Jump Bridge (hi-sec, low, 0.0)

(Teddy KGB) #1

It’s weird why CCP don’t let players to build bridges in NPC space. Nowadays time got more expensive, than in 2003 and a lot of people anoyed with 30min useless flight through empire. Really… I can’t find any argument against bridges in NPC space, only benefits for CCP and players.

  • Make bridges based on citadel mechanics (build cost, defense etc)
  • Max travel distance ish 2,5,10 light years depending on bridge size
  • Bridge must be avaliable for all, like stargates, and do only gate function
  • Can be anchored in any NPC space
  • Optimal base fuel cost for BC size for 10ly jump - ~15kk isk

(erg cz) #2

You do realize, that it will be the end of high/low sec gate camps?

(Kannibal Kane) #3

What he ^^^ said…

(Rovinia) #4

Highsec would be littered up with huge amounts of stargates in a matter of weeks. And because of highsec mechanics, much harder to remove than in Lowsec, NPC 0.0 and Sov space. As a sideffect, hauler businesses and the High / low sec gate content erg cz mentioned would vanish or take a serious blow.

(Teddy KGB) #5

is it a problem to camp jump bridge??

(Rovinia) #6

If there are too many of them, yes. Gatecamps require bottlenecks.

(Nicolai Serkanner) #7

Search harder.

(Teddy KGB) #8

I see no problem here at all. Make the price for haulers huge, so using this gates for hauling tritanium will bring no profit. Make minimum build cost for starggate more than 20 bill and no problem with littering space. Gate camps will be more effective, coz jump back will take money again.

(Fluffy Moe) #9

20 bil is like 0.00001 ISK for goons and alike. If it were like 200 Tril, then maybe, and only with some severe limitaions:

  1. should be connected only to some new funky designed for it space (to be implimented by CCP)
  2. should work much like wormholes and shut down once X amount of mass comes through, then it has to be refueled and power itself back up again, the bigger it is and the more mass came through, the longer the power up multiplier.

But its stupid to connect deep NS and HS directly. Bypasses too much gameplay.

(Solonius Rex) #10


From a lore perspective, this would make no sense. Its the same reason why Empire space restricts the usage of cyno fields. They dont want other factions setting up staging points in their own space that could be used to attack them. Gates are limited in number, easily controlled, and more importantly, fixed, and therefore allow the empires to know where the fleets are coming from. This would never be allowed, Lore-wise.

From a gameplay perspective, this would be a mess. Its the same reason why you need a certain level of Sov to set up jump bridges. Its because they create a massive amount of logistical and defensive benefit. Being able to avoid gates and gates, and instantly move from one to another is a tremendous benefit. You are basically trying to make it so that anyone can anchor a jump bridge, anywhere, without restrictions. This would be such a disaster and completely unwarranted.

No on both counts.

(zluq zabaa) #11

A few thoughts to this:

The new Stargates will be upwards of 100 Bil, if I’m not mistaken. While feasible for many groups, this is not the kind of number that will attract a lot of Highsec dwellers to clutter space with these.

However, if someone where to drop a 100 Bil structure in Highsec, the likely outcome would be an influence on current gank systems and of course lowsec/highsec gatecamps.

Then again, this would probably just mean that the gankers/campers have two new choices: move a few systems to the newly created bottleneck or destroy the 100 Bil structure.

It really depends on the priceta, jumprange and other details.

Unless you have the ability to defend it, you won’t anchor a 100 Bil structure in hostile space.

So if this would be introduced, it’s more than likely that gankers themselves are the ones to set up such structures, just as lowsec gatecampers: from one side of their area of influence to the other. It’d certainly be a quality of life improvement for influential groups, but also pretty harsh on everybody else.

(Mai Hantaka) #12

If you really cannot think of any reason for the status-quo you have an extremely limited understanding of the dynamics within EVE.

(Netan MalDoran) #13

I feel like that would kill the balance of camps.

But what I would like to see is bridges in npc nullsec, but be limited to one bridge per system. Much like how moons are limited to one miner per moon.

(Salvos Rhoska) #14

OPs sense of entitlement legit makes me angry.

As if its not ridiculously easy enough already to transit mats between HS and NS, he just wants more.

LS already is bypassed…

(Teddy KGB) #15

I play eve since 2006 and see “unlimited” understanding of the dynamics within EVE from CCP. I know that this will change balance, but it wont make eve worse, trust me. I used to start threads that have been met up with criticism and some of my ideas implemented in eve now. Sadly not all of them…

(Teddy KGB) #16

You should use a solution thinking. For example:

  • Link two gates to security status of a system. It will solve bypass problem
  • Make price huge for haulers or restrict them at all. It will solve hauling problem

There are a lot of different solutions, but i’m here not to work on it, no one will pay me. I only discuss a problem when it get apparent…

(zluq zabaa) #17

If I understand you correctly, this is mostly about being able to bring your character from a to b without doing doing 30 jumps.

For this we already have Jump Clones. Personally, I’d much rather see more clone jumps per day. Like, why don’t they change the Infomorph Sync skill into something more usefull, like +1 Clone Jump per day.

(Teddy KGB) #18

No. People buy ship in jita or other hub and have to travel 30-60 minutes to 0.0 entrance to find PvP or any other purpose. They never meet any problems in high-sec why they have to waste there time?
People come home wrom their work and have 1-2 hours to have a rest and play computer games. Will they prefer EVE or other MMO?

(Ramona McCandless) #19

There’s already at least half a dozen solutions to that.

(Sethyrh Nakrar) #20

This idea is bonkers. It would just create more thrash in highsec. Why? Look at the tons of useless, unfueled junk that sits there.

OK. The owner pays for the fuel. In Upwellstuff as well as in JBs. Problem is: Accesslists. No one in his right mind would alow to use it for anyone. Because it would be a strategic nightmare.
As from the view of a goon: Do you seriously think we would allow the north to use them??? LOL.

Also you can camp structures and JBs. And JBs are going the way of the dodo anyways in fall. And a JB that goes for 2ly? Funny. Cute. Just use the normal route.

And haulers die easy enough in the tradehubs. And when I look at some killmails, right so. Funny how much of a story they tell.