These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3221 - 2015-03-06 21:15:00 UTC
Papa Django wrote:
Lot's of wh ? Ok let's explore the chain hunting
Pretty highsec ? Ok let's doing some logistic travel.
Lot's of anomalies ? Ok let's farm
Close connexion with a friend corp ? Let's group with them.

Connection to ~insert bigger fish than you WH alliance~

log off your main, log in your PI alts and hope they close it for you Big smile

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#3222 - 2015-03-06 21:15:14 UTC
Vigilanta wrote:
Did he actually say that? lord of mercy help us if he did.


In response to a question about why he tackled the "taking and holding" of sov instead of the "reasons why we fight for sov:"

CCP Fozzie wrote:
For a couple of reasons. One is that we have been tackling why for quite a long time, like I said. The changes we've been making throughout the last couple of years have been aimed towards that. And they have been successful. I know there's a lot of people who claim that nullsec is completely useless. I mean, there's obviously ways in which the economic [?] could be improved in nullsec, especially in certain areas like mining. But we can see how much money people are making in nullsec, and it is [...] a gigantic amount.


Having watched the discussions about wealth in nullsec as an outsider, there are clearly a lot of assumptions made by various parties about the terms of the discussion--"optimal/suboptimal" becomes "possible/impossible," or ISK/hr is discussed without reference to the amount of preparation and effort and (character and player) skill required, and I'm sure there are many more ways in which the discussion gets blurred. Right in this thread, I've seen the assertion that any ratting opportunities in systems that might get traffic are worthless.

There are a lot of unstated assumptions flying around, and I don't think that helps to sort this out. So, unless you're prepared to go out and say that CCP Fozzie is lying or an idiot--in which case you might as well go fashion yourself a tinfoil hat--you have to start with the assumption that there actually is a gigantic amount of money being made in nullsec, and then figure out why it doesn't seem to be distributed or apportioned or available in a satisfactory way.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Rainus Max
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Reckless Contingency.
#3223 - 2015-03-06 21:17:26 UTC
DaReaper wrote:
Vigilanta wrote:
Rainus Max wrote:
Its probably been asked but why are a single system's sov bunkers (or whatever the hell they are) scattered across the constellation? If you are going to do that wouldn't it make more sense to change the sov claim from a system based one to a constellation?

And please please please don't make this time zone based warfare, I've fought Russians in Sov wars in the past and it ain't fun - I'd rather have the old POS based system back.



I actually agree with you constellation svo would be better, and would solve the 80-90 command node issue.



Be careful what you wish for...

pre dominion constellation sov was hell


Because that was still system based sov, constellation sov would be you take the whole area in one go. What I had thought up was basically you claim the constellation and designate a 'capital' system - if you want to invade the whole constellation you attack the capital and then the constellation wide bunker system kicks in.

But there are a few things you almost certainly (eventually) need to add into make the whole thing worth the effort for most constellations:
1 - Dynamic sec levels, IE if you over use a a system an the sec drops, ignore it and it goes up
2 - Move to a moon goo system that basically means you can mine everything on every moon but there's associated abundances of all the materials
3 - Moar sec regions (I'm generally in favour of this for all secs)
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#3224 - 2015-03-06 21:17:33 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
I have managed to read most of this thread, but I feel like it is time to put out some ideas of my own. Fozzie Sovereignty has reminded me that that Eve is designed by the descendants of bloodthirsty Vikings. When the Vikings come to visit, you have four choices:

(1) You bring out a smaller force and fight them. They kill you. Not the worst thing, since death is not permanent in Eve, but bad for the ego.
(2) You bring out a stronger force and fight them. In which case they try to scurry back to their ships and go somewhere else.
(3) You hide inside your castle. In which case, they stare impotently at your castle, call you a coward, then get back in their ships and go somewhere else. Or they AFK camp you just out of spite.
(4) You can pay them Danegeld to keep them from bothering you.

In Dominion Sovereignty, the Vikings have to bring big expensive siege equipment to get you out of your castle. They have to devote time, effort, and organization to besieging you. This creates some barriers to entry for newer players and rewards large, well-organized groups (warfare always will). Additionally, there isn't much that the Vikings can pillage from you outside your castle - there are no farms and fields to pillage. All of Eve's resources are renewable (NPC's, Belts, etc) or require time and effort to kill (e.g. POS, POCO's). Unless they catch an unlucky peasant (i.e. ratter or miner) out in his fields before he can get inside his castle, there really isn't anything the Vikings can do. This is very frustrating for would-be Vikings. It encourages options (3) and (4), which are bad.

