I expect a political system that is effected by what you do, especially PvP.

1. The meaning of OPs shouldnt just be of financial nature.

2. Concerning PVP i think - anything artificial e.g. being locked up in an area by artificial means - contradicts the PVP thought since certain means are taken away from you. The more effective you exploit these artificial elements the more success you will have.

3. This leads to open pvp - whereas the freedom should be there to do so - not everywhere, but still in social plaaces. Keyword non-consensual pvp is a basic element since its pointless to fight someone who takes into account to die.

4. Behaviour should be rewarded or penaltylized as in creating several - factions relating to each other through their behaviour, outlaws whatever you call them - who again have some benefits in their areas, have to risk more as in being catched and are excluded from other certain areas.

5. It shouldnt solely depend on numbers - which is a hard task in a game where skill comes from intel and preparation, so maybe the different factions resulting out of behaviour could have certain influences on viability.

edit:

6. There shouldnt be any rewards as in items, but solely the idea of having defeated an opponent.

docking up leet pvpers

Srs guyz. I C U cn d0 it.
First we need something worth taking and holding. Something we don't have to live in at the same time as protecting it and something that outweighs the effect of taking it.
Then we need complex mechanics that allows us to attack and defend in a different way each time.

It's getting there but it's a long way off.

I agree about the eve comment ... the territory ownership system in eve is the reason I stopped playing eve ..it just ground everything to a halt.

we need something that requires a huge commitment of manpower and large mechs but if you manage to do that then conquering should be fairly quick.

This will necessitate large scale engagements ... but with the new proximity interference system ... these would have to be spread out ... and utilize artillery. Maybe have multiple ways of territory conquering ... errr ... hacking ((just like the current intrusion system) ... destroying (Literally flatten everything and the rebuild [the last bit would be a long vulnerable process]) ... siege (cutting supply lines e.g. stopping the power supply to manufacturing and refining and prototype facilities until the enemy surrenders ...maybe by occupying adjacent zones? power transfer zones - easy to do but hard to defend)

Just some ideas

Seamus (Rik)

Numerous small scale pvp objectives that give nice rewards.  Mines in shadowbane essentially for those familiar with the best siege pvp game ever made.

3-4 mines per beta island.  Vulnerability windows open for 1-2 hours at a time per mine staggered throughout the day.  Make the mine a active hacking node and the first person to hack it locks it down until the next vulnerability window 1 day hence.  Mine produces different ore types(titan,hdt,epriton,etc.) which is deposited into corp storage for controlling corporation every hour/day.

i almost forgot the most important thing:

i expect that the pvp'ing parties can be attacked by strong NPCs at anytime out of the blue.

This is an excellent idea. I'd go a little further, and have the mine/geyser/crop yield a rare element that is unique to the Beta islands.

I personally dislike PvPvE. I didn't like it in WAR, it was one of the things that made me quit the game. It was one of the reasons I never bothered with Aion. If you pvp against other players, you want it to be them vs you. You don't want it suddenly to turn into a pve outing, or have random mobs running in and affecting the outcome...that would be RNG at it's worst.

As far as the OP is concerned, I like to have something to fight over, whether it be portions of territory, resources, structures, anything.

Yeah control points, and mines. Have the control points give very good loot that's worth taking. Darkfall had these but the loot was piss poor.

Like we're talking epitron or t4 mechs, kernels.

You guys did good with the hard roaming mechs.

It should matter when you lose
The attacker of territory should be at an inconceivable
Logistics should be hard
The tactic of "blueballing" should be financially prohibitive and / or carry penalties
Islands should exist as archipelago's and not land masses. There should be a lot more stations with some being strategically important due to their links.

This is another nice idea- but rather than giving income directly to the corp, how about extending their credit, giving them a bonus on harvested resources, or something else that's not so direct?

The problem I see with direct income, instead of additional resources, or extended credit, is that it can lead to an insurmountable advantage- if a corp holds key points long enough, it would gain huge amounts of money, potentially enough to keep them supplied indefinitely- the loss of a few heavy mechs wouldn't mean much.

Instead, give them a larger credit pool, which would allow them to purchase more, but would also require them to re-invest in their holdings. Or additional resources, which they could sell or use to build more. The point is that whatever advantage they receive, it must be returned to the infrastructure (the market) in order to be useful.

The current economy doesn't accurately reflect the cost of being a corporation- large, successful corporations have tremendous power, but they must expend a lot of resources to maintain them.