Traffic Control: Nullsec's High Bar

Avatar
deth2allsupercaps
Avatar
im down, where do I sign?
Avatar
Supers make this game boring for new players
Avatar
Press Butan?
Avatar
It's amazing to see something I study at length in my degree (Red Queen hypothesis) apply to a goddamn game about spaceships.
Avatar
as someone who dreamt of forging a path in nullsec i know exactly what he is talking about.. now where am i? part of the CFC
Avatar
I want CCP to take a year and rethink content drivers, siphons weren't the answer, and neither was the trusec nerf. While I don't want EVE to become an endless fight to keep my sov, I really dislike being invincible, it's no fun. I also love the CFC and do not wish to leave it. Perhaps this new "Player Built Stargate" is what I'm wanting, but, probably not. I want CCP to make eve fun for the smaller guys too instead of shitting on them everyday.
Avatar
"Those who cannot adapt become victims of Evolution." - Sir Molle
Avatar
Super Caps, and the associated arms race of them, was the death of true null space sov warfare and the ability of "new" corps to engage in it. However, I seriously doubt that anyone truly believes that any of the Null blocks, especially goons and their CFC lackeys. would truly like to see them all disappear. I remember when...lol...goons showed up and swarmed into null sec, it was awesome. However those days are gone forever and your owns success has forever almost completely ended the chance of "the little guy" having a chance at true null sec without the blessing of the blessing of one of the blocs, that were created and endorsed by the goons, whether directly or indirectly.Good article, though.
Avatar
Don't press the button yet glorious leader, Im in the market for a wyvern.
Avatar
Supers make this game boring for old players as well. In fact, it might even be more boring, since we remember what it was like before supercapital dominance.One of my alts is currently flying a super; it's been around for so long that I remember when it was called a Mothership. (Back when it was little more than a plus-sized carrier that could fit a clone bay, and was used as a forward operating base for hitting cynojammers.) I'm holding onto it for sentimental value only; if it weren't for that, I'd have sold it years ago.
Avatar
Perhaps he should press it and save you the isk!
Avatar
Lets get some fucking shoes, and then DO IT!
Avatar
I agree that supers are game breaking at the current state of the game but, what is a realistic solution? You can't just remove them or nerf them to a point of irrelevance that would cause such a mass exodus of veteran players it could realistically kill the game completely. If you make a new counter against them then the new counter becomes the new super and nothing has changed so, what is the solution that keeps the game healthy and enjoyable. Right at the moment, I am having a hard time thinking of what can be done.
Avatar
my main interest in Sov politics are the culture and personalities. These latest articles by mittens are a real delight for me because of how much they say about the man behind the mittani. we can see hes growing up. hes thinking less about his legacy as a goon and more about his legacy in new eden. it must be very liberating for him to finally let loose a little.
Avatar
The agreement is between the CFC and PL, not between the CFC and PL plus PL's pets.
Avatar
In this day and age of eve? You can't. I wish I had an easy answer for the smaller entities to get a leg up on things. I've played for 8years and watched 0.0 evolve from multitudes of smaller blocs to the renter empire and super blocs that exist now. But I don't think exterminating supers will do shit. .. unless the leadership of these super blocs completely fails in all sides. ..and the coalitions totally collapse,I'm only able to grasp straws on what could be done. Would reinventing Sov and putting a cap on alliance size do things? Maybe? Probably not... nerfing capital jump range? Probably little affect. So I too am not sure exactly what could be done to help the little bros
Avatar
For the record, the USN did not destroy ships with small, fast, and cheap fighter planes. During the early parts of the war, they were using small, slow, and cheap bombers like the SBD Dauntless, and during the later stages of the war they were using large, fast, not-so-cheap fighter/bomber attack aircraft like the Chance-Vought F4U Corsair.Of course, by that time, PACFLEET was anything but a 'smoking ruin'.
Avatar
Reducing jump range would only mean the large blocs would need to move more cynos and set up more fuel caches, and we all have the capacity to do both of those things without much real effort.
Avatar
Removing sov timers would only mean that the majority of fights happen in timezones where the player count is lowest. And by 'fights', I mean 'one side alarm-clocks to take a system unopposed, then the other side takes it back unopposed four hours later when they have overwhelming force, lather, rinse, repeat'. CCP wants to see the big headliner fights. Ninja-grinds won't do that. And that's all you'd see.Reducing Titan and Supercarrier building material would make them cheaper - but you'd still have to dedicate a character to flying that one ship. That, too, is one of the barriers to ownership. As for reducing EHP - sure, if you're making them cheaper, make them easier to destroy. You'll see the meta shift entirely to supercapital combat as the large blocs will be able to afford to replace them easier, and the little guys who want to break into sov-holding... don't have the SP to do it, because the large blocs are still able to field a pair of full fleets of supers, each - and have less reason to be cautious with them.Other than using titans, dreads already do the highest damage vs unmoving, big-ass structures. Supercarriers aren't used for their dps, they're used for their e-war immunity and ability to function as a massive logistics fleet and keep one another (and any non-triage/siege capitals on the field) alive.
Avatar
Let's say you do that. Let's also say EVE somehow gets enough players to make use of that space. Here's what happens:Smaller blocs develop in the new space. Fearful of their larger neighbors, they band together, or make nice with those larger neighbors. Eventually, they've gobbled one another up until... VOILA! Two large blocs again. Maybe 3, if you're lucky.The nature of humanity is ever-enlarging social groups, seeking hegemony in a quest for the illusion of self-determination.
Avatar
I like the 'Red Queen' analogy but I think it falls a little short in that we don't get all that much evolution, certainly not in the high end of the ship inventory register on what ships can do. There is a very great deal of evolution in how ships are used through the ever-evolving process of ship balancing and the addition of new space frames to do whatever enters our nefarious minds to do. We don't see a whole lot of that in super capitals, at once because there aren't a lot of them and also because you want to be careful in what you allow ships of that class to do.The main problem is that CCP, a company that shows an endearing lack of understanding of its own product, once thought that super capitals / titans would be so hard to come by that they would never become an over powering force. They completely ignored the idea that because they were there and so powerful people would go through the great effort of building them, which was made 'easier' by having more people around to do the building. What CCP would have wanted to do was to increase the mineral requirement by a factor of 15 (my arbitrary number) so that you would have to really want to build one and that it would take an absurd amount of effort. At that point using a titan in an engagement becomes a risk unto itself: because they cost that much effort to build them, you have to ask yourself whether you want to use the few you have in the present engagement.I concur with the point that Sov mechanics need to be changed so that it becomes a viable option for corps to pursue. As it is now the power blocks are so huge that they make any such aspiration null (ahahaha) and void. The problem from the point of view of CCP is that any change they make will end up favouring established powers because they already have the force of numbers. Power blocks are there because they have power. That's what it means. Any change CCP makes at this point would have to start from the current situation and that is not really an easy change for them.What we want to do is to find a solution to how society in EVE resolves to establish territory and what that means for established powers.A few years back there was a school of thinking that would have created a type of covenant that would establish smaller entities as 'owners' of a slice of their own space. True alliances. That idea appears to have been forgotten in the great myst of time.
Avatar
I've advocated years ago for adding more systems to New Eden. Not in the tens but in the thousands. So that you could actually go out and make some of your own content.
Avatar
They didn't conquer unified nations with professional armies and unity of purpose, so that's a poor analogy.
Avatar
Give them tracking. So you can take em out and mess up a battleship blob, but prepared to lose them just as quickly.
Avatar
The root problem is that making things harder doesn't make them less useful or important, it only reduces the number of groups capable of doing it.This. This is what everyone who keeps saying 'well, we can just make it harder to do X, that'll give little guys a chance' doesn't seem to get: There is no problem in the history of problems that can't be solved better by increasing the number of brain-hours being dedicated to solving it, and/or the number of man-hours of effort being dedicated to addressing it.The solution to the 'big blocs are strangling everyone else' isn't to make it harder - that'll only make sure only the big blocs have the manpower resources to enact the optimal solutions. It's to give us more reason to limit ourselves, rather than be limited by bumping up against someone else's shit. Incentives for density, rather than system quantity. If the returns on a system scaled in such a way that it was more economically advantageous to have 30,000 guys in 1 place, rather than spread over half of the galaxy, we'd do it. You couldn't keep the Theta guys out of that 1 place, even if you drove to their houses and left them hog-tied inside their own clothes dryer.Of course, how to do that without making it suicidal to try to bring a hostile force in, or without horribly overloading the hamsters keeping CCP's servers running... now that's a problem.
Avatar
but also think of Supers and capitals jumping in an unleashing a swarm of subcaps with titans able to bridge in fleets without having to risk themselves necessarily unless there are other titans to attack. Jump in, unleash your subcaps and pilots, jump out and get more.That way supers and carriers are still a useful method of force projection providing a massive benefit at great risk to themselves.The question is how to you make them still useful against other capitals. Maybe make it so that while subcaps can easily destroy them, it takes other caps to hold them down.
Avatar
Totally true and I stand corrected.
Avatar
Arms races are fundamentally a symptom, and supercaps are just one facet of the arms race.
Avatar
Mittens and most everyone else in the CFC would press the button that magically splits the CFC into multiple pieces, if it got rid of supers as well. Most of the reason we have been able to assemble such a huge coalition is fear of supers. After the NC died it was clear that to face supercap fleets you needed overwhelming numbers, so it was pretty easy to glom together.It's true that if CCP did delete supers the CFC would have a crazy advantage, and we wouldn't break apart just because (most of us like each other now). The CFC wouldn't be an unshakable coalition anymore though, because there wouldn't be the fear that keeps any alliance from leaving of their own free will..
Avatar
It's the cold war, except supercaps destroy buildings while leaving people standing. And for all the co-opting of Soviet imagery the CFC indulges in, the whole thing runs a lot more like NATO. NCDot/N3... well, I dunno, they're on the other side of the Tritanium curtain.
Avatar
Veteran entitlement is quite possibly the most pervasive cancer in any game. End-game players are a dime a dozen in the CFC but the difference is that they don't feel entitled to win because of how long they've been playing.
Avatar
"Kill all supers" is just a small part of the problem. Power projection needs to be axe-murdered if nullsec is ever going to be lively again.
Avatar
They didn't lose interest, the people they had conquered got access to the same technology and decided they didn't want to be colonial serfs anymore. Then europe said didn't want that empire anyways and made quick plans to transition out in a way that saved pride.Europe conquered because they had supers, Africa & Asia had T1 cruisers.
Avatar
Eh, Europe enjoyed more advantages than just professional armies and unity of purpose - technological innovation swung around to their advantage just as they were looking to expand and compete w/one another, rather than come into direct conflict.As well, the actually colonized areas (as opposed to most of sub-saharan Africa, which was nominally 'colonized' but other than South Africa itself had no significant 'colonist' population) were areas like the New World and Australia - places where the natives had no defense against the Europeans' secret army: diseases. Had Cortez marched upon meso-American civilizations not suffering from epidemics that killed or incapacitated the majority of their populations, he might have had an entirely different fate.At the same time, it's horribly, horribly inaccurate to even begin to characterize the end of the Colonial Era as 'losing interest' - rather, they were running out of places they could seize. Japan proved too insular and too intractable. China, too large and too difficult to control - 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia' isn't entirely about Russia, after all. Montgomery's first rule from the book of war, as he put it, might have been 'do not march on Moscow', but his second was 'do not involve your armies in a land war in China'.As a result, Europe's empires began to try quietly knifing one another. Bismark's work in keeping the Concert of Europe in play, as it were, involved quite a lot of posturing and growling about colonial interests. After World War I, the issues that most often came up for the League of Nations were issues of conflict over colonies. Europe didn't 'lose interest'. Rather, it simply got to the point where it was actually easier for Europe to tear itself apart for four years of unfathomable carnage than to successfully manage to claim any significant territory that someone else hadn't already stuck a flag into.
