That could be interesting. But youre right - the things i posted were just a quick write up - i'll be doing a 2nd draft. Stock is interesting and i already have some ideas going how stock and corps can be connected reflecting their productivity and their political actions.

Maybe you're right about pvpers rejecting this. But as i said earlier - if anybody would get what he wants to 100% there would be no need for a game - because the game consists of precisely changing the state of non-completness to more completeness, in very different ways corresponding to trade/pve or pvp. So that's what the game should deliver for all.

edit: youd be surprised how many dedicated pvpers ive seen in pvp games wanting to build their own house and water flowers - aswell as traders backstabbing a red when they had opportunity to do so ;>

Read up the consequences i proposed Savin - it sort of is a political system with responsabilities to your corp and your own standing, restricting you from entering industiral/social zones as a ganker - or making it possible to gain more out of your personal standing when combining it with high quality facilities.

It also requires pvpers on C) to hunt down gankers in A) to work against their constant personal/corp standing loss coming from holding OPs in C). This creates dynamics between players.

Its a beginning at least and your welcome to question it or make additional proposals.

Thanks for commenting - hope i can answer you questions with the following:

Sure, i also like it simple. There will be new zones anyway - so this is just an idea how to use them.

I also understand your concerns about starting in A) - but this isnt as painful as you might assume as it isnt meant as the "first steps island" - B) is this still for players starting out.

Its just meant to confront people with the need to make a decision. They can are meant to either go to B) directly or stay in A). If they would just start out in safe B) there wouldnt be that direct confrontation the 3 different zones might have rdy for them. But overall - it'd also be possible to start in A), B) or even C) as a choice.

I'd also imagine it like the way you just did - low to mid in B) some more mid in A) and higher in C) PVE activities are thought to take place spread evenly accross all 3 zones. They already have enough benefit themselves. Maybe high end PVE targets need to reside in C) for making the OPs worth something. If OPs would have a more tactical meaning in pvp/trading or pve - pve targets could be evenly distributed over the 3 zones.

Thats what this system is trying to do. A) would be a mixed experience, C) would have focus on pvp and area control and B) would focus on pvpless trading and pve.

To still have some diversity - i would revise my above comments and change to not evenly distribute pve over the 3 zones, but making the encounters more characteristic A) would deal with a history of mercenary allrounder thingy - specialized loot for the mechanics, while A) would have pve encounters somehow relating to indy guys whereas C) would have the more combat related pve encounters.

Actually every mediocre programmer could implement that system within a week or less for a first draft. Its a standard task and very easy to reflect in software. I do these things on a daily basis.

Additionally, there would only be a CS grind if people messed up their PS, have to reside in C) because theyre red and dont want to do missions in B) becasue theyd be free targets.

Only in this case would lead to a grind for the corp mates. The actual change of colors would go rather quickly to reflect sanctions and behavious directly onto player and corp:

- a yellow killing a green would go red immediately
- a yellow killing another yellow wouldnt, killing 2 yellows would
- a green killing a green would go yellow
- a green killing a yellow wouldnt go yellow, killing 2 would
- red would be red

A system at all to reflect consequences vs behaviour.

The pvp type guys would go red automatically by claiming outposts and would have to work against that in A) by missions or killing reds there. If they didnt - they wouldnt have access to B) at all and would be free targets in A) for anybody.

The gankers would go red fast in A) and would be bait for the pvpers in A) or C) trying to stay yellow or green.

Thanks for asking. The system has a rather direct way of prosecuting violations, makes them really hard to do on a regular basis but we all know that these incidents will happen if they are possibble - so the resulting colors will feed each other to accomplish their own current goal.

Scenarios:

1) you attack with boost, regain some energy while approaching and use your bit of energy to attack. --> The targets will have more energy at their disposal to strike back and will even have more left for a speed boost to follow you.

2) you attack without speed boost.

a) targets can withdraw with boost and you can keep distance but not approach them.
b) targets stay for a fight and both fire and ew away. now chances are equal.

Now in 2 of 3 scenarios EWs cannot dictate the fight as opposed to now where they can dictate any scenario. And even in that 3rd scenario they are dependent on the target willing to take a fight.

I call that a progress without taking away the dedicated role of EW.

Siddy you cant trashtalk maths. If you attack and loose cap you will always have less cap then people only being there trying to prevent you from fleeing thus being always faster then you if you attempt to withdraw after an attack.

Or do you wanna tell me that within the fight youd wait for your cap to recharge to full and do nothing?

If you base effectiveness exponentionally on cap-reserves - 50% cap being used would only result in a 25% effective speed boost, 25% in 5% effectiveness as opposed to 100% at full cap.

There would be no way you'd escape. Maybe some - but not all depending on opposing numbers.

You would also have to enter combat without speed boost and thus approach the enemy much slower to have the above odds.

If youd enter combat with speed boost - your cap was empty totally, would need to recharge to even get of 1 shot or module - or then wait a long time passively to recharge fully.

The odds would clearly favor the victims being able to chase you, if your attack didnt work.

Now you come with differing numbers in setups to make everything uncalculable for a balancing basis?

Again, im not talking about any specific setups - but simply making EWs pick a choice - to attack or withdraw. This is independent of numbers or other mechs involved and atm EWs can do both at any time. Thuis is what makes other LR worthless and is an unproportianal advantage of 1 class against many others.

This would simply change with the need to make a choice at a certain time. You can still do anything, but not attack and withdraw at will.

Whats so bad about that? EWs still have the role as fast scouts/roamers, ew support or tacklers. But youd have a weak spot that is not an inverse of speed, which would be even lesser armor.

Hm - im not talking about plated mechs or whatever Siddy - just about facts.

And evebn if you cap recharge is fast: you'd empty it when pushing with the boost into the enemy, need time to recharge to use modules and need time again to use the boost.

You wont be faster then people having their whole accum at their disposal to follow you.

Doesnt matter how you put it - it would not benefit the ones pushing foward and backward all the time from skirmishes - but still allowing people to scout or withdraw without having engaged first. Only 1 bot class can do this atm.

And this is what this whole thread is about.

Btw thst aside, my Tyr has always had a speed of 70 and i didnt die to an m2s a single time - so - theres no need for personal insults.

Siddy again - the problem isnt the speed difference in general - but that it allows the small ones to flee and atatck at the same time.

Reducing it to attack or flee - is enough. The versatility is the problem.

Do you use you head sometimes other then hurting yourself by making ridicoulous offensive remarks only falling back on you a moment later?

Everything could stay the way it is but be solved by making the speed an active but limited ability decreasing accumulator.

You would still have your role as it is now - but not have to use that advantage on purpose to either attack or flee - but not both at the same time.

I wouldnt say that - some m2s know what their doing - thats cool - but this issue still is a design flaw that needs to be solved appropriate rather then inverse.