These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Null-Sec Sov. Redesign Proposal

Author
Alistair Cononach
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#1 - 2011-11-17 16:56:27 UTC
Sov. Redesign Proposal

Sovereignty is now determined based upon a “Sliding Scale”, based on:

--Occupancy/System Use (i.e. PvE Activity)
--Defense/System Use (i.e. PvP Activity)
--Infrastructure (i.e. Industrial Activity/Structures)
--Station Ownership

Based on the four factors above, System “Ownership” would belong to whomever made the most of the ways to “own” via IMPROVEMENT, RESIDENCY and ACTIVE DEFENSE of a Solar System.

The biggest hurdle of this system is setting the valuation of each portion towards the sliding scale. IN my view, Infrastructure ownership would be the most important, putting up your anchored structures and defending them. Second would be Station ownership (as it’s a portion of Infrastructure). Combat (PvP) and Exploitation (PvE) would be smaller, but meaningful contributors.

Changes to System Structures:

1. Moon Mining POS Module Removed, Replace with an Anchorable Moon Mining Facility. Moon Mining Facilities (MMF’s) can no longer be anchored inside a POS. Moon Mining Facilities must be anchored around a moon separately, and multiple Moon Miners can be anchored (i.e. competition). For each addition Moon Mining Facility anchored and operational, the per-cyle yield is split evenly between them.

2. Station Ownership no longer tied to any other factor in system. Stations can be attacked and fought over at any time.

3. System Improvement structures can be attacked at any time.

4. Structure Defense Guns added, and work similarly to (weaker) Low-Sec NPC Gate Guns. Max of ?? per Structure (say, 4?). These can be anchored at Stations, Moon Mining Facilities, System Upgrade Facilities and Gates. They came in all 4 racial flavors, and in all four Weapon size-classes).

5. System Gates can be Disabled (Temporarily). They cannot be destroyed.

6. Most Structures in System go into a randomized 4-24 hour reinforcement when first attacked, and the their shields are brought to zero hp. Structures cannot be repaired or attacked again until they come out of reinforcement. No fuel is required.

7. Multiple Station can be built per system. Station can be built and anchored at any planet. Maximum of one per Planet.

8. Stations can be destroyed, including all assets held with that station. To do so, a group must first attack (reinforce) a Station. Then attack and conquer the Station. Finally, the have the option at the time of conquest to “Self Destruct” the Station, which starts a 7-day countdown timer. If the Station is re-taken within that 7-day period, the timer is stopped, and the next owner can either conquer, or start a new 7-day timer. During the 7-day timer, assets can be removed by players normally, and docking rights access reverts to “unlimited”. Evacuate at your own risk.

9. System Structures would have HP based on a sliding scale, to offer opportunities to combat fleets of differing sizes. For example, taking out a Station would require a sizeable Capital Ship Fleet. Taking out a POS, a much smaller Capship Fleet, or a sizeable Conventional Fleet. System Upgrade Structures could be quickly knocked out with a much smaller Capfleet, or a still-somewhat large/heavy conventional fleet. Moon Mining Structures, Gate Guns, Planetary Cutoms Offices and other possible improvement structures, would have less HP, and could be reinforced by smaller sized fleets, giving a tiered effect of objectives for those looking to attack and disrupt a Sov. Holder, and making defense a more important choice to make.

Purpose:

The purpose of this system is to make living in, fighting in, and improving a system key to owning that system. It makes it harder to have an afk empire without considerable infrastructure investment. It requires defense of structures, many now undefended by strong POS Shields, in order to retain that infrastructure. It makes living in, fighting in and PvE’ing in a system more important to owning it. It should reduce the size of some Empires, and open up opportunities fro smaller groups to hold a system or more by living there. And it provides for more opportunities for fights, at all the various attackable-at-will System Structures, and makes PvP and stopping PvP within a contested system more useful in terms of taking that system. It offers a complex, but straightforward, system that is true to the nature of EVE. Risk vs. Reward, and Ownership via Control of Space, not just control of a POS.

This system could also (with work) be added on to the low-sec Faction Warfare system, providing additional means to determine low-sec National System ownership.
Halcyon Ingenium
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2 - 2011-11-17 17:05:10 UTC
Features & Ideas is down stairs a bit.

By the way, since we're already talking, do you want to buy a rifter? I've got the cheapest rifters in Metropolis. If you can find a cheaper rifter, buy it!

Sakurako Kimino
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3 - 2011-11-17 17:11:02 UTC
Halcyon Ingenium wrote:
Features & Ideas is down stairs a bit.


this, but everyone is using GD for it now or looks that way

eve is about sin

Alistair Cononach
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#4 - 2011-11-17 17:25:04 UTC
Halcyon Ingenium wrote:
Features & Ideas is down stairs a bit.


Aye, well aware. But like a few of the forums since the migration to the "new" forums, F&A is generally ignored.

I'm sure a Moderator will move it shortly, but I did want to get a broader audience of potential viewers, in hopes that the quest for a better, fairer, more active Sov. system may still be int he works for CCP and EVE.

I think two of the big challanges for CCP going forward is their null-sec Sov. System and null-sec population/opportunity, and low-sec appeal. I think the proposal, perhaps with a few tweaks, would be a great first step towards both of those goals. Move away from the Era of POS, get most things out from behind the shields, and lets get fighting over them.
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#5 - 2011-11-17 17:27:21 UTC
Alistair Cononach wrote:
Halcyon Ingenium wrote:
Features & Ideas is down stairs a bit.


Aye, well aware. But like a few of the forums since the migration to the "new" forums, F&A is generally ignored.

I'm sure a Moderator will move it shortly, but I did want to get a broader audience of potential viewers, in hopes that the quest for a better, fairer, more active Sov. system may still be int he works for CCP and EVE.

I think two of the big challanges for CCP going forward is their null-sec Sov. System and null-sec population/opportunity, and low-sec appeal. I think the proposal, perhaps with a few tweaks, would be a great first step towards both of those goals. Move away from the Era of POS, get most things out from behind the shields, and lets get fighting over them.


If you're going to post in the wrong forum for broader exposure about sov issues, at least post in the right wrong forum: CAOD. GD is where we complain about smiling vexors and barbie dolls.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.