Traderella Astrosemites	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:17:00 - [174] Edited by: Traderella on 29/12/2008 02:17:17 Supported.
Tampika Svenyika Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:18:00 - [175] I too am supporting this.
Wu Liao	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:19:00 - [176] Supporting this.
NedFromAssembly	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:20:00 - [177] Supportin dis
Brionos The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:22:00 - [178] Edited by: Brionos on 29/12/2008 02:23:57 Agreement here, the fact that 80-90% of players are rejecting the endgame of 0.0 warfare and sticking to their highsec L4Q20 missions and their navy ravens is ample evidence that there simply isn't the incentive to take part in lowsec or zerosec activites that there should be. This restates the problem in very simple, accurate terms. As a casual player (does that term really apply to Eve?) I make the isk in Empire, watch it burn in 0.0. As it sits right now, no other way to do it on the time I have available. Attack effectively first.
PackItup	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:23:00 - [179] I agree detach the pos form sov and move to a planet baised system. but I would ad rather than agents in outpost controled in 0.0 a mechanice that allowes empire corporate sponsership. Perhaps required trade with an empire corporation. less poses means less logistics to maintain space. you would have to replace that aspect of holding space with somthing else. 0.0 is tied to empire threw legistics if you remove the required massive amounts of pos fuel it should be replace with somting else. I find 0.0 very under utalized. befor your alowed to colonize a planet for sov you would have to make a desision on one of the 4 empire work your standings up as a corp and alliance then trade for the technology to terraform a planet and claim soverenty. just a thought
LASER WATCHER GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:24:00 - [180] support yo

QwaarJet hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:31:00 - [181] Signed for great Vuk justice.
hlynurst Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:32:00 - [182] I support this.
Asero Lilium Venture Initiative	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:35:00 - [183] sounds poorl designed and not thought through. while it SOUNDS like it is good its causes problems on mmultiple levels. 1) PLANET SPAM. all the planets are full.... your screwed 2) Moons reducing sov cost. it allows sov pos to be partially paid for by the moons they are on. 3) any time you try to incentive small gang warfare against large entities your only shooting yourself in the foot. it SOUNDS good it however rarely works exactly like that
Pedro Sangre Ars ex Discordia	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:37:00 - [184] /signed
Moraguth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:40:00 - [185] I support all of these proposals. Good stuff for us 0.0 people :) good game Hoc filum tradit - This thread delivers.
g0th	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:42:00 - [186] supportin dis!
Vily Amarr Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:49:00 - [187] Disagree Boring POS warfare * Currently the only way to conquer space is through the destruction of the POSes in the system. -> wrong. there is difference between controlling Sov and controlling space * POS warfare is repetetive. -> shooting pos with dreads is repetitive, the fights that ensue rarely are * No direct reward for those participating in POS warfare. -> are dyspro moons worth nothing? Solutions * Detach sov from POS. -> and replace with what? * Different objectives for different types/sizes of gangs. -> so open ended i could insert "sell exotic dancers to rats to gain sov points" * More stuff to destroy and plunder for instant loot! -> isn't that the repetitive stuff you argued against 5 lines up? Useless 0.0 space * Many systems that lack valuable rats, ore and moon materials. -> very few systems hold zero value, and if they do you often find people farming them when you aren't looking * Sov holders have much space they have no use for, but have to occupy for tactical reasons. -> no use for until its during a carebear period, or they have to hold the area to control the moons which is the part "they have a use for" * No way to improve or develop space over time. -> outposts + outpost upgrades + faction towers + Jump brdige networks? -> obviously nothing Solutions * Ways to discover new belts. -> exploration, try it * Dynamic rat spawns, based on player actions. -> this would be nice tbh * Prospecting for more/better materials at moons (uncovered veins get lower yield over time?) -> kinda like this too * Construction of POS/Outpost modules or small anchorables that bestow benefits upon the system. -> elaborate * POS or small anchorables that produce consumer goods, etc. -> just have stations sell them? not all of them, but if station X(mim refinery) could sell robotics and oxygen station Y(caldari research) could sell mechanical parts that would be AWESOME Lack of Income sources for individuals 0.0 * Individuals can only gain income through mining, ratting and exploration. -> have you ever tried to make money in 0.0? its easy as **** * Complaint about missioning being exclusive to Empire/Faction space. -> who the hell is gonna grant the missions then? * Income sources are controlled by system, not players. -> wtf are you smoking? players in alliances control the important 0.0 resources with an iron grip Solutions * NPC factions respond to player action and establish themselves in alliance territory (or not), eventually handing out missions. bolded important part * Implement a player driven economy of trade goods (produced at small anchorables, consumed by outposts/stations). i agree with this at stations * Add new professions and activities. yes ambiguity is good. care to suggest some? Lack of quick small gang PVP, lack of objectives * Firepower is more important than mobility. -> get a clue * Blobbing. -> exact counter to this is one line up * Difficult if not impossible to take on capital ships without bringing your own. -> in large groups yes, got a solution to that? and this has nothing to do with sov last i checked * Small gangs cannot inflict damage or influence sov. -> small gangs inflict ***tons of damage. influence sov by destroying their enemy Supply lines are not very exposed due to jumpbridges, etc. -> this is true, and i would like to see the PG usage of a JB increase to reduce their defensive advantage cont.... -
Scatim Helicon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:51:00 - [188] Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 29/12/2008 02:54:20 Originally by: Vuk Lau All moon structures (current POSes) would lose their ability to count for sovereignity. SOV holding structures would be moved to planets. I am a little wary of physically moving POSs to planets as CCP seems to have plans (even if maybe they're just vague ideas at the moment) for developing the role of planets in a system's structure in the future and without knowing for sure at this stage what they'll be it would be a pain to have POSs there getting in the way. Perhaps just have the "XL POS" which claims a planet at one of its moons, but with the limit of one per planet. Quote: Planet orbiting structures should have much more HP then current POSes and they should have ability to anchor and online following modules: -Turret Batteries -Electronic Warfare Batteries -Energy Neutralizing Batteries -Missile Batteries -Shield Hardening Arrays -Corporate Hangar Array As well as modules connected to sovereignty mentioned above. Precise amount of HP (shield, armor and structure) as well as PG/CPU should be carefully increased, but with current number of capital ship ingame it needs to be a bit more then current Control towers. Again, I'd be wary of the increases in power we would be talking about here - buffing Sov POSs too much may lead to another 'bring dreads or don't bother' state of play as we had before POS guns moved outside the shields, with sub-capitals becoming obsolete and relegated to gatecamp duty. Quote: I would refer to the issue already raised by CSM http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=859419 . Every planet in system where alliances have sovereignty could be teraformed. Bringing planets to life - literally - is something that would be very cool to see, although I wouldn't let it apply to all planets, after all its not realistic to terraform a gas giant or an airless iceball. Additionally, having Terraform-able planets and/or moons (and perhaps even pre-inhabited - I 'm not familiar enough with the EVE backstory to know if there are inhabited planets out in 0.0) randomly scattered through the galaxy in the same way as moon minerals are randomly scattered would mean further diversification of 0.0 and a new type of resource to generate friction over - and could lead to interesting 'gold rush' conflicts between 0.0 alliances if areas of space previously considered poor value became more worthwhile due to the discovery of inhabitable worlds within its systems. As an aside, terraforming should be a non-trivial process - I'd suggest as a benchmark figure that terraforming a world be a multi-level process roughly similar in cost cost to the various levels of outpost upgrades, and take several weeks to complete. -----------
Steropes Main	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:53:00 - [189] I, too, support this.
Vily Amarr Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:55:00 - [190] cont... Solutions * More objectives besides POS warfare. -> kill? * Add small anchorables to destroy and loot. -> and what are we looting from them? * Add game mechanics that favor quick hit-and-run tactics. -> they dont already? * Make it beneficial for small gangs to roam and patrol own space. -> without points to defend you cannot patrol. without a reason to defend why bother? POS fuelling is tedious -> pos fueling is easy as ***. it is time consuming, but you have to realize that with the introduction of jump freighers, jump bridges etc. its hard to make it any easier without it being broken. Ice mining process is extremely boring. -> do you ice mine? last i checked macro's do that for us to the point where it is effectively an npc good * Distributing materials is repetetive. -> what? * Trade goods cannot be produced in the general area. -> they aren't produced anywhere's their sold. and i agree that the ability to get trade goods cold be made easier * Administrative nightmare for large alliances. -> if you cant figure out how to fuel 25 pos among 500 people you fail Solutions * Detach sov from POS so that less POS are required. standard sov pos's currently required is six. if you move them to planets that will stay ROUGHLY the same. however, you make it impossible to grab system footholds to try and break sov with tower spam. -

ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:56:00 - [191] Originally by: Vily Disagree Boring POS warfare * Currently the only way to conquer space is through the destruction of the POSes in the system. -> wrong. there is difference between controlling Sov and controlling space * POS warfare is repetetive. -> shooting pos with dreads is repetitive, the fights that ensue rarely are * No direct reward for those participating in POS warfare. -> are dyspro moons worth nothing? Solutions * Detach sov from POS. -> and replace with what? * Different objectives for different types/sizes of gangs. -> so open ended i could insert "sell exotic dancers to rats to gain sov points" * More stuff to destroy and plunder for instant loot! -> isn't that the repetitive stuff you argued against 5 lines up? Useless 0.0 space * Many systems that lack valuable rats, ore and moon materials. -> very few systems hold zero value, and if they do you often find people farming them when you aren't looking * Sov holders have much space they have no use for, but have to occupy for tactical reasons. -> no use for until its during a carebear period, or they have to hold the area to control the moons which is the part "they have a use for" * No way to improve or develop space over time. -> outposts + outpost upgrades + faction towers + Jump brdige networks? -> obviously nothing Solutions * Ways to discover new belts. -> exploration, try it * Dynamic rat spawns, based on player actions. -> this would be nice tbh * Prospecting for more/better materials at moons (uncovered veins get lower yield over time?) -> kinda like this too * Construction of POS/Outpost modules or small anchorables that bestow benefits upon the system. -> elaborate * POS or small anchorables that produce consumer goods, etc. -> just have stations sell them? not all of them, but if station X(mim refinery) could sell robotics and oxygen station Y(caldari research) could sell mechanical parts that would be AWESOME Lack of Income sources for individuals 0.0 * Individuals can only gain income through mining, ratting and exploration. -> have you ever tried to make money in 0.0? its easy as **** * Complaint about missioning being exclusive to Empire/Faction space. -> who the hell is gonna grant the missions then? * Income sources are controlled by system, not players. -> wtf are you smoking? players in alliances control the important 0.0 resources with an iron grip Solutions * NPC factions respond to player action and establish themselves in alliance territory (or not), eventually handing out missions. bolded important part * Implement a player driven economy of trade goods (produced at small anchorables, consumed by outposts/stations). i agree with this at stations * Add new professions and activities. yes ambiguity is good. care to suggest some? Lack of quick small gang PVP, lack of objectives * Firepower is more important than mobility. -> get a clue * Blobbing. -> exact counter to this is one line up * Difficult if not impossible to take on capital ships without bringing your own. -> in large groups yes, got a solution to that? and this has nothing to do with sov last i checked * Small gangs cannot inflict damage or influence sov. -> small gangs inflict ***tons of damage. influence sov by destroying their enemy Supply lines are not very exposed due to jumpbridges, etc. -> this is true, and i would like to see the PG usage of a JB increase to reduce their defensive advantage cont.... BAN THIS A##HAT
Vily Amarr Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.29 02:59:00 - [192] Originally by: ardik BAN THIS A##HAT i was trying to make it clear that the argument as put forth is clearly not well defined and may do just the opposite of what it intends to do. care to explain why you think i deserve a ban? -
InnerDrive Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 03:04:00 - [193] Edited by: InnerDrive on 29/12/2008 03:03:59 /signed pvp tournament?
ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 03:08:00 - [194] Originally by: Vily Boring POS warfare * Currently the only way to conquer space is through the destruction of the POSes in the system. -> wrong. there is difference between controlling Sov and controlling space No, there isn't. By controlling sov you in most cases control the scarce resources such as station services and dyspro moons. Don't think being afk cloaked makes you relevant. Originally by: Vily * No direct reward for those participating in POS warfare. -> are dyspro moons worth nothing? For most individual players, no, obviously not. Originally by: Vily Useless 0.0 space * Many systems that lack valuable rats, ore and moon materials. -> very few systems hold zero value, and if they do you often find people farming them when you aren't looking 90% of the systems in conquerable 0.0 has less scarcity power than L4s in motsu. It just isn't worth it. If you're thinking about exploration i hope you **ing choke on a forever Originally by:** Vily * No way to improve or develop space over time. -> outposts + outpost upgrades + faction towers + Jump brdige networks? -> obviously nothing Obviously. Since it's still worth less than our L4s in motsu baseline. Originally by: Vily Solutions * Ways to discover new belts. -> exploration, try it YESSS CLICKING 'SCAN' EVERY 180 SECONDS IS THE PINNACLE OF ONLINE MULTIGAMING IN THE YEAR 2008 ** YOU Originally by:** Vily Lack of Income sources for individuals 0.0 * Individuals can only gain income through mining, ratting and exploration. -> have you ever tried to make money in 0.0? its easy as ** It's also boring as and rarely even involves other people, apart from the guys in corp chat that keep you from killing yourself or something. Also, it's easier and more profitable in npc 0.0. Originally by:** Vily Lack of quick small gang PVP, lack of objectives * Firepower is more important than mobility. -> get a clue * Blobbing. -> exact counter to this is one line up * Difficult if not impossible to take on capital ships without bringing your own. -> in large groups yes, got a solution to that? and this has nothing to do with sov last i checked * Small gangs cannot inflict damage or influence sov. -> small gangs inflict ***tons of damage. influence sov by destroying their enemy Supply lines are not very exposed due to jumpbridges, etc. -> this is true, and i would like to see the PG usage of a JB increase to reduce their defensive advantage Oh come on, lack of small gang pvp in 0.0 is lack of rewards. Rewards that make it worthwhile to risk your ****. Right now, it doesn't exist. Do you even play this game?
Zaffm GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 03:11:00 - [195] Originally by: PackItup I find 0.0 very under utalized. befor your alowed to colonize a planet for sov you would have to make a desision on one of the 4 empire work your standings up as a corp and alliance then trade for the technology to terraform a planet and claim soverenty. just a thought 0.0 does not include factions, we don't want factions, if we wanted to deal with factional stuff we would be participating in factional warfare. Why is this a difficult concept to understand?
Roeun Deiaj Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 03:13:00 - [196] I support this.
Winchestori Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 03:16:00 - [197] yo thumbs up
Dragorin Minmatar Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 03:23:00 - [198] Supported!! [url=http://66.11.226.108/killboard/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=47019] [/url]
Battle Tested The Arrow Project	Posted - 2008.12.29 03:24:00 - [199] Definately, 0.0 needs a complete overhaul. It is getting too repetitive and boring, and needs to evolve with the growing number of people in it. The fact that NPC owned (unclaimable) regions are far more valuable than those that have to be fought over and held is out of balance.
Vily Amarr Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.29 03:27:00 - [200] Originally by: ardik Originally by: Vily Do you even play this game? more than you ;p while your extreme dislike of exploration is your call, it is not for others i do agree 0.0 could use a minor boost, but it has to be balanced by not being broken. just because high sec level 4's are broken doesn't mean you should furhter break something else. -

Jack Gates GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 03:58:00 - [201] I support this. yo, these are some good ideas. We really need to start cutting the fat in 0.0. I hope CCP listens to the CSM. that's a pretty :effort: troll you have there, vily
Flattus Maximus	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:03:00 - [202] boosh
DaiTengu Gallente GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:10:00 - [203] Originally by: Vily Originally by: ardik BAN THIS A##HAT i was trying to make it clear that the argument as put forth is clearly not well defined and may do just the opposite of what it intends to do. care to explain why you think i deserve a ban? Honestly, every objection you had is completely ******ed. It's obvious you just skimmed the proposals put in place, and that you really have no idea how 0.0 works.
Kleesama GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:11:00 - [204] Supporting this. Also agreeing dat vily is a few bricks shy of a full load.
Sunter	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:12:00 - [205] DaiTengu is da best. (supporting this)
Moon Dogg The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:27:00 - [206] Throwing my support behind this effort! *********************************** "Burn the land, boil the sea, you can't take the sky from me..."
Luunij Kao	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:29:00 - [207] I am in favor of this.
Tiberone GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:31:00 - [208] hey guys, what's going on in this thread is good.
Hapkidokid	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:37:00 - [209] i'm in favor of the 0.0 love
Hapkidokid	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:42:00 - [210] just a add on to my last.. what will this new sov and pos develoment do for exploring.. it will make exploring a system way more dangerous.... any thoughts on this?

Meisje	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:42:00 - [211] Edited by: Meisje on 29/12/2008 04:45:31 I think it's an excellent idea, I'm just concerned that it might make exploration very difficult with a pos shooting at you while you're trying to drop probes. Anyway, just a thought....
ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:43:00 - [212] Originally by: Vily while your extreme dislike of exploration is your call, it is not for others No, it's not my call. It's the call of the **ing player base who don't even consider the potential rewards of 3-4bn isk deadspace loot drops to be worth their time exploring, you ing **. let me repeat that, if you do exploration, you get 4bn isk. Yet people do not explore. They'd rather grind L4s in motsu for 3 months than doing exploration. Why? BEACUSE THAT TRITE IS MORE EXCITING THAN **ING EXPLORATION (ALSO, the deadspace boosters on contracts right now mostly don't even come from exploration, so if not for the alternatives the prices would be like, officer cap recharger territory, and then how would the motsu L4'ers AFK run their missions!?!?)
ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:44:00 - [213] Originally by: Meisje I think it's an excellent idea, I'm just concerned that it might make exploration very difficult with a pos shooting at you while you're trying to drop probes. Anyway, just a thought.... Good point, they should just kill of the entire exploration thing altogheter, it was terrible anyway. Just bring back static complexes and we can pretend it never happened.
Hail Xenu	Posted - 2008.12.29 04:46:00 - [214] Quote: Who gives a ** about pos and outposts, outside of moon mining or perhaps having some refinery station in the middle of nowhere to mine into then they're useless, a drain on isk and not an incentive to do in 0.0. What's needed is that's actually worth fighting over, and can be fought over, for the average got, like, i don't know, static complexes? Buhu they get farmed, EVERYTHING YOU DO IN EVE IS FARMING YOU DUMB ***S SHUT UP Hm, just quoting this post from page 1, good points.
Foulque	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:00:00 - [215] YUS
Keith Katar Resistance is Futile Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:06:00 - [216] Very nice ideas. I hope CCP agrees. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ticl Er hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:07:00 - [217] Thumbs up.
Everir Entar Legion Du Lys	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:18:00 - [218] Support.
Cottus	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:21:00 - [219] Good Ideas this makes planets worth a damn instead of just random balls in space.
3141592653589793238462 Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:23:00 - [220]

KalamMek	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:34:00 - [221] Yes please fix 0.0 tia
TigCobra Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:48:00 - [222] /signed
Bang Dao	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:49:00 - [223] Supporting.
Alant Sunir GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:50:00 - [224] Originally by: ardik Originally by: Vily * No direct reward for those participating in POS warfare. -> are dyspro moons worth nothing? For most individual players, no, obviously not. This is one I really agree with. There has to be better ways for individuals to make money in 0.0 space, or those individuals will stay in highsec running missions, or stay in 0.0 and mine for hours to stay in ships.
DrDooma	Posted - 2008.12.29 05:57:00 - [225] /signed
Ur kahanu Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 06:02:00 - [226] sounds like a good idea. you have my support.
Baun 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 06:24:00 - [227] The Enemy's Gate is Down
Phamina The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 06:35:00 - [228] 0.0 life needs to be more exciting than what it is now. Hopefully CCP will start implementing some of the suggestions by the CSM.
helpnuout The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 06:41:00 - [229] supporting. Helpn
deadmaus Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 06:50:00 - [230] Outstanding, this is why you guys won. Backing this 100%.