I am all in favor of mechanics which encourage people to fight, but I do not think Fozzie Sovereignty is quite there yet.

In Fozzie Sovereignty, the Vikings don't have to bring big expensive siege equipment to get you out of your castle. They can punish you for your unwillingness to come out and fight, by starting a series of timers that will make life suck for you more and more and make you lose your space. Unless you are hyper vigilant and always ready to fight during your designated prime time - in which case you sometimes get a fight or the Vikings will just jump in their ships and scurry away. Of course, if you lose the fight, they can still start the timers ticking on you. The defender has to keep winning, which encourages blobbing. The attackers only have to win a few times before your defense cracks completely.

The need for hyper-vigilance is balanced by the four hour prime time window, which is not the most terrible idea if it was tweaked a bit. My recommendation is to give the defending alliance more choice. First, make it so that we can designate a different prime time for each constellation (if I only hold one system, it applies to that system), rather than one prime time for the whole alliance. Then, give additional choices:

(1) Select one 4-hour prime time window.
(2) Select as much prime time as they want, as long as it is at least four hours total, and at least two 2-hour blocks. So, if someone wants "prime time" to be eight hours long, they have that choice. If someone wants it to be two 2-hour blocks, they have that choice. If someone wants it to be 23.5/7, they have that choice.

Why do I think this is better? Because I have a life. Asking me to guard my space for a continuous four-hour block is a huge commitment seven days a week. If I can split the commitment with my EUTZ friends, then we all get a chance to participate in sov warfare. Eve should not have to be a part-time job to participate in 0.0. Nor should I have to blob up with 10000 other players to cover my stuff when I want to go to the beach for a week.

Additionally, you could make it so there are benefits to having your space more vulnerable for longer time periods - such as better anomalies or other tangible benefits. Which leads to another proposal...

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#3225 - 2015-03-06 21:18:19 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
In the alternative, CCP could just give us the farms and fields we were promised so long ago. Make taking sovereignty require significant effort. Then let us build things out in space that require defending, generate ISK when they are being tended, and give killmails. In short, I am thinking of a better version of an ESS. I would call it the Weapons Test Facility (WTF). It could work as described below.

You purchase a BPC for a WTF from an NPC R&D firm (or find one in an exploration site, or whatever). You then build that deployable, undock, and launch it into space, it goes out to a random spot in your solar system and anchors itself (with restrictions as to where it will anchor). There would be many different varieties. Some, much more expensive varieties, could require you to scan them down with probes. Others would appear on the scanner like current anomalies do. You then undock, warp to it, and use your ship to run weapons tests on behalf of the NPC firm, which can match you against opponents who span the full spectrum of the Eve PVE experience. You could even let the player choose what tests to run – or have different WTF’s offer different experiences. Some tests would take a short amount of time, others would take longer (higher rewards). Exiting the simulation before you complete it voids all rewards and also ends the simulation completely. Thus, if you got interrupted by a hostile, you could exit the simulation and at least not have to worry about the rats (but lose all the rewards).

The WTF should not have have huge amounts of EHP or long reinforcement timers, but could have high resistances. I’m thinking a few thousand EHP, a 5-10 minute reinforcement timer, and 60-80% resistances (depending on the version). After the short reinforcement timer expires, the attacker can either scoop (50-100m3 volume) or destroy the WTF. The defender can try to save it, whether by killing the attacker, driving him away, or remote repairing it (thus the resistances, but low EHP). The WTF should be relatively expensive, generate killmails, be very quick to anchor (instantaneous), but slow to unanchor (>5 minutes). They generate ISK (or LP) only when there is a pilot in space actively using it. Using it either puts the player into a simulation or a mini-game or something, it could be anything, as long as it is somewhat engaging, as hard to bot as current PVE, and makes more ISK/hour than other options.

This WTF simulator could look disturbingly similar to killing rats in anomalies or missions, or it could have a variety of other mini-games. It might be functionally no different than “flying” your ship is currently, you just don’t actually move. Due to the way your ship completely interfaces with the scenario, if your ship is destroyed in the scenario, it can sometimes explode for real (blah blah blah lore reasons). There could be different versions of the deployable: with different costs and difficulty levels. For example, a Level 5 WTF might cost 250m ISK worth of materials to build, and generate 125m ISK/hour (or LP for that faction’s store), if you "tested" out a carrier at the Level 5 WTF. But, if hostiles chased you away from it, you stand to lose a substantial investment. It is an infinitely scalable system, without requiring mission hubs in 0.0 sov space. So, you can cram as many people as want to live in a system into there. Roaming gangs can now count on at least inflicting some pain, unless they move so slowly that you have time to unanchor and scoop it. Running away from it in the face of attackers has consequences. Yes, you save your ship, but you lose a significant item. It gives you something to defend against a roaming gang.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Vigilanta
S0utherN Comfort
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#3226 - 2015-03-06 21:18:32 UTC
lilol' me wrote:
Vigilanta wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
https://soundcloud.com/eve-down-under/eve-down-under-episode-97-060315 is the link of Fozzie being interviewed on Eve Down Under. You may want to skip the first 5 min of introductions.

