These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

SOV tearing down the old.

First post
Author
Kyle Sev
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2013-10-27 04:59:29 UTC
Saw this post on the mittani`s forum and it got me thinking. Would remaking SOV completly be better and how would you think it would be done?

Marlona Sky

It is pointless to build a new house on a foundation that is cracked and shattered. Practically all ideas in regards to fixing sovereignty only look as far as rebuilding a house on a broken foundation. I think the best course of action for us, if we really want to truly fix sovereignty, is to ask ourselves what results we would see across the null landscape (even FW because it does deal with territory control too) from a good system?

Keep in mind there will be many opinions about what they view would be good to see and another person would see that as bad. Just try and keep an open mind and don't be a **** about it.
Frying Doom
#2 - 2013-10-27 05:01:51 UTC
Would it not be more relevant to ask

How many GTCs do I have to buy to get Delve as a bonus?

Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#3 - 2013-10-27 05:17:07 UTC
A large variety of different structures to shoot

A mix of timer types, some more random than others


and most importantly

Very in-depth mechanics that players will have to fully explore in order to engage with



Which is to say, structures, timers, convoluted

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Dont UseYourAlt OnTheForums
Doomheim
#4 - 2013-10-27 05:27:26 UTC
anti afk cloaks machines with a level of sov
Varius Xeral
Doomheim
#5 - 2013-10-27 05:34:46 UTC
Yes, it needs to be completely rebuilt from scratch, with an eye to the fundamentals of MMO theory in general. Eve isn't the only game grappling with ideas like persistent universes, player controlled areas, mass warfare, etc. The first company to get it right will likely be at the forefront of the next generation of MMOs, despite what the "everybody wants tablet games with microtransactions for cookies" so-called game industry "experts" suggest.

Official Representative of The Nullsec Zealot Cabal

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#6 - 2013-10-27 06:16:13 UTC
It needs more NPCs

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Laserak
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2013-10-27 06:18:54 UTC
I can dig it. Drop everyones sov and rework the whole thing.

Just make sure you do it in winter Smile
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2013-10-27 08:10:43 UTC
- almost every system in SOV 0.0 is claimed
- people destroy lots of ships time by time in SOV 0.0
- map is still changing time by time

as long as these evidences present i see no point in changing SOV 0.0 system. What for? People don't like it but people use it.

Only when we will see lots of systems losing SOV because players leaving SOV 0.0 space and this space becoming empty - then it will be clear that time has come to change SOV system

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

ElQuirko
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2013-10-27 11:48:38 UTC
March rabbit wrote:
- almost every system in SOV 0.0 is claimed
- people destroy lots of ships time by time in SOV 0.0
- map is still changing time by time

as long as these evidences present i see no point in changing SOV 0.0 system. What for? People don't like it but people use it.

Only when we will see lots of systems losing SOV because players leaving SOV 0.0 space and this space becoming empty - then it will be clear that time has come to change SOV system


"- everyone starts off alive
-people are still alive during a TB outbreak
-some people survive said TB outbreak

as long as these evidences present i see no point in developing a vaccine to TB. What for? People don't like it but some people can deal with it.

Only when nearly everyone has died from TB - then it will be time to develop a preventative vaccine for TB."

Dodixie > Hek

Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#10 - 2013-10-27 12:06:53 UTC

The idea of SOV in nullsec is somewhat of a paradox. You could argue that wormhole space is the final frontier. But I'd like to see nullsec more accessible to smaller groups of players. If Harry wants to put up a POS in VFK, he should be able to, even if it gets blown up immediately. SOV should be controlled by the players not the structures. If you don't want someone to put up a POS in "your" space, I think you should have to blow them up instead of relying on SOV structures. Sure, ultimately it's the players who put up the structures and defend them, but the current mechanics favor large groups. And no, I don't think NPC null solves any of this.

I'm not saying change the existing mechanics for the current space. Instead, open up a new area of null with different rules. Add to that NPC factions that actively gain and lose control of space. I'm sure some sort of creative storyline/lore could explain the difference.

I'd also like to see high sec and low sec opened up more to player involvement in the policing of space. Additionally, Faction Warfare should actually mean something to the rest of the players aside from market prices.

These are all related ideas- tied together by the belief that there should be more player involvement for all aspects of the game.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.

March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2013-10-27 12:08:06 UTC
ElQuirko wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
- almost every system in SOV 0.0 is claimed
- people destroy lots of ships time by time in SOV 0.0
- map is still changing time by time

as long as these evidences present i see no point in changing SOV 0.0 system. What for? People don't like it but people use it.

Only when we will see lots of systems losing SOV because players leaving SOV 0.0 space and this space becoming empty - then it will be clear that time has come to change SOV system


"- everyone starts off alive
-people are still alive during a TB outbreak
-some people survive said TB outbreak

as long as these evidences present i see no point in developing a vaccine to TB. What for? People don't like it but some people can deal with it.

