These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Bypass this! A new idea for null sec sov mechanic
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mohamad Transporte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2014-08-12 09:47:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Mohamad Transporte
Power projection , Sov mechanic changes, etc.. all those ideas are not nice and limit options for getting the fights that we all search for

I have a cool idea i want to disclose here .. not sure if this has been brought out yet but here goes my brain fart:

> Reduce SBU timing to online to 1 hour, once sbu is onlined, a countdown of random 12 to 24 hours starts for the system to enter something called "Battle mode". Battle mode stay for 6 hours. Onlined sbu will vanish once battle mode is effective and can't be offlined to be re-used
> SBU cost is ~ 500 mill building cost
> Cap Alliance membership to 4000 members
> Only alliances with more than 500 members can online sbu
> All ships that doesn't belong to the alliance holding sov and aggressor alliance will automatically have their locking ability reduced to nill (yes u can't lock anything) and bombers will have their bombing modules offlined when they pass within the sbu'ed system (however, they can lock and shoot if I-hub / station
> Cyno jammer doesnt work when a system is sbu'ed
> you can't sbu more than 2 systems belonging to the same alliance within 24 hours

--- General Output after patching---
1. Sov will be reflecting Alliance military power not the coalition's
2. limiting alliance members will prevent all x-coalitions to reform into one alliance
3. More fights since small alliances (800 to 2000 members) can fight unorganized full alliances
4. Cyno jamming for sbu'ed system will prevent camping gates by blues to that alliance

In short ... having more blues will have no effect to sov taking and will be limited only to skirmish fights here and there over pos
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2014-08-12 10:04:30 UTC
Wrong forum - therefore-> sis not read

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP
Ria Nieyli
Nieyli Enterprises
When Fleets Collide
#3 - 2014-08-12 10:12:29 UTC
So let's say my alliance has sov in a region... and people that might try taking over can't lock anything? Seems like an amazing idea!
Mohamad Transporte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2014-08-12 10:21:34 UTC
Ria Nieyli wrote:
So let's say my alliance has sov in a region... and people that might try taking over can't lock anything? Seems like an amazing idea!

I thought its obviose that only aggressor and defender can only lock.. updated OP
Velicitia
XS Tech
#5 - 2014-08-12 10:27:36 UTC
not to mention a "4000-man" limit. I'm pretty sure that with my skills alone, I can get a corp up that high ... (not that a 4,000-man corp would ever make sense).

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Jandice Ymladris
Aurora Arcology
#6 - 2014-08-12 10:38:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Jandice Ymladris
Some criticism.

The Limit won't work. CCP tried this a decade ago, by limiting corps pop. It only ended up in multiple corps cooperating as if they were a single group. CCP caved in and created the Alliance system, to formalize it.
Considering alliances now banded together in coalitions show that pop-limits won't stop player creativity.

On
> All ships that doesn't belong to the alliance holding sov and aggressor alliance will automatically have their locking ability reduced to nill (yes u can't lock anything) and bombers will have their bombing modules offlined when they pass within the sbu'ed system

I can abuse that system so easy it isn't funny anymore. Forge fake 'wars' between allies, make it a part of alliance doctrine, and suddenly, real aggressors have alot more problems to deal with then before. Excellent way to kill neutrals without retribution as well honestly (if you say, neutrals become immune to the warring factions as well: Hey look! Immune Logistics!)
In short, best rethink this part greatly.

This suggestion fails the 'Can I abuse this to hell 'n back?' check. In short, before you go public with an idea, see if you can find ways to abuse it, no matter how silly it might be. Don't think 'Nah people won't do that because reason x' because people will, if they can get an advantage that way!