Aura Mega	Posted - 2008.12.29 06:58:00 - [231] Very Nice Ideas
Carlos Johnson	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:06:00 - [232] Good ideas
half san 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:07:00 - [233] I support this!
HydroSan GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:08:00 - [234] Any change to 0.0 is good
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:18:00 - [235] Edited by: Vaal Erit on 29/12/2008 07:18:02 Originally by: Vuk Lau Planet orbiting structures should have much more HP then current POSes You want to replace multiple POSs with one big super POS? Are you crazy? Darius's post, however, is much better and I fully support him and his ideas. Improving the land you conquer is excellent, making 0.0 actually worth it in terms of isk for the general alliance foot-soldier will help populate it. Basically I was promised small gang objectives for 0.0 by CCP back in Revelations I and I want them. Full support for 0.0 re-structuring. -- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Bloodhands hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:18:00 - [236]
NeXxT Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:20:00 - [237] Supporting this! _____________________________________________
Idaeus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:27:00 - [238] I'm a lemming.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:30:00 - [239] Regarding the idea of moving sov holding structures to planets: I want people to be aware of this issue: many people warp to planets for various reasons - sometimes in combat, other times to scan belts. If we have sov claiming stuff at the planets, those structures SHOULD NOT automatically kill whatever warps there. Either they should have passive defense measures, or they must be positioned at least 300 km from the planet warp to point, out of gun range. It may not seem like a big issue now, but it will be once it is used on massive scale in EVE.
Qtang	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:33:00 - [240] Great idea. You have my support

Riastarthae	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:33:00 - [241] change is good!
Tasha Voronina Caldari Navy Reserve Force	Posted - 2008.12.29 07:35:00 - [242] Actually buffing something for once instead of a nerf.... supported! As for those small gang objectives... here's a couple of ideas: -solar batteries at POS that have to be outside of shields and are easily incapacitated, but while they're online, they reduce actual fuel costs for running said POS (only 2 per tower max) -local as it currently stands is agreed to be broken as an intel tool (at least, from what I understand and think) which it was never intended to be... well, here's a thought - anchorable structure at sun that provides current local functionality to 0.0, but is easily incapacitated, putting local into delayed mode -re:cynojammers - it's kinda early in morning, so this may be something really bad, but anyway, here goes: right now, we have one big cynojammer covering the whole system - why not split this functionality up into smaller structures? These smaller cynojammers would each individually jam only a portion of the system (let's say 5 AU around themselves) and be easier to incapacitate than the current jammer, but multiple could be linked together to jam the whole system. But, as soon as over 33% of the linked jammers are incapped, the systemwide jamming goes offline and only the individual jammers remain in effect. (This should be limited to a maximum of 3 jammers per planet, else this will only promote even moar POS spammage ) Further ideas along these lines should go (imho) along the lines of easily incapacitatable small structures which give system-wide benefits (which are small enough as to not be overpowering, yet significant enough to be worth defending). As for sov. mechanics... anything that reduces POS spam is good - ideally, controlling planets should grant you (higher levels of) sov., but until something like that is in place, the idea posted here should do. --- Sig will be updated shortly
Vanessa LaiDai GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 08:16:00 - [243] Sounds good to me.
Schwarzlicht	Posted - 2008.12.29 08:20:00 - [244] I think, this heads the right way.
Venkul Mul	Posted - 2008.12.29 08:41:00 - [245] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah POS fuelling is tedious * Trade goods cannot be produced in the general area. While I like most of what I have seen so far I see a problem here. Giving the possibility to produce trade goods to 0.0 alliances mean removing even the last link between Empire and 0.0. In theory Empire and 0.0 are in a symbiotic relationship, 0.0 is the frontier where you can gain and lose big fortunes in a very small time, empire is the old lands where the skilled laborers are, where are produced the things that make life more comfortable, ecc. If all the goods can be produced in 0.0, that relationship die. At that point we will be really playing in 2 different, unrelated, games, where there is no need to move from an area to the other, forever. --- An idea about stations: unless something has changed (I have never been a station owner so I can be mistaken), the owner of a station don't get any of the taxes on the items that pass through the station market. That seem strange to me. The idea of giving the station tax (not the broker fee) to the station owner seem a basic one. It would be a great incentive to the development of better markets in 0.0 and give a reward to the station owners.
Brmble GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 08:50:00 - [246] that's why you get the big bucks Darius o9 ~ no not believin in urself ~
couger malthas Shiva	Posted - 2008.12.29 08:57:00 - [247] i am Couger Malthas i support this thred _______________________________________________
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 09:17:00 - [248] First, some notes on the previous CSM posts. Notes: There is a lot here, so i won't go point to point: Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Boring POS warfare POS warfare is only boring in two regards. 1. Too many SOV objectives 2. Too difficult to achieve strategic goals that do not involve direct sovereignty control. The actual fights at the POS are fun. The challenges that arise to get a foothold and bring in resources, is fun. The problem comes when you have 30 POS to purge and no one is defending. If that number were more reasonable then there would be very little problem. Plundering specifically is a very bad mechanic. It is going to either have all the problems with strontium or all of the problems with ping pong and more. If you have a system where people can come in and take static resources that have been acquired then you will have a system where its impossible to producing using the plunderable options. They will be robbed during your off times. Quote: Useless 0.0 space Lack of Income sources for individuals 0.0 Dynamic rat spawns and POS/Outpost modules are a bad idea. Dynamic spawns are bad because it leads to an unpredictability in what systems will be the most productive. Systems that are more productive are more desirable for organizations and individuals. This means that a predictable quality of spawns in an area is good for bringing people together to fight. You can see this exemplified most easily for moons. Its what organizations fight over. If you had quality ratting ground to fight over you would see more conflict. If its dynamic then all space is going to be roughly equally valuable. And that does not generate conflict. POS/Outpost modules are a bad idea simply because they give the people who own the area another added advantage. As one of our goals is to bring people to 0.0, people are going to need to be able to produce well without the aid of these structures. Basically you need a system that produces on an individual level only when that person is in the area. You have the same kind of problem with missions, but i think its slightly reduced by the increased density that it leads too. Quote: Lack of quick small gang PVP, lack of objectives Small gangs inflicting Sov damage is not a good idea. While more defenses are bad, a move that would allow small gangs to influence sov would be a massive change in the level of power needed to remove sov. It would become effectively impossible to hold. The problem lies entirely in the barriers to entry for killing strategic pos modules such as miners, bridges, and cynos. If you make taking down and putting up these types of modules faster and easier then small gangs have a real place on the battlefield. Not as a main tactic, but as support. It should also be noted that there already are ways for small gangs to be useful, they just are not so explicit as many would like. Quote: POS fuelling is tedious Get rid of it. With the exception of strontium, POS fueling serves no purpose in eve. Roll the cost into the structures. A POS that is not tended will not provide a lasting deterrent to its destruction. If a constant cost is deemed to be required as a game mechanic, then make that constant cost be deducted from the corporation wallet automatically and give directors a proper POS management system that informs them of status without bunking up their mail. That way players can "delegate" the fueling of POS to NPCs. "Logistics" should be "getting ships and men to the front" and not "making sure everything is fueled".
Goumindong Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 09:17:00 - [249] Originally by: Vuk Lau Planet orbiting structures should have much more HP then current POSes No, they should not. One of the problems in 0.0 is the inability of new entities to get involved. Making things harder to kill increases the barriers to entry for attacking sovereignty. While less sov related small gang activities ought to also be present, increasing the barrier to entry for attacking sovereignty would be counter productive in that regard. Originally by: Darius JOHNSON here are a number of ways to accomplish this, one that I've proposed involves giving spaceholding alliances the ability to upgrade their space over time, increasing the sec rating or seeding asteroids or even a mechanic to add agents, perhaps via station upgrades. The possibilities for this are endless but at the end of the day the big picture desired end result is to make conquering space worth it If this happens, it has to be permanent increases(I.E. not gone when you kick the folks out) and there have to be realistic and known limits that enforce a hierarchy in terms of quality of space. Otherwise we may run into a problem where all space becomes equally good as people max out their improvements. ___________________________________________________ Now a list of some things that are very important to get big picture right On Sovereignty and POS The Mechanic of: Side one places structure to claim, side 2 kills structure to reduce claim needs to be preserved The number of structures need to be reduced The strategic and logistical functions of POS need to be removed from the structures that hold Sov: There is a fundamental break in the level of effort required to advance against each that cannot be served when they are melded together A system similar to the strontium mechanic needs to be preserved for any built up asset that can be destroyed or plundered Other plunderable assets must not incur loss of activity prior to the point that it was plundered or after it is resecured On enhancing the value of 0.0 Any player influenced improvements must be permanent: Temporary changes reduce the incidence that a region will be attacked It should not be possible to "gimp" a region with said upgrades Player improvements must not allow an optimal improvement strategy to end up with regions of equal value Flat improvements need to be aimed at individual rather than corporate or alliance production Flat improvements need to end up with regions of differing value
SemiAs08	Posted - 2008.12.29 09:22:00 - [250] sound good

Rick Pjanja hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 09:22:00 - [251] i agree :D
Vashan Tar GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.29 09:25:00 - [252] Supported
KINGmann	Posted - 2008.12.29 09:43:00 - [253] Sounds Good!
snikje	Posted - 2008.12.29 09:57:00 - [254] i support this
Barnybear	Posted - 2008.12.29 10:18:00 - [255] 0.0 Sov-system need to be changed.. this is a nice idea for it
Lord PET hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 10:59:00 - [256] Supporting ideas.
McTecman GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 11:15:00 - [257]
Ashemi Darkhold hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 11:19:00 - [258] Edited by: Ashemi Darkhold on 29/12/2008 11:19:14 I agree something needs to change, and this seems like a good start. ------ hirr!
am0n tristessa	Posted - 2008.12.29 11:37:00 - [259] Edited by: am0n tristessa on 29/12/2008 11:37:18 Sounds good to me.
RaukoCrist Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 11:55:00 - [260] I truly support making 0.0 life more worth it to individual players. Revamping how 0.0 mechanics work just seems like the best solution, not some nerf/boost to Pos-mechanics. The changes Darius and Vuk puts to the table seem to have good points, and with CCP's refinement they might make Eve a lot more interesting for us who want to live in 0.0, and not participate in the Empire factional warfare. Bringing missions to 0.0 through some standings-mechanics might also be a good way to start, but Pos mechanics are the true clinching point. Ankhwhatever, your points are sometimes self-defeating, and sometimes just seem... not so well thought out. Looting and Small gang pvp-points in particular. Eve should not be about WoW-like raiding parties. Thank you CSM's, for trying to make our game more fun.

Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:01:00 - [261] Quote: Right now as it stands the risk versus reward equation is completely skewed in Eve. 0.0 is completely stagnant and the reason for this is that conquering space is simply not worth it. There's no "massive riches" to be gained. Technically there is. Those moons are big earners. The moment suicide gankers' insurance gets nerfed officer mods will sky rocket in price. Quote: What I'd recommend is not to reduce the value of NPC and Empire/lowsec space but to BUFF 0.0. Plus a system for empire to consume far more of wat 0.0 has to offer. One option obviously being the above suicide ganker option. Another would be tournament arenas that consume and destroy mods if you lose. Quote: There are a number of ways to accomplish this, one that I've proposed involves giving spaceholding alliances the ability to upgrade their space over time, increasing the sec rating or seeding asteroids or even a mechanic to add agents, perhaps via station upgrades. Would there be some sort of reversing factor of this? Quote: NPC agents in Conquerable outposts npc agents :) so beautiful an idea. I love to see the big alliances coming out :) ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
Gen Mayhem	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:01:00 - [262] Making it easier to challenge SOV is a good thing, but making a small roaming gang capable of doing it will only become a headache as someone already pointed out, you can't make it TOO easy... I think making it easier for the average player to make more isk in 0.0 is also a good idea, maybe the systems that get ratted empty more often generate better rats than a system that is not ratted in as often. Or vice versa a system that doesnt get ratted in generates better rats than one that has 10 people ratting in it 24/7/365 (or something just an example) I do agree completely though that the main isk makers should be the individuals, not the corp or alliance with static ops funneling in huge sums of money. As for getting people out of empire, why not have an event that temporarily makes empire not so secure? I know this is going out on a limb but as an example, concord goes on strike, leaving empire undefended for a week or two. Or better yet, someone ****es off the jovians, so they decide to come rip up empire for a few weeks, maybe it could become an event where the eve community must defeat the invading power to restore security to 1.0. This would cause a mass exodus of players from empire, boost 0.0 corp populations and maybe even help form new alliances. Also what about random wormholes, let's say one opens up in "alliance a's" territory, leading to "alliance b's" space. suddenly this new wormhole connecting one end of the universe to the other, not only allows, but forces corps and alliances that wouldn't normally have much exposure to eachother, to be face to face and either fight or join forces. Also the randomness would make it an "iffy" proposition to go through, what if you're attacking the other alliance and the wormhole closes behind you, leaving you 40+ jumps from home? I agree with the suggestions made by the CSM members, but think you should be very careful how easy you make it to destroy SOV, and also think you should try to suggest a wide range of things that could benefit the entire game, even if it could be at the expense of someone playing now. Whats good for the future of eve, may not be the most liked suggestion.
RoyofCA Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:29:00 - [263] The first two posts should be CCP's top priority and will greatly benefit everyone in the game, drawing more players. I support the first two posts in this thread.
Moloc's The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:31:00 - [264] Sounds good.
RazorCRO The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:34:00 - [265] Thumb up!
Moon Kitten GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:44:00 - [266] Hrm yes an excellent idea.
Proud American GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:46:00 - [267] Originally by: Moon Kitten Hrm yes an excellent idea. Yes, it's quite good actually.
Tuxedo Catfish	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:51:00 - [268] I support this message. o7
DaiTengu Gallente GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:52:00 - [269] Originally by: Ephemeron Regarding the idea of moving sov holding structures to planets: I want people to be aware of this issue: many people warp to planets for various reasons - sometimes in combat, other times to scan belts. If we have sov claiming stuff at the planets, those structures SHOULD NOT automatically kill whatever warps there. Either they should have passive defense measures, or they must be positioned at least 300 km from the planet warp to point, out of gun range. It may not seem like a big issue now, but it will be once it is used on massive scale in EVE. People warp to planets because there's no chance of a hostile POS being there. Also, they warp to planets because belts sometimes have rats in them. If you're invading a system, this makes a covops or interceptor far more useful, as they can make safe spots. A hostile force shouldn't be able to warp to a planet in a sovereign system with no repercussions. Planets, especially if they are populated, should be heavily defended.
Kuisma Koistinen	Posted - 2008.12.29 12:53:00 - [270] Thumb up also!

Lady Lard GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 13:00:00 - [271] The first post is reasonably accurate.
Kayl Breinhar Gallente GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 13:05:00 - [272] Supporting this wholeheartedly. Do something.
boot q GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 13:16:00 - [273]
Llynia Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 13:20:00 - [274] Quote: Supporting this wholeheartedly. Do something. You forgot your thumb dude. btw, nice ideas!
Triggsz GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 13:27:00 - [275] Supporting this :V
By Chance	Posted - 2008.12.29 13:35:00 - [276] Supporting this.
of1570 Constructors Fighters Salvagers Kraftwerk.	Posted - 2008.12.29 13:38:00 - [277]
Leon Thorne Free-Space-Ranger Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 13:50:00 - [278]
Lumen Atra GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 14:09:00 - [279] Going with the crowd of support, here.
Phil Miller GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 14:20:00 - [280] poast

Dr Felonius Civilian Purposes Limited	Posted - 2008.12.29 14:46:00 - [281] Edited by: Dr Felonius on 29/12/2008 14:46:58 Never been to 0.0, never plan to go to 0.0, because as the OP suggests, I don't see the risk/reward ratio justifying it. It would be interesting to see that change. For whatever it's worth, more agents in 0.0 certainly wouldn't do it. Being able to run the same missions I already run, but get paid more for it, would be pretty weak sauce unless we're talking an enormous pay bump.
Wodan Violence GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 14:49:00 - [282] Supporting this because Darius told me to.
Robert Jones GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 15:00:00 - [283] Support, it will make 0.0 somewhat more interesting than spamming a billion towers on a system with 43 moons.
Godamnit	Posted - 2008.12.29 15:04:00 - [284] Supporting this.
theBEANman Duragon Pioneer Group GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 15:15:00 - [285] good ideas hope they come up with something
Typhena The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 15:45:00 - [286] /Signed What about Outposts? I think we should find a way to effectively destroy an Outpost, or even find a way to add another Outpost in the same system. --- Sig Under Construction
Tamir Lenk Caldari Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 15:46:00 - [287] I, too, support this proposal.
Qlanth Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 15:58:00 - [288] I would really, really like to see agents in 0.0 space.
Nihilanth GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 16:04:00 - [289] Supporting dis
Arktes	Posted - 2008.12.29 16:05:00 - [290] Support

Tjakka KIA Corp KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.12.29 16:22:00 - [291] Support!
Samalina	Posted - 2008.12.29 16:51:00 - [292] Can we sneak in not needing a password for alliance members to use Jump Bridges?
Fuujin GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.29 16:54:00 - [293] Edited by: Fuujin on 29/12/2008 16:53:44 My thumb, it is up.
Lars Erlkonig Discrete Solutions Ltd.	Posted - 2008.12.29 16:56:00 - [294] I support this idea. POS warfare sucks when it's a battle to see who can anchor 20 towers faster. Having spent hours anchoring towers, this really sucks the fun out of eve. Originally by: TWD We suck and Goonswarm are PvP gods.
RahSun Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 16:57:00 - [295] Implement this, please.
Mrski Okupator The Arrow Project Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 17:04:00 - [296] Yaay! Glad to see we didn't pull that CSM election scam for nothing :P ___
Fuujin GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.29 17:09:00 - [297] Also, since we're talking about buffing 0.0....any way to get better-quality lowends to spawn out there? Stuff like "superdense veldspar" or something--basically looking to make it economically viable to mine something other than ABC. Right now, the macrominers in empire supply 0.0, since it is far, far more economical in both time and isk to buy and export trit/pyer/mex/iso from empire than it is to mine it 'locally'. Plus the amounts available are presently insufficient for most alliances' needs. A few million units of trit is the barest starting amount for most capital or even battleship construction jobs. Its even to the point where it far more efficient to melt rat loot than it is to mine lowends. This needs to change. A change like this would also buff crappy nulsec regions that otherwise aren't any better than lowsec--if you get superdense omber/hed/hemo, you suddenly have an obvious incentive to mine in fountain as opposed to khanid or devoid (not that you'd mine there to begin with, but just sayin')
Jarna Civire	Posted - 2008.12.29 17:15:00 - [298] 10 page to long didnÆt read it all so if these have already been posted, sorry. - Boring POS warfare AND POS fuelling is tedious Along with making the planet POS for sov maybe make it so only one tower per alliance can be in system (Oldest tower holds the sov). X time = higher sov. Pro: If you have two big teams trading blows then there are only 2 timers. Your tower and theirs. This makes less time waiting around for the ônext towerö to come out and it will make for better fights because it will be an all or nothing for both sides. Only having one tower will make POS fueling better too. Con: This could be exploited by having many alliances working together to hog all the planets. Resolution to this would be to make the non-sov towers cost additional fuel after X time. This will help make that exploit more costly and force any attacking fleet to pull out of a system until that additional cost timer leaves. - Useless 0.0 space AND Lack of Income sources for individuals 0.0 Make the value of the space based on sov. The higher the sov the better and faster spawns of rats, minerals, and complex. A sov 4 would also include agents for the local pirate factions. Pro: If you tie sov directly to gaining profit will make it happen. Making a high sov system able to support more players will cause less space needed to fund a large corp. Agents in 0.0 for sov 4 would solve this. Could also make non-ratted mining belts too so someone can mine without fear of rats. Con: With current 0.0 population there will be even more space that is unused. But this could allow more space for empire folk.
Vladimir Tinakin Hadean Drive Yards Archaean Cooperative	Posted - 2008.12.29 18:16:00 - [299] Sounds good. 0.0 needs a buff. ----------------------------------------------- Hadean Drive Yards
Res Tance Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 18:44:00 - [300] The thumb says it all

Bucks	Posted - 2008.12.29 18:47:00 - [301] Signed
WizMan Caldari Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 18:48:00 - [302] supported --- Regards Wiz.
Horzunaman	Posted - 2008.12.29 19:35:00 - [303] signed
Zastrow GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 19:55:00 - [304] I'm a bit late to this thread apparently, so I don't know if it's been brought up in the previous 11 pages.. but POS setup is a terrible, horrible game design flaw. Take it from someone who has set up hundreds of fully armed deathstar large towers, asking a player to devote HOURS to sitting idle in a forcefield, clicking "anchor" ... "online" and waiting 5 minutes between clicks is just punishment. Absolute punishment. It's the most unfun experience in eve. A full deathstar setup takes 6 or so hours to be finished. SIX HOURS. There has to be a way to automate this. POS setup is the biggest issue I have with sov warfare. Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Leandre	Posted - 2008.12.29 19:57:00 - [305] /signed Darius and Tuk proposal.
Man Juicer	Posted - 2008.12.29 20:14:00 - [306] Making 0.0 life more interesting is better for the game.
Wax Leprotic	Posted - 2008.12.29 20:16:00 - [307] Yes. I agree. Also, I don't disagree.
Hottie McGee GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 20:23:00 - [308] 0.0 needs to be boosted. i'm sure that any member of any alliance can agree to that.
Alexi Kalashnikov GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 20:24:00 - [309] Knowing the masses in EVE live in Empire, to attempt a nerf of Empire would be player-base suicide for CCP. I believe that buffing 0.0 is the correct course of action to correct the imbalance noted in the op. There are several other mechanics which need to be visited, balanced, adjusted and the like: but creating value is the first step in creating conflict.
Baron Tenebrius hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.29 20:26:00 - [310] supported !!!

