Tuesday, February 08, 2011

Jump Bridges And The Art of Alliance Maintenance

In my podcast last week I talked about why I love jump bridge and how I think any discussion to remove them is unfortunate. Today I'm going to talk about how I think they should be changed to allow them to make null sec more dynamic and fluid battlefield.

While this is not totally off the top of my head, it has not been put down on paper before so buyer beware.

1) Divorce Jump Bridges from POS. Instead make them beefier in terms of hitpoints (and give them reinforcement timer as per sov structures) and anchorable at planets by themselves. In addition, like sov structures, they appear on the system overview and not just grid overview so anyone can see them and warp to them.


They need liquid ozone, they can require a password to use (but can be made publis too), and as per usual must be paired with another in range. Except anyone can use them if there is sufficient fuel and they have the password (if not set to public).

The result will be that jump bridges will be easier to use (don't need to bookmark and update them all the time) and more available.

2) Allow corporations to set up jump bridges in low sec. Not sure how to get around the whole "you need ihub upgrade to place jump bridges" thing, but I think the ability to shape low sec would be awesome. These could be like real smuggler's gates while still providing a place for pirates to investigate and camp. (Remember, they are not at POS anymore so no POS gun protection.)


* * * * *

I think that make jump bridges more visible and usable will be balanced by making them another point for more conflict and sabotage. I think that making them available in low sec will make that region of space more interesting and vibrant as it creates the idea that people can more around more freely and faster. And all in all, I'm in favour of giving players more control over shaping their own space.

7 comments:

  1. Generally I like the idea. What I'd add to it would be possibility to overtake the jumpbridge.

    Lets say we have password protected bridge. Our enemy can come to the system. Put it in reinforcement mode. After timer runs out it's possible to destroy the bridge or change the password/ownership to yours. Of course to use the bridge both ends need to have the same password/ownership. If this data does not match bridge cannot be used.

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1464853
    i hope u are running for csm

    ReplyDelete
  3. Maybe also given them the ability set a service charge, based on amount of LOz consumed per jump?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I must say I disagree with most of your suggestions here.

    Null sec needs to be moved in the direction of smaller, discrete alliances. Jump bridges make it too easy to project power as it is, and making them easier to warp to and removing them from POSs won't help if you then go and bump up their hitpoints

    They need to be fragile, so whether or not they have a re-enforced mode, they need to be a feasible target for disrupting an enemies logistics.

    Similarly, the other thing that needs to be changed in null sec is an environment that supports all of the "careers" out there, not just PvP. As long as you're not risk averse, there should be a way of making yourself useful in null sec. At the moment, high sec logistics chains via JF, jump bridge etc effectively ensure that will never happen. They kill any local industry and any local market.

    Move jump bridges in to low sec and you take it further in the wrong direction by making this problem even worse!

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Null sec needs to be moved in the direction of smaller, discrete alliances."

    I disagree with this assertion. I think any effort that goes directly against human nature to look to numbers for protection is doomed to failure and worse, hurts the game. What we need is a way to allow subcaps to move more quickly while limiting the speed of caps/supercaps.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Sorry, when I say smaller, I'm not necessarily meaning in numbers. I'm talking physical size and amount of space held. This is the impact CCP tried to achieve with dominion. Increase the amount of people a system can support, whilst decreasing the amount of unused physical space an alliance can control. Whilst it didn't work as intended, it was a good goal

    Limiting the speed of caps and supercaps whilst allowing speed on subcaps would reduce the physical size of alliances. Even if not in raw numbers, in physical size, as it would limit the space they could project power over.

    If you could slow down supercaps in some meaningful way (ie, alter their jump ability and make sure they can't fixed jumpbridges) I'd be be fine with increased subcap mobility via jumpbridges (especially if you changed the jumpbridges to be susceptible to said subcaps)

    ReplyDelete

AddThis button