These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

First post First post First post
Author
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#641 - 2015-03-03 20:54:13 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
After reading most of these pages, my main concern is nothing addresses the population density problem, you still can't run many players at once in a system, making it vastly harder to defend against these snap timers.
These aspects need fixing at the same time or before this system is implemented. A good Null system should look like Osmon does for standard size of local.


You don't think CCP isn't taking this opportunity to nerf income?


Signature locked
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#642 - 2015-03-03 20:55:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Lena Lazair
Demetri Dentrov wrote:
huh. Ok.

So, what's to stop the largest alliances from simply synchronizing their vulnerability windows? Perhaps I don't fully understand the system (Only read it once. Didn't scribble stuff on scratch paper like I usually do...) but wouldn't syncing the vulnerability window create a sort of "Mutually Assured Destruction" scenario that neither alliance would dare to breach?

If you need all your forces to defend during a window, then you cannot use those forces to attack during the same window.


That doesn't sound like an inherently bad state of affairs.

The MAD right now is that sov structure bashes guarantee that every, single, fight, escalates into a TiDi cap brawl (or a timer being flat out ignored by one side or the other). People don't breach this balance because grinding out structures that noone showed up to defend is BORING. Likewise, TiDi cap brawls, for all their marketing awesomeness? Also boring. No one wants to risk upsetting the status quo and be forced into a long series of structure bashes to defend their own sov after a retaliation.

What you propose is an environment where two alliances are fighting at the same time across multiple constellations, ideally with just as many people as would have been involved in the TiDi cap brawl, except all in different systems, in mixed size fleets, taking (or defending) multiple objectives, with overall coordination and strategy of these multiple forces being a major component of the victory. In other words, fun. Alliances aren't going to avoid that, they're going to actively seek it.

EDIT TL;DR -- MAD right now is not actually stopping anything because of the D; it's more like MAB (mutually assured boredom). If we could replace the B with an actual D, people would gladly lead their alliances to fiery extinction provided it was a fun experience to do so.
Harry Saq
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#643 - 2015-03-03 20:55:48 UTC
I actually think this is a very novel approach, and aside from the bad mechanic of pressing a module and waiting, I like the overall architecture (yeah the 4 hour window may use some tweaking, but is a good starting number).

Bad Mechanic = Push button wait x amount of time (10 minutes to 40 minutes after the initial cycle of 2 to 5 minutes).

I see this as an incredible opportunity to introduce something really interesting and innovative. The Entosis Link module can eventually be used as the bridge interface into a Dust 514 capture environment.

Since we are in pods flying and interfacing with our ships virtually, the Entosis Link can be a way to project ourselves into a capture defense environment created by the structure. In here we will essentially load onto a Dust 514 Grid into an avatar of ourselves. We would then play the first person shooter by having to capture an objective from NPC defenses and hold it for the duration (the first cycle can be calibration time where we setup lodouts and whatnot).

Still keep the limitation of 1 link and the other link simply boots out all Dust 514 interfaces OR creates a 1v1 dualing opportunity where you can boot the other out for some amount of time, but for simplicity, just have it lock all out.

This would also create an interesting dynamic where you need to reposition your better Dust players around the constellation during the big event, as other players might suck and fail repeatedly.

This will give the poor schlub having to click the module something REAL and SKILLFULL to do, where he/she will play a critical role in the capture process, while still potentially getting blown up in his ship, while being defended in normal Eve-O by friendly ships. This also uses already built eve mechanics and lore (well I guess the PC Dust version wasn't/isn't finished, but I did say eventually)

This will also mitigate against useless alts that are only there to click the module and further moves away from pointless multiboxing mechanics (if something isn't engaging enough to do that requires your attention it is a bad mechanic and needs to be moved away from, as this is where alts start springing up, to push the thing and wait for the thing to do the thing etc etc etc, meanwhile the human is doing this N+1 number of times across multiple cients).

Having a mini-game could work as a placeholder, but those aren't really so much skill based as they are random luck in clicking the buttons, in a bad version of minesweeper (I would rather have a freakin eve themed angry birds to play instead).

The big takeaway is the pilot activating the module should have something immersive, compelling, and engaging to do that requires skill while the capture clock is running, and if not done will result in failure.
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#644 - 2015-03-03 20:56:49 UTC
Tiberian Deci wrote:
Adrie Atticus wrote:
Tiberian Deci wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
xartin wrote:
gment the nullsec playerbase as entire major regions of eve's active timezones will be excluded from participating in content.

Think from the perspective of an attacker wanting to capture alliance held space that is only vulnerable during EUtz.

UStz and AUtz will be completely excluded from any ability to be useful or participate. the same scenario would apply for defenders as well.