mdjacks	Posted - 2008.12.29 20:29:00 - [311] /signed
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.12.29 21:01:00 - [312] Originally by: DaiTengu Originally by: Ephemeron Regarding the idea of moving sov holding structures to planets: I want people to be aware of this issue: many people warp to planets for various reasons - sometimes in combat, other times to scan belts. If we have sov claiming stuff at the planets, those structures SHOULD NOT automatically kill whatever warps there. Either they should have passive defense measures, or they must be positioned at least 300 km from the planet warp to point, out of gun range. It may not seem like a big issue now, but it will be once it is used on massive scale in EVE. People warp to planets because there's no chance of a hostile POS being there. Also, they warp to planets because belts sometimes have rats in them. If you're invading a system, this makes a covops or interceptor far more useful, as they can make safe spots. A hostile force shouldn't be able to warp to a planet in a sovereign system with no repercussions. Planets, especially if they are populated, should be heavily defended. I worry that in alliance 0.0 space, there won't be a single planet without these new structures in place. People are already used to be able to warp to planets, thousands of people. If you add game features that insta-pop anyone careless enough to warp to planets as they did for years before, you will create lots of problems. Even if you think it is "fair" game mechanic, many people will be upset over it. I agree that sov claiming structures should be heavily defended. But there's no reason for them to insta-kill everything that warps in. Perhaps those structures should only respond to aggressive action, similar to CONCORD and sentry guns. If someone warps there but doesn't attack anyone, he shouldn't be attacked by the automatic defense
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.29 21:24:00 - [313] Originally by: Vuk Lau This is something which is discussed in CSM for quite some time. It is not a simple issue so we will give our best to present this during our meeting in Iceland. This is some of my ideas based on draft Darius made for current 0.0 situation SOV mechanics All moon structures (current POSes) would lose their ability to count for sovereignity. SOV holding structures would be moved to planets. POSes will remain as they are currently but they will lose all structures connected to sovereignty as: -Cynosural Generator Array -Cynosural System Jammer -Jump Bridge -System Scannin Array Planet orbiting structures should have much more HP then current POSes and they should have ability to anchor and online following modules: -Turret Batteries -Electronic Warfare Batteries -Energy Neutralizing Batteries -Missile Batteries -Shield Hardening Arrays -Corporate Hangar Array As well as modules connected to sovereignty mentioned above. Precise amount of HP (shield, armor and structure) as well as PG/CPU should be carefully increased, but with current number of capital ship ingame it needs to be a bit more then current Control towers. That will significantly decrease amount of POSes we have atm and it would limit SOV holding structures strictly to the planets. Planets I would refer to the issue already raised by CSM http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=859419 . Every planet in system where alliances have sovereignty could be teraformed. Each planet would produce certain amount of NPC goods (or moon products) and it should be stored in some new structure which will be present on different warpin points around the planet (current mechanic where you warp from any direction to the planet and always end up on same spot needs to be changed). Those structures should be guarded by some light defenses simply to prevent lonely frigate to be able to pop it. 10 man HAC gang should be optimum to take one of this silos pretty much quickly and to loot the stuff from it. It will give a new goal to small roaming gangs which are at this moment pretty much useless in 0.0 alliance warfare. NPC agents in Conquerable outposts There should be introduced NPC standings towards Alliances. We have at this moment NPC toward corp standings but it is easily exploitable by making one man corps who will be owner of outposts. If counting only NPC towards alliance standings it will give huge role-play impact to 0.0 alliances which I am sure many will accept it with joy (hi CVA brothers). Anyway with hitting 1.0 standing towards NPC faction alliances should get ability to invite level 1 agents into their outposts (maybe after some event with AURORA team û yes we want AURORA back) or by paying certain fee. Later on with eventual increasing of standings alliances can invite lvl2 and later on level 3, level 4 and in the end level 5 agents (maybe end game would be cosmos agents or something connected with tech3). Ultimately it can be connected with planets structures and adding more roleplaying like, as higher standing is, more goods will planet colonies produce. Or opposite, hostile attacks on planet could decrease NPC standing toward Alliance. Basicly there is lot of good ideas floating around and we would like to hear your thoughts about it. 0.0 needs to be made easier to siege, you're trying to make it even harder. Less system defense, more fleet pew pew. It's the Economy Stupid
StarDeffender	Posted - 2008.12.29 21:29:00 - [314] So dont put them on planets put them in sun's orbit or some spot anywhere. Like the control bunkers in faction war. Only thing here would be that the alliance puts it up with whatever mods it thinks it will need [defenses, system scanners (that all aliance members can use), whatever]. A special "system gravity well thing" can be invented as a spot where the aliance cand build that SOV POS and no where else in the system cuz of the massive energy needed to run it and "some other role play text here" :P Love the aliance been able to get agents in aliance stations ideea. Star o7
Vuk Lau	Posted - 2008.12.29 21:29:00 - [315] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: DaiTengu Originally by: Ephemeron Regarding the idea of moving sov holding structures to planets: I want people to be aware of this issue: many people warp to planets for various reasons - sometimes in combat, other times to scan belts. If we have sov claiming stuff at the planets, those structures SHOULD NOT automatically kill whatever warps there. Either they should have passive defense measures, or they must be positioned at least 300 km from the planet warp to point, out of gun range. It may not seem like a big issue now, but it will be once it is used on massive scale in EVE. People warp to planets because there's no chance of a hostile POS being there. Also, they warp to planets because belts sometimes have rats in them. If you're invading a system, this makes a covops or interceptor far more useful, as they can make safe spots. A hostile force shouldn't be able to warp to a planet in a sovereign system with no repercussions. Planets, especially if they are populated, should be heavily defended. I worry that in alliance 0.0 space, there won't be a single planet without these new structures in place. People are already used to be able to warp to planets, thousands of people. If you add game features that insta-pop anyone careless enough to warp to planets as they did for years before, you will create lots of problems. Even if you think it is "fair" game mechanic, many people will be upset over it. I agree that sov claiming structures should be heavily defended. But there's no reason for them to insta-kill everything that warps in. Perhaps those structures should only respond to aggressive action, similar to CONCORD and sentry guns. If someone warps there but doesn't attack anyone, he shouldn't be attacked by the automatic defense Or there should be more warping points for planet, cause current mechanic when u warp from any direction you end up in the same spot.
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.29 21:30:00 - [316] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON This post is essentially extracted from our conversations in Iceland regarding 0.0. I'm not going to get too into detail regarding mechanics as that's really the dev's jobs, but I think we can all agree that 0.0 needs some love and it needs it now. There's a few pieces to this proposal and I'll update it as necessary with any good ideas. I'm in a bit of a rush as today's the deadline to get topics posted for Iceland so I'll be editing this with things I think of or your non terrible ideas as we progress. In simple bullet form: CCP has expressed a desire, and I agree kinda, to move away from POS's as the sov claiming mechanic. I don't believe a good replacement has been conceived. In the interim what could go a long way is reducing the quantity required to hold sov. My favorite proposal was made at the 0.0 roundtable in Iceland. This would have sovreignty claims moved from moons to planets, with industrial POS aspects moved to moons and decoupled from sov. This would serve to reduce the number of posses required to claim and give smaller groups a target to hit to disrupt industrial operations alone. Industrial structures should be easier to attack and should not require the large amount of people a sov pos requires to engage. This will also serve to address the problem of people "claiming more space than they can defend". Right now as it stands the risk versus reward equation is completely skewed in Eve. 0.0 is completely stagnant and the reason for this is that conquering space is simply not worth it. There's no "massive riches" to be gained. In truth with the way truesec works NPC 0.0 is actually FAR more profitable. What I'd recommend is not to reduce the value of NPC and Empire/lowsec space but to BUFF 0.0. There are a number of ways to accomplish this, one that I've proposed involves giving spaceholding alliances the ability to upgrade their space over time, increasing the sec rating or seeding asteroids or even a mechanic to add agents, perhaps via station upgrades. The possibilities for this are endless but at the end of the day the big picture desired end result is to make conquering space worth it. You should not be able to get richer in Eve doing less work. These are the big two and I realize they're VERY high level. I'll post more/refine as things are added to this thread. That is what this forum is for. 0.0 is dead b/c it's a massive time sink. Thinking that changing pos from moons to planets is all that's needed isn't going to do jack. As for increasing ratting spawns in 0.0, I mean wtf you carebear. We're going to invest more in this system, so lets have the blood raiders come in larger quantities so we can farm them for money? That defies so much logic a 3 yr old could do better. Reduce hp on structures, remove pos from moons, increase sig radius of pos structures, limit cyno jammer and jump bridge activities... It's the Economy Stupid
Xencieth	Posted - 2008.12.29 21:30:00 - [317] Edited by: Xencieth on 29/12/2008 21:36:55 Originally by: Darius JOHNSON This post is essentially extracted from our conversations in Iceland regarding 0.0. I'm not going to get too into detail regarding mechanics... This is another goonie idea to change game mechanics to help save Detorid. Sorry guys, but Detorid will Burn, goonie ideas wont stop this. 90% of support votes are from goonswarm or morsus mihi which is telling everything.
Detheriel GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 21:34:00 - [318] Excellent ideas / discussion, signed.
Samantha Rhoads GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 21:35:00 - [319] Signed
AlpiNeStaRs	Posted - 2008.12.29 21:44:00 - [320] Thumb's up.

Romulus Silvia Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 22:09:00 - [321] i didn't read the OP. i was just told i had to vote for it.
Zastrow GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 22:17:00 - [322] Originally by: Romulus Silvia i didn't read the OP. i was just told i had to vote for it. thumb post Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
HydroSan GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.29 22:48:00 - [323] Originally by: Ephemeron Regarding the idea of moving sov holding structures to planets: I want people to be aware of this issue: many people warp to planets for various reasons - sometimes in combat, other times to scan belts. If we have sov claiming stuff at the planets, those structures SHOULD NOT automatically kill whatever warps there. Either they should have passive defense measures, or they must be positioned at least 300 km from the planet warp to point, out of gun range. It may not seem like a big issue now, but it will be once it is used on massive scale in EVE. quoting this from a few pages ago
Hunter GlobaGateways The Edge Foundation Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2008.12.29 23:18:00 - [324] checking in to get this to happen in EVE. Its much needed.
Sir JoJo Minmatar Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.29 23:42:00 - [325] Needs some tweaking thats for sure! moving sov mechanic to planet is good but making the new sov mechanic even harder to kill is so wrong! tottaly agrre something needs to be done and some of these ideas are very good but it needs lots of tweaking!
the5thcylon	Posted - 2008.12.30 00:10:00 - [326] It is a move in the right direction, but I don't think that it goes far enough to fix the problems. It will fix things like pos spamming wars to some extent, but that's about it? As people have said the fix needs to encourage the two entities to fight / make war / pew pew. This does not do this IMO.
Kwa Zulu The Graduates Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.30 01:05:00 - [327] I support fundamental improvements to 0.0 and support changes in the way sovereignity is implemented. A move from moon POS to planet POS could be a good one if it means less structures to waste time on (ie: Just 1 structure instead of having to do like 15 POSin a system, even if that single structure is harder to kill). Ofcouse there is room for many more improvements, so let the ideas continue to show up here. CCP will have to decide in the end what to do with it.
Orree Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.12.30 01:24:00 - [328] I'm very much interested in seeing less of the precious 0.0 space in this game be completely worthless. Given the growing player base, it just seems silly to have so much space be absolutely useless. Additionally, the idea that NPC 0.0 space is often better than conquerable 0.0 has always seemed a bit incongruous to me. It would be nice to see that change substantially. While I do not like POS warfare or the current sov mechanics, I am a bit nervous about the idea of fiddling with these things. There just seems to be so much potential for making things worse or just as bad (but in a different way) than what we already have. Still, it's worth looking into. "How much easier it is to be critical than to be correct." ---Benjamin Disraeli
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.12.30 01:46:00 - [329] I thought of some PvP incentives for 0.0: 1) Allow small roaming gangs a way to steal part of the goods that moon POS produces. It should be balanced in such a way as it takes a long time to steal stuff - basically, almost like roid mining, but this one is POS mining. And the rate of supply transfer would depend on number of people involved. So 1 person could never get much. This would create incentive for hostiles to come into alliance space to get rich off undefended POS. At same time, the defenders would be alerted that someone's stealing their shit and assemble a gank squad to counter them. Balance things just right, and both sides will be eager to fight. 2) Reduce the usage of jump bridges and jump freighters. Simplest way - make it much more expensive. This will force more people to use 0.0 gates for travel, and more gate travel means more targets for PvP. This is the way it was for years in EVE before the jump bridges and titans got introduced. And it was good, so nothing extreme here. It would be great to see alliances gather escort missions again, or see some ratters use real gates to travel.
Silvero Gallente Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.30 01:47:00 - [330] Edited by: Silvero on 30/12/2008 01:54:24 Originally by: Kwa Zulu (ie: Just 1 structure instead of having to do like 15 POSin a system, even if that single structure is harder to kill) I have participated in discussions like that before, having "one" military outpost to claim sov in a system. At a significant higher price (5+bil?) then a pos but for that extra isk's you get fitting, clonning services and a limited personal/corp/alliance hangar. System jammers, scanner, guns , ecm , cyno beacons and bridge should be possible to equip to your deathstar. The pos gunner can now sit inside the outpost and shoot. (yay windows) Upgrades follows the same foundation, pedestal, monument as a regular outpost but now you get more cpu/power to equip more and heavier weapons for every sov lvl you gain +isk for the platform ofc. Otherwise it should follow the normal behaviors of a pos like reinforcment / fuel requirements. It should be anchorable even at gates, just to increase the we own this space feeling. Normal pos's should be left as they are but without a sov point, and to kill any normal pos's in a sov system you need to take down the military outpost if such is present in the same system. And last when it dies it really dies :-) /got a little carried away there

Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2008.12.30 02:23:00 - [331] Edited by: Darius JOHNSON on 30/12/2008 02:23:59 Originally by: Yaay 0.0 is dead b/c it's a massive time sink. Thinking that changing pos from moons to planets is all that's needed isn't going to do jack. As for increasing ratting spawns in 0.0, I mean wtf you carebear. We're going to invest more in this system, so lets have the blood raiders come in larger quantities so we can farm them for money? That defies so much logic a 3 yr old could do better. Reduce hp on structures, remove pos from moons, increase sig radius of pos structures, limit cyno jammer and jump bridge activities... My base assumption is that the time sink simply isn't worth it. As a matter of fact is says that right in the post you quoted. I didn't get into details because details are for devs to work out. I really could care less whether the solution for upgrading space involves increased spawns, roids, agents, whatever. The high level idea is that space needs to increase in value to account for the investment in time to make it worthwhile. The risk vs. reward structure is completely skewed so that there's no incentive for new players to band together to claim space in 0.0. You see it is a massive timesink, but people will invest in a time sink if the payoff is there. Today it's not. Ignoring your editorialization I wouldn't have a problem with any of the 4 mentioned ideas you've listed. As a matter of fact all 4 have been discussed in the past both here and on the goonfleet forums. Originally by: Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
Blaumunkt GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.30 02:30:00 - [332] This is a sober, well-considered, conservative beginning to a discussion that's long overdue. Baby steps are better than nerf/buff sledgehammers, and this is a good start.
Davor Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.30 02:53:00 - [333] I support this
Esmenet	Posted - 2008.12.30 03:24:00 - [334] I dont agree with everything, but 0.0 needs a major revamp.
waa r	Posted - 2008.12.30 03:53:00 - [335] Edited by: waa r on 30/12/2008 03:54:51 Posting to support this.
Xencieth	Posted - 2008.12.30 04:14:00 - [336] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON This post is essentially extracted from our conversations in Iceland regarding 0.0. I'm not going to get too into detail regarding mechanics... This is another goonie idea to change game mechanics to help save Detorid. Sorry guys, but Detorid will Burn, goonie ideas wont stop this. 90% of support votes are from goonswarm or morsus mihi which is telling everything. Originally by: Romulus Silvia (goon) i didn't read the OP. i was just told i had to vote for it.
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.30 04:16:00 - [337] Edited by: Yaay on 30/12/2008 04:17:45 Edited by: Yaay on 30/12/2008 04:16:49 Edited by: Yaay on 30/12/2008 04:16:15 Originally by: Darius JOHNSON Edited by: Darius JOHNSON on 30/12/2008 02:23:59 Originally by: Yaay 0.0 is dead b/c it's a massive time sink. Thinking that changing pos from moons to planets is all that's needed isn't going to do jack. As for increasing ratting spawns in 0.0, I mean wtf you carebear. We're going to invest more in this system, so lets have the blood raiders come in larger quantities so we can farm them for money? That defies so much logic a 3 yr old could do better. Reduce hp on structures, remove pos from moons, increase sig radius of pos structures, limit cyno jammer and jump bridge activities... My base assumption is that the time sink simply isn't worth it. As a matter of fact is says that right in the post you quoted. I didn't get into details because details are for devs to work out. I really could care less whether the solution for upgrading space involves increased spawns, roids, agents, whatever. The high level idea is that space needs to increase in value to account for the investment in time to make it worthwhile. The risk vs. reward structure is completely skewed so that there's no incentive for new players to band together to claim space in 0.0. You see it is a massive timesink, but people will invest in a time sink if the payoff is there. Today it's not. Ignoring your editorialization I wouldn't have a problem with any of the 4 mentioned ideas you've listed. As a matter of fact all 4 have been discussed in the past both here and on the goonfleet forums. People who don't come to 0.0 now don't care about risk v reward. They care about not losing anything at all. Hell even 0.0 has taken this turn as you hardly ever see anyone fight w/o overwhelming odds. 0.0 already is on carebear mode with insurance, officers, moons, and everything in between. You want to go and tweak risk, nuke empire, don't buff 0.0. I personally won't go for any of these changes unless they come with a nuke to insurance completely. Even then, 0.0 is already profitable enough. Blame the ******* leadership if they don't share the wealth of those 100bil in moons. It's the Economy Stupid
Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2008.12.30 05:04:00 - [338] Originally by: Yaay People who don't come to 0.0 now don't care about risk v reward. They care about not losing anything at all. Hell even 0.0 has taken this turn as you hardly ever see anyone fight w/o overwhelming odds. 0.0 already is on carebear mode with insurance, officers, moons, and everything in between. You want to go and tweak risk, nuke empire, don't buff 0.0. I personally won't go for any of these changes unless they come with a nuke to insurance completely. Even then, 0.0 is already profitable enough. Blame the ******* leadership if they don't share the wealth of those 100bil in moons. Incen"tive\, n. [L. incentivum.] That which moves or influences the mind, or operates on the passions; that which incites, or has a tendency to incite, to determination or action; that which prompts to good or ill; motive; spur; as, the love of money, and the desire of promotion, are two powerful incentives to action. What your crystal ball tells you people care about doesn't make for a very compelling game. If 0.0 was worth the effort, more people would expend it. More people working to conquer space means more fighting. Some variety would be a good thing. Most of 0.0 is far from profitable in comparison to the cost of maintaining the space, and the benefit to the individual is tiny when contrasted against NPC space, or one of the few regions which for some strange reason have NPC truesec throughout. I'd personally love to nuke empire, but I don't see that happening anytime soon. I'll settle for the realistic. Originally by:* Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2008.12.30 05:10:00 - [339] Originally by: Xencieth This is another goonie idea to change game mechanics to help save Detorid. Sorry guys, but Detorid will Burn, goonie ideas wont stop this. 90% of support votes are from goonswarm or morsus mihi which is telling everything. These are actually ideas extracted from others at fanfest. Most are neither original or my own. This isn't the thread for your terrible and poorly written propaganda. Originally by: Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
Gramtar GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.30 05:45:00 - [340] Edited by: Gramtar on 30/12/2008 05:47:00 While nearly all 0.0 regions are "claimed" by some alliance or another, the vast majority of systems are empty. The reason for this is simple. You can make more isk running level 4 missions in empire than doing anything in 90% of 0.0. Exploration simply moved some plexes from being completely static (a few static complexes essentially remain). The vast majority of 0.0 is unused, because it's worthless space. Whatever the solutions to this, it should not be tied solely to stations and outposts. There should be a mechanism to improve the quality of a system through sovereignty, and it shouldn't require the investment of dropping an outpost, at least to start out. This is important if we are to encourage non-space holding corporations and alliances to venture forth to 0.0, which is a worthwhile goal. The aim should be to improve 0.0 for all players, not just those alliances that currently hold stations and outposts.