Avatar
The supers ARE the power part of Power Projection. Regular old dreads and carriers are increadibly vulnerable to subcap attack - they're vulnerable to scrams, ECM, damps, etc etc.Supers? Bubbles and hictors, or go home, because you can't touch them.
Avatar
For the record Douglass SBD Dauntless was arguably the best dive bomber in the war. It was neither slow or cheap. And it was used from 40-44 throughout the whole war not just the early stages.
Avatar
What's really unforgivable about CCP's lack of foresight regarding supercapital proliferation is the story Hilmar loves to tell about how he first found out there was real emergent gameplay going on in EVE. The story about how when he was on Family Leave just after release, he hooked up with a group of miners, and saw them jetcanning - using a mechanic intended as a testing tool to achieve higher rates of efficient, cooperative return on investments than CCP had envisioned.In the first months of the game's existence, he had it blatantly demonstrated: If you dangle the carrot, people will do things you cannot predict in order to band together to get that carrot. And once they have it, they'll plant the damned thing and grow more.
Avatar
DERP! I stand corrected as well - I was thinking of Douglas' TBD Devastator torpedo bomber, primarily!
Avatar
Supercapitals and Red Queen are but a symptom of the actual issue, the elephant in the room, the alpha and omega of why every PvP game dies and EVE will die too.MORE. IS. BETTER.Be it experience, players or stuff, more is better, and the only counter is to shift the rules each now and then so everyone is forced to start from scratch and that provides new blood a chance against what otherwise will become impossible odds of massed experience and resources.But then, conversely, as soon as the people who massed up experience and resources find them unusable, they grow angry. And they quit.The only way to lessen the evils of a competition game that reaches Red Queen status is to open alternate gameplay paths so players can compete in a different way.And that is not coming to a sandbox MMO near you any time soon.
Avatar
You are talking about 1 key issue from 2 completely missing part where block itself even full of subcaps also breaks the balance. It doesn't matter which of 2 tools in your disposal will you use against a newcomer, Supercap or a huge subcap fleet. Both of those issue raise the bar for nullsec every day. You missed the point that Supercap blob at the moment is used to counter swarms of subcaps. It's like if US army will try to stockpile tactical nukes while Chinese and Russians will push for more troops.
Avatar
I don't really agree with your premise that if supers are removed smaller groups will be able to take SOV. Although, I agree it will be a step in the right direction. At the end of the day any attempt to take SOV (anchor SBUs, towers, hit R64 moons, etc) will yield the bloc a free intel notification telling the bloc who I am and what I am doing. If I couldn't fight the bloc's 400+ supers and capitals what are the chances I can fight the bloc's 400+ carriers/dreads that can power project and to the system they never use that I am trying to take? Especially since the only reason the bloc knows I am trying to take that system they never use is because of notifications? The odds are better than when the bloc was fielding 400+ supers, but still not great.If you want small groups to enter SOV you have to eliminate the tools that allow blocs to afk hold thousands of systems they don't use. Supers becoming non-existant is a start. Until notifications die and power projection takes a hit you won't see any new blood.
Avatar
Maybe open Jove space and make it super rich in resources. Maybe that ought to make both power blocks to finally fight again?
Avatar
Where are all the small groups that used to try to gain sov then get splattered? Living in wormholes. This is where you go if you can field a half dozen capitals with a support fleet, because you aren't going to get blobbed by 250 slowcats or dropped by supers. This has contributed to the stagnation of null because all of those groups who might in the past have been able to harrass a bloc while operating out of nearby npc null or lowsec, or band together in a mini-coalition and take a constellation or two have gone and found their own sandbox (with blackjack and exotic dancers). While I love living in w-space there's no doubt in my mind that it is draining null of it's mid level pilots. I'm one of them myself.
Avatar
The real question is why the goons haven't created an alliance called "Null Sec's Schlong" and drawn a giant penis on the map with sov.If you want to change cap dominance, remove ewar immunity. That's the easiest big red button to push.
Avatar
Isn't the fallacy of the 'nerf power projection' argument that it somehow dissipates power in sov warfare. It may indeed stop random groups hot dropping your lowsec fight but in a sov I can't see it having a dramatic effect apart from making it harder to take a blocs sov.George Foreman has pretty slow hands, but when they eventually get their they still hurt.
Avatar
I'd give it a week before we saw "Wrecking ball mark 2, now with obscene amounts of remote ECCM" meaning you'd need a fleet of ECMGus plus another fleet of DPS to take them down - and the people who can field 500 subcaps have supercaps of their own anyway.If there were a simple magic red button I'm not saying CCP would have pushed it by now, but at the very least we'd have heard of it because CSM or this site would be shouting to the rooftops about it.I'm inclined to something like limiting supercaps to only operate in space with truesec below say -0.4, which means that if you want to set up in a crappy corner of nullsec you stand a chance of wresting it from your renter overlords. That would have meant no Asakai of course and no staging your supercap fleet out of low sec so that idea also needs work.
Avatar
About the only thing I'd take issue with in this is the "SOLELY" responsible part. A few other factors feed in to excess power projection but fundamentally he's right.Let's just admit they were a mistake - understandable at the time, but glaringly apparent now and just get rid of the fuckers. They don't make anybody happy, even the people who fly them, there's no way to balance them. CCP: please just fucking ditch them and then we can get on with our spacelives.
Avatar
I agree. I have heard him mention that story and I have no problem with it, because it is emerging game play and it should totally happen, just to see what the sandbox will allow for. But to be then surprised that when people get the opportunity to build immense star ships, because they can, and not think that will happen as much as possible...CCP keep underestimating what we will do when given a chance (well, maybe not the people who've played the game themselves).I think that's at the heart of what this piece is about: people will maximize the return they can get from any system and because that's the kind of community it is, they will do that as soon as it becomes possible. It is at once the great potential and the great risk of the sandbox.
Avatar
Well at the moment the number of entites in null with any agency is two. Advanced mathematics was never my strong point but maybe you can explain how "making things harder" could reduce that number?Maybe you could also explain how being able to shoot a POS with dreads without getting raped by bloc supers is "making things harder" for small groups as well while you're at it.
Avatar
That, and running around nerfing carrier/jumpfreighter jump ranges and increasing fuel use in the name of "nerfing power projection" hurts the little guys far more than the coalition blocks.Fuel is subsidized by the coalition... they have multiple people with whole accounts worth of cyno-alts. Mucking with fuel and ranges and throwing in esoteric requirments for cynos, etc, just means you need to throw a few more people at the problem, which is easy enough to incentivise.Compare that to joe lowseccer, who has, oh, say, three accounts and has to pay out of pocket for his own fuel. He's also the only carrier pilot in his corporation, and so-on. Start throwing nerfs at the big guys, and HE will probably up and quit.
Avatar
The big blocs can cross the map in 15 minutes if they want to get organised about it. How big a map are you thinking of?
Avatar
Titans are also vulnerable to subcaps as well as supers. In small groups and having no support any kind of ship is vulnerable to number greater number of other ships. What titan or mothership can do to a cruiser? Supers and Titans are not a problem, they are PART of the problem. You cannot try to solve whole problem by dealing with one of its parts. You can completely remove supers from game even now, but I doubt it will have a dramatic on current sov nullsec. People will just abuse another part of this problem - More worm bodies on the field. Thus we will get to the point where outcome of the battle was determined by fact of who will load grid first.
Avatar
This isn't a result of humanity, very much the opposite. It's the result of game mechanics. Almost nobody, including the coalition members themselves likes the status quo. You don't need to forcibly break up the coalitions, all you need to do is allow smaller groups to be able to stand independent in null sec and the coalitions will fall apart naturally.
Avatar
'Small groups' of supercaps being vulnerable would be relevant if there were any small groups of supercaps left.Guess what, they've all merged together into today's mega-blocs.
Avatar
2 - 1 < 2Also what? Removing supercapitals is not "making things harder", it's the opposite.
Avatar
A lone titan or supercarrier can just, you know, jump out, against anything NOT an infinite-point scripted heavy interdictor, a bunch of neuting battleships, or an interdiction bubble (which don't work in lowsec). Certainly, Titans are less of an issue in lowsec because they're just big dreadnaughts without access to their Doomsday... but Supercarriers? Still have fighterbombers aplenty to vomit onto unfortunate lowsec dreadnaughts.
Avatar
Sure, let's add more space. Thousands of empty systems more... So that when you go on a roam you die of boredom before reaching the destination... The vast majority of nullsec is empty! No one lives there apart from renters and big blocks, and these are concentrated in a relatively small area. I mean, take a ceptor and fly through dronelands. There's sov in every system, sure, but you'll see that maybe once in ten systems will you find a lonely neutral present in local. Many of the people that used to live in nullsec, left either for FW (more action and easier to MAKE MONEY), highsec (the so-called industrialists and those who farm incursions - easier to MAKE MONEY) or for other games. Making money is something very important in this game and it's just easier out of nullsec (which seems stupid to me but hey, the FW farmers won't agree with me there...). When null was the biggest gold mine around - people were in null, now - they're not. As for the blocks themselves, they are making money (and tons of it) but from enterprises that require being a big player.So to simplyfy - nullsec ain't worth being in if you're a small group. It is worthwhile if you are a huge block, hence we have 2 superpowers and a tiny number of small entities that don't know better.
Avatar
After 3-4 months one will win and rotflstomp the other with their new found riches. Two blocks are worse than six, but one block would be a disaster.
Avatar
When I was living in Period Basis with Tribe, the popular saying was "0.0 is empty". And it pretty much was. These large blocks control a lot of space, but most of them is either rented or unused (just the moons). When it comes to social interaction (pvp) you need to go through half the space to get some pew.
Avatar
*death to all super capitals. You aren't an editor here are you? :negative:
Avatar
You can say same about 1k battleship fleets that CFC fields. What can counter those fleets? A bigger fleet or tracking titans right? You should know by now that massive supercap power that exists on one side of nullsec was put together as a response to swarms of battleship fleets existing on other side. You cannot take out supers and say that problem is solved. It doesn't matter what will I use to gank a lowsec pilots, a massive subcap fleet or supercaps, if you cannot match the numbers or have inappropriate hardware your fleet will be killed or end up running from the field.P.S.Supers are perfect for killing anything bigger then battleships. If you feel disappointed by fact that supers to exactly what they were designed for aka killing capitals, you should review you vision of game once again so it will match reality
Avatar
Agreed. But it would be an excellent first step.
Avatar
Reduces them from 2?
Avatar
So let me get this straight: your hypothesis is that removing supers will consequentially lead to 1 bloc owning 0,0 uncontested?
Avatar