How is this different than properly stronting a timer, or a POCO timer? Defender picks his advantageous time, and everybody adjusts accordingly.


BECAUSE OMG IT'S DIFFERENT AND HARD AND CCP ARE KILLING MY PLAYSTYLE AND MAKING SOV WORTHLESS!!!!!


No, sov is largerly worthless already, only thing the vast majority of buffer zones allow you to do is get an early warning that a Random Legion is knocking on your door.

Then again, I'm sure Test could live in a region full of -0.05's just because it's sov.


TEST can stand on it's own without aid from 15,000 other people too, collapsing 2 alliances into iself, and being under the thumb of Mittani too. Now if we are done measuring e-peen, sov isn't worthless. The people that own the majority of it have turtled up and decided that it's in their best interest to be friends and make money off of it without actually using it themselves. This is nerfing that, and will hopefully bring about a more active and dynamic sov ecosystem where gudfites are easily found and people deploying across the map for fights because they allied with everyone next door is a thing of the past.


I fully agree on your point, you needed 19 000 this round with multiple alliance smore collapsing in Catch just to get a random piece of sov.

In the new system you will be able to take sov without own forces alone as you'll outnumber lots of other null dwellers already so I guess that's a plus.
Darius Caliente
The Pinecone Squad
United Federation of Conifers
#645 - 2015-03-03 20:57:00 UTC
These changes look (almost) awesome!

I include the (almost) for a single reason, which breaks the entire design. The "4 hour vulnerability window" is a horribly flawed concept. Anyone who has fought over POCOs will tell you that you always set the RF timer to the time when your enemy has the least people on. For the majority of groups in EVE, this mean setting your timer from 09:30 - 13:30. Not only do you avoid most major groups but you limit your threats to Aussie players who are interrupted by downtime. I fear that this same tactic would be employed for Sov defense, making it impossible for the majority of EVE to take part. With downtime occurring at 11:00 and an active system requiring a 40-minute capture time time, the ability to capture is slim.

Let's assume that I know the system I want is active (40-minute capture time) and they used the classic 09:30 - 13:30 timeframe. I have a 50-minute window before downtime to active my Entosis link. Let's assume an average downtime of 30 minutes (this can of course be slightly shorter or slightly longer). I have a 120-minute window post downtime. You've now take my 240-minute window and turned it into a 170-minute window.

In another scenario, assume I'm smart enough to review the EVE Offline activity graphics ( http://eve-offline.net/?server=tranquility ) and determine that the lowest point of activity is between 07:00 and 08:00 each day. I use this number to set my timer for 08:00 to 12:00. I remove 40 minutes before DT + DT, that's 70 minutes gone, again taking myself to the 170-minute window but I've now ensured that the largest active chunk of time (08:00 - 10:20) sees the lowest activity with ~17K active players.

At this point, I've greatly increased the difficulty in taking the system.

Instead, why not use the true activity level of the pilots to indicate the true prime time. Allow a corporation to indicate their prime time when they first take a system. However, adjust the prime time automatically on a rolling 7-day average, similar to how corporation and alliance standings are calculated. If 95% of NPCs are killed and 80% of Ore is mined between 20:00 and 21:00, that should become the middle of the 4-hour vulnerability window. This prevents the window from being used as a defensive mechanic to limit the threat.

It would also then be possible to add a mechanic that says a system with no activity over the 7-day average loses it's window and is always vulnerable, making it even easier to take inactive systems.
Lake Askiras
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#646 - 2015-03-03 20:57:13 UTC
Couple concerns:
-If the Entosis hackingmathingy doesnt stop your ship, I´m gonna orbit the thing in a interceptor going 20k m/s and laugh at everyone
-The prime time thing, although I understand why you think its good idea, BUT consider this drives alliances to throw multi-timezone away and only focus on single tz, the "prime time". You need to either make the window lot longer or come up with something else.
A1arica
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#647 - 2015-03-03 20:57:30 UTC
At first read through, the thoughts that come to mind is:


* It encourages ratting and mining so you have a maxed out index.
-- This should make all the "carebears" happy in "I'm supporting my alliance by padding my corporation's and own wallet."

* Having a strict 4 hour time window that can only be changed every 96 hours is not a good game design
-- it limits variety over multiple systems that may be used by different corps within an alliance IN DIFFERENT Time Zones
-- it discourages diversity of people working together for a common goal because it creates segaration of the population via timezones.