Providing a new home for refugees in the Aurora Arcology
Mohamad Transporte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2014-08-12 11:33:10 UTC
I updated the OP by something called battle mode and making sbu vanish and costly
so lets say u want ur alt alliance to sbu ur system to protect... that will cost u half billion for each sbu.. thats around 1 bill covering 2 gates system and u need to do it every day !!! since the sbu vanish and can't be offlined and re-used
Ka'Narlist
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#8 - 2014-08-12 11:56:28 UTC
Sounds like some arena system to me, in other words sounds bad
Mohamad Transporte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2014-08-12 12:04:42 UTC
arena still better than the stagnation that we currently have in null (i.e half broken is still better than totally broken), and wh system has no sov for players that dont like this
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2014-08-12 12:18:44 UTC
This thread smells on tears, are you disbanding?
Ka'Narlist
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#11 - 2014-08-12 12:23:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Ka'Narlist
Mohamad Transporte wrote:
arena still better than the stagnation that we currently have in null

No its not. Sure sov needs to be fixed but there are far better suggestions then destroying the sandbox with arenas

Adrie Atticus wrote:
This thread smells on tears, are you disbanding?

If I was in the bastion I really wouldn't try to **** talk others Blink
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#12 - 2014-08-12 12:24:13 UTC
Sov is functionally impaired on a more fundamental level. A few superficial changes will not 'fix' it. It needs to be more dynamic, malleable and unstable. And that needs a lot of little pieces designed that work together in a complex system. Hell, my simple design example with sovereignty and population has several full length posts of stuff and those don't even go in depth on the details. And it's still missing elaboration on planetary population, control and subterfuge.

Imho, sovereignty should resemble the sov holder building up a tower out of blocks and other people playing Jenga with it.

Sovereignty and Population

New Mining Mechanics
Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2014-08-12 12:26:37 UTC
Mohamad Transporte wrote:
arena still better than the stagnation that we currently have in null (i.e half broken is still better than totally broken), and wh system has no sov for players that dont like this

Did you just basically tell every null dweller that doesn't like your idea to move to WH space? Yes, that solves everything. Why didn't I think of that? Hell, we should all just stop bitching about Dominion sov right now, and move to WHs.
Golemag
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2014-08-12 12:30:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Golemag
Dude, don't you get it? CCP is doing the suicide dance since 2 years now. Right after they started to listen to the fukcs who think they are good at this game but are nothing else then being an assholes.
Instead of listening to people with 150+ Million SP behind their back, they think they can improve the game with ridiculous ideas and worst, making all the ships the same.

They don't care. I don't see EVE online - online for more then few years. They lost their way. Making the game for kids while this was never the case with EVE.


Ask them why there isn't another EVE server out there. And maybe ask them what happened to the other one.

The people from which all this is decided have no idea what's going on. The people who do, don't care to explain them.

Good they have a vision. Only they went so far off that they are no longer part of the real EVE mechanic.

There is practically no NULL sec in EVE. All system have stations. One Alliance rule them all. Noone is left to become big enough to oppose them.
They will all die from old age or being bored as hell ratting in empty systems to buy ships that they can't lose to anything.
Mohamad Transporte
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2014-08-12 12:32:02 UTC
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
Mohamad Transporte wrote:
arena still better than the stagnation that we currently have in null (i.e half broken is still better than totally broken), and wh system has no sov for players that dont like this

Did you just basically tell every null dweller that doesn't like your idea to move to WH space? Yes, that solves everything. Why didn't I think of that? Hell, we should all just stop bitching about Dominion sov right now, and move to WHs.

I am not going to be dragged into arguments.... thats not exactly what i meant


True sandbox become "weak" in null if this approach is adopted... but it seems the only way to fix the blobbing attitude and long list of blues we currently have and reduce pressure on nodes when having sov fights as i would say maximum number that will be fielded from maxed alliances would be 600 from each side

this will create a lot of fights where the focus will be on the doctrines and countering tactics rather than which alliance has longer list of blues...

ofcourse, this doesnt mean diplomicy will have no effect since having the sov doesnt mean that u own the moons and other resources.. but will simply generate less income due to fuel penalty and other ideas from here and there on revamping ihub
Nemah Xadi
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2014-08-12 14:43:43 UTC
I guess it would bring back drone assist to large fleet fights - no need for locking.

Save Nemah!
Rowells
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#17 - 2014-08-12 14:51:07 UTC
arbitrary caps and dozens of proxy alliances, Yay!
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#18 - 2014-08-12 15:14:53 UTC
Jandice Ymladris wrote:
Some criticism.