I - in turn - would like them to take a look at content showstoppers. There's plenty of content drivers around but when a fitted T1 cruiser can cost over 50 mil I smell bullshit. Back in the days when I started playiong eve, you could buy a fitted Dominix for that. Sure, you can say "then take your afktar and grind some more isk" - you'd be absolutely right, you can, but everyone hates the grind. The prices make pilots and even huge block FCs insanely risk-averse (after all, replacing that 250 man BS fleet will cost a pretty penny), hence less action, less balls-to-the-wall type of flying.
Avatar
What? Are you trolling or did you just not read my post?
Avatar
What? Are you trolling or did you just not bother to read my post?
Avatar
All these people who are trotting out the idiotic "but.. but.. numbers!" line: please stop. It's a dumb argument."But numbers!" is *always* going to be a precondition because EVE is a single-sharded open world. The point is that at the moment you need numbers AND supercaps. So the BNI of today can never hope to emulate the success of the goons of 2005 and be the plucky rebel fleet fighting the evil empire.The evil empires of today don't have just one death-star, but hundreds. If you don't have hundreds too you can just fuck right off unless you want to join the empire - or else be the empires carefully preserved punchbag for when it gets bored and wants to work off a bit of testosterone.
Avatar
I just used my trusty ol' CSM time machine to go back to 2009 and persuade CCP to add ~2500 systems to EVE, and work in severe nerfs to power projection. We can use the results of this 5-year experiment to see what the political map of space with no supercaps and extremely restricted PP looks like.Well let's just take a look-see at this here data shall we?
Avatar
I would disagree that removing JBs would give a nullsec to CFC on a silver plate. I remember times when there were no JBs in game and fleets had to travel by gates. I remember that when big fleets (150 LR battleships) clashed my ishkur with T1 guns and drones still made a difference. Me and many others like me in support fleets (support fleet was called a kitchensink fleet of frigs and cruisers back than) were camping multiple routs and making life of reinforcement a living nightmare. From 100 ships traveling to dest 20% were dying on a route. Now nobody uses gates, people travel by jump bridges or use titans to get into final destination. You cannot effectively disrupt reinforcement unless you will bring a hugeass fleet into enemy stating system and camp undock.
Avatar
Door #2
Avatar
Why do you keep replying to me with things that are unrelated my posts?
Avatar
Mittens. I don't like him but he's always right when it comes to Eve mechanics. CCP give him a bloody job already.Death to all supers.
Avatar
Well said.
Avatar
Back in the day a BS cost 50 mil but the time it took to acquire that 50m was far higher. (Also a 2014 T1 cruiser is likely a better ship than a 2007 BS in most ways.) Replacement costs for a fleet are painful though, though a lot of that is the fact that 250 man fleets are common these days. Back in the day that 500 people fighting in one system was a major war and lagged everything to shit. Lots of things about the old days sucked, and the fact that they sucked was not critical to the overall meta.A huge factor in risk aversion these days is the factor that logistics play in fights. Welping a full fleet for zero kills is a thing that happens, and being on the wrong side of it sucks. THAT was the good thing about the old days, the fact that smaller or less skilled groups could feel that they were accomplishing something with "isk victory" or such.
Avatar
I kind of agree with your pov on supers but to shift all blame to supers is wrong, in my opinion there is a magnitude of reasons why we are were we are now and yes one of them is called super capitals. Another one is resources, size of organizations, ease of logistics and renting.To literate on that a bit more the amount of resources an alliance needs are immense in the current scale of eve sov-war. There is sov cost, fuel cost, SRP COST, infrastructure cost, subsidies and more. These immense costs force alliances to take more space then they should actually need simply to satisfy their hunger for income via renting. Same can be said about corporations a single -1.0 system can not even sustain a ~20 !actual humans! corp if they are in one timezone. WHY? Anomaly re spawn timers of 5 minutes a pretty stupid mechanic yet its there WHY? Personal nullsec income if you are not happening to be building super-capitals is shit. Ratting income scales incredibly bad if more people do anomalies together they are being punished for it by earning less instead of being rewarded for it. Because you know MMO team-play should be rewarded?.. WHY? Mining kind of scales really well if you use multi-boxing software because hidden belts re-spawn rather quick and you have multiple of them. So why does ratting not scale? Moons and renting i'd love to see both gone and in renting personal income goes up and alliances gain the ability to tax that income obviously the way mining is taxed would need to change but non the less that would be better then what we have now. SRP? should not exist! WHY? Because with SRP there is no sense of loss, loss's are meaningless!Right now if you're ratting you're making 120 to 200mil per hour in nullsec depending were and with what you rat. ~400 if you do smartbomb ratting but since that requires you to use at least 4 characters its a pretty bad benchmark. Mining 75-90mil per hour in hidden belts per character but since it scales quite well I'd argue that its one of the best forms of income right now in nullsec.Now lets compare that to lowsec level 5's for amarr make me 500-600mil per hour cashing out implants using 2 characters (Passive tanked tengu [8mil sp toon] and maxed out Paladin 30mil SP toon]. Risks? Non if you know how to do it right. If you use a super to blitz the non gated missions you're looking at 1 to 1,4b per hour.That is pretty neat income! Wormholes? C5's made me 45bill in 9 days of escalation farming with 3 friends. We could have done it just fine with 3. Which would have given us a better payout but since we only did it to kill time and because we did not give 2 shits about Phreeze's assah deployment at the time we did not really mind the lower payout. Yes this requires alts and high SP but the risk when you do it in AUTZ and have all the people that tend to role statics watchlisted there is NO RISK! In total we did 2 C5's farm one empty role the static c5 to find a new one with plenty of anos and sites to run.We made about 950mil per hour each since everyone was using 2 accounts that ends up at 475mil per character per hour.Pretty damn tiring because you HAVE to farm for 4 days straight everyday but same time really good isk at no risk!Now what about NPC 0.0 Level 4's well you can run them in semi unprobebale fits at pretty much no risk and since all you do is blitz missions 300-380mil per hour is the norm for Sansha and Angels that is.Not bad huh? Real Risks whops NON.Ah almost forgot Faction Warfare its pretty neat money as well if you are farming for the right side and wait for T4 to cash out and you can do it in bombers 'lol' boring but no risk what so ever.Highsec well no clue highsec sucks I'd never bother trying to life there so no clue but I reckon the level 4 income aint that bad if you blitz em..So why would any of these groups ever bother to try and take sov space? Right there is no reason for it. Not worth it.Thats just the income part then we have the part about industry even after the changes 0.0 industry sucks because the ratio of highmins to lowmins while mining is retarded 90% of the value when striping a Large Hidden belt comes from Megacyte and Zydrine. 90%!! It should be around 50% at most the rest should be lowmins. The way 0.0 mining is right now localized industry without being forced to import lowmins is impossible. WHY? With the changes to Jump-fuel cost import and export is getting a whole lot more expensive which is supposed to force local production but the basic requirements for that to happen do not exist. T2 Production you'll always have to import stuff ALWAYS! T3 well you'll have to import everything.. T1 well you'll have to import lowmins. To make up for that we get a slight buff for amarr outposts 1% ME per upgrade level across 2 upgrade lines one to tier 3 one to tier 2 thats 5% for 65billion isk. ARE YOU KIDING ME? 50% increased fuel cost in return we get 5% and that is not a real 5% buff! Why? Because pos mods have 2%! So you're looking at 3% for 65billion of investment... Yes we also got the minmatar outpost fully upgraded you look at 19,6% more efficient refining over highsec for a 48bill investment. But that can not make up for the fact that there is not enough lowmins in the ore. 19,6% more of nothing is still nothing anyone see the problem with that? Even if you bother to upgrade the outpost to tier3 you'll still have to import lowmins in form of compressed ore from highsec yes you'll have to import 19,6% less but you'll still have to import. WHY?Eve has fundamental flaws in its design and so far CCP has never been willing to address any of it. Because big fights are free PR and CCP loves that PR god forbids it goes away in favor of fun gameplay. What they fail to realize is that everyone who wants to try the game after such headlines has already done so by now and how many of them stayed? I'd like to a a chart of that I bet not a whole lot because eve SUCKS. Its one of the most expensive MMO's to play just in terms of subscription alone 13,99€ per month and since its impossible to really play with just one account most of us have at least 2-4... and what do we get for that kind of money well not a whole lot other then tons of excuses delays bad features broken features bad fixes broken fixes not sure if there is a need to go on. I've lost confidence in CCP to turn shit around and make eve fun again hercance I unsubbed 15 out of 16 accounts. No need to keep paying 220€ per month for a shitty game. I doubt i'm the only one. Small fixes all the time are nice but you can only do that for so long eventually you'll have to deliver something else again. And sorry but the industry changes are pathetic at best they could have been a way to completely fuck up the status quo but CCP does not seem to have the balls to do it.
Avatar
Back in the day it took 3 Havens (only counting isk gain, without the loot, which was much more valuable than now) to earn that 50 mil. Now, with a Domi at 250mil+ with fit and getting roughly 30 mil isk per Haven... do the math.
Avatar
While I agree with the "death to all super" thing, I can't see what change it would bring.How a small corp able to form 200 men fleets will be able to take space from a block able to throw 500 ships at them on every timezone.Not mentionning slowcats
Avatar
Contract them all to Chribba who will reprocess them...
Avatar
lol it makes me laugh when people blame renters and renting of systems for the issue, yes renters bankroll the alliances and coalitions, but what some seem to forget is many renters would just return to HS/LS and Null would still be in the same boat without the income if the ability to rent systems disappeared.
Avatar
Given what we've heard about their pay scale for foreigners, they couldn't afford him.
Avatar
ECM isn't the only EWAR - and it's not the most reliable. Sensor damps, webs, points that aren't mounted on a HIC... all that would be enabled.
Avatar
What can they do to a cruiser? Fit smartbombs. :)More realistically, though, that's why they fly a part of a combined Supercapital/Capital fleet - subcaps can't break supercarrier reps, and carrier-based sentry drones can hit subcaps without too much difficulty.
Avatar
People will maximize the return they can get from any system because that's the kind of species we are: a living one. Life tends to seek maximum return for minimum effort.
Avatar
Very nice.I want to throw a link in here to James' article (all hail the saviour) on supercaps, I personally think this nails it.http://themittani.com/features...The tl;dr version:1) Nerf Supercap EHP2) Introduce a Sub-Cap for EWAR against Supers (so that Subcaps are the paper for the super-rock)3) Reduce Supercap cost so they are actually loseable3b) Make Supers dockable at Stationsdid I miss anything?Making it possible to kill supers with subcaps would give a great incentive to new swarms to become aggressive.Also farms and fields, always farms and fields.
Avatar
We still use gates. We use gates to get from jump bridge to jump bridge. And we move 250-500 ships 20+ jumps without appreciable losses (people who go afk on a gate for 10m after the fleet's already left are folks we didn't really appreciate anyway. ;) ).The big advantage a cruiser gang would have in that situation is how amazingly slooooooow battleships warp now. It's almost as bad as trying to get across a 100 au system in a stolen retriever!
Avatar
Iv said it before, everyone come to WH-space
Avatar
Reps can be broken and there are many ways to do that. FBs can be killed and supers will become just a sitting ducks. Smartbombs won't do any damage to cruiser if he won't just hug the target and go afk. There are ways to deal with that, but if you are talking about full scale escalation then all you need is to bring more worm bodies on field. Remember that massive capital fleet was created just to counter massive subcapital fleet, since BS vs BS fights are irrelevant.
Avatar
Yes, you do use gates. But you use 2-3 gates or maximum 5 while distance from battlefield and staging system is 20 jumps. It doesn't matter when will u approach on POS to be bridged to another system - Titan or a JB structure, it's all the same. None of the fleets should be able to cover god damn 20 jumps in 2-3 minutes. If ship has a jump drive it must jump, but it should have a cooldown, there must be some pros and cons when you are making a shortcut like it is in everything. Right now it's like jumping from skyscraper without a parachute instead of using stairs/elevator.
Avatar