* Lacking a true catalyst for conflict -where is the risk vs rewards
-- I can see that smaller entities may still try and stake a foothold but it doesn't address the larger sov holding coalitions today from still not being able to get to a system in time for their "vunerable 4 hour window"
-- It encourages members to stay in their home systems and relatively speaking not seek out conflict . . . thus still being in the same situation today of stagnation. Or, the Oh's it XX:XX time to fend off the daily roam.


Something to consider related to the Entosis Link module, will this promote corp hopping so that a small goup of people can quickly be in the "right" alliance for who wants to hold the sov within a coaltion defending a system then continue to depend on the allies for the pvp ship defenses?

Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#648 - 2015-03-03 20:57:35 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
I keep hearing how bad nullsec is, then a Nulli guys says its so bad he rents it out to people who pay them vast rent and presumbaly make ISK out of it, otherwise they would not be there. The contradictions are huge, why would they rent space if they could not make ISK out of it.


If you were interested in the truth, the answer would have been obvious to you: Because it makes more sense to rent it to some poor sucker with lower standards and use your own time to go do something either more fun (pvp) OR more lucrative pve things of which their are many.
Borat Guereen
ARRAKIS Ltd.
#649 - 2015-03-03 20:59:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Borat Guereen
At last, I am all caught up with this threadnaught and the devblog behind i and I really like what I have read about the upcoming planned changes. Making pieces of sov easier to take is part of my CSM X platform.
I like how the control nodes will spread the fight around.

There are a few things that I believe need more work:

The Prime time issue:
Make prime time strictly for the reinforcement exit. One great idea previosuly posted is to extend the prime time range for attacks based on current occupancy activity, so an inactive system could be attacked anytime, or a system with its indexes all at 5 could only be attacked during the set prime time.
Another one would to also set an invulnerability time of 8 hours where the local structures can't be attacked.
I would also favor to set the prime time at the corp owning the structure level, rather than at the alliance level.

The Entosis link mechanic:
Great mechanic overall, but I would suggest that entosis link should work anywhere within the grid on a structure without needing to lock it, to get rid of the current relation with the ship's locking range. The T2 difference would only be about the cycle time, and not the range anymore.
Only cruiser* size of larger ships could fit en entosis link.
To affect station services or command nodes, a cruiser* size hull or above would be required.
To affect iHub, you would nee a battleship hull, the link from smaller ships would not work.
To affect a station, you would need a capital hull, the link from smaller ships would not work.
Entosis link would be invulnerable to any e-war, and the ship applying it would lose its mobility and not be bumpable out of range either. It would have to be destroyed to terminate the link.
Last but not least, the link could not be applied too close to the target structure, especialy on stations or services where the ship would have to stay at least 150km away for the link to work. I do not think station games would be good, and the defenders (and attackers in freeport state) would have to commit to the fight out of docking range.

Sov Benefits

I concur with those that suggest that more activities are included in the indexes increase, including PvP, PI, industry... and I do agree that some kind of extra benefit from these indexes in term of income should be incorporated, much like the ESS brings some extra income for its presence.

*Update: after more thoughts, I believe the smaller possible hull type for a Link Entosis should be a battlecruisuer, instead of a cruiser.

Candidate for CSM XII

Big Bits
Spartan Industries
#650 - 2015-03-03 21:01:34 UTC
Enthosis module needs to be similar to cyno: 0 mobility while it's activated. Also 250km range is insane.
Sieonigh
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#651 - 2015-03-03 21:04:41 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
CCP in all their might.. still never even mentions on how they will deal with AFK CLOAKY CAMPING in null sec

as I previously mentioned "we'll all end up AFK CLOAKING left and right"


therefore with this plan.

A- Cloaky Camper begins camping a system.. dropping its indexes allowing for easy take over with frigate fleets

this is what CCP wants and calls it active gameplay


thanks for the direction to another game and company ill spend with them instead of you ccp..

congrats on losing money



shhh shhh im right behind you .... point!
Aaeriele
Nobody in Local
Of Sound Mind
#652 - 2015-03-03 21:05:12 UTC
Shalazan wrote:
At night, there are fairies. And these magical fairies can only come out in the deepest darkest night four a few hours. Now these fairies have magical wands, known by the village elders as "Entosis Links". Now, during these few hours the magic fairies can use their wands to cause trouble, reinforcing the castles of the land and making terrible timers appear on them. Now the abandoned castles take no time at all, because nobody loves them and have abandoned them, you know what that's like. But in heavily used castles, the magic fairies may have to use their wands longer and put more magic into the the castle before it falls.