He addresses interceptors @ 11 minute mark

'If gameplay devolves into people orbiting at 250 km . . . then we would make sure that that doesn't happen"

Prime Time window will be the first 'breakout thread.

Look, go listen for yourself . . . or wait for the next thread. Greygal voiced a good idea of linking prime window to the indices of the alliance. One that is not active would see their window widen, making them more vulnerable.

m


Listen to as much as I could stomach. When Fozzie got to the part where he talked about how much isk was being made in null and how "it's obviously valuable because people rent the space he proved that he doesn't understand the difference between isk (what you get in sov null from anomalies) and WEALTH (what you get more of if you know what you are doing outside, especially if you are doing it outside of sov null). the WEALTH faucets (LP and blue loot for examples) outside of null also sink isk which is good, but that doesn't matter to the individual whose wallet got fatter

The presence of rents means null systems AREN'T valuable enough to take for your self (but are totally ok as a form of passive income for your alliance). The kinds of liquid isk you can make in null as a renter is nice (and that liquidity and ease of acquisition is a key selling point), but it has a hard ceiling that once you get there, people usually smarten up and go do the more lucrative things (like l5 blitzing, FW l4 missions and high sec incursions)

If the main guy leading the charge for sov changes doesn't understand the above, the system he and his people develop when they get to he "why" stage (phase 3?) will be every bit as flawed as the last anomaly changes were (I'll refrain from linking that 4 year old dev blog just this once).

You're supposedly the PVE-ist CSM we have, you should know this things as well , no?



Did he actually say that? lord of mercy help us if he did. The way we rent space versus whether its valuable or not is up for debate. There is alot of systems that are basically given away just to generate ~any level of income~ form them. Something like 80% of the rent we collect comes from 5% of the best systems IN THE GAME. Im talking the perfect PVE systems in entire regions, your dead end, tons of advanced warning, lots of belts, ice, -.99 trusec systems. If you want a **** system there like 500 mil a month and you honestly could probably talk us down to 250 mil if you talked a good game. Better than moons? yes, but realize we sell our best space for this income, not just any nullsec system


What a load of complete and utter BS. You don't rent for 500mill or even 250mill. There around 1.5 bill at least i mean some are like a ridiculous 10-13billion!. You shouldn't be allowed to rent full stop. You are lazy so and so who intact should be living in their own systems and getting income from this. What gives you the right to say we own this but we won't live in it, so we 'rent' it out. I hate the whole rental thing, its getting out of hand, and if CCP do nothing to stop it then ill be unsubbing for sure this time. Its wrong for the game.


For me i would create a new instance of eve and let everyone else have a proper chance to start from the beginning, because anyone who has just started or even been playing a couple of years, either has to kiss someones ass, or will never ever get to the same level as the current large alliances, they just don't have the same options or opportunities. This is why people leave in droves. This is why other MMOs have many worlds so that everyone has a chance.


Guns, lots and lots guns. Really? have you ever talked to me about Darkeshi rental rates, dont call me a liar without a fact basis. What you dont get is that those same guns will allow me to extract rent from you in ANY sov system. I may not be able to own the sov but i can make sure you will pay me money by making your sov unusable. I can kill the ihub park a cloaky camper in your system with covert cyno for a few weeks ect. So your either going to rent or im going to extort you. CCP cant protect you from it without making the game not a sandbox.

You know why people rent space in eve? because they dont want the hastle of owning an controlling sov. They pay us to deal with that hastle, your are trying to remove a relationship that both sides are very very happy with.
Vigilanta
S0utherN Comfort
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#3227 - 2015-03-06 21:27:11 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:


Having watched the discussions about wealth in nullsec as an outsider, there are clearly a lot of assumptions made by various parties about the terms of the discussion--"optimal/suboptimal" becomes "possible/impossible," or ISK/hr is discussed without reference to the amount of preparation and effort and (character and player) skill required, and I'm sure there are many more ways in which the discussion gets blurred. Right in this thread, I've seen the assertion that any ratting opportunities in systems that might get traffic are worthless.