I disagree - yes, there's the eventual breakup of empire from internal stresses, but those build up over a long time - multiple lifetimes, usually. By comparison, gangs begin to aggregate against new 'outsiders' and gel into more organized structures fairly quickly. And overall, the history of human society has basically shown that pattern again and again and again - small bands or gangs grow to city-states, warlords consolidate power into petty kingdoms... as long as there's an external 'other' - which is exactly what that 'add a fuckton more systems' idea is intended to create, 'others' - humanity's self-destructive paranoia and utter inability to rise above our jealous nature as physically under-impressive apes gets re-directed into maintaining the tribe against the 'other'.That's what gives rise to religion, too - at its core, it's a method of branding. 'WE are of X tribe. We follow X tribe's gods! Those who do not are BAD! Shun them! Or stave their heads in! Whatever floats your boat!'The human animal is just another ape, looking to belong to the strongest band, with the most virile leader. S'why Vladimir Putin could get away with not rigging elections, if anyone in Russia knew how to not rig one: he projects that virile strongman persona, and an economically depressed populace still smarting from a generational fall from 'Superpower' to 'China called me a punk-ass bitch' wants that feeling of 'our leader is strong, we are strong'.But yeah. We clump together. We clump together a lot more than we break down. No society in the world has truly broken down into Anarchy. Every time an Empire falls to internal stresses, the culture and most of the mechanisms and trappings of power are retained. Why do you think the Catholic Church took 1500 years after the fall of Rome to use Italian in masses celebrated in the Eternal City?
Avatar
do they actually pay foreigners less?
Avatar
Not so. For example, before we said 'eh, fuck it' and actually deployed down to Delve, we were running battleship fleets down into PR-8CA from VFK, in Deklein. Even with the Eye of Terror, that's 19 jumps, more than half of which are gates. And as anyone who's done null fleet combat knows, in some ways, a jb is MORE of a trap than a gate. If your fleet is spotted entering warp to the jb, the enemy can warp a dictor in, drop a trio of bubbles all over the jb, and then you're fucked.You'll land right in the middle, on the jb, at the point furthest from being able to warp away, and because it's a jump bridge, not a gate... you can't jump through when pointed or bubbled.
Avatar
but what about the sexy ship mods? we gotta think of something to turn them into, right?
Avatar
posted this in reddit, but figured i should post this here as well. copy pasting.tldr:1. remove sov notifications2. undo trusec ratting changes3. tie ehp of structures in sov nul to index levels4. limit cyno jumps per ship.when in a null bloc, whats the phrase that most people hate hearing?structure grinding. tcu, sbu, pos and ihub grinding is so boring that people would rather just go in and farm fleets rather than actually contest space anymore. we would love to take x region, but the thought of grinding the region down is tedious and we don't want to do it.high barrier to entry? looking at region grinding again as the main bar for entering into null.can a small group ( and by small im counting a 100 man corp or even a 200 - 500 man alliance ) of extremely active players take a system out in the middle of nowhere ? nope. they need to grind through millions of hp and on top of that, the sov holders will be warned of the impending attack via mail and they have the safety of waiting for ref timer to come up to put up a response fleet.will this small group be able to contest ? absolutely not. and this example is for a non used system out in the middle of nowhere a coalition has taken so they can put it up on market for a potential resident who will either rent or become a pet of the owning bloc.ive read a suggestion that limits mass through cynos. this was compared to wormholes. where one has to calculate the mass of ships they will take into enemy territory and account for wormhole stability. however there is a flaw to this suggestion. the main reason wh mass limitation works is because you cannot simply open another wh to the exact same system again. once its mass is used up, it closes. if its a static, you can try rolling it for a new one, but it may take hours or days or weeks for a new wh to be found going to the same place. if a cyno were to have a mass limitation, there is nothing forcing the escalating party to simply open another cyno. this will result in battlefields peppered with cynos. a solution is to limit cynos opened in system, but then you come into the problem of one side purposefully opening 2 or 3 cynos to max out the cynos deploy-able in a system preventing the other side from escalating at all.i have read a suggestion of forcing capitals to only be allowed to jump from one system to an adjacent one. this suggestion completely wrecks havoc on current industrial supply chains. this would cause the import and export of goods moving in and out of an area to completely stagnate.simply making a method harder doesnt actually fix any problem. the large blocs will simply adapt by adding more cynos and not allowing the smaller entities to adapt due to the large amount of resources it now requires to complete the same objective.suggestion to deleting supers from the game is a bit silly. supers are a result of problems rather than THE problem. supers as a ship are fine, its the ability to move them from one side of the universe to the other in under 5 minutes that everyone agrees is the problem. capitals are always under the threat of super drops no matter what they are doing. so how do we solve this problem? how do we bring life back into nullsec and allow more groups to fight it out?there really isn't a single answer to this question. if there was, the brainiacs of ccp or our lovely csm would have figured something out long ago. a paradigm shift is in order to keep null alive.cherry picking through these threads, there are a few suggestions that I personally think would go a long way in helping sov be the place to be.1. sov notifications. getting rid of anchoring sbu and pos in opponent sov should be removed or made to be an ihub upgrade. this would force larger coalitions to either keep their systems patrolled or pony up for ihub upgrades. this by itself of course wouldnt help, but it would indeed go a long way to helping minimize the size of these behemoth coalitions and help the smaller groups to take a step into null sov.2. undo the trusec changes to ratting made in previous expansions. i think this change was done in 2012 or so , but this change caused a large exodus of player corporations from the lower trusec into higher trusecs as a means of making more isk. cause sov players to centralize in a single system may generate larger fights, but with the current ratting mechanics with systems the way they are, a -1.0 system can hardly support more than a couple ratters at the same time. the changes should be reset, but not for only this reason to tie in with the other suggestions.3. tie the hp of ihubs to military or industry index of the system. there are large swaths of systems that are completely empty and taken only to be used as a buffer zone. the mass exodus of a large amount of systems can also be credited to the ratting changes when sov null had its trusec value shaken and all the valuable ratting systems were shifted to the -1.0 or close band. tying the ihub hp to index value forces sov owners to actually utilize their systems or have them vulnerable to capture. this change may force people to hell camp systems to lower its index before assaulting, so there may need to be tweaks to the length of index levels and requirements for said index levels. looking at industry specifically because its harder to maintain 5 industry index than military by far.4. get rid of timers. sov warfare is dubbed timer warfare for a reason. getting rid of timers completely may be a bit too drastic but making sov flips easier may lead to more content for those wishing for content, but it also allows smaller entities to fight their way in as well. combined with lower ehp on ihubs, it may be completely plausible to take an unused system and fortify it via index upgrades. perhaps having index 5 will allow structures to maintain their current ehp and maybe armor ref timer, but anything lower than 5 will be severely effect ehp and timer length. or even splitting military index and industry index to do 2 separate effects on structures in your sov. timer and ehp perhaps to prevent simple ratters rotating systems to maintain index.5. limit cyno usage per offensive capital ships to 2 jumps a day. jf / rorq made exception to the rule to prevent logistics interruption. limiting a player using a cyno may cause problems of reshipping and reinforcing fights, thus forcing individual ships to have cyno usage limitation prevents fleets from jumping their supers down to losec for lulz and opening up their regions for 24 hours to super escalation without hope of reinforcing with your own supers. this doesnt stop people from having multiple supers located in different staging areas, but then at that point, youre looking at a coalition need to have multiple supers staged at multiple regions for defense and there is a limit to logistics.power projection via cynos is the most talked about subject so i would like to expand on this. large blocs hold huge swaths of space and they hav eno problem defending it due to their ability to send their supers anywhere in the universe when the need arises. such projection is unmatched. there should be a penalty for holding so much space. not in terms of required isk sinks, but a defense penalty for looking to defend so much land. as with any country with a large exposed border, military power should be spread to defend its space rather than clumped in a single hammer being used to smash anything anywhere anytime.i am a mere lowly line member for a bloc, but these are the suggestions that i think could help eve create more interesting content for all groups, and not just the major blocs.
Avatar
For once I agree with Mittani. Supercapitals are a very very serious problem. BUT while dominion did not hold the keys for the current status, it did certainly raised all flags indicatign that this was the future and only a fool would not focus all their efforts into massing supers.
Avatar
The only way to lessen the evils of a competition game that reaches Red Queen status is to open alternate gameplay paths so players can compete in a different way.worm holes, dust, facwar, soon to be valk, alliance tournys....
Avatar
BTW, My fix. Add a manteinance fee to any super. 2 billion per month to motherships, 10 to titans. Do not pay.. ship become a wreckage.... There must be a limit of how many can be kept operating this way...
Avatar
yeah but don think neither CSM or anyone is gonna really URGE ccp to do this . also i think back then u needed Battleship 5 of the respective race to get into any capital. Although ccp might have thought by reducing the duration this wud increase the number of players using caps and opening up more capital engagements to happen( which did happen ) . But this also happen . New player --- > Join Bloc ---> minimum requirement - Carrier ---> 3 months training - Carrier ready ---> 2 more months joining cap/super cap fleets ---after 5 months either trains another toon for super cap and goes thru the same cycle -- or plays another game with coms so that some one pings incase of fight ( which is rare ) . So after 5 months of game time either u afk play eve or u switch over to another game .So if i had spent my time of say Gallente battleship 5 .. opening up marauders and Black ops + a lot of other ships allows the player to atleast see things better by the time he gets to lvl 5 battle ship and achieve some sort of specialization .and it wud take another 2 months to train for another race carrier( don u think this wud increase game time ?) . With the current scenario u don need specialization to fly a capital ship and and join a huge spider tanked carrier fleet where u jus assign fighters or drones and sit like sheep untill time dialation ends ..lol i even got to sleep for 5 hrs during B-R cos i was pretty confident no one was going for the nex 20 hrs .. and if the worst happens node crash and dc i'm safe anyway ... but even after 5 hrs i saw my carrier still repping in spider .. i cud only smile at game mechanics .. game play made so easy :) ... and as any bloc member wud say .. why the hell wud i leave such a easy life style :p -- make me
Avatar
Reps can be broken - IF you can bring enough firepower to bare. FBs aren't in play against a subcap fleet anyway. Why do you think the Wrecking Ball was so effective? Each supercarrier means you need another super's worth of reps cancelled out. And if you're really going to try to burn through all of the sentry drones the carriers drop, you're insane - and that's even if the supers aren't carrying sentries in their fleet hangars to resupply after you kill 100+ drones per carrier.Pouring warm bodies into the fight is only effective if you know the enemy's numbers aren't sufficient to hold out until downtime. If they are? Don't even bother. You can't bubblecage him, and you can't make him log back in. So unless you can bring enough in to force a Z9PP-style situation (where, I should note, there were no supers on-field), if the enemy fleet has a decent carrier/supercarrier mix, just... don't. Do something more productive and less frustrating, like slamming your dick in a car door for the 8 hours until downtime.
Avatar
why not the clerks 2 version?
Avatar
You know you've been awake too long when...... you see "sexy ship mods" and the first thing your tired brain comes up with is 'jesus christ, how do you even do a nude patch for a Dominix?'
Avatar
On which counts are you considering this column to be correct, the claim that the 2009 and 2014 sov maps are radically different because of supercapital imbalance alone? Or the bit that subcapitals don't matter in a world with the presence of a supercapital arms race?
Avatar
