The font size
Being serious the only thing I can think of really would be damage to ships when bumping. Never understood why it wasnât a thing.
I hate the limitations of large transports. Giant ships the size of a station are equipped only with reinforced bulkheads. Although they could put a hundred guns and a reactor from the station. This is unrealistic.
In addition, the pilot must choose whether he will be displayed in the chat system or not. In principle, it should not. A recent experiment, I think is right.
Graphics in my opinion are also outdated, but I could be wrong. I run the game at maximum settings sometimes, but maybe the video card and this monitor are simply not able to show a good picture. It seems to me that the best graphics settings give a mediocre picture anyway.
Because it would be game breaking due to issues around stations.
It would also be hard to determine who was the aggressor in many cases without some kind of stupid traffic court.
Yes but I believe that the âwhite knightâ bounty hunter-want-to-be types would join in drovesâŚCrime still would not be prevented but the mechanics for punishment would but put in the hands of players rather than ones nâzerosâŚ
âŚjust a daydreamâŚ
You can still have the invuln buffer. It would only mean people wouldnât be able to afk around dock/undock points. How is that game breaking? Seems to me it would make things more interesting.
Im not really advocating for any changes to asset safety and its system, not at the moment anyways. itâs something that can be investigated later. To be honest that system was introduced to eve to solve most pressing issues, like being lobbed from a corp, to lose access to everything.
I personally just believe that stations need to be more serious, and more vulnerable at the same time, which by values equates to no or only one timer, and serious amounts of damage.
When we bring capitals into this conversation we can start to move in a direction that really offers them a real purpose and identity, and from that, i believe dreads should get a mother ship equiv, and the two should really be about fighting the stations, and the carriers, and mothers be about defensive support (killing other caps).
To be clear, what i mean is that other ships cannot really attack or do anything to the station because of its damage rates, and their inability to handle it (due to lack of siege) so some capital changes will need to be made to help push these types of caps into that direction.
I also believe that stations should absolutely eat alive people, and punish them in a serious manner for threatening it, this would be an excellent way to help control exponential capital growth to non-capital growth rates.
For example, we use logi and faxâs for a purpose, to heal a fleet. In a similar way, dreads and super dreads (which iâll term warships) should really just shine at this objective, and iâd even go as far as to say maybe we should consider removing the ability to really do any meaningful form of damage to the station by other ships. This could be achieved by stat changes to ships, and the stations which means no code is really involved in it. altenatively, ccp could ivnestigate the idea of dreads have modules that some how hault super-tuned regeneration rates that only dreads could stop, effectively resulting in dreads and warships being the only type of station killer.
this would also force carriers into a new role we could look at bonusâs that would potentially enable them to do more damage to capital + specific ships. this would effectively push both ships into a unique position that is pvp oriented and will open up doors for the expansion of pve-capital based content which iv been advocating for for a while. Things like capital ratting plexs, etc.
In the end i want to check the blobs of capital with a hardstop âf you capsâ and i want to make it difficult for people to check stations.
I also want to limit stations to starting at small size, and upgrading to medium, and then large ultimately ending in keepstars (etc) instead of deploying the size you want. if we pair this with a corporate system that has some sort of limit to the amount of stations that can be upgraded at once, and tag that on an alliance you could fight the spam through time gating (by only allowing 1-2 stations per a corp to enter the 30, 60, 90 upgrade period (all things still usable in that time but maybe slightly higher fuel costs)).
lastly, iâd cap the amount of stations, systems, an alliance and corp can have.
I have this position because of the spam of stations, and i strongly believe stations should be a keep focal point to corporations to give them a sense of goals and objectives as in eve we really gotten to much in null to easily.
oh boy, is this ever so true.
1 Like
its really important to understand that the higher the complexity and graphics level of a game, the lower the population. Its unlikely that ccp will do any form of graphics upgrades to the game, and out side of things like ships and model revamps, animations, i personally dont think they need to play with graphics and that whole area.
Then you also need to make it immensely more difficult to build a station, and impossible to put them in highsec. Otherwise you just make the station proliferation problem even worse since putting one up is easy and attacking one is expensive and difficult. And in highsec it would be literally impossible to destroy a station once it is built.
(Obviously this is your goal, since youâre still salty about losing your highsec station in a war.)
2 Likes
Can I just ask, totally honest question, apart from being annoying to some, what is the issue with station spam?
I am absolutely on board with this. Lets time gate it behind skills, and insanely high mineral requirements. We can also gate on 30, 60 and 90 day upgrade timers before the benefits hit. So for example smalls may have 2 or 3 upgrade slots, mediums +1, and larges +2. You could limit access to those by the upgrade timer.
You could limit the smaller stations to high sec, and make them require battleship spam as a point of control there.
Im not advocating for small structures to be insanely dependent on caps to be killed, but it would be better if for example the whole (old-day) spider tanking concept made a comeback from this and became its primary tactic.
we could also create a sub-cap battleship variance that has a siege capability, like a bs version of a hac.
1 Like
Station is not dead bro.
You are advocating station ownership only for veteran or wealthy players, yes?
People monopolize moon control with it. We need a overhaul to the corporate system badly, but its in that area of code that ccp does not want to touch.
I was considering the idea of placing a new gui in the game that could be a replacement, so that the current corp system sites sleeping while a new, improved version helps the game, but im not sure from this side of things if that is technically possible at the moment. only ccp would be able to investigate that, but one of the main issues that come from it is a required purge of all corps and alliances, and that is a doosey. part of the reason i was saying we should experiment with another server to test the restart vibes of the population.
something has to be done with the UID system in eve client to pare with alts to prevent multiple corporations from being used, or created with in a specific period of time by the same individuals.
alternatively we could just have the npcs rent the moons for periods of time, then force the deactivation of stations automatically after those timers hit. this way a lot of moving is required to deploy and maintain stations in high sec.
I think it runs along the same mindset when Titans came out. They were meant to be like an endgame goal that an entire alliance would have to work for to achieve. Now they, along with stations, have become almost trivial to attain. Theyâre just a new shiney to get, just because. An obnoxious gated community of McMansions.
I see youâre going to lie and pretend that you never made that âWAAAA REMOVE HIGHSEC PVP THEY KILLED MY POOR STATION ALL WE WANTED TO DO IS MINE WITH OUR WHALE NAMESâ post?
I thought it wasnt possible to monopolise moons due to mining free for all?
Just trying to understand as I dont feel impacted by em, just wanted to understand.
Actually, i think that stations should require team donations to be built. Mechanically the stations should require 10m trit from each player, or what ever. This would help validate industrial players again and give a sense of equalized commitment to the people.
I dislike that players can just buy a station, create a corp and launch it, and that process is the reason for spam.
You can use the tax on refinement to screw over people and make loads.
Itâs annoying clutter, and thatâs a good enough reason. But it also devalues the accomplishment of building a station. Who cares when all you have to do is buy a station on the market and drop it in a highsec system where it is unlikely to be attacked, but also contributes nothing to the game and has no reason to exist? It takes it from being a major goal and step towards building an empire to nothing more than a meaningless participation trophy.