Check out the full devblog by Game Design Director FC Okami to learn more about the changes that are coming and the philosophy behind our approach to projection.
This is a hugely significant topic so we’d love to know your thoughts. Please use this space for all questions, comments, and feedback! You can also head over to the discussion section on the EVE Online Discord server, too
The restriction of Ansiblex ACLs is potentially dangerous. If they’re restricted to a single alliance only, then you’ve seriously harmed the concept of coalitions and made it so that only mega-alliances will want to maintain Ansis at all.
This could result in a collapse of sov-holding entities.
But player woned nullsec is to dumb to install and maintain gateguns…
Thats what you want to say… I am not DUMB… i can anchor stuff in space and maintain it.
Thats my JOB HERE.
What will happen to ansiblexes connected to other alliances? (one side owns one, the other one owns the other). Am I right to assume they will become one way?
ACL changes feel like a direct stab at coalitions. You say you want to encourage smaller alliances, but they really only exist in the out-of-game concept of coalitions. Making Ansiblex alliance-only will further incentivize larger alliances.
As an example, probably 90% of the Ansiblex I have used connected one alliance to another in the same coalition. Different owners on each end, per @Jana_Halley and @Hiroshi_Moromuo
I want to see some numbers before I can judge if I like the change or not.
Can a big bloc send 180kiks through 3 ansis without any time loss still?
What amount of cap will be drained if a 250man BS fleet takes a ansi in zone 1 or 2, not home zone? will it need to be splitting the fleet or will they trickle in and miss half the fight?
What numbers are you working with? Or is this just a matter of: “look, this is my motivation to change something, let’s all come up with numbers now?”
It seems like a huge attack at big coalitions like Winterco and Imperium. It does not affect The Initiative at all as they are one alliance. This is not going to do anything to diminish Fraternity or Goonswarm but it will harm their smaller coalition partners. Some smaller alliances may even have to fold and merge into the larger alliances depending on how punishing this ACL change is.
It is very unwise that ACLs only to alliance members, as this forces smaller alliances to merge into super-alliances rather than remaining independent. It also makes it difficult for fleets composed of pilots from different alliances to deploy quickly. At present, potential emerging nullsec powers in the Blood region and drone region are made up of many different alliances, and this is highly detrimental to the growth of new powers.
The ACL idea is a bad one, you claim to want to help small groups to flourish but then you force them to abandon their original alliance to join the mega-alliance that will take the place of the coalition.
Either scrap this horrible idea or implement the “coalition” concept in-game, as a group of alliances, and assign the ACL to that.
You also claim you don’t want to disrupt ansiblexes day-to-day operation, if you really do you should revert the change that prevents from using them when bubbled/scrambled, it never affected force projection anyway and only enabled camping against single players
If you’re a small alliance that is actually part of an enormous coalition, you’re not a small power. My view is this aims to discourage large coalitions from having shared power altogether, an entirely good thing for small entities.
Big group stays the same size but now everyone knows who’s who without having to resort to out-of-game sources to see “coalitions”. Actual small groups unaffected.