Coranor Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.30 05:48:00 - [341] A lot of these proposals have been doing the rounds through the community in various forms for a while now and they're not bad but not perfect solutions either but then when will we ever find a perfect solution. 0.0 for average corp members isn't all that ** hot compared to running lvl 4 missions. For corps and alliances ofc its a different story what with high end moons. This may filter down to the members in different ways but will never have the obvious appeal of money directly in your wallet. Problem with making ratting or mining better is that you make ships relatively cheaper which messes up your pvp risk/reward ratio. Losing a ship should still hurt after all. Boost 0.0 too much and it becomes that much easier to make up the isk for even a dread. I don't particularly think that this is needed. The sov claiming pos at the planets is not a bad idea so long as the pos at moons can still be armed to the same standard as they are now, so they can be used for staging pos. Otherwise every planet would have a pos and attacking anywhere would be next to impossible so no one attacks anyone ever again and ccp shuts down the servers. Best way to do it in my opinion would probably be to differentiate between station sov and industrial sov. Use pos to determine industrial sov in non station systems and use the station to determine sov in station systems. 0.0 was far more dynamic when we were fighting over stations to take the actual space instead of waiting for reinforced timers bored out of our on both sides of the fight. Arm the station ofc and up the hp so that we need to use dreads to do the job. Dreads still need to have their role. One side takes the station, the other side takes it back and on and on we went till someone either ran out of ships or will to fight over that station anymore. Far better than sitting waiting for timers and repping crews and all that boring **e. Just get your fleet and go take the station, make the other side stop you. Hell even timezone ping pong like bkg long long ago produced a pretty epic battle for that system.
motomysz Stardust Manufacturing	Posted - 2008.12.30 05:55:00 - [342] Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah POS fuelling is tedious * Ice mining process is extremely boring. * Distributing materials is repetetive. * Trade goods cannot be produced in the general area. * Administrative nightmare for large alliances. What ever happened to the idea of pos fuel pellets which can be produced from the pos fuel components and then transported and fed to the pos in single 1-hour/1-day/1-week units?
Zzelle Ultrapolite Socialites GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.30 06:43:00 - [343] 0.0 definitely could use a boost and I think everyone's pretty sick of POS warfare as it exists today. +1
Kayosoni Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.30 06:51:00 - [344] Approving this topic. Don't listen to yaay, he has no idea what he's talking about and dies in stupid ways everyday. Moon mining pos need a huge nerf, planetary pos idea is pretty good considering there is no better idea for a 100% decoupling of sov from pos. Planetary pos also need a boost as even with pos gunners it's pretty much impossible to do anything to a decent sized attacking fleet. More changes I see that are good: Jump bridge should be limited to moon pos so that they are vulnerable to smaller roaming gangs. No jump bridges in same system as cyno jammer. DDs don't work in same system as cyno jammer. Un****ting the rest of 0.0: true-sec means something (npc space isn't the only place with 3x 1.7m spawns anymore pls) In fact, completely remove belt rats from Player owned Constellation Sov space. More exploration encounters should be there. Introduce advanced Exploration and consutrction to build or find new static belts, systems within systems (basically making a new system by exploration). Exploration yields veins of t2 production stuff, etc. there's tons of stuff you can do to uncrap 0.0. and it needs it badly.
Kayosoni Caldari Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.30 06:56:00 - [345] Edited by: Kayosoni on 30/12/2008 06:57:37 I also really like the idea of having NPCs go to player owned Sov4 space. Have a way of making alliance LP or something (every time alliance member does mission for such and such NPCs alliance gets a small amount of LP) and you can have alliance LP store where alliance executor can buy things like agents and place them in alliance owned stations. Just another way of "upgrading" space. There needs to be a way of allowing players to add static content to systems. This is the biggest thing to uncraping 0.0. The Outposts were the first major step in this. It's now been 3 years since something as major was added to the game. There has been nothing of real substance added to eve since 2005.
Hambonius Omega GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.30 08:38:00 - [346] I too am supporting this
Ravan Glass	Posted - 2008.12.30 09:32:00 - [347] Edited by: Ravan Glass on 30/12/2008 09:33:57 first of all I will say that I am not trying to bash any one ,but it is hard to listen to idea's on how to improve 0.0 space when it is being pushed by a coalition that own's half of 0.0. secondly , I found a lot of the posts talking about the fact that most people are staying in empire. It is my opinion that it is pretty much impossible to move out to 0.0 without either becoming a renter for a coalition or joining a coalition. the day's of lone alliances seemed to be long passed. if alliances could hold a couple systems without getting smashed by the big guys, then the rewards would be greater then the risks. And about getting rid of local. i think that would kill ratting and mining in 0.0, who would put an expensive ship in a situation where it is defenseless and can be killed without notice. it would just push more people back into empire
Ivena Amethyst	Posted - 2008.12.30 11:15:00 - [348] +1 -------- Is that an Itty V in your pocket or ar you just happy to see me?
Thali Panacea	Posted - 2008.12.30 14:00:00 - [349] Supporting this! work, buy, consume, die
Peaches Nthala	Posted - 2008.12.30 14:04:00 - [350] I would reactivate 2 accounts if 0.0 gets an overhaul!

Xenuphobic GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.30 14:06:00 - [351] Edited by: Xenuphobic on 30/12/2008 14:05:55 I too am supporting this glorious ideas.
Ariad Valens	Posted - 2008.12.30 14:42:00 - [352] I support the idea of Sovereignty being moved from Moons to Planets. I also have an idea about how to bring Planets into the game and make 0.0 both more lucrative and more interesting: 1. As proposed Sovereignty should be based on POS's anchored at Planets not Moons. 2. Planets should have attributes such as a population, resources and facilities. Based on these the Planet will produce certain goods. Population can be increased (up to a certain level) by adding Colonists/Refugees etc. Facilities can be built by the Corporation owning the Planetary POS. 3. Population and Facilities should be vulnerable to attack via Planetary Bombardment. Ships should be provided with the ability to orbit a planet and bombard the Planet, reducing the population and damaging facilities. Perhaps only Dreads or Battleships should have this ability. 3. To provide Sovereignty the Planet must be provided with certain goods it requires, which will depend on the population, resources and facilities. For example a planet may produce excess Planetary Vehicles but need to import Food. Only if the import requirements are met will Sovereignty be provided. 4. The import and export of goods from a Planet is via NPC Convoys. These Convoys are not controlled by players and will travel between the Planet and the Planet's POS at random times, taking goods produced by the Planet to the POS and imported goods from the POS to the Planet. These convoys will be vulnerable to attack and hence will provide rich targets for roaming gangs and warrant protection from the POS owners. This is not a fully developed idea so I would welcome any comments on how it can be improved.
Laechyd Eldgorn Art of War Exalted.	Posted - 2008.12.30 14:47:00 - [353] While I support general idea to make 0.0 less stagnant, I do not think making RATS better would help anyone. There should be something else to gain for combat pilots. Exploration is nice but for larger number of people there's just simply not enough of sites per region. In my opinion making income just by killing npc's shouldn't be first solution to anyone at first place. I'm a combat pilot but I surely don't make much isk by systematically killing npc's, it should be something 3 month old newbie does. Also npc's should be much more intelligent. On the other hand separating moon mining from sovereignity claims is a great idea im hoping it will come in game soon. However I don't think it will solve the problem easily claiming large areas, since it's all about who can get biggest blob and just simply crush anyone. That's why we basically have so few player "factions" atm anyway. While being realistic in some way it doesn't explain so easy logistics part. I'll be supporting general idea though. :/
Ariad Valens	Posted - 2008.12.30 14:59:00 - [354] How about moving Sovereignty from Alliances to Corporations. This should provide for more fragmented 0.0 politics. Decentralisation of power away from large Alliances should encourage a more dymanic 0.0 environment.
Duranium	Posted - 2008.12.30 15:22:00 - [355]
Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2008.12.30 17:12:00 - [356] Originally by: motomysz What ever happened to the idea of pos fuel pellets which can be produced from the pos fuel components and then transported and fed to the pos in single 1-hour/1-day/1-week units? If that was the "flogging the dead horse" proposal I believe it's been on the agenda. It was already voted up I just don't recall if we've already discussed that particular item or if it's on the agenda for Iceland instead. Originally by: Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
Xanja 2H Industries	Posted - 2008.12.30 17:37:00 - [357] Originally by: Coranor Best way to do it in my opinion would probably be to differentiate between station sov and industrial sov. Use pos to determine industrial sov in non station systems and use the station to determine sov in station systems. 0.0 was far more dynamic when we were fighting over stations to take the actual space instead of waiting for reinforced timers bored out of our **** on both sides of the fight. Arm the station ofc and up the hp so that we need to use dreads to do the job. Dreads still need to have their role. I like this ^^^^ general idea supported -----------------
SkwisgaarSkwigelf C.R.M Productions Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2008.12.30 19:07:00 - [358] My name is Batman, and I approve this message.
Mildaria Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.30 19:29:00 - [359] Supported. <shots pos>
Edmund Khan Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.30 19:36:00 - [360] Failure. Sov claiming towers at planets just means full coverage in every single important system. Instead of just three POS at moons, everyone will spam all seven or so planets. Which is even worse than now. And if they have more HP, well, good luck with that... Like said few times before... System is based around the sun, why not put a single claiming tower at the sun. With massive HP stuff and bonuses, very expensive.... If you want takeover sov, you have to kill it, simple as that. You'll have to put real effort to kill it, and it will be worth defending. No more sov claiming with haulers, no more pos spam. Keep the industrial/whatever POS at moons.

Twoquestions	Posted - 2008.12.30 21:29:00 - [361] /signed
Zeus Carver	Posted - 2008.12.30 21:35:00 - [362] Originally by: Edmund Khan Failure. Sov claiming towers at planets just means full coverage in every single important system. Instead of just three POS at moons, everyone will spam all seven or so planets. Which is even worse than now. And if they have more HP, well, good luck with that... Like said few times before... System is based around the sun, why not put a single claiming tower at the sun. With massive HP stuff and bonuses, very expensive.... If you want takeover sov, you have to kill it, simple as that. You'll have to put real effort to kill it, and it will be worth defending. No more sov claiming with haulers, no more pos spam. Keep the industrial/whatever POS at moons. Or why not just allow for only ONE planetary POS so you can't spam them at every planet?
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.30 22:14:00 - [363] Edited by: Yaay on 30/12/2008 22:17:10 The problem i have is that this doesn't address the issues of 0.0, it's merely brushing over them. People don't fight in 0.0 because it's a huge time sink, not a huge financial sink. Nobody want's to go shoot station services because it serves no purpose for the considerable time and resources needed. Nobody wants to hammer POS because you can restront them and force siege after siege strictly due to timezone warfare. Not to mention the time required to off line guns and mods ahead of time or risk losing dreads or debilitating your fleet in fights. Task are unachievable and all that results is global wars that end in stalemates. Smaller players either tag along or die trying to solo. Fight numbers are out of control as a result. Removing massive stuctures completely, and removing rediculous hps on objects will be far more productive than any "incentive" for coming to 0.0. Make people fight more to where wars are realistic, and you'll see a boom in 0.0. It's the Economy Stupid
Fuujin GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.30 23:30:00 - [364] Originally by: Yaay Edited by: Yaay on 30/12/2008 22:17:10 The problem i have is that this doesn't address the issues of 0.0, it's merely brushing over them. People don't fight in 0.0 because it's a huge time sink, not a huge financial sink. Nobody want's to go shoot station services because it serves no purpose for the considerable time and resources needed. Nobody wants to hammer POS because you can restront them and force siege after siege strictly due to timezone warfare. Not to mention the time required to off line guns and mods ahead of time or risk losing dreads or debilitating your fleet in fights. Task are unachievable and all that results is global wars that end in stalemates. Smaller players either tag along or die trying to solo. Fight numbers are out of control as a result. Removing massive stuctures completely, and removing rediculous hps on objects will be far more productive than any "incentive" for coming to 0.0. Make people fight more to where wars are realistic, and you'll see a boom in 0.0. Your main points deal with POS warfare and how ******ed it is...fix or take awy that mechanic--decouple sov--and many of the boring parts get minimized or eliminated.
Irida Mershkov Noir.	Posted - 2008.12.31 01:17:00 - [365] I like.
Xencieth	Posted - 2008.12.31 01:46:00 - [366] Originally by: Darius JOHNSON This post is essentially extracted from our conversations in Iceland regarding 0.0. I'm not going to get too into detail regarding mechanics... This is another goonie idea to change game mechanics to help save Detorid. Sorry guys, but Detorid will Burn, goonie ideas wont stop this. 90% of support votes are from goonswarm or morsus mihi which is telling everything. Originally by: Romulus Silvia (goon) i didn't read the OP. i was just told i had to vote for it.
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.31 02:14:00 - [367] Originally by: Fuujin Originally by: Yaay Edited by: Yaay on 30/12/2008 22:17:10 The problem i have is that this doesn't address the issues of 0.0, it's merely brushing over them. People don't fight in 0.0 because it's a huge time sink, not a huge financial sink. Nobody want's to go shoot station services because it serves no purpose for the considerable time and resources needed. Nobody wants to hammer POS because you can restront them and force siege after siege strictly due to timezone warfare. Not to mention the time required to off line guns and mods ahead of time or risk losing dreads or debilitating your fleet in fights. Task are unachievable and all that results is global wars that end in stalemates. Smaller players either tag along or die trying to solo. Fight numbers are out of control as a result. Removing massive stuctures completely, and removing rediculous hps on objects will be far more productive than any "incentive" for coming to 0.0. Make people fight more to where wars are realistic, and you'll see a boom in 0.0. Your main points deal with POS warfare and how ******ed it is...fix or take awy that mechanic--decouple sov--and many of the boring parts get minimized or eliminated. moving pos to planets isn't fixing the problem, it's just moving the problem. It's the Economy Stupid
Fuujin GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.31 02:25:00 - [368] Originally by: Yaay moving pos to planets isn't fixing the problem, it's just moving the problem. Its mitigating the problem and perhaps tweaking it to be less of one. Until POS or their equivalent are totally decoupled from sov claims--necessitating a better mechanic to be devised--at the very least this gets the ball rolling, and it possibly opens the door to that long-promised option of planet coloniziation and use.
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.31 02:57:00 - [369] Edited by: Yaay on 31/12/2008 02:58:58 Edited by: Yaay on 31/12/2008 02:58:28 Originally by: Fuujin Originally by: Yaay moving pos to planets isn't fixing the problem, it's just moving the problem. Its mitigating the problem and perhaps tweaking it to be less of one. Until POS or their equivalent are totally decoupled from sov claims--necessitating a better mechanic to be devised--at the very least this gets the ball rolling, and it possibly opens the door to that long-promised option of planet coloniziation and use. nobody yet has said how this solution works for the better, all they say is that it'll work. Moving sov holding to planets doesn't fix anything, it probably actually makes it worse. Less planets means more control over a system b/c it's easier to cover all planets. Same reason low moon count systems are so nice to have. Total moon control now makes life hell on the attacker. How will planets fix that very problem? Add onto that the call for more defense of these planetary sturctures and you get a double wammy. 0.0 doesn't need more defensive structures, it needs less. Moving things to planets is only making more of less. Everyone's supporting something and refusing to look at it's flaws. It's the Economy Stupid
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.31 04:30:00 - [370] Originally by: Yaay nobody yet has said how this solution works for the better, all they say is that it'll work. No, we have said multiple times that the current problems with POS warfare stem from the fact that there are too many POS that people have to deal with in order to take sovereignty. This manifets in two manners. 1. High numbers of timers mean that organizations can manipulate timers more easily to avoid fights. Rather than coming for a single fight at an off time, an attacker needs to maintain a presence over a large swath of off time. 2. High number of POS mean that purging a system takes a lot longer than is necessary. After the system has been taken and there are still 5-10 enemy POS sitting around that need to be destroyed each one has to be reinforced, and killed at a later time. When there is no fight over these POS as there often isn't as the system has already been lost it becomes a simple boring repetition to knock them all down. Moving POS to planets fixes that problem by moving POS from a high count area to a low count area. Moving POS to a single point of contention might make control too binary[I.E. 1 or 2 points] though I am sure that it is on the table. Either way, its pretty impossible to say that such a system would be bad for the game since there is a fairly agreed upon problem of too many POS to shoot down. Re: "Goons just want to save their systems". If the above system had been implemented before the last number of fights, it is unlikely that we would have held more ground that we currently do.

