Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I want Null Sec Sov to feel more like Low Sec "ownership" that Low Sec residents have over their systems by simple power projection. There is absolutely nothing that a Low Sec resident has to do to "own" his space than to simply exist there and use it. Eventually people learn who lives there and then it becomes natural to know who your neighbors are, to like them and to hate them.

It makes the massive clustercluck of owning 20 systems that aren't being used productively and throws it out the window immediately. There is no benefit to any of that. Each system becomes an entity which can maintain as many players as want to project their presence there. You give different tools to existing in that space.


A lot of this is dependent on totally revisiting POS" and making the compatible with 2012 ergonomic standards (carpal tunnel no more!). It also means taking the Moon Goo and redistributing its value and effectiveness from being a "powerhouse" for a few moons that generates trillions of ISK in quantity. Although there should not be symmetry, there shouldn't be overtly gross ASYMMETRY to the degree there is right now. These Moons combined with the need for large numbers has forced and pushed alliances to simply try and grow larger and larger, and yet not more effective at managing their space, rather than focus on actually which space they own and how they can use it.


You can put up an Outpost and own it, and run it various ways. You can also put up iHUBs and other expansion units. However, these aren't Sovereignty structures anymore, strictly. An Outpost can be initially owned by a group of players, and deny docking rights to unwanted pilots, and so forth. However, to take over that outpost, as one of the few only truly "ownable" things in null sec (Along with POCO's now), there are various options that may be taken to acquire that outpost, without fleshing into each of the options, here is some ideas :


1. Military Victory
2. Diplomatic Victory
3. Economic Victory


Each of these potential options has various decision trees for the attacker and defender.


To gain the benefits of, let's say, reduced POS fuels or a cyno jammer, you simply need to launch the iHUB in a system and establish it. It doesn't strictly give you ownership of the system. It doesn't need to be destroyed to "control" the system. It just means you have put up an industrial advancement in that solar system that you can benefit from. To stop people from using the perks of that industrial advancement, requires making sure people don't put up POS" or use that space at all. Projection of power. So, any advancement can be destroyed, but it, in itself, doesn't stop or inhibit or warn the "owners" that they are going to lose any space. A reinforcement timer is fine, to defend it. But the perception is the relevant difference.

Moon Goo distribution and value and POS' need to be redesigned for all of this to work. They need to be more streamlined and less difficult to maintain. Also, the Smallholdings would work very well to enforce the existence in a system and remove the need for "Sovereignty" to use it.


The sovereignty mechanic, in itself, doesn't provide anything other than a psychological and economical barrier to entry into Null Sec. It's a psychological barrier because it allows ego-trips to claim large swathes of land they will never use - and it's an economical barrier because any fresh blood coming from Empire space to go into Null Sec has to overcome forces with exponentially more assets and wealth than they can possibly have access to, and with a limited scope of success on ever earning that money back.


Removal of Structure shooting won't be 100%, but diminishing the value for Mega-Alliance blobs is important.


The relevance and break from the former SOV systems as a whole is focused on removing the concept of "ownership" strictly. It will exist, but on TANGIBLE and REAL objects - things that are used and have a purpose. Much like you OWN a ship, or OWN a POS. But what is SOV anyways? And how can it be recreated in a way that doesn't act as an inhibitor to existing and operating in null sec - creating a "Social engineering" project for every alliance. But a way for EVE Pilots to venture out there and try and break away from the megalomaniac delusions of alliances today - at least on a level that is as disruptive as it is today.

If that's the case, then why is most of null sec empty and that infrastructure not being used effectively by many people? Tends to be lots of empty space. Ask anyone in Null Sec and they'll tell you Null Sec is safer than Low Sec.

Im still going to say its too cheap to hold sov, costs need to be increased, it should take 50% of the value of a system to hold it, basically you need to use the space you own, not a bit from here and bit from there.

For the love of God, NO.

I'm not a Goon and I'm saying "aw hell naw!"

Not everywhere in null sec but some "known" null sec systems, but agree since sanctum/heaven nerf there are a lot more systems completely empty for hours or days where your risk is minimum compared with "some" low sec, farm there is for nothing but peanuts, they're not empty without reason.

this idea has a major issue.....you aren't factoring in tz based play.


Those empty systems youare whining about, may be open because the corp its been given too is not your tz. If a US tz player and flying through space occupiied by oceanic corps (asia, the aussies and the sheep shaggers) in your prime time yes it will be mostly empty. We are at school/work. Set your alarm clock for 0500.....do that same drive thorugh and will see way more poeple.


Which is why this idea sucks. US and oceanic would ahve an eternal cycle of sov games. the aussie corps on, they knock out your sov US tz. we go to bed/work/school and the US peeps and you do the same to us. Waht about this sounds like fun.

Also has the issue of making eve a job and not a game. have to be on to keep the sov. Some players like having lives. rosy palm and her 5 sisters gets old, its friday night. Play eve to keep your corp space or hit up the club and maybe get some rl play. Current SOV makes the latter possible. Unless led by kartoon, molle or bobby your alliances sov won't dissolve overnight. Go have some fun, your SOV will be there the next morning.

Actually null isnt owned the way its shown in automatic influence map for example, it shows RA to be huge.
now if you open dotlan and go look Red Alliance you actually see alot of difference (about how few systems they actually have)
now if we take closer look at Wicked Creek you notice that RA actually own only 2 systems there even tho its completly red in influence map. this is because influence map bases heavily on who controls the system having stations.

In this example I just wanted to point out, that quickly comparing number of members divided by how much they seems to own space doesnt equal population density

Nothing is preventing you to set up a pos in someone elses space and mine/rat youre *** off.
only thing you cant do is dock, if youre comparing living this way into living in lowsec.
and if it is so empty why not just go there and shoot the TCUs down.

big areas of null is not worth living anyway because sec -0.1 (which is kinda usual) doesnt give much of anything.
If you want more population divided over null take a quick look towards CCP, if they could upgrade this waste land into something valuable.

And what comes to PL, they havent really owned any sov in past 1,5 years. but they own fair share of high end moons in null.

btw according QEN [http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/QEN/QEN_Q4-2010.pdf]
(its year old, there isnt newer ones) 11% of population is living in null vs 7% in low

Uh, lol.

Ya, the moment you anchor a POS the whole alliance directorship gets a letter saying "XYZ Corporation has anchored a POS in this system"


Dude - you get dropped on so hard it's not even funny.

You can not ninja launch a POS in someone elses Null Sec Sovereignty.