Maybe.High-damage, low-cost silver bullet counters to perceived imbalances have had mixed success. Stealth bombers were originally introduced as anticapital platforms, for example, and have shifted to a role designed to keep fleets on their toes. How well they fill that role, however, and whether or not it is sensible for a band of thirty pilots to be able to knock out a full fleet of 250 with maybe three hulls in the game even remotely capable of countering them if they react in under a second is questionable.Whatever anticapital platforms one proposes, one must also be extremely careful not to turn into another monster. The capacity of less than three dozen pilots to wipe out N many targets smells strongly of AoE doomsday power -- particularly with the probing meta as stupidly simple as it is right now.
Avatar
OK, throwing this question out there--how do the costs of sov maintenance scale, both in the base mechanics and the externalities of doing so? Is it linear? Does it get easier or harder as you scale up?
Avatar
Well if you were a soldier, on a mission in some country, would you be keen to die for your country if it told you to pay for your own rifle/bulletproof vest/tank/jeep?...
Avatar
I will, just build me a stargate path only between those systems where I can shoot someone.
Avatar
If the cause is both critical and just, people have proven willing to sacrifice much for the cause of war -- whether or not they're enlisted!
Avatar
A Noob idea considering rolling back time before supercaps is not going to happen:A Stealth Bomber or something equivalent that was able to fit a Capital Torpedo Launcher instead of a Bomb Launcher with the same limitation for how many capital corps could be carried. The Capital Torp Launcher would require a target lock and the stealth bomber would need to be aligned with the target similar to a bombing run. Lock up target, fire capital torp and warp to a safe point.Counters to this new tactic: You are relying on glass cannons to deploy this new tactic that needs target lock before firing the payload. Alternatively a newfleet role could be introduced for ships to be fitted with heavy defender missiles to counter the new tactic and defend the supercaps.A wing of 'Davids' against Goliaths. This could also bring younger pilots and corps/alliances into the battles and nullsec. Could it also lead to more supercaps on one side than the other actually being a potential disadvantage then leading back to more subcap fights? Just a thought.
Avatar
Well... I guess I'm not one of them.
Avatar
EVE is NOT a simulation of life. If that's what CCP want, I'll end my subs now. Do not like simulations outside of Sim city.EVE is a game
Avatar
Considering you're immortal in eve I suspect it's not.
Avatar
Here's the thing; very little would change of you remove supercaps. Do you honestly think the only thing keepin MoA from rolling Fade is supercaps? NPC groups can't take sov because it's held by two mega blocs. I fail to see how getting 800 megas dropped on you is an improvement over supers. The point of this argument is that with RUS dead the CFC is at a super disadvantage again.So what is the answer? There isn't one. There is no way to fix sov because the real problem is human nature. Players want to win and gravitate towards large groups. It was inevitable that null eventually got conquered by a handful of large blocs. Nerfing supers won't change any of that. I have some good news for you though; these things work themselves out. N3 won't last forever; pl and ncdot will only babysit those other shitlers for so long. Eventually they will fracture, goons will swoop in and we'll have another war.As for the supercap hate, I have to say I don't get it. Super kills are exciting and the possibility of giant escalation is the best part about null. If caps aren't for you faction warfare might be a better fit than null.
Avatar
And that point is wrong. Supers or no, nobody is breaking into sov null. Why does it matter if you get dropped by supers or 800 megathrons. It's the size of blocs that are the problem, and no one can fix that except the players.
Avatar
The problem is not that subcaps are useless. The problem is that, in order to be useful in a capital engagement, you have to bring more of them than any given node can possibly support. It is a technical issue, not (just) a gameplay issue. A thousand baltecs is still a force that can threaten any fleet in the game - but you'll never be able to use the massed firepower of that many battleships successfully when it takes 20 or 30 real minutes for them to recycle guns after one shot.Finding a way to fix the technical bottlenecks that prevent massed subcap fleets from effectively working together would fix the supercap problem to a large extent - but that might be a hurdle that's insurmountable with current technology.
Avatar
Maybe it wasn't marketed as such, but actually it has IMHO the best rule set (no gate guns - you can fly any ship you want, bubbles - you can hunt small/cloaki shit with a reasonable chance for success etc.) for small gang warfare. In addition to that, back in the day, Tenerifis, Detorid, Omist, dronelands, Esoteria, Paragon Soul, all were swarming with renters, people (in majority) who were willing to defend their gold mines/farms/whatever you call it. Try picking a fight there now, take 1 or 2 friends and try to find some action there. Oh, and get loads of alcohol, you'll need it for the trip.
Avatar
The breakups of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia in the 1990's, East Timor splitting off Indonesia in the beginning of this century, and the existence of de facto independent states (Kosovo, Palestine, South Ossetia and Transnistria for example) says "No sadleric, you are mistaken, EVE is not playing out like real life."
Avatar
Supers vs a fuck you fleet. Supers damped to zero targeting range, comedy ensues.
Avatar
Sov itself is the problem.Just get rid of it altogether.
Avatar
sov mechanics is not fun. timer boards are not fun. the cycle of bash rep bash rep bash rep is not fun. Out of 10 fleets 1 will have a "fight" and it can barely be classed as a fight at that.
Avatar
The thought of a thirty thousand man Theta dogpile make me so HOT.
Avatar
If he's actually gotten close enough to every single moon in all 3 regions to see siphons, he sucks at probing moons.
Avatar
I think you should record yourself reading it so we can listen to your inspirational voice
Avatar
I really agree with this piece, and it reads like you finally put down the thesaurus.
Avatar
HA! Sitting on top you often overlook the basic issue. It is not super caps, it is the control of the space and the super caps.Imagine this, what if there were lower limits set to the amount of people in an alliance (like 500)? What if there were limits to the amount of systems that could be held by an alliance (like 20)? Limits to how many alliances can be held by one person (EULA not game mechanic).Yes the blue doughnut would still exist, but would be far more fragile and difficult to maintain.Balance that and eve will change instantly. CCP has been catering to 0.0 forever and has literally given control of the game to them. Amarr, Gal, Cald, and Minmi are supposed to be the Power, not Goons, PL, etc. That is one of the major faults with this game, On a social level (even imaginary) the ingame super powers should control the size and ability of the neighbors and their effect on the citizens. I mean really, It is like the whole world saying "Middle East feel free to do whatever you like, you can even come to London and kill thousands. Outside of punishing the people caught within our borders, we will never do anything about it." Just makes no sense.If there was a red button that would nerf the bloc's and open up 0.0, thousands would be smashing it.
Avatar
You'd be surprised how many of us have probed ridiculous numbers of moons.
Avatar
I don't know, ask the Army of the United States, 1775-1820 or so. One of the many reasons for the 2nd Amendment was to make sure people had muskets and defray the cost of equipping them by the State.I think Switzerland's 'every household must have a rifle and a bicycle' worked that way, too.
Avatar
Except they clearly didn't have the power to do it. Carving up China, as you put it, would have been utterly impossible for a western power to achieve - Field Marshal Montgomery's statement before Parliament to that extent was specifically about Europe's inability to do just that.China is large, the population (by the age of European Imperialism) thought of itself as one nation, and there are no appreciable strategic control points. Entire armies of defenders could simply vanish into the woodwork in an area the size of the continent of Europe.Japan, it should be noted, never attempted to undertake a European-style conquest and colonization - they were far, far more brutal and savage (which, really, is saying something) - and ultimately, unsuccessful. There's a vast difference between being able to occupy parts of a country, and being able to successfully conquer it.
Avatar
Considering that we have the technological infrastructure of a society that can look at the population of the entire world when Rome fell and say 'yeah, we've got twice that many people here in the US' and still manages to not completely break down, I think we (any of the large blocs) can probably handle an additional 30,000 nerds if we have to.
Avatar
Exactly.
Avatar
Look, here's how this plays out:CCP does what you say.Supercapital pilots point out that they're being punished for re-subscribing.Someone points out that "this is just like Incarna - CCP's trying to make us buy GTCs so we can sell PLEXs and have enough ISK to bring our supers back. This isn't about game balance, it's about fucking the players and sucking all the money they can out of us, just like those stupid-ass monocles". This does not need to be factually accurate for someone to point this out.Once someone's done that, the Greek Chorus on the forums takes hold of the 'CCP is trying to fuck the players!' bit between their teeth hard, and it's another PR nightmare, with people clamoring for CCP to make internal changes and all up in arms about bullshit, regardless of whether or not any of it is true, simply because they can be.Why does this happen? Because that is what people are. People are insecure, conspiracy-obsessed morons who, in groups, tend to look for any opportunity to decide 'I'M BEING OPPRESSED!' because it allows them to lay the fault for their personally-perceived failures at the feet of 'The Oppressor', or whoever the fuck is doing them wrong.And CCP has already been through that wringer once. They're obviously gun-shy about going anywhere near it again. For the love of dog, since Incarna, they've done their best not to make anyone upset, not to really rock the boat at all. They're like an abused spouse when it comes to actually standing up for any kind of coherent vision in their development process. The players raise a fuss, and CCP caves, without ever actually making their case or standing up for themselves and saying 'give us a chance and let us show you where we want to take this'.If you think they're not so fucking risk-averse as to go nowhere near even the hint of a whiff of an idea that might cause an uproar like that, you clearly haven't been in your Captain's Quarters recently.
Avatar
Yes, subcapitals can alter the meta of engagements, however, as the meta escalates to supercapitals, the influence of subcapitals becomes negligible. You can't bring enough subcaps to overcome a critical mass of supers as hardware pragmatically imposes a limit on the numbers of subcaps that may be brought to a fight.On another level, I very much agree with your sentiment that supercapitals are not the only contributing factor to the high barrier of entry into nullsec.
Avatar
No, because right now there's at least the illusion of some chance of actual conflict. If it's a done deal that no, nobody can take Region X, then you're going to see maybe some small gang roams, but you won't see any serious warfare taking place.And if there's no serious warfare taking place, then you're going to see those pockets becoming cash cows for the organizations who snapped them up in the first place, and had the wherewithal to get that supercapital production up and running, fast, at scale.And that's going to be the little guys, right? I mean, let's be honest here, everyone knows that if you need a bunch of people who are both organized enough, and masochistic enough, to run a few thousand battleships as escort fleets for entire... shall we say... swarms of freighters hauling in the infrastructure needed to begin producing supercapitals en masse at the expense of the State... then that's obviously only going to be something the little guy who doesn't hold sov yet can do, right? I mean, there's no way that's something that only the large, organized blocs can manage.Especially not doing it in multiple regions, simultaneously. PL/N3 and the CFC could never win a land rush like that and just lock everything down EVEN TIGHTER, right?
Avatar
Please, please please. Sole reason of stoping so many supers and titans was a blobfest that NC was generating. Only reason to tank all that damage coming from massive subpac fleets was to field ship that could withstand volleys and be effective. People did their math and started using titans. And all those maths were done even before NC died.
Avatar
Why would you use defender missiles? Just fit smartbombs and firewall the incoming missiles, just like subcaps do.
Avatar
So why don't you just bring back high sec capital ship production and then have it magically teleport to a low sec station inside a certain radius of the manufacturing station? Or am I just dumb?
Avatar
I feel like you guys are making his point. Your examples are all rebellions, revolts, or civil wars. These are the ways that null sov does still change hands, when an alliance breaks down into chaos. What we don't see are upstarts trying to join the "great game" like Japan did in early 2oth century by claiming colonies in Asia to compete with the European powers. In the end they ran into the same problem we see in EVE, not enough caps.