Now, when these magic faeries use their special wands they become vulnerable and unable to move! During this time the knights of the castle can defend their lord and banish these fairies in an explosion. Additionally, magical wizards can also use these wands to defend their land and stop the magic of the fairies from reinforcing the land. Now, if the magic fairies are successful in reinforcing the castle, it will have a timer. When this magical hour glass is done ticking down, it will cause magical places to pop up in the area of that castle. The wizards and fairies must once again battle using their wands for control of these magical lands to control the overall castle. If the defending wizards control the majority of these lands, the castle is saved and the fairies have to wait until its dark again to attack. But if the fairies win, the castle will be locked open for all to use and visit by the gods of generosity for two days, after which another magical battle for all the land occurs, where the one who holds the majority of the lands gets the castle.

The end.


x space fairy
HVAC Repairman
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#653 - 2015-03-03 21:05:35 UTC
owned you in pos sov
owned you in dominion sov
will own you in occupancy sov

still havent felt the touch of a woman
Canaith Lydian
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#654 - 2015-03-03 21:05:42 UTC
It's brilliant on many levels. I'm looking forward a system that uses everything Eve and integrates in into SOV. Miners, ratters, PVP'ers, and everyone in an alliance matters, and there are benefits for embracing more of the game. Everyone is more important. Awesome. Can't wait to see it work.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#655 - 2015-03-03 21:05:55 UTC
No structure shooting. Ammo futures just took a dump
Xiaoyi Tsuruomo
Goryn Clade
#656 - 2015-03-03 21:06:57 UTC
I really like thise whole setup, of course some adjustments have to be done here and there
but in this setup everyone has to know how to fly ships and pvp and not just anchor up and shoot primary
this is really an update for the real pvp`ers and not the f1 monkeys that get controlled by some big ass guys taking in all the money
Rollo Brinalle
Imaginary Rats.
#657 - 2015-03-03 21:07:46 UTC
Seven Koskanaiken wrote:
4 hour timer is a bad idea making virtual Berlin Walls between players. I'd go so far as to say it was encouraging nationalism and is borderline-racist.


I was thinking the same thing but it's no different then POS mechanics today as you can kind of control when your tower comes out of reinforce with the level of strontium you place in there. So in a way it's net net.

I do love all of the tears from the null bears though... Your cheese has been moved deal with it!
Nof Nof
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
#658 - 2015-03-03 21:09:40 UTC
I was in agreement with you until that last paragraph. Why does high sec have to suffer for null to grow? If null is an attractive enough proposition on its own merits then players will come. Not everyone wants to play the great null game. Attempting to force players out of high sec by effectively making it a low income potential newbie tutorial zone (as has been frequently suggested in the past) will only succeed in forcing a lot of people to just give up and leave the game. That's a bad idea for Eve in general and for CCP's revenue in particular/[/quote]



Well half the reason ns isn't ad attractive Is the risk free nature the influx of isk easy ore and pve provides. Seeing how it's the most active area of the game players shouldn't get an incentive to be risk averse. You shouldn't be able to use orcas or anything of thst nature in hs. Null sec suffers every day cause of the cost benefit ratio. There are 2 possible ways you can change the incentive and both lead down the same path.

If you offer more null sec incentive it offers greater reward and greater inflation thus making the same hi sec income worth less. If you limit high sec income you force more players to explore and expand their horizons

Either way the risk reward of hs vs ns is the issue if players can get in shiny ships from veldspar grinding you have a problem. I have no issue with how players choose to spend their game time, however being a hi sec miner should have minimal rewards.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#659 - 2015-03-03 21:10:26 UTC
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Agent Known wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
REALLY IMPORTANT:


Entosis Link should trigger alert IMMEDIATELY - not after a 10 Minute delay when the damage is already done!!!!


*(Please like this post so Dev's will clearly see this)


If you're actively using the system they're contesting then intel channels would tell you well before they got to the structures anyway.


Intel channels don't tell you someone's fit or cargo.


No where in all of EVE's mechanics does an attacker of a POS or POCO or ANY player owned structure get a free 10 minute head start in contesting anything in this game....


@#[email protected] THAT! That's **** game design right there --- I'm all for what's proposed EXCEPT that!


I would go so far as saying any system upgraded past level 1 (so 2 and above) should give that warning, but only those, so basically if your alliance makes even a passing try at using the space you get that benefit, otherwise, your clueless about who's doing what in that wooded 10 acre lot behind your house.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Infrequent
Mass Collapse
It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
#660 - 2015-03-03 21:10:53 UTC
All of these null anom bear tears, my god this is a gold mine. Can't wait for these changes, if you're threatening to leave null or infact Eve in general because CCP are actually making educated decisions on Eve's most prominent issue, good because the game really does not need people like you.

Keep it up CCP, once things get ironed out, tweaks made, numbers crunched, we'll have us a fantastic set of changes coming to null that'll finally work to get it out of it's sorry state.