Yeah, no ■■■■.
That’s why the OP tried to call out megablocs in his OP.
Which is also why he’s proposing that EVE Online adopt
Because he thinks that this would weaken those megablocs.
And my point is that his idea is dumb, because it wouldn’t do that. Megablocs already have the organization and infrastructure to weather this kind of a change. And if the megablocs don’t (because the cost is prohibitively expensive), how much better would groups that do not have the organization or infrastructure survive?
All of the usual no-brain ideas have been thrown out and addressed.
why don’t they just tie maintenance cost to in-game alliances, so if an alliance has too many capitals, then their cost is higher? (megablocs will just have their executors create alts that control smaller alliances that are all set blue, congrats)
why don’t they just make the keepstars eat more fuel if they have too many titans docked? (how many keepstars do Goons have? and what number? because this will act as a hardcap for groups that don’t have the manpower to spam multiple keepstars)
but real life (this is a video game, gtfo with your “real life” argument)
We should all look on the bright side - although the mega-blocs are unassailable, they don’t seem interested in dominating every single null sec system. It could always be worse.
Easy solution: anyone who thinks this is a fun system can transfer a monthly 10% tax to a random NPC corp (or buy an equivalent amount of minerals and trash those). Everyone thinking this is a terrible idea that adds no fun to the game can continue playing as always.
It’s just another one of those “remove capships from game by nerfing them out of existence” ideas. It’s “remove capships but don’t admit we are removing capships.” To that, I say, just propose removing capships and be done with it.
We look to nature for inspiration for our machines all the time. I find it hard to believe you are intentionally being obtuse with this statement.
Many years ago now I suggested in CSM subforum that resources wear out and fatigue from over use, to create a situation where they either naturally pool at the borders of an empire thanks to those border territories being unusued. This would enable easier dreadbombing of capital mining fleets etc and diminish the absolute value of low sec status systems as being these unlimited resource nodes.
But this warning was ignored and we have arrived at the inevitable conclusion. So we deal with our problems we have today: a scared developer who doesn’t want to rock the boat, Bloc leaders who know that they have the power to kill the game overnight, a casual playerbase who get shafted every time a resource rebalance happens.
It’s the trifecta of failure and it keeps rolling on. They release yet another wave of broken BS ships in triglavians and neglect to fix the fundamentals.
None of what you have said matters because this is a video game developed by CCP and not nature. Unless you can show me with definitive proof that CCP is developing this video game with the goal of “looking to nature”, you can piss right off.
Your ignorance is no defense in court. I have actually worked in mining in real life, when the ore runs out, its out. Allowing the economy of the game to get as bad as it has thanks to unlimited resource generation from a tiny area of space is ridiculous and damaging to the games health. You don’t need to break the 4th wall to see that.
I think the motivation behind this thread is not a bad one - it seems like a good idea to limit how much power a single group can amass and store. However, I think Scoots has pointed out why this line of reasoning is entirely futile - you cannot solve the problem by applying any type of mechanism like this - there are too many workarounds.
Its not a broken mechanic, its a necessary mechanic. The other option would be to create instanced 5v5s or 10v10s for every PVP battle, which is stupid and goes against everything that EVE was built around.
This is the consequence of freedom. Yes, you can say what you want because you have free speech, but it also means you have to listen to others voice their stupid opinions.
First off, there were always subcaps that were more expensive than Caps. Even when i started out seven years ago, there were carriers that were cheaper than marauders.
Secondly, again, your idea only hurts smaller groups and individuals. An idea that doesnt benefit a side that already has tons of benefits, while punishing smaller groups and individuals, is counter-intuitive to what your solution is trying to solve.
Sure. So the counter to that is for ores to deplete permanently, so that people playing 2-3 years from now will not be able to mine at all because all the ore belts are empty. Even the moons run out eventually, and there are no more moons left to mine. Brilliant.
Im all for this idea. Make mining obsolete in a couple years time.
Moons will deplete and citadels will wither and decay into dust.
Trigalvians will turn off stargates and nothing will be left but a few scattered wormholes.
Eventually even the lights in Jita station will be shut off.
Protons decay.
.
.
Entropy doom.
It is obviously implied because he uses it to posit his point of the currently broken economy because of resources being unlimited. His solution is to make it possible to deplete resources completely. If he thinks he can limit it otherwise and “save the economy”, he is deranged.
You could have read the original linked post from 5 years ago if you like. The resources suffer depreciated yields because the area is overfarmed, fringe territories get richer ore types because they are underfarmed. Eventually power gets concentrated at the edges of territory because they need to defend their income. Right now the fringes are abandoned and its the internal systems that do ALL the heavy lifting. You still cant attack the fringe systems because response times are too low* thanks to titan cannon and jump bridges. The defender has every single advantage and isnt punished for having HQ 30 jumps from the area being attacked. You’re welcome btw and keep your opinions to yourself.