There are a lot of unstated assumptions flying around, and I don't think that helps to sort this out. So, unless you're prepared to go out and say that CCP Fozzie is lying or an idiot--in which case you might as well go fashion yourself a tinfoil hat--you have to start with the assumption that there actually is a gigantic amount of money being made in nullsec, and then figure out why it doesn't seem to be distributed or apportioned or available in a satisfactory way.

its so very very very relative though. Additionally you cant say a gigantic amount of money is being made in nullsec unless you compare it with say, LS, HS, WH space. On its own it might seem like a lot in comparison to other regions of space it may seem like nothing.

I would be interested to see fozzie present these numbers and learn more about the income of the game. I suspect we wont see it though and if it is anything like the battleships are fine graph things might happen that are not pleasant.

I have been in nullsec for 8 years, over half of that time i have been a ceo of a large corporation and I have been involved in the leadership of various alliances. With the exception of the top tier alliances the rest are not that rich, generally if you break down the moon income, and hell even the rental income to a per pilot basis it might buy each pvper like, a fitted battleship per month. fights like B-R took months to fully SRP. I have the advantage of being involved in some of these "massive" incomes once you put them into perspective not so massive.
lilol' me
Comply Or Die
Fraternity.
#3228 - 2015-03-06 21:28:53 UTC  |  Edited by: lilol' me
Vigilanta wrote:
lilol' me wrote:
Vigilanta wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:
https://soundcloud.com/eve-down-under/eve-down-under-episode-97-060315 is the link of Fozzie being interviewed on Eve Down Under. You may want to skip the first 5 min of introductions.

He addresses interceptors @ 11 minute mark

'If gameplay devolves into people orbiting at 250 km . . . then we would make sure that that doesn't happen"

Prime Time window will be the first 'breakout thread.

Look, go listen for yourself . . . or wait for the next thread. Greygal voiced a good idea of linking prime window to the indices of the alliance. One that is not active would see their window widen, making them more vulnerable.

m


Listen to as much as I could stomach. When Fozzie got to the part where he talked about how much isk was being made in null and how "it's obviously valuable because people rent the space he proved that he doesn't understand the difference between isk (what you get in sov null from anomalies) and WEALTH (what you get more of if you know what you are doing outside, especially if you are doing it outside of sov null). the WEALTH faucets (LP and blue loot for examples) outside of null also sink isk which is good, but that doesn't matter to the individual whose wallet got fatter

The presence of rents means null systems AREN'T valuable enough to take for your self (but are totally ok as a form of passive income for your alliance). The kinds of liquid isk you can make in null as a renter is nice (and that liquidity and ease of acquisition is a key selling point), but it has a hard ceiling that once you get there, people usually smarten up and go do the more lucrative things (like l5 blitzing, FW l4 missions and high sec incursions)

If the main guy leading the charge for sov changes doesn't understand the above, the system he and his people develop when they get to he "why" stage (phase 3?) will be every bit as flawed as the last anomaly changes were (I'll refrain from linking that 4 year old dev blog just this once).

You're supposedly the PVE-ist CSM we have, you should know this things as well , no?



Did he actually say that? lord of mercy help us if he did. The way we rent space versus whether its valuable or not is up for debate. There is alot of systems that are basically given away just to generate ~any level of income~ form them. Something like 80% of the rent we collect comes from 5% of the best systems IN THE GAME. Im talking the perfect PVE systems in entire regions, your dead end, tons of advanced warning, lots of belts, ice, -.99 trusec systems. If you want a **** system there like 500 mil a month and you honestly could probably talk us down to 250 mil if you talked a good game. Better than moons? yes, but realize we sell our best space for this income, not just any nullsec system


What a load of complete and utter BS. You don't rent for 500mill or even 250mill. There around 1.5 bill at least i mean some are like a ridiculous 10-13billion!. You shouldn't be allowed to rent full stop. You are lazy so and so who intact should be living in their own systems and getting income from this. What gives you the right to say we own this but we won't live in it, so we 'rent' it out. I hate the whole rental thing, its getting out of hand, and if CCP do nothing to stop it then ill be unsubbing for sure this time. Its wrong for the game.


For me i would create a new instance of eve and let everyone else have a proper chance to start from the beginning, because anyone who has just started or even been playing a couple of years, either has to kiss someones ass, or will never ever get to the same level as the current large alliances, they just don't have the same options or opportunities. This is why people leave in droves. This is why other MMOs have many worlds so that everyone has a chance.