Avatar
You are wrong. You see small groups will actually live in and patrol their space. So they will be able to collect the intel themselves instead of having TQ hand the intel to them. Large groups currently own so much space that without notifications they couldn't reasonably patrol and gather the intel themselves. At the very least removing notifications will create opportunities for the blocs to lose space they don't live in or actively patrol.Power projection nerf is a must. The fact that the blocs can move capital ships to ANYWHERE in New Eden within 15-20 minutes is too powerful. The reason blocs own thousands of systems is they can easily defend thousands of systems. TiDi just makes that all the easier. You have to create situations where at a certain point a system is simply too far away to defend unless you live there. If you don't do that then you end up with what you have today: two blocs owning thousands of systems with the ability to defend ANY of them in 15-20 minutes.
Avatar
You're probably just dumb.
Avatar
You're dumb.
Avatar
^Everything this. I didn't think of Japan's inability to hold the Pacific theater in those terms before -- capital imbalance. Four carriers and incredibly bad luck at Midway cost them the war.
Avatar
A bloc or clump that falls apart quickly reforms in some shape, due to the same forces that formed it in the first place. And the same problem for new entrants remains: join an existing bloc, or die.
Avatar
hodor
Avatar
I was just making a goofy joke, but I do appreciate your perspective! Good debates starting from silliness; who knew?
Avatar
You can plausibly bomb 1k battleship fleets, if they screw up their anti-bomber support. It takes real work to keep battleships from being bombed (although the biggest advantage is in sowing enough chaos that the logi with them can't tell what to rep...) and hits from 2-3 bomb runs worth of bombs is enough to blow away even the absurdly tanked bloc warfare battleships altogether.Capitals, though? Good luck, it'll take 30+ waves of bombs hitting a single carrier and they need to not get repaired in the 5 minutes it would take to make that many bomb runs. (Besides which, the carriers can just all refit smartbombs and firewall the bomb runs if someone seriously tried that.)
Avatar
Lets assume this region is horribly difficult to get resources to from high security space due to distance and choke points. Building supercapitals and capitals in this space is going to be exceptionally expensive if you import. You'd need to mine locally and consistently. Mining fleets can be attacked. Supply convoys moving through choke points can be attacked. Capitals can be stolen - pilots can be convinced to move. I do agree that it would eventually stabilize into a similar status quo scenario that we have today but for awhile it could be a very exciting place to be. Its not likely that one organization would be able to maintain control over it in perpetuity - we don't see that with normal 0.0 either. Power has changed dramatically over the past few years.
Avatar
Agree in some cases but even now the majority of fights happen outside of every ones prime time. The Halloween war was a great example of this with NC. not being able to compete during rus time nor could rus compete during NC.'s prime. This is why a timer to re-capture systems needs to be in place to prevent it changing hands daily. The point im trying to get at is eventually holding vast amounts of sov will become tiresome and with multiple smaller entities slowly eating away at your sov you simply wont be able to control it all or at least wont be bothered to control it all. OK so you cant just get rid of every timer. But there shouldnt be shield and armor/structure timers for everything. This would generate a lot more smaller scaled content.As for the Supers EHP/cost alteration....in some ways you are right, but by limiting the amount of drones a supercarrier can have would prevent the meta from shifting to Supercarrier only fleets. Smartbombing and Neuting fleets would easily counter this while their reduction in EHP would allow them to be disposed of in a timely fashion. Maybe even double their build time to slow down replacements.
Avatar
Sounds like the kind of thing CCP gets off on.
Avatar
WH= the space where people pretend to be hardcore but in reality its only in the logistical sense.. they make isk with more safety than any other space in eve. they take fights only because they know there is no element of surprise. The one community where risk is shunned rather than celebrated.so glad none of my friends managed to drag me into of those whiney holes
Avatar
That means you need to either rent from one of the blocs or hope to be sponsored into one of the blocs, or get one of those wacky 'You're not officially in our bloc but we use you as content generation when everyone is bored' situations like XIX, BRAVE and CVA.NOTE: the above paragraph is a quote; I am shit when it comes to post formattingI feel that you are ignoring the political atmosphere and the reasons why BRAVE/HERO jumped into sov warfare. Meatshield accusations aside, there were internal content drivers coupled with a weakened RUS coalition that fueled my decision to invade to Burn Catch. Granted, we may not be the biggest fish in teh sea, but we are independently swimming in the same lake. Before someone counters with whatever argument, look at our lossboards. We've been killed by everyone.Granted, we may lose this sov, but that was never the point. In fact, SOV wasn't even a priority until Darkness disbanded, and we were in position to exploit that. Even if we do lose this sov, to say that is was handed to us is an insult to us and our "meat backup" haha I mean fuck, it took us 3 months, because we gournd that shit in siege bombers and 300+kestrel fleets.Metagame aside, Brave did accomplish something, regardless of whether we are able to retain the SOV in Catch.Shit's on fire, yo.-Lychton Kondur
Avatar
Consequense: The larger groups will prestage cap fleets in strategic locations all over Eve. Pilots will clone / podjump or fly interceptor to the staging system of the evening. Big guys keep on rolling, small groups get shit on.
Avatar
You did grind the majority of the systems.. but Sov warfare is normally fought over key systems. And every time it came to a key system timer Big Brother N3 and PL would be there to do the hard part for you. Grinding systems that are not being defended doesnts mean anything.. Hell you guys havent be able to get rid of the -A- pos in GE >_>
Avatar
In an environment where power projection dominates the notifications do reinforce a blocs power. However if the ability to project power quickly was removed, then the notifications become a lot of noise each would need to be investigated to determine which were real threats. Defences could be spread thin trying to cover all your bases... or you may have to gamble and run the risk of deploying to the wrong location.Power is not the problem, superior numbers aren't the problem, its the ability to deploy them anywhere quickly that is.How can any of us practice Sun Tzu (which is what we all secretly dream of doing) if you can never attack where the enemy isn't...unless they're not playing elite, star citizen, or wombles in space yet.
Avatar
Upon further thought, you could just give recons and eaf's the ability to bypass ewar immunity. They have shit dmg, except for a few of the non-cloaking recons, so we might actually see them used....
Avatar
At least they knew to use all caps since it makes you sound smarter.
Avatar
I always like coming here and being entertained by this scrub fgt bloc lord complaining about game mechanics he had a big hand in bringing forth. So damn entertaining.
Avatar
Notifications will never be "noise" as they are far too detailed to be anything less. "Alliance X anchored SBUs in System Y" could never be misinterpreted as anything less than an attempt to take the system. "Alliance A RFed Tower B in system C" could only be interpreted as an attempt to destroy the tower. Far too detailed to be "noise". If alliances want this intel they MUST live in or patrol the area in question. At the end of the day if the space/moon matters to the bloc they will put in the effort to gather the intel necessary to keep that asset. Every single moon and every single system must be checked every single day. If they fail to do so then the asset must not matter to them. Then a more local group, who will put in the intel gathering effort, should have the opportunity to take the asset. This will only be possible without free intel notifications letting the bloc know what the local group is up to.
Avatar
EAFs (Hyenas and Ceres, for example) actually do see a fair amount of use (though not as much as the Celestis, obviously), because while they're fragile, they also tend to have long application range, combined with high speed and a small signature.
Avatar
Actually, having done mining work in High-Sec, W-Space, and Sov Null, I think it's fairly easy to say the safest place to make isk in EVE is Sov Null. Being out here means you have a support network already, and not only can you see the very moment when non-friendly entities enter system (unlike W-space, where a smart PvE operation will be accompanied by a number of scouts whose sole job is watching for new entries into the system, or High-Sec, where it's often impossible to tell which of those hundreds of neuts is the potential ganker), but with good reporting on Intel channels - a matter of cultural conditioning more than any player skill - you can be aware of even the fastest of interceptor gangs far enough away that you have ample time to dock up.
Avatar
Sounds like blobbing is the issue, not the ships.
Avatar
Thus the implementation of mini-games.
Avatar
What did you expect? There's nothing goofy about Internet spaceships. #srsbusiness ;)
Avatar
MoA can't take sov, because they have 20 pvp pilots that join their fleets. Good luck shooting an ihub.
Avatar
The only real solution at this point is expanded territory. That is, you put parts of the game where the largest ships cannot safely navigate- use some warp-shadow-planetary-debris-tiny-wormholes boojum to make a valuable chunk of space where larger ships suffer significant penalties or cannot enter entirely.If there are valuable regions supercaps cannot be used in, then other ships will return to relevance in those spaces.
Avatar
What would the kick back be if you could build supers in low sec..?
Avatar
This assumes there's a motivator behind small groups picking at the overstretched alliance. In a sufficiently large universe that you're describing, there exist only forces that drive the separation of players.
Avatar
Comment is in allcaps. Comment is using supercaps. Comment has gone meta. Wither, we, our fall of human consciousness as so many a tuna scapegoat bearing the sins of Machiavelli. http://www.tradecardsonline.co...
Avatar
I always thought that in certain situations it would be better if devs created counters rather than constantly balancing back and forth. A new or re-purposed ship which acts as a great counter to supercaps, either by destroying, immobilizing or disabling them in some other way.
Avatar
Poor Yorktown. She was listed as KIA at least twice during that fight..
Avatar
Clearly, supercapital proliferation now means that if you can't field at least three full sentences of supercapital letters, you cannot own land.
Avatar
Machiavelli is The Mittani, the tuna is an Erebus viewed from directly above, and the fall of human consciousness is this fucking article.
Avatar
Does that not give a bonus to groups able to use aside-from-the-Game skills -- including skills in creating InfoTech infrastructure -- to build and operate large organizations?Hmm... I wonder which group has demonstrated such skills?
Avatar
Would it be an improvement to EVE to remove in-flight hull repair, maybe even in-flight armor repair?In Real World wet-ocean navies, you don't fully patch up a broken hull without a drydock big enough to hold the ship in question. If the damage is bad enough, you have to carry the ship home:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...Even if the heavy damage is only to the superstructure, you need a shipyard and lots of time to repair it, especially when high-tech subsystems have been involved:http://news.usni.org/2013/12/3...And that was for a hit by a rogue drone without even a warhead!
Avatar
In WW1, at Jutland, the British battleships turned away, not from the German battleships whose T they had crossed, but from a torpedo attack by German destroyers.In WW2, in the night naval battles around Guadalcanal, the killing weapon was the destroyer-launched torpedo. The American cruisers, operating in formations optimized to deliver gunfire, suffered horribly until the American commanders figured that out and re-tuned their formations and maneuvers to keep the cruisers away from the Japanese torpedoes while the American destroyers exploited the American sensor advantage -- radar -- to deliver their own killing torpedo attacks.
Avatar
hell yeah, glad to see this asshole write candidly again. Love the rest of the submissions on this site, pretty much my go-to for vidya game shite, but damn this jackass can write. I've been doing my best to win at eve since launch, except for the occasional lapse in common sense every few 'expansions'. To the grrgoons crowd, it's a healthy reaction. But keep in mind the headlines these assholes... I mean content creators, have generated since they swarmed in and started doing things the wrong way. If you can't see how much that has prolonged the vitality of this litter box, then your opinions are pretty much forfeit anyways. Never been a goon, fuck the goons honestly (because they're a great screw if you like open sores), but one of the most meta things le mittens can do to protect his serious space ship tribe is to mock all the stupid features in this game that are still turning off new customers 11 years later... or whatever.
Avatar
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...Last scene still makes me giggle.
Avatar