The Limit won't work. CCP tried this a decade ago, by limiting corps pop. It only ended up in multiple corps cooperating as if they were a single group. CCP caved in and created the Alliance system, to formalize it.
Considering alliances now banded together in coalitions show that pop-limits won't stop player creativity.


+100

The number 1 problem with all 'brilliant ideas' is that many times the idea guy either doesn't know what happened in the past or does not take the past into account. That's why (in game and IRL) we get these Battlestar Galactica repeating cycles of crap aka "this has happened before, and will happen again".

The features and ideas forum are chocked full of such 'context-less' ideas. I really, honest to God laughed out loud when I read (in a SOV related thread) where a guy suggested the SOV system be based on how many POSes one has in a given system, his utter lack of awareness that the pre-dominion SOV system was just that was either incredible or the greatest troll ever.


Quote:

This suggestion fails the 'Can I abuse this to hell 'n back?' check. In short, before you go public with an idea, see if you can find ways to abuse it, no matter how silly it might be. Don't think 'Nah people won't do that because reason x' because people will, if they can get an advantage that way!


And that is number 2 lol. Mainly, people can't see past their own perspective, so when they make up ideas, they are doing so based on how they thing they would react to a given game mechanic. They think that "if it were just that way, I would fight more", and because other people are just like me, THEY would fight more too.

They can't fathom two important things here: A- people aren't like them and will respond to needs and circumstances in ways the idea person can't predict and B- THEY THEMSELVES don't really have a grasp on how they would react, they just think they do lol
Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
#19 - 2014-08-12 15:18:11 UTC
This thread has nothing to do with the price of plex.

.

They say most of your brain shuts down on the EvE forums. All but the impatient side, and the sarcastic side. No wonder I'm still awake.

**This IS my main so STFU.
Lugia3
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2014-08-12 15:26:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugia3
Mohamad Transporte wrote:
Power projection , Sov mechanic changes, etc.. all those ideas are not nice and limit options for getting the fights that we all search for

I have a cool idea i want to disclose here .. not sure if this has been brought out yet but here goes my brain fart:

> Reduce SBU timing to online to 1 hour, once sbu is onlined, a countdown of random 12 to 24 hours starts for the system to enter something called "Battle mode". Battle mode stay for 6 hours. Onlined sbu will vanish once battle mode is effective and can't be offlined to be re-used
> SBU cost is ~ 500 mill building cost
> Cap Alliance membership to 4000 members
> Only alliances with more than 500 members can online sbu
> All ships that doesn't belong to the alliance holding sov and aggressor alliance will automatically have their locking ability reduced to nill (yes u can't lock anything) and bombers will have their bombing modules offlined when they pass within the sbu'ed system (however, they can lock and shoot if I-hub / station
> Cyno jammer doesnt work when a system is sbu'ed
> you can't sbu more than 2 systems belonging to the same alliance within 24 hours

--- General Output after patching---
1. Sov will be reflecting Alliance military power not the coalition's
2. limiting alliance members will prevent all x-coalitions to reform into one alliance
3. More fights since small alliances (800 to 2000 members) can fight unorganized full alliances
4. Cyno jamming for sbu'ed system will prevent camping gates by blues to that alliance

In short ... having more blues will have no effect to sov taking and will be limited only to skirmish fights here and there over pos


So basically, you don't want to change anything about the current sov except completely remove the little guys leaving ONLY the megacoalitions remaining?

Also, adding member caps will just make people split into 2 +10 alliances. Therefore, accomplishing nothing except more complexity for the sake of complexity. Idea is bad. Move along citizens. See my signature.



SUPER EDIT:
Mohamad Transporte wrote:

> All ships that doesn't belong to the alliance holding sov and aggressor alliance will automatically have their locking ability reduced to nill (yes u can't lock anything) and bombers will have their bombing modules offlined when they pass within the sbu'ed system (however, they can lock and shoot if I-hub / station

Are you ******* serious? 0/10, everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read this. I award you no points, and may the hounds have mercy on your corp.

"CCP Dolan is full of shit." - CCP Bettik
123Next page