Only when nearly everyone has died from TB - then it will be time to develop a preventative vaccine for TB."

bad example:
- TB (whatever it is) comes to people
- SOV 0.0 don't force anyone to come there and suffer => people DECIDED they will live there and "suffer"

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"

Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#12 - 2013-10-27 12:09:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdiel Kavash
Mechanics which incentivize both the attacker and the defender to show up for as many fights as possible.
Provide targets for all sizes and types of fleets.
Make every fight meaningful.
Allow people to damage an enemy's infrastructure without necessarily escalating into a sov war. (No siphons don't count.)
Decent income sources from 0.0 on personal, corporation, and alliance level.
Less space should be able to sustain more people, thus reducing the need for massive unused territory.
Renting agreements/treaties supported by game mechanics (e.g. alliance wide tax rate, shared blue lists, shared cyno beacons, etc.)
Encourage mining/manufacturing/industry in 0.0 instead of importing from highsec.
Reintroduce PvP-based income sources.
Reduce the effect of timezone warfare and the need to alarmclock ops.
Provide incentives to introduce new players to 0.0 early on. Corollary to that, improve corporation/alliance security features so that doing so isn't suicide by the way of awox.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2013-10-27 12:09:52 UTC
Here's an idea - it's based on real life - if you want to take someone's territory you go there and kill them and then you occupy it with your forces. Then you defend it.

The EvE version - you drop a stupid module and go back to your territory and magically you are given that territory. Don't even need to be there for that. No need to have troops there to defend it its got magic invulnerability timers.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#14 - 2013-10-27 12:22:20 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Here's an idea - it's based on real life - if you want to take someone's territory you go there and kill them and then you occupy it with your forces. Then you defend it.

The EvE version - you drop a stupid module and go back to your territory and magically you are given that territory. Don't even need to be there for that. No need to have troops there to defend it its got magic invulnerability timers.


That's what I meant to say. You said it better.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.

Xavier Higdon
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#15 - 2013-10-27 12:48:06 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Here's an idea - it's based on real life - if you want to take someone's territory you go there and kill them and then you occupy it with your forces. Then you defend it.

The EvE version - you drop a stupid module and go back to your territory and magically you are given that territory. Don't even need to be there for that. No need to have troops there to defend it its got magic invulnerability timers.


You are dead on. The worst game mechanic ever invented is the magical invincible mode and New Eden wide warning system. You want that system? You should have to defend it.

What I would like to see is a system where structures are more easily taken and defended on the fly. Do away with reinforcement timers, since that just causes alliances to ignore attacks until they've assembled a blob, and implement a more realistic alert system. Create a skill tree, Station Management, System Management and Region Management, that gives +1, +2 and +5 to the number of stations a pilot can manage. When a pilot is considered the station manager, they will receive an alert warning them the structure is under attack. No one else is warned, just the station manager. You could anchor structures without a manager, but then there would never be a warning if it gets attacked.

As for the reinforcement timer, it just makes no sense. It leads to group A blobbing the structure, putting it into reinforcement mode with no resistance, while group B tells their blob to be ready at noon tomorrow. Structures and systems in general should be both easier to take down, and easier to defend. An attack on a structure should consist of a single fight, making it possible for smaller groups to destroy them. On the other hand, solar systems should be defensible. Structures that buff allies, or debuff enemies, that actually fight back or buff structures. Perhaps NPC fighters and drones, or even fast attack craft. We, the capsuleers, aren't the only inhabitants of New Eden after all, and while we're busy elsewhere someone is running that station.

The possibilities are endless if we move away from the current blob and grind mechanics.
Abdiel Kavash
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#16 - 2013-10-27 12:53:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Abdiel Kavash
A timer gives both parties an opportunity to plan and prepare for a fight at a certain place and a certain time.

Without timers, you will only end up with one alliance shooting structures while the other one is asleep, only for them to be shot again by the other alliance after you leave. Why should I commit forces to fight off your fleet if I can just wait for you to leave and flip the structure back without a fight?

tl;dr: timers = chance at fighting real people
no timers = shooting unmanned structures
Harry Forever
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#17 - 2013-10-27 12:58:15 UTC
SOV is completely messed up, there is no dynamic in there, it takes way too much effort to take it, and thats why everybody is just friend with their neighbours, SOV is safe, safer as highsec could ever be, its carebears paradise please keep it like that, its fun shooting those newbs out there
Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2013-10-27 13:06:11 UTC
It needs a revamp, push it towards encouraging warfare and building a lasting empire no one dares to challenge.

That said, timers will likely stay as they prevent sov war from being a timezone ping-pong.

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph

I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
#19 - 2013-10-27 13:07:20 UTC
I have an idea... give all the SOV to me, then make it so it cannot be taken over by anyone else, and then I can declare myself ruler of the Eve Universe. Lol I'd let people fly and play in my space, for a fee of course.
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#20 - 2013-10-27 13:09:30 UTC
Abdiel Kavash wrote:
A timer gives both parties an opportunity to plan and prepare for a fight at a certain place and a certain time.

Without timers, you will only end up with one alliance shooting structures while the other one is asleep, only for them to be shot again by the other alliance after you leave. Why should I commit forces to fight off your fleet if I can just wait for you to leave and flip the structure back without a fight?

tl;dr: timers = chance at fighting real people
no timers = shooting unmanned structures


I totally get the reasoning. But the problem is it's like redcoats facing off against each other. That's not fun, no matter how many people are involved. Fleet Doctrines and strategies are also a problem, but that's a player-driven bittervet problem.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.

123Next pageLast page