An interesting and clearly informed article.The question is raised as to what could be done to resolve the problems identified. I have given this some thought previously, as it seems odd and counter productive for a sandbox to stagnate in this way. Sandboxes are supposed to allow creative solutions to force change. When they do not change they become tedious and poor value for the consumer of entertainment. This is essentially what we do, when we pay to be entertained by the sandbox. We seek to influence events by using creative means to change things. It's the whole point, the value at the core of the deal.I am hesitant to conclude that game mechanics should allow new players, such as myself, powers to significantly change events. That Must make it very hard to give depth to the skill tree, and to the experience of playing for a long time and learning the craft of fleet commanders. In these respects, I think eve has got a lot right. I think it must be presumptuous and even reckless for a novice like myself to suggest changes for the game mechanics.So, without changing the game mechanics as such, I propose an alternative solution that would use the existing game mechanics, but leverage the story lines of New Eden to both drive player created change, and also add depth to the gameplay for existing bloc commanders.I propose that the Empires of New Eden begin to act like Empires, and start recruiting players into NPC fleets that have the mission of "sweeping null sec clean with the broom of reform". Pioneers of civilization. Settlers. Citizens exercising their manifest destiny etc ad nauseam. This is what empires do, so it fits the NPC mold.The idea is very much like Faction warfare, which pits empires against empires. Except, in this case the NPC fleets would be gathered to go to war against large null sec blocs.It could be made interesting and "fair" if the null sec blocs were able to know in advance how big the invading fleet would be. Although CCP would be advised to build very large fleets, they would be mostly staffed by eager noobs with low skills and cheap ships. My feeling is that CCP could balance the size of the invasion (settlement) fleet to match the existing Null sovereign, and thus guarantee a "good fight".To balance things further, each empire might launch an invasion fleet simultaneously against the four strongest null sec blocs. Thus, there would be a price to pay for true domination in the game. If you command one of the four top blocs, you would need to withstand periodic assaults from Empire noob fleets, lead by CCP staff. I would guess this might even delight such leaders, as it would add a new test of their skills, and provide drama and action for their colleagues.Lastly, it would add depth to the back story of New Eden, and this is something that adds value to the franchise. Empires should act as empires would act. Nothing should be lifeless and static in the sandbox, if it is not so in the real world.Rest assured, if I were a rich young man from a noble gallente family, I would lobby the senate to raise an settlement fleet. I would be full of the pride of empire, and I would see the political economy as a means to bring glory to my clan and riches to my families industry. I would be so full of my own importance that I should wish to see the Mitanni's head on a spike. Not because of his sins, nor because he threatens me. Only because I am Gallente, and he is not, and he dares flaunt my people's will. The Mittani, and the office he purports to establish in world affairs, is outlaw and heretic, a seething abomination to any prince of empire.And, as a prince of empire, I should not flinch to lead thousands of noobs to horror and death in null sec killing fields, for these capsuleers would be heros of the empire, and immortalized in history and popular verse. The consumption generated would further endorse the fortunes of my family, who contribute significantly to Gallente war industry, and I should consider this also to the purpose of a greater good, for it would all be in the pursuit of the glory of empire.CCP are Empire, both by analogy and by matter of factual power. Their NPC staff players can be princes of empire, if they have the wit to act the part. They can solve these problems by sticking to character, in a broad sense, and making sure the changes they drive are equitable for all players, most especially the current leaders of the player community.The author of this article correctly, in my view, cites the need to bring the broom of reform to null sec.Without needing to be expert in anything except what I like, one hopes it might be done with a great series of battles, with unprecedented carnage and overwhelming, unfair circumstances, with widespread participation, and yet with equity and dignity.
Avatar
Outstanding! Gotta git me one'a them Gallente carriers, yup!
Avatar
Quite funny, how things change over... well, 9 years :D
Avatar
Good to know Mittens is reading Mord Fiddle's back issues. Mord called for pushing the big red supercap destruct button a while back. http://fiddlersedge.blogspot.c...
Avatar
#DeathToAllSupers&TitansI've been saying that supers(Moms) and Titans are the single most broken mechanic ever added to EVE. CCP made a HUGE mistake adding them to the game and for whatever reason they refuse to fix them. A super shouldn't have 20x the EHP and 5x the damage output of a carrier. The Moms were bad enough but when they became "Supers" they became so godawful over powered that it's not even funny.Nerf all supers to where they are 2x the EHP and 2x the damage output of a normal carrierNerf Titans and remove their DD and just increase their turret dmg to 2x that of a dread. This 1 shot any cap crap has got to go.But, honestly, I'm right there with this post.... hit the big red button and just remove the damn things from the game. While you're at it take out the damn jump bridges too.
Avatar
I've only been playing the game for like 3-4 years but was this Gaylord scrub complaining about supers when CFC were ballpeening the rest of eve with em? Or is it just now that someone else is better at supers?
Avatar
ISIS is only having success because the superpowers are ignoring them.
Avatar
while in the last 2 articles you've raised valid points, having done a lot of reading there's always with you other objectives linked, if supers are so bad to eve, then surely also the otec agreements are as well, holding a monopoly in anything is always bad.In some respects the arguments your using here are the same or similar to the agreements irl over nuclear disarmement, though in this case I'm also reminded PLs shall we say specialty is supers, and taking away supers is taking away something one of your coalitions main rivals would hamper them rather effectively though if CCP did remove supers.I have no doubt you would somehow try to shift the blame from PL for that to CCP itself, sorry alex but your past history shows too much how things go, you always aim for the long con as the saying goes, which is why even though you do raise interesting points,Though unless it's coming from a actual trust worthy party in eve (and I'm not talking CCP or the CSM etc) too many are going to look for ulterior motives on the part you you and yours, sorry alex but you've played the meta game, too much, too often, and some would say too well for ANYONE in eve to take an actual risk supporting you, there's too much chance of you and/or CFC turning round and f**king them over as you've demonstrated repeatedly throughout the whole time you have all been in eve.If you want people to even consider your actualy acting in good faith, GIVE UP THE OTEC monopoly, this is very much a case of "put your money where your mouth is" and give up something that's liable to actualy be not to you or youur's own benefit.Your asking eve to trust not just a goon but the arch goon himself, not to have ulterior motives behind what he's doing, you've taught eve where you are concerned to ALWAYS look for the ulterior motive behind what you are doing.
Avatar
Control the narative, Control.....
Avatar
Actually one sub cap that can't be discounted are bombers, considering just how much damage bombers can dish out, I'd not call them useless
Avatar
there's another problem in that if you also make things easier then you make it easier for the large blocks to steam roller everything else as usual.CCP would quite litteraly need to add approx the same volume of systems currently into the game again so it doubles the total number, make the space ONLY accessable via "Pleated Space" ie something similar to WHs, but have them ONLY connect to other N space systems, and have the systems have a natural *cyno jammer* effect that can't ever be turned off, the only jump gates in the systems are the ones players build, which CAN NOT connect to from any of the current K space though there are ones that could be built which catapult you into normal K-space, which is randomly choosen so players can NOT choose the destination of where they will come out, and because there are no NPC gates, SBUs are NOT needed to attack/take the new "sov" Maybe have a new kind of combinied TCU/Ihub with less HP than either of them (The Idea's to have a area where it's simply not possible to actually have caps nevermind larger) or less resists or both, with easy to shoot "upgrades" though have them incappable, offlining them till they get repped back up again, possibly one could be a upgrade which reduces the % chances of new "pleated space" forming etc, and also allow multiple (similar to) outposts in a system, though only one can be designated "primary" station so that "primary" station acts in a similar manner as to the way the RFs work for current outposts, possibly also remove local similar to WH space, reflecting the fact that the new systems are NOT K-space, you could also make it so that player built jump gates, the corp/alliance/individule built they can only "simply" connect them to other systems they've "claimed" though they can always try to "force" a connection to a neutral or hostile gate, which opens up the possibility of further "forced" connection attempts, though allow the systems to possibly "float" as it where so that each space is not always in range of the same group of other systems all the time, unless their "Linked" via player built stargates, Put in additional Moon goo's but also put planetary rings in for Mining?Harvesting? that you were talking about a while back.
Avatar
ISIS are BRAVE
Avatar
not this shitty one anymore :P and based on the influence map, neither do the rest of you..
Avatar
Okay Mittens, As i understand it, you literally have the power.Goon Swarm has CSM's, they have a huge swath of space, they are one of the two remaining superpowers(as defined above).All you have to do, to change the game, to make it better, and fix all the problem you outlined, Is put forward a proposal.it just needs to be:bipartisan with respect to your foeWorkablefairGet on the phone. Call N3/PL. Get on a team speak and talk it out.Find a way to make sure there is war and its fun and then all of you together propose it.If you love this game(or hell just love living off it), think up a way to fix it. or maybe find a way thats been proposed on the forums somewhere, i don't really know. But you do not need to convince people /of/ your opinion on why the game is failing. Thats just silly. You are one of the very few people who play the game who can steer it provided you take a step back and negotiate a plan in good faith.people in your position shouldn't complain, you should be complained to.you have the power to ACT.
Avatar
You mean the single-shard universe can't handle the game. The lag was not the sub-cap pilots' fault--it was CCP's.
Avatar
Sovereign alliances and/or blocs should be able to build a structure [that should take day/weeks to build] that would allow them to have concord in the system that it is in. That would tear the blocs apart because whoever was in control of it would have lot of power. It would also allow an alliance that can defend a system long enough to build one to make a foothold as they try to make a name for themselves.
Avatar
ISIS hasn't created anything yet. They are basically saying on paper that they "own" the areas that they are currently in, but it is like some random from high sec saying they own an area because they put a POS up. Sure they live there now, but the moment a real power comes along they'll get sieged and ejected.
Avatar
How about have every moon give you a material, but have each moon only give a limited amount of that material before it needs to reset after downtime. I believe the cost of barely used systems is too low and they should be penalized for lack of activity.As far as materials go here is my radical change to how systems work: I would eliminate POS moon mining altogether. If you wanted to grab materials from a moon, you would first launch a probe to the moon and scan for materials. You would then have to launch a mining center, similar to the command center for PI. After the module is full of the material, you launch the module back into space and pick it up. A max number of different materials and a finite amount of each material would exist and would also reset after each downtime. A tax could be put on each mining event, be it the Sov-owning corporation or the alliance that the corporation belongs to. I would also go as far as eliminating all manufacturing and production at POSes in Sovereign space and replace that capacity with what could be considered mini stations. You would still have the main ones, but then each would have 3 sub faction types like the Khanid, the Thukker, or even the Lai Dai types that would specialize in some form of production or research. They would have half of the capacity and storage that the main station would have and they would have to represent the other three racial station types, ex. would be if your main station was the Amarr factory station, the other three would be smaller versions of the other stations.
Avatar
Its not about being immune, however logged off dictors at all the poses and instant cyno mechanics is bad.