Alekseyev Karrde Noir.	Posted - 2008.12.31 05:07:00 - [371] Hopefully we see some of this soon --- Zombie Apocalypse Guitar-Wielding Superteam
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.31 05:27:00 - [372] Edited by: Yaay on 31/12/2008 05:30:27 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Yaay nobody yet has said how this solution works for the better, all they say is that it'll work. No, we have said multiple times that the current problems with POS warfare stem from the fact that there are too many POS that people have to deal with in order to take sovereignty. This manifets in two manners. 1. High numbers of timers mean that organizations can manipulate timers more easily to avoid fights. Rather than coming for a single fight at an off time, an attacker needs to maintain a presence over a large swath of off time. 2. High number of POS mean that purging a system takes a lot longer than is necessary. After the system has been taken and there are still 5-10 enemy POS sitting around that need to be destroyed each one has to be reinforced, and killed at a later time. When there is no fight over these POS as there often isn't as the system has already been lost it becomes a simple boring repetition to knock them all down. Moving POS to planets fixes that problem by moving POS from a high count area to a low count area. Moving POS to a single point of contention might make control too binary[I.E. 1 or 2 points] though I am sure that it is on the table. Either way, its pretty impossible to say that such a system would be bad for the game since there is a fairly agreed upon problem of too many POS to shoot down. Re: "Goons just want to save their systems". If the above system had been implemented before the last number of fights, it is unlikely that we would have held more ground that we currently do. you seem to not get it, i want them on planets too, but that's not the only fix. darius and worthless band of 10% elected co want to buff up thier defenses on planets, i'm saying remove more and more defenses. Darius is saying 0.0 is worthles, i'm saying it's already too vauable. this game already has way to many isk faucets, we dont' need more. there's 1 small good fix coupled with about 30 bad ones in their proposal. I don't think anyone feels they need to stay on moons, I'm saying it's not enough to just throw them on planets. removing ALL the bad in the current system is the first step to restoring 0.0 to what it should be. smaller escalations building to larger ones. right now it's bring everyone, bring the kitchen sink, bring santa, and everyone pray to god that he'll come to. And if mom's done baking, give her a computer so she can play on our side. It's the Economy Stupid
Xathytoz Scoopex Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2008.12.31 07:03:00 - [373] Signed
Fuujin GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.31 09:11:00 - [374] Originally by: Yaay you seem to not get it, i want them on planets too, but that's not the only fix. darius and worthless band of 10% elected co want to buff up thier defenses on planets, i'm saying remove more and more defenses. Darius is saying 0.0 is worthles, i'm saying it's already too vauable. I think you're the one missing the point. Sov mechanics need to be revisited and revised to something not resembling an abortion. However, barring that, something should be done in an attempt to patch/fix/make it less dumb. Gutting the system without a good plan to replace it is a bit rash, however. A simple, iterative move would be to shift to planets and then maybe throw in additional tweaks. Hell, the planets thing is just a suggestion in and of itself--the point is to get the ball rolling and to throw some ideas at CCP who have ultimate control over any changes. The whole 'advisory council' concept, I know. Blobbing will always be part of 0.0. This is human nature and cannot be changed; you can just make it less required to bring them, but as someone mentioned: if you can do the job in 10 minutes with 30 people, someone will prefer to do it in 30s with a fleet of 150. As for 0.0 being too rich....only certain regions may qualify. Vast majority of 0.0 is no better than lowsec.
Ag'Ammemnon	Posted - 2008.12.31 12:33:00 - [375] Supporting this
Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2008.12.31 15:35:00 - [376] Originally by: Yaay you seem to not get it, i want them on planets too, but that's not the only fix. darius and worthless band of 10% elected co want to buff up thier defenses on planets, i'm saying remove more and more defenses. Darius is saying 0.0 is worthles, i'm saying it's already too vauable. this game already has way to many isk faucets, we dont' need more. there's 1 small good fix coupled with about 30 bad ones in their proposal. I don't think anyone feels they need to stay on moons, I'm saying it's not enough to just throw them on planets. removing ALL the bad in the current system is the first step to restoring 0.0 to what it should be. smaller escalations building to larger ones. right now it's bring everyone, bring the kitchen sink, bring santa, and everyone pray to god that he'll come to. And if mom's done baking, give her a computer so she can play on our side. You seem to be ignoring what I'm saying. Perhaps I haven't been clear every time I've been crystal clear including in the OP. I've tried to avoid specifics, but the fact is that examples need to be given in order to help people understand what the desired end result could look like. The unfortunate part of that, and why I've tried to avoid it, is that people such as yourself will not be able to see beyond the examples. I've already said that I agree with you in many ways regarding space needing fewer defenses as opposed to more. What I don't get, because it simply isn't so, is how you can see that being able to deploy FAR FEWER posses is a greater defense. Your statement that 0.0 is too valuable is pretty patently false. If it was so valuable people would be stepping all over each other to get a piece. At least in theory. As far as 1 good fix in 30 proposed... I haven't proposed 30 fixes. The base of my proposal can be best summed up as "Minimize the number of posses in play and separate their roles on the way to removing them entirely as a sov mechanic" and "Buff the profitability of 0.0 as an incentive, but don't just buff it make people work for it and invest in the space they claim". I count two recommendations. There are a number of specific examples there, but those are merely examples of how a system could be architected to provide clarity. Nothing more. At the end of the day I could care less how it is implemented provided the theory is answered. The problem isn't necessarily that the mentality is bring everyone and the kitchen sink... this is an MMO. That's what happens. It's natural. The problem is the vast amount of tedium involved, the ability to abuse that tedium to avoid conflict and the lack of bang for the tedium's buck. I don't disagree with you that 0.0 needs a complete revamp, but, as I've said at least twice now, I don't see that happening in the near term. What we can do is provide some thoughts on how we can transition in that direction. The first step in completely REMOVING posses would be to phase them out a bit and alter their roles. THAT is what's specifically requested in this proposal. Originally by: Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.31 17:32:00 - [377] Edited by: Yaay on 31/12/2008 17:34:18 Originally by: Darius JOHNSON Originally by: Yaay you seem to not get it, i want them on planets too, but that's not the only fix. darius and worthless band of 10% elected co want to buff up thier defenses on planets, i'm saying remove more and more defenses. Darius is saying 0.0 is worthles, i'm saying it's already too vauable. this game already has way to many isk faucets, we dont' need more. there's 1 small good fix coupled with about 30 bad ones in their proposal. I don't think anyone feels they need to stay on moons, I'm saying it's not enough to just throw them on planets. removing ALL the bad in the current system is the first step to restoring 0.0 to what it should be. smaller escalations building to larger ones. right now it's bring everyone, bring the kitchen sink, bring santa, and everyone pray to god that he'll come to. And if mom's done baking, give her a computer so she can play on our side. You seem to be ignoring what I'm saying. Perhaps I haven't been clear every time I've been crystal clear including in the OP. I've tried to avoid specifics, but the fact is that examples need to be given in order to help people understand what the desired end result could look like. The unfortunate part of that, and why I've tried to avoid it, is that people such as yourself will not be able to see beyond the examples. I've already said that I agree with you in many ways regarding space needing fewer defenses as opposed to more. What I don't get, because it simply isn't so, is how you can see that being able to deploy FAR FEWER posses is a greater defense. Your statement that 0.0 is too valuable is pretty patently false. If it was so valuable people would be stepping all over each other to get a piece. At least in theory. As far as 1 good fix in 30 proposed... I haven't proposed 30 fixes. The base of my proposal can be best summed up as "Minimize the number of posses in play and separate their roles on the way to removing them entirely as a sov mechanic" and "Buff the profitability of 0.0 as an incentive, but don't just buff it make people work for it and invest in the space they claim". I count two recommendations. There are a number of specific examples there, but those are merely examples of how a system could be architected to provide clarity. Nothing more. At the end of the day I could care less how it is implemented provided the theory is answered. The problem isn't necessarily that the mentality is bring everyone and the kitchen sink... this is an MMO. That's what happens. It's natural. The problem is the vast amount of tedium involved, the ability to abuse that tedium to avoid conflict and the lack of bang for the tedium's buck. I don't disagree with you that 0.0 needs a complete revamp, but, as I've said at least twice now, I don't see that happening in the near term. What we can do is provide some thoughts on how we can transition in that direction. The first step in completely REMOVING posses would be to phase them out a bit and alter their roles. THAT is what's specifically requested in this proposal. Perfect example, 00yz. Smaller POS counts mean systems are harder to take. Goons/ra and co had how man attempts to take that system w/o any real chance when we had total moon control. Less defenses in system means more smaller scale warfare which means huge nap pacts are less effective. RZR can't go help MM every time they get attacked if they can loose every indy and mining option every time they leave. They instead have to spend more time defending themselves. Less defenses is the key to restricting space holding because it limits how easily you can defend vast space. It's the Economy Stupid
NanDe YaNen The Funkalistic	Posted - 2008.12.31 17:39:00 - [378] Resonates very well with what I came up with regarding 0.0. Yay for CCP being on the money. Moar ships for everyone. Moar pew-pew.
Sulora Eve Liberation Force Liberty.	Posted - 2008.12.31 18:21:00 - [379] I fully support this. The way 0.0 works and the rewards an alliance can gain needs to be looked into and adjusted. --------------------------------------------- Est Sularus Oth Mithas
Fuujin GoonFleet	Posted - 2008.12.31 18:27:00 - [380] Originally by: Yaay Perfect example, 00yz. Smaller POS counts mean systems are harder to take. Goons/ra and co had how man attempts to take that system w/o any real chance when we had total moon control. Less defenses in system means more smaller scale warfare which means huge nap pacts are less effective. RZR can't go help MM every time they get attacked if they can loose every indy and mining option every time they leave. They instead have to spend more time defending themselves. Less defenses is the key to restricting space holding because it limits how easily you can defend vast space. You'll still have the same situation with one control bunker versus 3-7 planetary towers. And at least these encourage fights, not TZ pingpong. Again, don't try to eliminate/rule out blobbing. Its not going to happen so forget it. If taking a system means enough to one side that they organize enough people to steamroll it, they're going to do, so good for them. Quote: Less defenses is the key to restricting space holding because it limits how easily you can defend vast space. The only way your statement approaches coherence is if you're trying to say that the harder it is to defend, the less spread out you'll want to go. At that point, the real qualifier is how hard it is to take the defense point/tower/whatever? What is the appropriate force to use--a 20 man HAC gang? 200 battleships? 30 dreads? Where is the line drawn, and how do you determine it? In case you're not seeing the point, I'm trying to illustrate a basic balance quandary: making it tough enough where if you sleep or are weak in a TZ you won't lose sov, but at the same time making it "easy" enough to be a concern when dealing with a large spread out area. Its very difficult to do. This may be the ultimate result of the sov system revisioning, but there are other ways they can go that may be more interesting/fun--planet colony control, etc.

Arina	Posted - 2008.12.31 19:04:00 - [381] sounds good
NanDe YaNen The Funkalistic	Posted - 2008.12.31 19:24:00 - [382] TZ ping-pong. Good description. How about coupling the TZ ping-pong with a mechanic that opens up a large area of vulnerability instead of just one point? e.g. if you have one tower, when it comes out of reinforced it will be the only point of contention, whereas if you own a lot of towers in a region, when one of them comes out of reinforcement, they are all points of contention. Balance the attendant added headache to defenders with lower fueling/drudgery for the entire system of towers so that maintaining one isn't much easier than maintaining many. If you need space, you take it. If you don't, you don't bother with the added exposure. Could also add a larger defensive advantage at a central structure that overlooks the tower network. When it goes, the whole network unanchors. In the event that nobody wants to fight, there are fewer knockdowns to weather through. Even though a small alliance might not like the idea of getting steamrolled at once, they would stand a better chance at that central point of contention that at any of the satellite towers.
Idaeus GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.31 19:49:00 - [383] Bring back static plexes (something to fight over). Remove smugglers gates (forces choke point/pipe control). And the rest of that POS crap.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.31 20:46:00 - [384] Originally by: NanDe YaNen How about coupling the TZ ping-pong with a mechanic that opens up a large area of vulnerability instead of just one point? e.g. if you have one tower, when it comes out of reinforced it will be the only point of contention, whereas if you own a lot of towers in a region, when one of them comes out of reinforcement, they are all points of contention. Come on NanDe, how many times do i have to tell you that multiple contention points does not work. If you have multiple attack points then the attackers can choose to attack any that they want while the defenders must choose to defend one and hole they guess right, or defend them all and guarantee a loss. Quote: Balance the attendant added headache to defenders with lower fueling/drudgery for the entire system of towers so that maintaining one isn't much easier than maintaining many No, that is a **ty mechanic that makes for a ty game. No one should "balance their game by making it more boring". If you want to incur costs to holding space roll those costs directly into the towers and do not create grind mechanics. Quote:** Could also add a larger defensive advantage at a central structure that overlooks the tower network. When it goes, the whole network unanchors Having a system be won or lost at a single battle is not a viable alternative to "having a system be won or lost over 30-40 battles". A med point is needed
NanDe YaNen The Funkalistic	Posted - 2008.12.31 21:21:00 - [385] Network of Multiple Contention Points -- Yeah, it makes it harder for defenders, but they already get the defensive advantage (tower defenses) and get to somewhat randomize the TZ thing to their liking. The big thing that it does is makes mobility important, which adds a lot of tactical flavor. Attackers and defenders have to be mobile and have to keep good intel. Currently, the TZ balancing mechanics completely take the fun out of giving the defender the runaround across their territory, which caters only to the well established. Centralized Network Hub (?) -- I always vote for less management and fuel required. If the hub (maybe constellation is highest level of organization?) requires about as much fuel as a tower, then everyone is at best going to be at the current rate of boredom but will have less running around fueling to do. Quote: Having a system be won or lost at a single battle is not a viable alternative to "having a system be won or lost over 30-40 battles". A med point is needed Happy middle ground: Multiple reinforcement cycles. There, you have to win at least a few. Less than required to hit everything in a constellation, but more than just a fluke holiday win. Happy New Year 新年おめでとう＾＿＾
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.31 22:11:00 - [386] Edited by: Yaay on 31/12/2008 22:16:36 double post It's the Economy Stupid
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.31 22:16:00 - [387] Originally by: Fuujin Edited by: Fuujin on 31/12/2008 Edit: and if you are trying to say that the notion of losing all your industrial/system improvements is a distinct and viable possibility every time you blink, go to bed, or jump out of system...just no. That would not be a fun game. If you're not around to defend your own space, then yes, this should be the case. Remember, someone has to attack you to lose these things, which means a hostile fleet out in the open ---> fights. If you're home to defend, great, fight potential. If you're an attacker, great, more ways to provoke fights. Nowadays, it takes so long to nuke station services that nobody bothers b/c it's such a massive investment for so little yeild. Make it easier, people are more inclined to do it repetitively to cause grief. While at the same time, forcing someone to defend their turf. Less HP on structures is just as much a buff to the defenders for not having to spend countless hours of boring work just to repair things. I don't know about you, but I don't consider idling in a carrier while mods rep fun. The idea they're presenting isn't provoking fights, it's just moving the mechanics of today to a different location. It's not addressing massive nap pack blobs because people still aren't running the risk of losing space easily. It's not addressing jammer and jump bridge issues which are 2 of the biggest downfalls of sov. If I'm missing something b/c darius is refusing to tell the finer details, then sure, I'll buy into the plan. But I'm personally a skeptic of someone who refuses to put out all the cards on the table. What frightens me is that for 2 years now, being both the attacker and the victim, I've said 0.0 is borked and a massive time sink. This isn't some fotm deal. It's not enough to buy into a plan b/c parts of it are good where other parts look flat out wrong. I want a plan that works for fear of waiting another 2 years to get this fixed again after all the wasted time on the first plan. It's the Economy Stupid
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.31 22:43:00 - [388] Originally by: NanDe YaNen Network of Multiple Contention Points -- Yeah, it makes it harder for defenders, but they already get the defensive advantage (tower defenses) and get to somewhat randomize the TZ thing to their liking. No, it doesn't. A fight where the defenders don't show up isn't a fight. The attackers will chose one point, blob it, and lock down the system. It pretty much negates all defensive advantages and means that defenders have to find a point where they can hold all three. Its dumb. Quote: The big thing that it does is makes mobility important, which adds a lot of tactical flavor No, it doesn't because mobility is largely an on-grid phenomina and not an off grid phenomena. The difference between a BS gang and inty gang unless the warps are very long is very low. To top it off, in a large mixed gang(which is what you will see) your entire mobility advantage will be negated by not being able to win a fight. Quote: Happy middle ground: Multiple reinforcement cycles. There, you have to win at least a few. Less than required to hit everything in a constellation, but more than just a fluke holiday win. This is exactly the current situation. There are a number of towers that will come out across a time period and you have to win some number of them. Moving it to a central location doesn't change anything. The problem is that there are too many "nodes of contention". The solution is simply and does not require anything radical in terms of gameplay. Whomever holds the most planets wins. Shoot the things on planets. Shoot them one at a time. All you have to do is reduce the number of points that people are going to be shooting at.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.12.31 22:46:00 - [389] Originally by: Yaay Less HP on structures is just as much a buff to the defenders for not having to spend countless hours of boring work just to repair things. I don't know about you, but I don't consider idling in a carrier while mods rep fun. Is this a joke? Less HP on structures is a direct nerf to defenders because it makes attacking them easier. The defenses will deal less damage before they are knocked out, you need less forces in order to get the job done. Etc etc etc. The repping cost is not time sensitive, does not require any "sufficient force" to start doing, and since there is a much larger area under which it can occur is much less dependent on structure hit points.
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.12.31 23:07:00 - [390] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Yaay Less HP on structures is just as much a buff to the defenders for not having to spend countless hours of boring work just to repair things. I don't know about you, but I don't consider idling in a carrier while mods rep fun. Is this a joke? Less HP on structures is a direct nerf to defenders because it makes attacking them easier. The defenses will deal less damage before they are knocked out, you need less forces in order to get the job done. Etc etc etc. The repping cost is not time sensitive, does not require any "sufficient force" to start doing, and since there is a much larger area under which it can occur is much less dependent on structure hit points. you're right, and every reason stated there is anti blob which is the whole point. they were designed, (i dare you to look up the old blogs) for small scale goals, not massive fleets. It is the job of a fleet to defend a system, not pos guns. As for repping, that was aimed at station mods being offlined, but either way it holds true. will they get offlined more, yes, but will you spend nearly as much time repairing any one mod, no. the big problem with pos warfare is what it has done to 0.0 warfare in general, not just the tower spamming. so yes, it needs drastic changes. It's the Economy Stupid

Darius JOHNSON	Posted - 2009.01.01 00:24:00 - [391] Edited by: Darius JOHNSON on 01/01/2009 00:27:04 Edited by: Darius JOHNSON on 01/01/2009 00:25:42 Originally by: Yaay If you're not around to defend your own space, then yes, this should be the case. Remember, someone has to attack you to lose these things, which means a hostile fleet out in the open ---> fights. If you're home to defend, great, fight potential. If you're an attacker, great, more ways to provoke fights. Nowadays, it takes so long to nuke station services that nobody bothers b/c it's such a massive investment for so little yeild. Make it easier, people are more inclined to do it repetitively to cause grief. While at the same time, forcing someone to defend their turf. Less HP on structures is just as much a buff to the defenders for not having to spend countless hours of boring work just to repair things. I don't know about you, but I don't consider idling in a carrier while mods rep fun. The idea they're presenting isn't provoking fights, it's just moving the mechanics of today to a different location. It's not addressing massive nap pack blobs because people still aren't running the risk of losing space easily. It's not addressing jammer and jump bridge issues which are 2 of the biggest downfalls of sov. If I'm missing something b/c darius is refusing to tell the finer details, then sure, I'll buy into the plan. But I'm personally a skeptic of someone who refuses to put out all the cards on the table. What frightens me is that for 2 years now, being both the attacker and the victim, I've said 0.0 is borked and a massive time sink. This isn't some fotm deal. It's not enough to buy into a plan b/c parts of it are good where other parts look flat out wrong. I want a plan that works for fear of waiting another 2 years to get this fixed again after all the wasted time on the first plan. Um, I'm not refusing to put any cards anywhere. My cards are on the table entirely. You're just refusing to look at them and believe what the hand was. It's certainly your prerogative to decide I'm doing some sneaky backdoor thing, and given that all of this is public before and after the fact at the end of the day either I'll have presented exactly what I'm saying I am, or you'll be right and I'm a sheister and you can crow about it on the forums. Ultimately my proposal is purposely open ended to give the devs room to be devs, and you can believe what you will about it as you'll know in the end how it turned out. My plan's only got two points and if you somehow think that trying to bring more people to 0.0 won't provoke fights then cool. If you prefer a system of 70 moon systems where there's a month of buildup before a single fight then fine. If you want to go all or nothing with whatever's in your head then sorry, that's just not what's on the table here. Removing posses entirely may very well be the desired end result, but what I'm proposing is a transition, as nobody and I do mean NOBODY has a workable mechanic for the end game at this point. Originally by: Iroku Mata Darius is time to STFU and make your GSM place free for someone who got the humildity to have the job you claim and failled!
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.01 00:51:00 - [392] Edited by: Yaay on 01/01/2009 00:58:18 Originally by: Darius JOHNSON Edited by: Darius JOHNSON on 01/01/2009 00:27:04 Edited by: Darius JOHNSON on 01/01/2009 00:25:42 Originally by: Yaay stuff Um, I'm not refusing to put any cards anywhere. My cards are on the table entirely. You're just refusing to look at them and believe what the hand was. It's certainly your prerogative to decide I'm doing some sneaky backdoor thing, and given that all of this is public before and after the fact at the end of the day either I'll have presented exactly what I'm saying I am, or you'll be right and I'm a sheister and you can crow about it on the forums. Ultimately my proposal is purposely open ended to give the devs room to be devs, and you can believe what you will about it as you'll know in the end how it turned out. My plan's only got two points and if you somehow think that trying to bring more people to 0.0 won't provoke fights then cool. If you prefer a system of 70 moon systems where there's a month of buildup before a single fight then fine. If you want to go all or nothing with whatever's in your head then sorry, that's just not what's on the table here. Removing posses entirely may very well be the desired end result, but what I'm proposing is a transition, as nobody and I do mean NOBODY has a workable mechanic for the end game at this point. I don't think you're a bad at all, i think you're doing what most people do. You want your plan to work and you're trying to put it out there in it's best light. I just feel it's not being examined for it's merit and people are just bandwagoning on change because they hope it'll work. I want people to go out there and examine the changes and be sure they'll work before implementing them, because we've all seen how long it's taken to even get this far, god help us if we have to start again. You're own people are hurting the cause by stating on the forums that they're supporting this b/c they're told to w/o examining it, and sadly, I'm betting that's true for most of em. If we're gonna make this work, it's gotta be a full out revamp of the existing system, because we all know rewrites are less likely to go through with the devs than revamps are. I'm not against your changes for the most part, I'm just saying their not enough and the idiots out their blindly showing support for something they know nothing about are hurting every measure of this. If me being a loudmouth is what it takes for the system to get a fair look at, then so be it, I'll play that role well. I'm just not gonna be satisfied with the "this might work" approach. I do think you're completely wrong about 0.0 value though, and the devs have had a record of reducing empire value in the past per your previous arguement. So I don't think it's beyond reason to ask for more devaluation of empire and stagnant value in 0.0. Coupled with that, the rewards of 0.0 need to be countered by 0 insurance or at the very least, basic insurance limitations. Risk v reward, I risk more cost of ships and space, my reward is the fruits of 0.0. It's the Economy Stupid
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.01 01:14:00 - [393] Edited by: Goumindong on 01/01/2009 01:16:03 Originally by: Yaay you're right, and every reason stated there is anti blob which is the whole point. they were designed, (i dare you to look up the old blogs) for small scale goals, not massive fleets. It is the job of a fleet to defend a system, not pos guns. I have absolutely no clue what you're saying or trying to say. Though if POS were designed for small scale goals then that is a laugh. Quote: As for repping, that was aimed at station mods being offlined, but either way it holds true. will they get offlined more, yes, but will you spend nearly as much time repairing any one mod, no. They will be offlined more and faster. This makes it easier for an enemy to attack because mostly do not care about you repping it up when they are not there but not using it when they are. Quote: the big problem with pos warfare is what it has done to 0.0 warfare in general, not just the tower spamming. so yes, it needs drastic changes. What stopped station ping pong? Yea, that was terrible. Started "big NAP fests"? Ah ha ha ha. It didn't start them or even propagate them. Quote: I do think you're completely wrong about 0.0 value though, and the devs have had a record of reducing empire value in the past per your previous arguement. So I don't think it's beyond reason to ask for more devaluation of empire and stagnant value in 0.0 When has CCP reduced the value of Empire? Also it is a pretty unreasonable thing since its likely to lose them subscribers. Quote: I'm not against your changes for the most part, I'm just saying their not enough and the idiots out their blindly showing support for something they know nothing about are hurting every measure of this. You aren't saying that at all, you're going back and forth between saying work work as advertised and saying its not enough. You've no clue what you're talking about in either instance. Edit: Oh i forgot, you're the "its the economy" person. no wonder.
Venomire GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.01 01:24:00 - [394] Originally by: Yaay You're own people are hurting the cause by stating on the forums that they're supporting this b/c they're told to w/o examining it, and sadly, I'm betting that's true for most of em. Nobody would believe us if any one of us claimed otherwise, so we don't bother and poke fun at it. This subject is being discussed in considerable length on our own forum, even by those that simply posted "because they were told to." Granted the posts are generally cynical because it all hinges upon CCP doing something, but that's the nature of the beast. Anyway, I'm supporting the general idea of a 0.0 revamp, which is the rather open OP calls for. And another another 0.0 round table, perhaps one held in game or IRC with moderated discussion, until the next fanfest.
Kombikiller The Edge Foundation Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2009.01.01 10:28:00 - [395] I like these ideas.. signed
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.01 16:08:00 - [396] Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 01/01/2009 01:16:03 Stuff Quote: hell is freezing ove(u)r, revelations 2 is coming reported by CCP Oveur \| 2007.05.24 09:54:10 \| Comments Structure Warfare Enhancements Revelations 2 will significantly expand the opportunities for strategic operations between fixed structures in space by encouraging siege-type game play, enabling attrition warfare, providing tactical objectives for smaller attack forces, and improving the economic vitality of outposts. As for empire nerfs. Agent movement, Mission rat devaluation, and removal of ice belts and standard asteriod belts just to name a few of the big ones. It's the Economy Stupid
Venomire GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.01 18:05:00 - [397] A lot of that had to do with spreading people out though to relieve some congestion in a few systems (except they just moved the problem to other systems).
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.01 19:44:00 - [398] Originally by: Yaay As for empire nerfs. Agent movement, Mission rat devaluation, and removal of ice belts and standard asteriod belts just to name a few of the big ones. Those were not nerfs. Agent missions, ice and asteroids moved to relieve congestion, there was no loss of value. All that happened was the people spread out to cause less of a drag on the server. And if you consider lag as a cost that people have to pay when they partake in an activity[a reasonable conjecture], then those spreading out of resources would have actually increased and not decreased the value of empire space. As for the Oveur quote: Yes, moving guns outside of POS shields did indeed lower the barrier to entry to attacking a POS. But you made no mention of the rev 2 changes in your statement. You referred to POS in general.
Luckyduck Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.01 23:34:00 - [399] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Yaay As for empire nerfs. Agent movement, Mission rat devaluation, and removal of ice belts and standard asteriod belts just to name a few of the big ones. Those were not nerfs. Agent missions, ice and asteroids moved to relieve congestion, there was no loss of value. All that happened was the people spread out to cause less of a drag on the server. And if you consider lag as a cost that people have to pay when they partake in an activity[a reasonable conjecture], then those spreading out of resources would have actually increased and not decreased the value of empire space. As for the Oveur quote: Yes, moving guns outside of POS shields did indeed lower the barrier to entry to attacking a POS. But you made no mention of the rev 2 changes in your statement. You referred to POS in general. Agents have been consistently moved to lower sec areas as a risk v reward issue. It's been a gradual move over time, but most high quality agents have moved to low sec or border areas, and I'm willing to bet the remaining few will over the course of time find their way there as well. Dev's have consistently stated that it is as much about traffic as it is a risk v reward thing. Asteroid belts have been tweaked in several ways; only one of them was the removal from 1.0's to relieve traffic. Same with ice mining. Spawn timers, changes in rocks found in sec status areas, etc have all been tweaked in less profound natures over the course of time to withdraw wealth from high sec. Mission rat devaluation was the biggest and most notable as it came with very harsh cries of "i'm quitting" when it happened. Mission rats were devalued on a level of upwards of 70% of their original values which were on par with 0.0 rats or better. The loyalty point system was a setback to this even though it was designed as a feature, not a counter to that huge nerf. It has unfortunately re shifted more weight back towards the profitability of the remaining empire locations for agents as much as it has benefited all agents. Another thing they've done with Agents is a Revamp of where their missions send you. There are quite a few missions out there that attempt to send you into lowsec regions. Missioner's found a way around this by buiding up their status enough to allow refusal of most missions like this. The point is, Developers are not against throwing the hammer at empire rather than increasing the value of 0.0 just because the balance isn't there yet for the average player. I mean really, what makes more sense from a logic standpoint, Devaluing empire on current game mechanics because it's out of whack, or creating new game mechanics with new potential bugs and exploits so that 0.0 can be just that much better. I'd rather they spend less time fixing empire so that that extra time can be spent elsewhere.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.02 05:07:00 - [400] Originally by: Luckyduck Agents have been consistently moved to lower sec areas as a risk v reward issue No, they have not. They have not moved from high sec to low sec. Moving down in sec rating, but not crossing the barrier into space that is not protected by concord actually increases the rewards without increasing the risk. Quote: Asteroid belts have been tweaked in several ways; only one of them was the removal from 1.0's to relieve traffic. Same with ice mining. Spawn timers, changes in rocks found in sec status areas, etc have all been tweaked in less profound natures over the course of time to withdraw wealth from high sec. No, they were not. Quote: Mission rat devaluation was the biggest and most notable as it came with very harsh cries of "i'm quitting" when it happened. Mission rats were devalued on a level of upwards of 70% of their original values which were on par with 0.0 rats or better. The loyalty point system was a setback to this even though it was designed as a feature, not a counter to that huge nerf. It has unfortunately re shifted more weight back towards the profitability of the remaining empire locations for agents as much as it has benefited all agents. The rat "devaluations" were coupled by salvage and LP. It was entirely offset(and purposefully) and saying that an entirely offset change is a nerf is disingenuous Quote: I mean really, what makes more sense from a logic standpoint, Devaluing empire on current game mechanics because it's out of whack, or creating new game mechanics with new potential bugs and exploits so that 0.0 can be just that much better. I'd rather they spend less time fixing empire so that that extra time can be spent elsewhere. 1. You do not need to make new game mechanics in order to increase the value of other space. 2. You are just as likely to add new exploits when changing code to reduce the value of empire space as adding new code for new mechanics 3. Devaluing empire is not necessary to fix the problem of whether its "out of whack". "Out of whack" is a relative term that can be fixed as easily by increasing the value of the other space which is not valuable enough. 4. If you believe that 0.0 is dense enough in its individual production capability then you really must not have spent much time there. Even if you don't want to increase the value of individual production you need to increase the production density because systems only supporting a handful of people is one of the larger causes of sprawl in Eves 0.0.

