If you block the arteries, guess whats happening. The vital parts dont have enough stuff in circulation for cells to live there. There is necrosis setting in slowly first in those parts, if something very important was exchanged, and exchange blocked, whole organism will eventually die.
If you block the road, the stuff doesnt come thru to people waiting. They will move where stuff is, to Jita.
Instead of having stuff redistributed, you will have only one central point.
Before Niarja became null, I remember going often to Amarr, but since then I dont go there for anything else than wormhole chain in case I have PvP fleet, and I go in a shuttle. Not bought there, not sold there anything in a year or two.
I’m sure people will happily point out problems with this idea but player groups set up ship caster routes , you need permission to use them and obviously susceptible to war decs , so it would need a large group to protect it.
They could sell permits to use the caster , which would mean it’s eve first useful permit , unlike others that are sold by players.
I’ve put this idea out before (as have others). Basically player/corp controlled jump networks. Someone will come along momentarily to trounce the idea as truly horrible and the end of all that is EVE.
It’s an interesting idea, but like most things in EVE it shouldn’t be considered in isolation. EVE has a number of problems that end up limiting player interaction with the game. So new concepts should be looked at as “what EVE problems does this improve, what new opportunities present, and how could it be abused to make some things even worse?”.
One problem is corp participation. It would be better for the game if more players were in more active corps that did more things. And another ‘problem’ is long, slow, inconvenient travel times. (In quotes because for some people, including CCP, they appear to consider 20 minutes of nothing but warp travel to get from point A to B to be a ‘feature’.)
So sure, if a corp could put up a ship caster/warp gate, and set up permissions and fees to use it, and possibly even “approved travel destination” lists for different groups… that could end up making travel more interesting. There would be more reason to interact with/be in a corp. Corps would have a potential income source but also wardec liability. So they might need to recruit more or create defense networks. It might be interesting if they were capturable and not just destroyable. Wars might happen over caster networks.
The obvious ‘downside’ would be jumps set up to skip lowsec choke points, so less ganking and less gate camping. And the potential for fleet force projection such that fleets could show up to battle sooner than expected. Although an organised fleet already has various shortcuts to travel possible. And of course fleets shouldn’t be able to use a caster except as individuals, which would make interception a possibility.
The end result would depend a lot on what travel/control options were implemented, how fees were set up (some of which should go to an NPC fee sink, the CTA), what the war implications are, how it affects corp/alliance interaction. Also things like destination scatter… does it take you to a specific location (another gate?) or does it sort of ‘scatter’ travellers out a mini-wormhole type exit on the other end.
We use mold to do road net optimization because it’s among the best ways to find optimum answers. Logistics using blood vessel and other similar metaphors is a time honored tradition.
Okay, so each individual shipcasts themselves. How does this work in such a way as to allow sufficient traffic for logistical activity but constrict a combat fleet? I don’t see a way unless it’s something like the jump fatigue reductions on haulers that currently exists.
Sure, jump fatigue is one way. “You can’t be in a fleet to use a corp caster” plus destination scattering is another approach. So any fleets would need to re-form and group up after any jump, which is where interception possibility comes in.
One problem with EVE ideas is, generally everything gets picked apart in isolation. Most EVE problems (corp participation, travel barriers, etc.) won’t be resolved with one-off, single idea bandaids. Better EVE design would require looking at multiple things that interlock and affect each other.
Corp gates in high sec (or low) would need to address the known issues with null Ansiblex’s (see Reddit: We don’t like Ansiblex gameplay for an idea) as well as be tied to various corp membership and probably wardec issues in order to encourage more participation.
I don’t know about you, Kezrai but most (?all) of the MMOs I’ve played recently have some system of ‘Fast Travel’ in which, once you’ve ‘discovered’ a region you can use the feature to avoid schlepping great distances. They can also be ignored if - like me - you’re fond of just picking a direction and ‘running’.
Your suggestion might not turn out as badly as you think. Yes, folks could avoid Lowsec choke points, etc., but wouldn’t that just mean that gankers and campers could gather in swarms around the remaining popular landing points?
CCP would have to design it very carefully, so that, for instance, Uedama and similar wonderful hotspots would still offer golden opportunities, and that Lowsec was, in certain situations, utterly unavoidable.
Convenience (faster, but riskier) versus Inconvenience (slower, but safer).
I haven’t yet managed to absorb your other detailed suggestions, but thanks for putting them out there.
How so, when without you, me and everyone else it would be dead? The distribution of goods is organic, not automatic or mechanical. You need logically thinking people to do it in EVE.
Thxs and I like your more detailed explanation, but one thing I was looking at is that fact that CCP has all the game mechanics in place.
We have ship casters, we have player structures with permission mechanics , we have a tax system , we have a war system that can be used to stop the jump net work.
The biggest point is it will need a group of people to work together to make it work and protect the system.
If it ever happened it would probably end up like the Poco cartels or even the TTT but these all add to the game and no one said eve is fair too all.
Before Niarja fell, Vecamia was an amazing shortcut from Gallente space to Cleyd in Amarr space. Since it was not in anyway a main route it was often dead.
I generally go with this as well… something is more likely to get done if they already have all the code needed to do it. However, doing something with existing code because it’s ‘easy’ isn’t that great if it’s also destined to fail from the get-go. (Like so many of CCP’s various initiatives.)
I’d prefer if they were able to add a long-term, interesting dynamic to the game rather than another abuse/exploit/remove the feature cycle. For instance, it’s possible that if they just put in shipcasters that could be wardec-destroyed, the whole thing might fall apart. Or might be exploited forever by the few largest alliances and no one else would be allowed to keep any.
However, if another feature was added, say something like “defense contracts” for assets, then it might be viable long-term. A defense contract could work something like a courier contract - you set the asset, the time span it’s to be defended for, the payout, and the collateral. If the asset survives that period, the defense corp get paid; if it blows up, they lose the collateral. We pretty much have all the code in place for that as well, and it could make various things more interesting.
Point is not to look at too narrow a scope when adding new things. It’s disappointing to see them take an interesting idea (Resource Wars, for instance) and implement it so badly it’s an instant fail. CCP needs to look a couple steps ahead and make sure all the details are in place to support a new feature.
Being “organic” does not mean it’s a living organism : your organs are organic.
Being “not automatic” does not mean it’s living : eg volcanoes explosions.
And having living people does not mean it’s alive itself : Otherwise your car is alive when you drive it.
Eve is not a living organism. So any comparison that rely, explicitly or implicitly, on that statement is absurd.
When you talk about necrosis in Eve, it’s stupid. The systems won’t disappear.
The effect you talk about could happen, but could also not happen ; and it could also happen without the causes you talk about. While in a real living organism, it will happen. Your comparison is absurd and used to claim that something you don’t know about is bound to happen while you have no argument for that claim. It’s an appeal to stupidity using comparison.
When your opinion completely destroys the play style of thousands of players and changes the entire function of the game for absolutely no benefit to anyone? Yeah. I mean best case is it’s a troll. The other option is it displays such a mind numbing lack of understanding of the game itself that it calls any of your opinions into question. It’s like showing up at a major league umpire meeting and suggesting that perhaps strike outs should be removed from the game.
That seems harsh, why not build upon the lore and have rogue drones hack CONCORD ships thus turning every CONCORD ship and stationary gun against capsuleers (but not against non-capsuleer ones)?