You ever wonder why you don't hear stories about scrappy groups from NPC 0.0 trying to take sov space and getting smacked down by the blocs who attempt to defend their territory? In theory this should happen all the time. In practice, it almost never does. 

There's a 'You must be this high to ride' bar in front of sov null. Unless you are a bloc or are backed explicitly or implicitly by a bloc you're not going to get to get a slice of sov - and supercapitals are entirely to blame. 

Whoever has the biggest supercapital group near a quadrant can ensure that an organization trying to gain entrance into sov null or build up any real capital fleet in NPC 0.0 gets utterly splattered. You want to try to build up a capital group in lowsec? Good luck deploying against a tower without someone in a bloc finding out and dropping a pile of bored supercarrier pilots on you. You want to build up or buy enough supers that you can take down sov structures without seriously questioning your life choices? You need to have more than a bloc can destroy to prevent them dropping on you - which means you essentially must be a bloc already. 

Each supercapital birthed from a CSAA anywhere in nullsec raises that bar of entry ever higher. The path to sov null for corporations and alliances now is to rent or to swear fealty to one of the blocs. We don't think about this as a crisis point regularly because the bar is so high now that it's been aeons since someone actually 'broke into' sov null the old-fashioned way. No, BRAVE isn't an example of someone breaking into sov null; they were handed Catch by N3 over the corpse of the already-broken RUS bloc, which fell victim to the Red Queen effect. We'll get to that in a bit.

In the days before supercapitals, subcapitals were enough for a group to wreak havoc. Capital fleets existed, but were vulnerable; some of the most amazing fights during the Great War were classic subcapital + capital engagements, with chaos unleashing as Dreads jumped into an engagement and sieged on contact. For ten minutes per siege cycle, you were going to unleash hell and/or go down in flames, and every ship had a useful role.

Even in the setpiece 'good press' battles CCP loves so much, subcaps in the supercapital era are a waste of time. You want to know the dirtiest secret of B-R5? We ordered CFC subcapitals to stay out of B-R5 and only sent a handful of fleets, mostly diverted outside of that system to interdict N3 staging systems. The subcaps were literally not worth the lag they created. Welcome to Eve Online, where you should probably just go sit on your hands and twiddle unless you've got Jump Drive Calibration 5 and can fly a capital at a bare minimum. 

Nowadays, anti-structure Dreads are prey unless they're already under the umbrella of a superior supercapital force. It's better with the five minute siege timer, but there's a reason everyone uses cap-boosted "Ninja" dreads to hit towers and scamper for cover before the supercapitals come raining down on top of them. 

Supercapital apologists will blame Dominion itself, rather than their favorite endgame toys. The reality is that even if the code was rolled back to before December 2009 and we suddenly had POS Warfare in 2014, the issue would be identical: imagine trying to grind towers to take sov without having supercapital dominance first. 

Here's a look at the midpoint of the Great War between Delve I and Delve II. That's an era when there were only a handful of supercapitals in the game - already they were a tremendous imbalance and examples of worst-in-class game design, but they hadn't yet blobbed together enough to completely break everything. Here we are today.

We - and by 'we' I mean the blocs - have sov nullsec in a stranglehold. You want to play in sov null in 2014, you need to regularly engage caps or supers against structures, and you can't do that unless you already have supercapital dominance. That means you need to either rent from one of the blocs or hope to be sponsored into one of the blocs, or get one of those wacky 'You're not officially in our bloc but we use you as content generation when everyone is bored' situations like XIX, BRAVE and CVA.

The reason non-sov entities don't even bother to attempt to break into sov nullsec without bloc sponsorship or renting is that the above is entirely obvious to basically everyone with a pulse that doesn't have a vested interest in defending the status quo.

Yet not only do supercapitals raise the bar for entry in nullsec, the necessary arms race for supercapital dominance strongly drives bloc formation. In the past history of Eve, there were once up to six blocs, if one is generous and grants Provi 'bloc' status - and years ago when battleship fleets and capital fleets mattered, they could be counted as a small bloc. Now there are three blocs, two if you count PL and N3 as one. 

Sov Nullsec is essentially in a constant arms race, and supercapitals are the driving force behind the dreaded Red Queen Effect. When a bloc fails in the supercapital arms race, it goes extinct - see the collapse of the RUS. The surviving blocs get ever more effective and acquire ever more supercapitals; should one falter or fail in this race, it will vanish from the map to be replaced by a swathe of rental space. This is worse than simple 'mudflation'.

The only solution is to completely remove the current org-level need for supercapital ships to maintain sov space - which is to say to remove their status as the ultimate counter. If someone handed me a big red button which would allow me to delete every supercapital in Eve and remove every BPO for the damn things in the game, I'd punch that button so hard that I'd break my fist.