Opiboble Inte Classic Pirates Arcos Alliance	Posted - 2009.01.02 06:40:00 - [401] Would love to see the SOV system get changed, it is a bit of a pain currently. bye all
Matarella Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2009.01.02 11:15:00 - [402] Yep, good idea.
galphi Unitary Senate Unitary Enterprises	Posted - 2009.01.02 11:35:00 - [403] Excellent ideas to eliminate the stalemate and boredom involved with POS support and sovereignty. 9 thumbs up!
Commander Tigre Killed In Action Zenith Affinity	Posted - 2009.01.02 17:36:00 - [404] I support this "We Choose to listen to the lies we don't want to hear. The truth is, your already dead." - Commander Tigre
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.01.02 17:58:00 - [405] Originally by: Dealer Dan I've tried to make money in 0.0, I've done everything from ratting with fighters assigned to mining high-end ores with a maxed out hulk or moon mining. When you figure in the logistics, the skillpoints, the capital investment and the inherent risk of any 0.0 activity, none of it can compare to the money that one can make in highsec. There is no reason to live in 0.0 unless you enjoy the pvp, which is more often decided by lag or timezones than skill or organization. There need to be more incentives for people to move into 0.0, and more limitations to growth of alliances to make room for new organizations. I operate almost exclusively in 0.0, without alliance membership/support. Our small corp manages to make a good living this way. We don't see other groups like ours though, and you have hit on some of the reasons. Not easy out here. I support ideas like these that will encourage more small, independent groups to move out into deep space. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Luckyduck Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.02 18:06:00 - [406] Edited by: Luckyduck on 02/01/2009 18:07:15 Edited by: Luckyduck on 02/01/2009 18:06:51 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Luckyduck stuff 0.0 is highly profitable, people just don't know how to exploit it's riches for the most part. There's a small 20 man group in fountain that has dealt with every hostile and it's brother. They manage to pull in about 7 bil a day between them w/o any moon mining. Their cost for doing this, about 30 mil a month. People want the 1 hit wonders to wealth, they don't like working for it. There is a value to risk in this game already that people just don't understand. My apologies if RKK has an economy on the same scale as all of Goonswarm, but may we really are just better than you.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.03 00:43:00 - [407] And how often do they play, what is the barrier to entry, and secondary costs of their operation?
Terios Corvalis HUN Corp. HUN Reloaded	Posted - 2009.01.03 02:24:00 - [408] Edited by: Terios Corvalis on 03/01/2009 02:25:31 Changes are usefull by definition, since people have to adapt, learn, and face new challenges. /signed
Luckyduck Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.03 04:55:00 - [409] Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 03/01/2009 00:58:37 And how often do they play, what is the barrier to entry, and secondary costs of their operation? How dense is the production? Because, iirc, exploration where we are is not nearly that productive(and its boring, mind numbing, requires large swaths of time concurrent and is very sparse in the amount of people it allows partake) Are there gas pockets out there? Quote: People want the 1 hit wonders to wealth, they don't like working for it. There is a value to risk in this game already that people just don't understand. Yes, there is a value to risk in this game. Unfortunately that value is for the most part very negative. You've shown yourself to have a good misunderstanding of "value" in the past(See: Its the Economy linked in Yaay's post above. Yaay == Luckyduck) complaining that inflation was occurring when it was simply an increase in wealth. Why are we to trust you now without evidence? actually, enjoi posted later exactly the same thing i said.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.03 06:02:00 - [410] So what you're saying is that you don't know what you're talking about and aren't going to back up the 7b/day claim. Got it. Note: The POS scam is not deflationary. Deflation and inflation are purely monetary phenomena. The POS scam was a supply shift for a single good, not inflation or deflation. Similarly t2 price level increases which would have been "caused" by it would have been a function of increased demand for a single good and not inflation or deflation. Whether or not there was going to be inflation would have been entirely determined but whether or not the money supply and velocity were increasing or decreasing, not whether or not supply of a specific t2 good that doesn't increase t2 prices all that much hit a fairly inelastic section of the curve. Inflation is when the money supply gets higher without the amount of stuff being traded getting higher.

ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.03 06:23:00 - [411] Originally by: Luckyduck 0.0 is highly profitable, people just don't know how to exploit it's riches for the most part. There's a small 20 man group in fountain that has dealt with every hostile and it's brother. They manage to pull in about 7 bil a day between them w/o any moon mining. Their cost for doing this, about 30 mil a month. Oh this is good. Ok let me make some guesses since you for some reason don't want to tell us this invaluable piece of information that would actually make your argument not look weak as ** and if it really wasn't you'd spurt it out since you're ing yaay for s sake and you cant shut up about anything since you're borderline **ed. Unless it's an argument made entirely out of , and you'll be laughed out of the forum when you actually present it in its full form instead of HEY GUYS THIS GUY I KNOW TOLD ME HE MADE HELLA ISK, WHY U NOT MAKING ISK? PERHAPS U NUB?!? I mean it's not like you're related to this isk scheme since you're hella rich from being the big mercenary fc and . how did that go anyway? i heard the last alliances that hired you promptly disbanded. maybe you're just some secret alliance hitman? no wait, you're too ing incompetent to do something useful unless its a sheer ing accident. But i digress, my guesses: You're not doing anything with farming missions or the COSMOS, since those are obviously unique to NPC fountain so it doesn't apply anywhere else. You're not doing mining, since there wouldn't be a 30m a month cost for just running some macro hulks. You're not doing ratting since the one system you have isn't big enough to keep 20 ratters. And if you've managed to get 20 guys to click 'scan' every 180 secs for any period of time long enough to be worth making an argument over, then yeah, you're totally better than me. So, with that out of the way, what is it you're doing in fountain that makes 7bn a day? And if all of bob is making 7bn a day, not even counting the moon mining or taxes, why aren't you all in titans? Why aren't you even able to pos spam a single backwater goonswarm system? And most importantly, why are half the **ing people in Motsu bob or gbc if 0.0 is so profitable? As my homie sun tzu said: to ask that question is to answer it
ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.03 06:32:00 - [412] Originally by: Goumindong So what you're saying is that you don't know what you're talking about and aren't going to back up the 7b/day claim. Got it. Note: The POS scam is not deflationary. Deflation and inflation are purely monetary phenomena. The POS scam was a supply shift for a single good, not inflation or deflation. Similarly t2 price level increases which would have been "caused" by it would have been a function of increased demand for a single good and not inflation or deflation. Whether or not there was going to be inflation would have been entirely determined but whether or not the money supply and velocity were increasing or decreasing, not whether or not supply of a specific t2 good that doesn't increase t2 prices all that much hit a fairly inelastic section of the curve. Inflation is when the money supply gets higher without the amount of stuff being traded getting higher. Acutally, while it's obvious that yaay doesn't know what the **** he's talking about, inflation is generally used to simply describe a rise in prices, unless speaking specifically about monetary policy or some gay **. Of course, the only prices that have risen enough to be worth talking about in jita are some raw material prices, but others have gone down, so overall the prices are, statistically, mostly the same. actually, it's more commonly used to distinguish ****ed gots posting on the internet about some * they dont even understand, but used to try and add sophistication so they wont be called out on their **ed **.
ardik GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.03 06:52:00 - [413] Edited by: ardik on 03/01/2009 06:52:25 Originally by: Luckyduck There's a small 20 man group in fountain that has dealt with every hostile and it's brother. They manage to pull in about 7 bil a day between them w/o any moon mining. Their cost for doing this, about 30 mil a month. People want the 1 hit wonders to wealth, they don't like working for it. There is a value to risk in this game already that people just don't understand. Actually, you got me really interested here. What exactly can be so profitable, yet boring enough to be called 'work', that it's worth doing? I mean, 7bn in timecards, that's not ****ing much unless you work at burger king or something. Then again, you guys keep saying the 10 usd for sa.com access is such an extortionate sum, so perhaps you really are that poor? Interesting nonetheless!
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.03 07:09:00 - [414] Edited by: Goumindong on 03/01/2009 07:13:52 Originally by: ardik Acutally, while it's obvious that yaay doesn't know what the **** he's talking about, inflation is generally used to simply describe a rise in prices, A general rise in prices. Not a rise in specific prices. This is why inflation measuring techniques use a basket of goods and not a single good, because the pricing of single goods are more subject to supply and demand disruptions which would otherwise throw that off. edit: i should note that Yaay claimed that inflation was happening without the price increase* and now is claiming that a single instance of a price that rose due to a supply disruption means that he was right about inflation.
Luckyduck Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.03 15:36:00 - [415] Originally by: ardik Originally by: Luckyduck 0.0 is highly profitable, people just don't know how to exploit it's riches for the most part. There's a small 20 man group in fountain that has dealt with every hostile and it's brother. They manage to pull in about 7 bil a day between them w/o any moon mining. Their cost for doing this, about 30 mil a month. Oh this is good. Ok let me make some guesses since you for some reason don't want to tell us this invaluable piece of information that would actually make your argument not look weak as ** and if it really wasn't you'd spurt it out since you're ing yaay for s sake and you cant shut up about anything since you're borderline **ed. Unless it's an argument made entirely out of , and you'll be laughed out of the forum when you actually present it in its full form instead of HEY GUYS THIS GUY I KNOW TOLD ME HE MADE HELLA ISK, WHY U NOT MAKING ISK? PERHAPS U NUB?!? I mean it's not like you're related to this isk scheme since you're hella rich from being the big mercenary fc and . how did that go anyway? i heard the last alliances that hired you promptly disbanded. maybe you're just some secret alliance hitman? no wait, you're too ing incompetent to do something useful unless its a sheer ing accident. But i digress, my guesses: You're not doing anything with farming missions or the COSMOS, since those are obviously unique to NPC fountain so it doesn't apply anywhere else. You're not doing mining, since there wouldn't be a 30m a month cost for just running some macro hulks. You're not doing ratting since the one system you have isn't big enough to keep 20 ratters. And if you've managed to get 20 guys to click 'scan' every 180 secs for any period of time long enough to be worth making an argument over, then yeah, you're totally better than me. So, with that out of the way, what is it you're doing in fountain that makes 7bn a day? And if all of bob is making 7bn a day, not even counting the moon mining or taxes, why aren't you all in titans? Why aren't you even able to pos spam a single backwater goonswarm system? And most importantly, why are half the **ing people in Motsu bob or gbc if 0.0 is so profitable? As my homie sun tzu said: to ask that question is to answer it Actually, it was 20 guys, Ratting, Mining, Plexing and low end moon mining and reactions. As for the entity, It really doesn't matter who it was. Hell, I've spent 1 day ratting solo and made 450 mil... 150 off bounties, 150 off loot, 150 off rigs approximately. And that was't even a full day nor did it include 1 rare spawn.... At the end of that day, I made an additional 70 mil off a hauler spawn.
Luckyduck Gallente Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.03 15:40:00 - [416] Edited by: Luckyduck on 03/01/2009 15:43:07 Edited by: Luckyduck on 03/01/2009 15:40:49 Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 03/01/2009 07:13:52 Originally by: ardik Acutally, while it's obvious that yaay doesn't know what the **** he's talking about, inflation is generally used to simply describe a rise in prices, A general rise in prices. Not a rise in specific prices. This is why inflation measuring techniques use a basket of goods and not a single good, because the pricing of single goods are more subject to supply and demand disruptions which would otherwise throw that off. edit: i should note that Yaay claimed that inflation was happening without the price increase* and now is claiming that a single instance of a price that rose due to a supply disruption means that he was right about inflation. When t2 ships become more expensive, they'll effect the rest of the economy b/c other ships will become more viable. Heavier use of other ships means more increases in prices. Inflation is the devaluation of money. There are about 20 different definitions on what inflation is, it's very hard to say exactly and most economist will tell you just that. Ultimately, the markers of inflation are more money leading to higher prices. What that means is that my money is devalued and I'm more willing to spend extra on goods since the cash means less to me. Deflation is the increase in value of money. In the US right now there's a big concern that deflation is about to hit heavily because everyone is so concerned about spending cash. IE this dollar's more precious to me today because I might need it tomorrow. You are taking half of my equation and saying the answer doesn't make sense. Enjoi stated the whole equation just as I did and both of us were right, and contradictive to you. Both of us said inflationary pressure being overshadowed. Either way, if you want to argue this, take it to the other thread or convo me one day in private.
GoodNDead	Posted - 2009.01.03 22:16:00 - [417] Edited by: GoodNDead on 03/01/2009 22:20:41 i like what i saw on the first page.. and i am sure if anything useful had been posted in the later 13 they would have been added :P I prefer industrial pos stay on moons and sov pos get moved to planets.. only difference being that POS anchored to planets can add to sovereignty and industrial pos on moons can not. Leave they way POS are fueled, fitted, manned, and gunned alone. as for planetary resources.. i do think having lightly protected defenses and destructible objects be anchored on them in areas around the planet is a good step. its a new income stream and isk sink at the same time. they make good goals for roaming gangs. BUT.. their should be some effort required to destroy these items tho. something that a well fitted and select HAC gang of 10+ can do with some level difficulty. but... imposable to do with anything smaller then this. their should be some logistics required in taking these assets.. like blockade runners needing to follow the gang to carry the loot. my fear is.. if its made too easy then small gangs could rip billions off alliances while they sleep. doing it in small hard to catch gangs. Things the planet could offer... well i hate fling to empire to get AI offered parts to use.. so how about planets yielding AI offered POS Parts. enriched uranium / oxygen / mechanical parts / coolant / robotics Also having a manufacturing force living on the planet that could build things only AI offer depending how you setup the planet.. Starbase Structures / Random AI Items / Probes Why not small yields of moon materials since they would also be available on planets. the mining technique being less invasive on the planet would thus be slower with lower yield.
Madscience	Posted - 2009.01.03 23:53:00 - [418] a good way to revamp the nullsec/lowsec is by introducing some kind of new materials that can only harvest/process in null/lowsec before transporting them to somewhere else. This way it will help the inhabitants of null/lowsecc and promote people moving to the area.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.04 00:19:00 - [419] Originally by: Luckyduck Actually, it was 20 guys, Ratting, Mining, Plexing and low end moon mining and reactions. As for the entity, It really doesn't matter who it was. Yes, it matters who the entity was. You're gaining benefit from protection in many different ways Quote: Hell, I've spent 1 day ratting solo and made 450 mil... 150 off bounties, 150 off loot, 150 off rigs approximately Define "1 day". Because if you're claiming an 8 hour day then you're saying you make 56m isk/hour ratting. Which is really impressive and doesn't mesh with my experience or that of anyone else i know. And of course, 20 people doing it would require at least 10 systems. And if you mean 24 hours then you make 18.75m isk/hour ratting, which is below empire level 4 rates. Of course these numbers assumed you never took a break or were interrupted for any reason and so are a bit lower than the actual isk/hour you would have to achieve in order to make that kind of money.
Atreus Tac Quatidion Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.01.04 00:36:00 - [420] supporting to make my life more fun __________________________________________________________ -Cheers- Atreus Tac

Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.04 00:57:00 - [421] Edited by: Yaay on 04/01/2009 00:57:18 Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Luckyduck Actually, it was 20 guys, Ratting, Mining, Plexing and low end moon mining and reactions. As for the entity, It really doesn't matter who it was. Yes, it matters who the entity was. You're gaining benefit from protection in many different ways Quote: Hell, I've spent 1 day ratting solo and made 450 mil... 150 off bounties, 150 off loot, 150 off rigs approximately Define "1 day". Because if you're claiming an 8 hour day then you're saying you make 56m isk/hour ratting. Which is really impressive and doesn't mesh with my experience or that of anyone else i know. And of course, 20 people doing it would require at least 10 systems. And if you mean 24 hours then you make 18.75m isk/hour ratting, which is below empire level 4 rates. Of course these numbers assumed you never took a break or were interrupted for any reason and so are a bit lower than the actual isk/hour you would have to achieve in order to make that kind of money. about 5-6 hours of actual game time, hard to pin down time b/c it was over christmas spread out between family events. It's the Economy Stupid
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.04 02:01:00 - [422] Edited by: Goumindong on 04/01/2009 02:05:09 So you're saying that ratting in 0.0 is 75m isk/hour? Seriously? edit: Assuming your 150/150/150 numbers were correct then you Killed, looted, and salvaged a 1m isk battleship that dropped 1m isk in loot and 1m isk in salvage every 2.4 minutes for 6 hours of gametime. Color me skeptical.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.01.04 09:51:00 - [423] Speaking from personal experience, 20 mil an hour is what you get ratting in 0.0 I'd imagine that the paranoid "100km above belt point" Ravens make half of that. That's not counting faction spawns. There's no need to buff 0.0 spawns. Create a game mechanic that allows small gangs to steal whatever moon POS produces. Not all at once, but like a slow process, almost like mining. The POS owners should get alert eve-mail that someone's stealing their stuff so they can come defend it. If you have that, you get more roaming gangs, more pvp, and a chance for non-mega alliance people to make some decent money. There's no reason why the mega alliances should safely pocket all the moon stuff to themselves, without ever putting their jump bridge using jump freighters at risk. If they want to own all those 100s of moons, they better be ready to actively defend them. And not the way it works now, where they leave and forget, without worry
thesonarnet 0ccam's Razor UNLeashed Legion	Posted - 2009.01.04 10:41:00 - [424] .
Zerb Cerus	Posted - 2009.01.04 11:46:00 - [425] One lvl4 agent can supply at least 300 pilots with 25+M isk/h without any problems. (with 1 account, T1 BS and without faction fitting -> maybe 40+M with faction fit Marauder?) Now put that 300 guys into an AVERAGE 0.0 system. Try to imagine that .... ROFL +if you dont want to play eve in singleplayer-mode you can run missions in small gangs, but more than 1 ship shooting on the same belt-rat-spawn is a waste of time. I know you can do exploration ... did it myself buf if you factor in ALL the time (time for ganging-up, scanning hauling loot, and not only the time you spent in good plexes), isk/h & fun/h is not so shiny. => /supported
slip66 Black Nova Corp Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.04 18:12:00 - [426] Edited by: slip66 on 04/01/2009 18:14:27 I agree something needs to be changed and like some of the ideas. What about just making the sun the SOV claiming point? You have to have a special pos which: * can be a nice isk sink * could interfere with DDs when in close proximity to the sun only. you would still need pos at moons for logistics/mining. Even so I like the two main points Darius posted from the meetings and think they are steps in the right direction.
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.04 19:20:00 - [427] Originally by: Goumindong Edited by: Goumindong on 04/01/2009 02:05:09 So you're saying that ratting in 0.0 is 75m isk/hour? Seriously? edit: Assuming your 150/150/150 numbers were correct then you Killed, looted, and salvaged a 1m isk battleship that dropped 1m isk in loot and 1m isk in salvage every 2.4 minutes for 6 hours of gametime. Color me skeptical. exactly what i'm saying. It's the Economy Stupid
eWrath Caldari Revenent Defence Corperation The Omni Federation	Posted - 2009.01.04 19:32:00 - [428] Originally by: slip66 Edited by: slip66 on 04/01/2009 18:14:27 I agree something needs to be changed and like some of the ideas. What about just making the sun the SOV claiming point? You have to have a special pos which: * can be a nice isk sink * could interfere with DDs when in close proximity to the sun only. you would still need pos at moons for logistics/mining. Even so I like the two main points Darius posted from the meetings and think they are steps in the right direction. After reading some of this thread, I was going to suggest this... simply borrow the bunker mechanisms from Faction Warfare, make it as a new player-anchorable structure, works like a POS, but with much more defensive capabilities, the rest fits perfectly in this perspective. That should be the first step to take, in my opinion. ----- Beware miners with guns!
Scatim Helicon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.05 08:05:00 - [429] Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 05/01/2009 08:05:51 Originally by: Yaay exactly what i'm saying. In that case Delve's truesec status is even more wacky than I previously thought, because 75m/hour is not even close to representative of what the rest of 0.0 pays out (try ratting in Tenerifis or Esoteria, even in good truesec you're looking at 20m/hour on a very good day, once you've spent time clearing out the crap spawns). -----------
Orb Vex Colonizing and Terraforming of Planets R.U.R.	Posted - 2009.01.05 11:27:00 - [430] Edited by: Orb Vex on 05/01/2009 11:35:01 We want to do our job

Isidien Madcap GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.06 08:04:00 - [431] Originally by: Scatim Helicon Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 05/01/2009 08:05:51 Originally by: Yaay exactly what i'm saying. In that case Delve's truesec status is even more wacky than I previously thought, because 75m/hour is not even close to representative of what the rest of 0.0 pays out (try ratting in Tenerifis or Esoteria, even in good truesec you're looking at 20m/hour on a very good day, once you've spent time clearing out the crap spawns). Not to mention that that's only 1 person making that amount (whether it's 75m or 20m) per system. That's not really all that useful or interesting given the number of people you actually need to hold space or even maintain a presence in 0.0. Killing pirates in belts does not scale. ---- Isidien
Hun Jakuza Naughty By Nature	Posted - 2009.01.06 16:25:00 - [432] Not supported, because the eve not just 0.0
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.06 16:29:00 - [433] Originally by: Hun Jakuza Not supported, because the eve not just 0.0 What? Since Eve is not just 0.0 we should not make 0.0 better?
Hun Jakuza Naughty By Nature	Posted - 2009.01.06 16:43:00 - [434] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Hun Jakuza Not supported, because the eve not just 0.0 What? Since Eve is not just 0.0 we should not make 0.0 better? Empire players equal with 0,0 player. Not less or not more. This is an another thread, where the CSM want to give more economic and another advantage/prefer to smallest group of eve (9% population of eve live in 0.0) Enough from the favouritism somebody, anyone else plays too with the game, so wrong, if discounts, when provided to one of the sides only any of the reasonable requests of the other side are rejected.
Tiger's Spirit	Posted - 2009.01.06 16:56:00 - [435] Originally by: Hun Jakuza Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Hun Jakuza Not supported, because the eve not just 0.0 What? Since Eve is not just 0.0 we should not make 0.0 better? Empire players equal with 0,0 player. Not less or not more. This is an another thread, where the CSM want to give more economic and another advantage/prefer to smallest group of eve (9% population of eve live in 0.0) Enough from the favouritism somebody, anyone else plays too with the game, so wrong, if discounts, when provided to one of the sides only any of the reasonable requests of the other side are rejected. Yes, not supported too
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.06 19:21:00 - [436] Originally by: Hun Jakuza Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Hun Jakuza Not supported, because the eve not just 0.0 What? Since Eve is not just 0.0 we should not make 0.0 better? Empire players equal with 0,0 player. Not less or not more. This is an another thread, where the CSM want to give more economic and another advantage/prefer to smallest group of eve (9% population of eve live in 0.0) Enough from the favouritism somebody, anyone else plays too with the game, so wrong, if discounts, when provided to one of the sides only any of the reasonable requests of the other side are rejected. Why do you think only 9% of the population lives in 0.0? I would say its because the average individual can make more money running lvl 4 missions in empire. Most 0.0 dwellers have empire alts as well just do do business in empire without trouble (even mission), so be careful with your statistic. Just because 9% of the characters are out in 0.0 does not mean that only 9% of the people who play eve play in 0.0. And also would that be an indicator to you that 0.0 is actually not balanced with empire? If 0.0 was balanced wouldnt you expect to see half of the eve population out there (or maybe at least 1/3rd). 9% to me is a problem. You might as well argue for the removal of 0.0 Hun. What people in this thread want is increased rewards for their increased risk, not favoritism for 0.0 players. Right now under the current system the average 0.0 dweller makes less isk/h than your lvl 4 missioner with the added risks and obligation of 0.0 living. Yes you might be able to make 20m and hour or 75m an hour, but then you spend 6 hours an an alliance op to defend your space losing 2 battleships in this fight or that one (costing you 40mil after insurance, or 22b (hi molle)). And every hour you spend fighting to defend your space, someone in empire is still doing a lvl 4 mission, maybe to be annoyed once or twice a year by a suicide ganker. --
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.06 21:19:00 - [437] Edited by: Yaay on 06/01/2009 21:20:14 Originally by: Scatim Helicon Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 05/01/2009 08:05:51 Originally by: Yaay exactly what i'm saying. In that case Delve's truesec status is even more wacky than I previously thought, because 75m/hour is not even close to representative of what the rest of 0.0 pays out (try ratting in Tenerifis or Esoteria, even in good truesec you're looking at 20m/hour on a very good day, once you've spent time clearing out the crap spawns). I've ratted in fountain, curse, stain and other areas doing the same. Oh and it was a 17 belt system with multiple ratters in system. Of the 4, fountain was by far the worst hitting only about 56 mil/hr, but in fairness, it was a 12 belt system. It's the Economy Stupid
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.06 21:29:00 - [438] Yaay: I would like to see documented proof, which includes the # of accounts you were using to achieve this amount. In addition subtract profits gained from manufacturing rigs, the only value that should be included is rat bounties, and market value of the loot and slavage recieved. For your time quotient you have to include the time it takes you to get to a station with it. Also you must include the time in percentage form to which you were not ratting on average due to hostiles. A snapshot of your wallet with 1 hour of ratting would help as well. If you are going to keep repeating this, you might as well back it up with a bit more than our trust in what you say on a forum. --
Ebon Galant	Posted - 2009.01.06 22:03:00 - [439] Ok I am going to suggest something that I think a lot of people are going to hate, some will like but I have not seen on the forums so far but maybe it has. Make soverenty linked to kill mails. ..... This way you take soverenty away from POSes and force PVP. Kills would count towards your alliance and your corps hold on the system. Like capturing a flag in other games. Let the surrounding systems give bonuses to holding your current system. So say you have your one system and it is connected to 4 others those 4 give bonus to the current system to keep it from falling. This way you are not constantly fight with an empire that is dying from the inside out but the bigger you get the harder it is for you to maintain the borders. Have influence based on what you are flying the size of the gang and what you kill. You get more influence for killing things while in smaller gangs, ships ect. and less for the other way around. Like accumulating points an a kill board. The intended purpose would be to stop POS spam, get people back into smaller ships and gangs. Making PVP cheaper for everyone. Hopefully POSes will be used more as staging grounds, ocassional safe spots and more for industry instead of what it is now. I am hopefull that the proposed minning changes of moving belts to the dungeon system will help to fix some of the profitability issues. But I also think that for the long run yields are going to have to be increased in ores/refinable materials so that as EVE grows the supplies can keep up with demand. Perhaps these higher yield ores need to be restricted to just low/null sec. Coming from someone who has 1 acct and has yet to fly one, I beleive capitals are a royal pain for there use. And are to vulnerable by themselves. I beleive 0.0 will benefit if they were allowed to be more versitile and were more self sufficient. Weather that by changing how they move around or how much they can carry or a change in there fundamental purposes. But for some reason I don't think it is right that I should need alts, multiple accounts, and a corp support system so that I can afford the fuel needed to hide until I am in a fleet to fight. Just does not seem right to me. And it excludes so many players because they do not have the time to spend all day on a game. I do not have to have multiple accounts for other games to enjoy everything they have to offer, why should I for this one? (sorry for the sidetrack) Back to Soverenty, (my info is a little hazy here wheather they currently do or not) but have capitals help towards soverenty on top of the fights, but only while in space and visible. And the larger the capital the more it counts so Titans would be the most the MOM's and then the Carriers and Dreads. This way they could be used to stengthen one area or hold onother that is about to fall. Just my suggestions/observation/rant
Ammath Mentis Fidelis Un-Natural Selection	Posted - 2009.01.07 18:22:00 - [440] I was in the FF 0.0 panels about this and after with Darius. I think these ideas are key but also adding in a few other things missing detail in the OP... Sov Improvements, simple upgrades, add modules to the sov-holding poses that improve the value of the space with sov-level prerequisited.. maybe "deep space scanners" that improve the quality or number of belts... or increase the number and/or respawn of explorables and encounters.. maybe "convoy beacons" that attract more pirate activity to the area lowing the systems true-sec. Having these as modules for the sov-holding poses means that if you lose the sov-poses then the improvements go boom... this is important because it encourages people to hold the sov for longer (maybe even have 10 levels??) and REALLY want to defend it... make these upgrades VERY expensive as well meaning alliances will likely focus on developing their core areas and all their peripheral space become less important. Potentially opening more areas for other alliances to move in. A lot of these assumptions would need to be proven out with metrics that probably only CCP has based on gameplay patters and so forth... But improvable space means less of a need for vast reaches of space, usually empty, unoccupied, and sitting idle.... Thumbs up Darius for posting the OP.

Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.01.07 19:15:00 - [441] Linking sov to killmails will lead to abuse. People will be killing their own alts in noob ships by the dozens.
Ebon Galant	Posted - 2009.01.07 21:34:00 - [442] Originally by: Ephemeron Linking sov to killmails will lead to abuse. People will be killing their own alts in noob ships by the dozens. Well yes I suppose people would. The only idea i can think of is to keep people of the same alliance gaining points towards soverenty through kill mails. Giving even more importance to capitals in soverenty. But that still leaves alts out of the alliance and all i can say to that is that make it unprofitable to do so. I mean if its truely an alt all the isk comes from the same person. hmmm... but i can see both causing problems with corps leaving alliances and newer players. Because I think the only way to keep it unprofitable would be to alter insurance, why outfit the noob ship you are going to kill. How about scaling it so that the smaller the 1vs1's are the less you get while still getting more for be smaller than the other guy. say like frig vs. cruser = BC vs BC that way abuse is undoable while still incouraging(sp?) smaller ships and fights.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.01.07 21:45:00 - [443] forget it, the whole idea is rather shaky and won't be considered seriously. I'm not in favor of it System sov should definitely be about anchored structures. There are many different paths to take in that direction
teji Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.08 18:06:00 - [444] Supported. Also balance the loot tables between the rat types as well. NPC/Delve/Fountain truesec is so broken compared with the rest of 0.0. I wonder why this hasn't been fixed :tinfoil:
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.08 21:29:00 - [445] Originally by: Hun Jakuza Empire players equal with 0,0 player. Not less or not more. This is an another thread, where the CSM want to give more economic and another advantage/prefer to smallest group of eve (9% population of eve live in 0.0) Enough from the favouritism somebody, anyone else plays too with the game, so wrong, if discounts, when provided to one of the sides only any of the reasonable requests of the other side are rejected. There is no tag on your account that says "empire player". One of the primary points of making 0.0 more profitable is so that more people come out there. So if you want to partake after 0.0 gets boosted just come on out to 0.0. Its called risk/reward balance.
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.09 01:06:00 - [446] Originally by: Draygo Korvan Yaay: I would like to see documented proof, which includes the # of accounts you were using to achieve this amount. In addition subtract profits gained from manufacturing rigs, the only value that should be included is rat bounties, and market value of the loot and slavage recieved. For your time quotient you have to include the time it takes you to get to a station with it. Also you must include the time in percentage form to which you were not ratting on average due to hostiles. A snapshot of your wallet with 1 hour of ratting would help as well. If you are going to keep repeating this, you might as well back it up with a bit more than our trust in what you say on a forum. Here's an idea. Set standard goals for ratting that are common place in your corp that make sense. Get ships for ratting that, well, rat well. Get Skills that allow you to, well, rat well. Get common sense. Learn about market functions. Learn about investments and payouts. Train Hauling skills. Train more common sense. Ask your alliance to use common sense. Ask your alliance to actually invest in it's 0.0 space for the right reasons and the right ways. I did my money making this last time with a Sacrelidge. 5 heavy assault launchers, 1 salvager. Quite honestly, I could have done better if I felt like grabbing a T2 BS from empire, but I like to PVP in my limited play time these days, so I've not bothered really. If you want documented proof, get used to life sucking, I'm not here to provide you with all the answers to life. If you seriously can't figure out what's been done, then well, natural selection didn't favor you. God help us that some people were destined to be successful for their efforts while others weren't. It's the Economy Stupid
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.09 07:42:00 - [447] Originally by: Yaay Here's an idea. Set standard goals for ratting that are common place in your corp that make sense. Get ships for ratting that, well, rat well. Get Skills that allow you to, well, rat well. Get common sense. Learn about market functions. Learn about investments and payouts. Train Hauling skills. Train more common sense. Ask your alliance to use common sense. Ask your alliance to actually invest in it's 0.0 space for the right reasons and the right ways. I did my money making this last time with a Sacrelidge. 5 heavy assault launchers, 1 salvager. Quite honestly, I could have done better if I felt like grabbing a T2 BS from empire, but I like to PVP in my limited play time these days, so I've not bothered really. If you want documented proof, get used to life sucking, I'm not here to provide you with all the answers to life. If you seriously can't figure out what's been done, then well, natural selection didn't favor you. God help us that some people were destined to be successful for their efforts while others weren't. Haha, way to resort to ad hominim attacks instead of actually backing up your evidence, bravo you have outdone yourself. CAOD is in a different forum. "I'm better than you" continues to not be evidence. So lets do math, because I like math and it gives us a better ballpark. The only figure i'm going to take in account is bounties. You made 150 mil in 6 hours is your claim. Which is 25m/h in bounties. This is a bit highball for what I get in Feyth/Estoria but most of the regions you listed are npc 0.0 so they behave like -1.0 truesec. The biggest question is if you used another account to haul the items around and clean belts as you ratted for this would save you a lot of time. Because you have ratted recently getting a screenshot of an hours worth of ratting wouldnt be hard would it? Although I can extrapolate from the approximations of how much you make per hour when we look at fountain ratting. if you make 75m/h in delve/stain/curse and only 56mil/h in fountain if we divide by 3 we get ~18.7m/h off bounties which seems reasonable for a well setup system. Lets put it a different way: 9% of eve's characters are in 0.0, 0.0 feels empty. How does Yaay encourage people to venture in 0.0 for more fights? Fighting takes time, time is isk. How can 0.0 support the individual pilot over time (i include pvp time) better than empire? I think the reward has to be worth it that empire corperations would be willing to fight or slip by gatecamps to get out into 0.0 for isk making operations. Not just to stay in 0.0 but to venture out in it from empire. I don't think that venture is worth it in the games current state, unless your corp has a presence in 0.0. --
Alvar Kesh Ealurian Wolves Aegis Militia	Posted - 2009.01.09 11:22:00 - [448]
Bullen karlssson Swedish Aerospace Inc G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2009.01.09 13:41:00 - [449] Nothing more to say then yes please.
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.09 23:57:00 - [450] Originally by: Draygo Korvan Lets put it a different way: 9% of eve's characters are in 0.0, 0.0 feels empty. How does Yaay encourage people to venture in 0.0 for more fights? Fighting takes time, time is isk. How can 0.0 support the individual pilot over time (i include pvp time) better than empire? I think the reward has to be worth it that empire corperations would be willing to fight or slip by gatecamps to get out into 0.0 for isk making operations. Not just to stay in 0.0 but to venture out in it from empire. I don't think that venture is worth it in the games current state, unless your corp has a presence in 0.0. I know hardly any alliance or even if there is one that has died in the past year due to financial ruin and an inability to Muster ships for fights. I make less in fountain because of the lack of nearby stations whether npc or alliance owned where I rat. The salvage is also slightly less valuable because honestly, the drone rigs are worthless. For any 0.0 entity, that issue is or should be a non issue. 25 Mil an hr for rat spawns is an average day for anybody with a clue, properly chained systems reward upwards of 40 mil an hour per 1 person they can hold. Typically 8-10 belts sustain 1 person who's not totally emo selfish. I ratted in a system with multiple people, so those numbers declined down to what probably was around 25 an hr. Looting in a Sac requires all of 2 seconds since it's a close range ship that maximizes it's damage on NPCs the closer it gets.... defenders have no effect inside of 5km. I've also never claimed to loot everything when solo, only those things of value, although when I do run 2 accounts, I tend to bounty farm even faster, and make more from all the loot. Salvaging has the same luxury of being in range already with that ship. T2 BS are just naturally ranged well and can salvage/tractor/loot better while dealing more damage, hense that comment about their profitability. Per 1 salvage on the proper targets, I typically make about 800k. In stain it's more like 1.2 mil. In Fountian it's more like 4-500k. Good salvaging skills speed up the process considerably. Another consideration of 0.0 is salvaging fight wrecks, which tend to pay out enormously and which 99% of 0.0 people ignore. In 1 fight against the monkeys, I salvaged about 140 million. And most of the wrecks Were either lost to time or other people. Granted, you have to actually win a fight to even get to that point... god forbid. Where in empire can you do those sorts of things, and in timely fashion. A considerable collection of agent missions take more than a 15 minute window which 0.0 ratting allows. Empire lacks Moons, Legit loot, faction spawns, commercial value, Renters, and a considerable number of other valuse that 0.0 already holds. 0.0 does not need a boost, although empire does need a nerf. That said, If the devs ever, for any reason, actually listen to the general consent on insurance failures, I'll be all for a more profitable 0.0, as the rewards will start to match the risk more appropriately.

Sedious Bloke	Posted - 2009.01.10 02:56:00 - [451] Fixing is good
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.10 09:52:00 - [452] Originally by: Yaay Where in empire can you do those sorts of things, and in timely fashion. A considerable collection of agent missions take more than a 15 minute window which 0.0 ratting allows. Empire lacks Moons, Legit loot, faction spawns, commercial value, Renters, and a considerable number of other valuse that 0.0 already holds. 0.0 does not need a boost, although empire does need a nerf. 1. You just claimed that your numbers represent the final culmination of a full days ratting in an already properly chained system. You cannot then come in and claim that "0.0 ratting allows production in 15 minute windows". It takes a lot of time to properly chain a system. Certainly more than 15 minutes. If someone is chaining in front of you, they're doing work for you that you have to consider into your calculations of profitability. 2. Empire does not lack "legit loot". Though i have no clue what it means 3. Faction spawns: Only in delve 4. Commercial Value: Are you actually saying that there is more profit to be made in 0.0 selling than there is in empire? Seriously? There is a reason that the markets are larger in empire. 5. Renters are not personal income. Nor is it income that draws people into 0.0. Its its actually a cost that they have to pay to the people who already own the space. 6. "other values not defined"... because they don't exist 7. Saying that empire needs a nerf is the exact same thing as saying that 0.0 needs a buff. After all that time bloviating about how its so easy to make money you turn around and say "oh yea, but you totally don't make enough more money than in empire and it doesn't support enough people" which is what everyone else has been saying this entire damned time! Quote: 25 Mil an hr for rat spawns is an average day for anybody with a clue, properly chained systems reward upwards of 40 mil an hour per 1 person they can hold. Typically 8-10 belts sustain 1 person who's not totally emo selfish. I ratted in a system with multiple people, so those numbers declined down to what probably was around 25 an hr. So what you're actually saying is that your real production wasn't 56m isk/hour or 75m isk/hour as you previously claimed, but it was actually one half to one third of those claims? addendum: I am going to guess that you don't consider hauling time into your profit calculations do you?
Astria Tiphareth 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2009.01.10 11:37:00 - [453] Edited by: Astria Tiphareth on 10/01/2009 11:39:01 I don't even spend serious time in 0.0 and want to see this improved (perhaps because then I might). Supported. Originally by: Ankhesentapemkah Solutions * Add game mechanics that favor quick hit-and-run tactics. * Make it beneficial for small gangs to roam and patrol own space. Some time ago I suggested one mechanic that might work for this. It might be food for thought for someone. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... Environmental Effects
LaserX Legion of Steel Lions	Posted - 2009.01.10 15:23:00 - [454] Supported. ;)
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.10 18:01:00 - [455] Edited by: Yaay on 10/01/2009 18:05:52 Edited by: Yaay on 10/01/2009 18:01:42 Originally by: Goumindong So what you're actually saying is that your real production wasn't 56m isk/hour or 75m isk/hour as you previously claimed, but it was actually one half to one third of those claims? addendum: I am going to guess that you don't consider hauling time into your profit calculations do you? I believe i said bounty times. And as for hauling, you mean to that station in system where I sell things. 0.0 markets ftw. Not everyone relies on Jita for profits. Quote: 1. You just claimed that your numbers represent the final culmination of a full days ratting in an already properly chained system. You cannot then come in and claim that "0.0 ratting allows production in 15 minute windows". It takes a lot of time to properly chain a system. Certainly more than 15 minutes. If someone is chaining in front of you, they're doing work for you that you have to consider into your calculations of profitability. Team work allows for system chains, so yes, 15 minutes of time logged in is feasible. Again, teamwork, not I pwn selfishness. Whether the system is or is not properly chained does not negate the fact that you can log in for 15 minutes and do something, where as most empire agents require more time. 0.0 markets have higher profit margins due to scarcity. Empire markets offer quicker turnarounds. If you're not a price gouging git, or even if you are, 0.0 markets are nice k. It's the Economy Stupid
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.10 18:12:00 - [456] Edited by: Yaay on 10/01/2009 18:18:26 Edited by: Yaay on 10/01/2009 18:15:41 Edited by: Yaay on 10/01/2009 18:14:39 Quote: Originally by: Goumindong So what you're actually saying is that your real production wasn't 56m isk/hour or 75m isk/hour as you previously claimed, but it was actually one half to one third of those claims? addendum: I am going to guess that you don't consider hauling time into your profit calculations do you? I believe i said bounty times. And as for hauling, you mean to that station in system where I sell things. 0.0 markets ftw. Not everyone relies on Jita for profits. Quote: Quote:1. You just claimed that your numbers represent the final culmination of a full days ratting in an already properly chained system. You cannot then come in and claim that "0.0 ratting allows production in 15 minute windows". It takes a lot of time to properly chain a system. Certainly more than 15 minutes. If someone is chaining in front of you, they're doing work for you that you have to consider into your calculations of profitability. Team work allows for system chains, so yes, 15 minutes of time logged in is feasible if your team is working that system all day. Again, teamwork, not I pwn selfishness. Whether the system is or is not properly chained does not negate the fact that you can log in for 15 minutes and do something, where as most empire agents require more time. 0.0 markets have higher profit margins due to scarcity. Empire markets offer quicker turnarounds. If you're not a price gouging git, or even if you are, 0.0 markets are nice k. Quote: 5. Renters are not personal income. Nor is it income that draws people into 0.0. Its its actually a cost that they have to pay to the people who already own the space. 6. "other values not defined"... because they don't exist 7. Saying that empire needs a nerf is the exact same thing as saying that 0.0 needs a buff. After all that time bloviating about how its so easy to make money you turn around and say "oh yea, but you totally don't make enough more money than in empire and it doesn't support enough people" which is what everyone else has been saying this entire damned time! Last I checked, moon mining and renters often go to alliance programs such as capital replacements. So while the income is not directly in your wallet, the effects are certainly significant to the average 0.0 player. Not to mention that renting opens doors to smaller empire entities that could not practically hold space for themselves while reaping the rewards of 0.0. Other values include things like complexes, 0.0 agents and pirate faction gear/ships "hello phantasm/nightmare, rattlesnake... etc" and those in space cosmos areas that pay out quite well. Not to mention mining, drugs, and trade routes into 0.0 space that pay the most of any in game. Empire getting a nerf isn't the same as saying 0.0 needs a boost. One forces more inflationary pressure and outrageousness into the game, the other does not. This game cannot sustain it's economy forever if the faucets do not get turned off rather than increased. This is an age old problem in all MMOs that has truely ruined them. When everyone becomes wealthy, it loses meaning, there is a reason to have class warfare.
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.10 18:50:00 - [457] Originally by: Yaay I know hardly any alliance or even if there is one that has died in the past year due to financial ruin and an inability to Muster ships for fights. RISE.
Yaay Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2009.01.10 19:13:00 - [458] Originally by: Draygo Korvan Originally by: Yaay I know hardly any alliance or even if there is one that has died in the past year due to financial ruin and an inability to Muster ships for fights. RISE. they died for many reasons, money for the average player wasn't one.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.10 22:04:00 - [459] Originally by: Yaay Team work allows for system chains, so yes, 15 minutes of time logged in is feasible if your team is working that system all day. Again, teamwork, not I pwn selfishness. Do you understand the concept of "cost/benefit" do you?. You see, if you're benefiting from your corp mates work, then the guy who initially started the chain is paying for your increased profit. Not that he would do anything else, but he is still paying for your increased profit. Quote: I believe i said bounty times. And as for hauling, you mean to that station in system where I sell things. 0.0 markets ftw. Not everyone relies on Jita for profits. Goods still need to be moved within 0.0. Unless you only rat in station systems Quote: Last I checked, moon mining and renters often go to alliance programs such as capital replacements. So while the income is not directly in your wallet, the effects are certainly significant to the average 0.0 player. Not to mention that renting opens doors to smaller empire entities that could not practically hold space for themselves while reaping the rewards of 0.0. Yes, the prospect of rending space will certainly endear the alliance subsisting of 0.0 production income to go and move into 0.0... Oh wait. Quote: Other values include things like complexes, 0.0 agents and pirate faction gear/ships "hello phantasm/nightmare, rattlesnake... etc" and those in space cosmos areas that pay out quite well. Not to mention mining, drugs, and trade routes into 0.0 space that pay the most of any in game. So "other values" is "Delve"... Quote: Empire getting a nerf isn't the same as saying 0.0 needs a boost. One forces more inflationary pressure (not inflation you ****ed gits i'm sure will comment) and outrageousness into the game, the other does not. "Inflationary pressure" is "money supply increases that create inflation" or "stuff supply decreases that create inflation".... you git. Though nerfing empire would likely cause inflationary pressure through a reduction in production since more of empire based production is in items rather than isk. Now, boosting 0.0 by increasing the amount of isk produced there might be an inflationary pressure, but you don't have to increase the amount of isk produced you could instead increase the amount of stuff produced... which would be deflationary pressure. Also, i do not believe that "outrageousness" is a quantitative measure of anything that can really be increased... Quote: This game cannot sustain it's economy forever if the faucets do not get turned off rather than increased. This is an age old problem in all MMOs that has truely ruined them. When everyone becomes wealthy, it loses meaning, there is a reason to have class warfare. yes it can. The age old problem in MMOs is not that people get wealthy(if people get wealthy in Eve they will simply PvP more... which was good the last time i checked). The age old problem in MMOs is that they create a lot of currency faucets but there are no continual currency sinks. Eve doesn't have this problem because you can always trade isk directly for minerals via NPC sell orders** just as you can always trade minerals for ISK via insurance fraud. Game crippling hyperinflation simply cannot happen because if it starts people will turn all that isk into materials with the push of a button. It also cannot happen because there is constant requirements for new stuff when people blow it up.
German General Epiphyte Mining and Exploration Majesta Empire	Posted - 2009.01.27 03:49:00 - [460] check

Hugh Ruka Exploratio et Industria Morispatia	Posted - 2009.01.27 09:53:00 - [461] seems like a start... I'd agree with Vuks points ... some more things: 1. moon POSes are completely industry based with light defenses and slow initial response times. 2. planet POSes could be mini stations with only a ship hangar (you can store a fited ship there in case defenses are needed) with some reasonable limit on the hangar size, only docking and hangar, no other services. 3. once moon POSes stop being relevant for SOV, make a POS overhaul as suggested in the 'dead horse' thread :-) 4. make NPC rats spawn at industry POSes and attack the installations. If the POS kills the rat, no bounty is payed and the wreck is also destroyed by the POS. I realy have no clue about other things, my exposure to 0.0 was brief ...
Dumah Tace GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.01.29 19:53:00 - [462] Edited by: Dumah Tace on 29/01/2009 19:54:11 As far as alliance making improvements to different space, perhaps we could add a static cap so to speak to how far it can be improved. We could probably tie this to it's truesec rating or some other system. -edit- Wanted to support this topic
Jack Light legion syndicate	Posted - 2009.02.04 03:20:00 - [463] All the way
Lorzion IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2009.02.04 06:04:00 - [464] Edited by: Lorzion on 04/02/2009 06:04:29 0.0 Should have something static that people would fight for to pull real PVP off of the gates and POS's that would effect an alliance's income or something like that. Currently the only way for small allaince's to even make a dent in people's isk making ability is by sitting in a ratting system cloaked keeping everyone docked, safed and cloaked, and POS'ed.
LaVista Vista	Posted - 2009.02.04 09:34:00 - [465] Here's the CSM minutes where this issue is discussed quite a bit
Yon Krum The Knights Templar Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.02.04 10:57:00 - [466] Read the original suggestions. Read the CSM minutes on initial discussions. Heartily approve. In fact, I had intended at one point to write on this myself, but see most of these suggestions as being identical, will save the effort. "Hammerhead gave a homework for the CSM: brainstorming on this issue." I'll start another thread for this homework, however. --Krum
Jove X Dragon Highlords	Posted - 2009.02.09 03:31:00 - [467] Will there be a chance that in the revamping ... we'll actually see Empire faction rats distributed in 0.0 npc faction space?
Cataracts GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.09 09:01:00 - [468] Some very good ideas.
Temari Kurita GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.03.09 17:01:00 - [469] Supporting this. -=-=-=-=- Just another happy bee for the Swarm
Ray Tarkin	Posted - 2009.05.21 19:32:00 - [470] I find it interesting that i read thru 16 pages on this, and not one question regarding that stance CCP has about " Pushing more Players into 0.0 " ? I see what honestly looks like the same small groups of folks screaming at each other , all the while embracing this assumption that if there was even more stuff in 0.0, there would be a mass exodus into 0.0? No, i think you all relise why there are very few players exculsive to 0.0 and it isn't about ISK itself. It's about being able to log on, and go play, without hassel, without uber-doom, without having to constantly look over your shoulder or wait around for enough other people that wanna do what you wanna do to be around. Yes, i already hear the keyboards going at this, i'm such a n00b, ect ect. Yet, i think you'll find that argument is the reason even most of you make money in empire, and blow it in 0.0. Wanna make lowsec and 0.0 attractive? less hassel, less stress. Simple to say, but extremly unpopular to admit. You wanted the biggest ships, best rocks, best ice , ect ect . . You got it , and your alone. No-one even wants to try going out there, because it's just not worth . . There Time. Not ISK alone, but simply because it eats up time and stresses folks out to even try going out there. Guessing this is where you'll start Trolling and screaming Carebear? You said it yourself, Risk vs. Reward. It's not that there isn't reward there, it's that stress and risk to even make the attempt isn't worth it to most players, Because they just wanna play. In low-sec and moreso in 0.0, you just can't really do that, now can you ? You all wanted the pressure, guess what ? Most other players don't. They wanna go shoot some bad guys, mine a few rocks, chatter with others and relax. So, while i DO AGREE that you all could use more to do out there, and a few of the sugestions i see on here seem great in that direction, CCP's idea that if they keep just tossing candy out there, that more players will swarm out into it? No, not really. Some revamping that might instead make it less stressful? That might be a better question.

SXYGeeK Interstellar Planetary KIA Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.21 20:49:00 - [471] some awesome ideas in here. I particularily like the ideas around moving sov holding to planets, upgrading stations with agents, upgrading planets with colonies. I understand that NPC trade goods are an isk sink for the economy and this may be a good thing, but this could be remedies simply by paying salary to colony personel. the idea of making small gang targets out of the colonies is awesome! perhaps incorporate some of the sub profesion skills such as hacking and salvaging for small gangs to exploit hostile resources. -We So SeXy
SXyGeeK Bravo Interstellar Planetary KIA Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.21 20:57:00 - [472] Supporting!, maybe i can finaly use a hacking module in PVP :_) -We So SeXy
sxyklrsunfish	Posted - 2009.05.21 20:59:00 - [473] Supporting! less trade goods to haul is good :)
eliminator2 Annihilate. Shock Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.21 21:00:00 - [474] after seeing the first page full of MM and goon supports with there alts :p i was thinkin erm no but tbh it isnt that bad but could do with boostin low sec for the rich as well
SXYProwler Interstellar Planetary KIA Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.21 21:06:00 - [475] Supporting... I'm not an alt, i swear, just a similar name to my buddies :P
Huang Tang	Posted - 2009.05.23 16:20:00 - [476] Supported with all my love...! plz CCP make us happy!!1
Chunky Milk	Posted - 2009.05.23 17:52:00 - [477] Planets are a great start, but if you allow for small objectives such as complexes or pillars or society you're going to run into issues where a bunch of pirates with no territorial ambitions can directly influence a major power. Dreads should be required to even begin the contesting of space, it's one of the larger military assets alliances would have.
diabeteman ICE is Coming to EVE Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.05.25 16:00:00 - [478] check !
Tamahra Danke fuer den Fisch	Posted - 2009.05.25 17:22:00 - [479] including planets into the sov mechanics sounds nifty. /supported
De'Vadder Heavy Influence Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.26 10:00:00 - [480] Edited by: De''Vadder on 26/05/2009 10:00:46 I totally love the idea of small and little armed structures that generate some sort of wealth (trade goods) over time. If you could go and hack/destroy them and steal that wealth from the sov holding alliance that would be awesome, some real targets for roaming ops, and it would be cool to take a transport and someone with codebreakers out into enemy territory. I couldnt support this ideas any more. Please resize your sig to a maximum of 400 x 120 and a file size no greater than 24000 bytes - Mitnal

Aminam Proweco	Posted - 2009.05.27 15:37:00 - [481] supported
Sir Ibex	Posted - 2009.05.27 16:54:00 - [482] I disagree with the OP. 0.0 is VERY rewarding for those who are willing to take the risk, and it is A LOT more profitable then empire space. The mining is much better and more profitable. The ratting is a lot more lucrative and now the denizens of 0.0 got wormholes and everything that comes with it. I do support the idea of improving 0.0 but not the way the OP proposes. I want to see 0.0 made more accessible to newbs. There should be PvP bots that new people can practice with, and wormholes should be made available in empire space. Moreover, there are by far more pressing issues for ccp to work on. Ships need to be balanced, performance needs to be improved, missions should be made more interesting and diverse, the list goes on and on. So basically I SUPPORT OP's idea, but NOT RIGHT NOW.
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.05.27 17:03:00 - [483] Originally by: Sir Ibex ...and wormholes should be made available in empire space. Wormholes are available in all space, including empire. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Yue Rubens Fnord Works Event Horizon.	Posted - 2009.05.28 11:38:00 - [484] OP: Seed agents at your own station? \o/ Full support on that. Improve your space? Mhh, difficult. More Arkonor = Less Megacyte price and so on and so on. Good in theory. More space then you can defend issue? \o/ full support here too, take local off and this should be goners tho :) I don't think 0.0 needs to be buffed too much; but very valid points in OP.
Nova Soldier ROMANIA Renegades Legiunea ROmana	Posted - 2009.05.29 13:21:00 - [485] Finaly some good change when it commes to 0.0 sov.
Kytanos Termek Darkstorm Command Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.06.01 17:59:00 - [486] I am completely for a deep and complex system of empire development, and competition with other nearby alliances "empires".
Solj RichPopolous Amarr Eve Liberation Force Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.06.11 21:22:00 - [487] What if we removed local from 0.0, and made a planetary pos module that acts as an alliance subspace communication router for that alliance or standings based? Or anyone in the system? Systems not having it would be like wormhole systems are right now.
RedSplat Heretic Army	Posted - 2009.06.12 01:27:00 - [488] Planetary development and sov. holding mechanics that make it impossible to hold vast empires
Shaleen Beach Boys BeachBoys	Posted - 2009.06.12 07:39:00 - [489] supported Owing to lack of Eve-related content, signature removed. If you would like to discuss this, please mail [email protected] - Mitnal
Zostera Honour Bound Sc0rched Earth	Posted - 2009.06.12 12:00:00 - [490] I can't find anything to add to this really. The suggestions from Darius and Vuk get my full support.

Amasai Starfire Oasis Thalion Syndicate	Posted - 2009.06.12 19:39:00 - [491] thumbs up
Twilight Magester	Posted - 2009.06.17 08:08:00 - [492] /support op
Crode Eve University	Posted - 2009.06.18 21:18:00 - [493]


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 .. 17 :: [one 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.