Guns, lots and lots guns. Really? have you ever talked to me about Darkeshi rental rates, dont call me a liar without a fact basis. What you dont get is that those same guns will allow me to extract rent from you in ANY sov system. I may not be able to own the sov but i can make sure you will pay me money by making your sov unusable. I can kill the ihub park a cloaky camper in your system with covert cyno for a few weeks ect. So your either going to rent or im going to extort you. CCP cant protect you from it without making the game not a sandbox.

You know why people rent space in eve? because they dont want the hastle of owning an controlling sov. They pay us to deal with that hastle, your are trying to remove a relationship that both sides are very very happy with.


Yes i have actually. you also charge an extra 3 billion for people who don't want to be in your rental alliance. and yes you are a liar.
No its because they can't take sov because people like you n3 bring your 1000 people and supers and force them out thats why, The reason is because no one can get in sov because they can't hold it and are threatened. thats the truth nothing more. also if your alliance is taking sov then you should be forced to live there or lose it.
Speedkermit Damo
Invicta.
#3229 - 2015-03-06 21:31:30 UTC
Kah'Les wrote:
Elenahina wrote:

Or you could use 20 Rifters and save yourself a couple hundred million ISK.

Remember - they can't reinforce it, if you have it linked up too. You don't HAVE to kill the attacker. Just deny him sole control of the field.

That said, kill him anway, if you can, because you can.


Null is kind of supposed to be the end game, where dose people who have played this game for so long have to go to get away from the frigate game. SP should acually count for something, CCPs idea that newbro should be able to take sov is backwards. If you want to fly small gang pvp go do FW not null sec.


That's a supercap sized sense of entitlement you have there kid.

Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.

Ed Bever
Evolution
Northern Coalition.
#3230 - 2015-03-06 21:37:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Ed Bever
Though the idea itself is interesting, i think there's some small tweaks that would be in order. For starters, i think the difference between the T1 and the T2 Entosis link is too large, and that the T2 link has a too short cycle time, and 250km range is silly. I understand you wish to provide the attackers some option to kite, but this makes them nigh invulnerable, give it 100-150km instead, so, if they go AFK during the cycle, they will actually DIE.
In addition, the story doesn't exactly add up. I mean, WTF does Infomorph Psycology have to do with anything? Anchoring would make LOADS more sense.
Bleyddyn apRhys
Ravens of Morrighan
#3231 - 2015-03-06 21:39:57 UTC
Suggestion: Allow an alliance to set prime timezone on a constellation basis, rather than alliance wide. I would think that would make it easier for multi-timezone alliances to provide content in all timezones.

Sorry if this has already been suggested and/or shot down but 162 pages...
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#3232 - 2015-03-06 22:05:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Dersen Lowery
Vigilanta wrote:
its so very very very relative though. Additionally you cant say a gigantic amount of money is being made in nullsec unless you compare it with say, LS, HS, WH space. On its own it might seem like a lot in comparison to other regions of space it may seem like nothing.


I haven't done endgame WHs, but we ran C5s for money when I was in a WH. They were our statics, so we couldn't trigger capital escalations. We ran them in PVP-capable subcap fleets. We made more ISK running nullsec anoms in PVP-fit battlecruiser fleets when we found a suitable hole to nullsec. Once you include the time spent scanning and rolling and fighting (which at least was fun most of the time) the ISK/hr was enough to keep us in relatively cheap ships. We ran a mixed T1/T2 doctrine.

I've done vanguard incursions, though not seriously and not in anything fancier than a T2-fit T1 battleship. I don't remember any remarkable amounts of ISK. I do remember a fair amount of sitting around making 0 ISK/hr.

I've never made much from level 4s, but then I stopped running them quite a while ago, and I find myself physically incapable of clicking the Accept button on a mission now. It has nothing to do with the reward; CCP could multiply the payout by a factor of 10 and I'd still be sick and tired of them.

My point is not that it's impossible to make barrels of ISK under ideal circumstances outside of nullsec, but that it's neither automatic nor typical. The numbers thrown around for ISK/hr from running level 4s in high sec involve some next-level planning and execution, not to mention twisting the intended design of the mission system into something unrecognizable. The level of effort compared to running an anomaly is remarkable.

Also, if you look at where the money really is in high sec, it's with the players. High sec is like Vegas: the naive gamblers bet on the games, and the professional gamblers bet on the naive ones. Once you establish that--why is LP so profitable? because you're figuring out what other players want, going to where there are lots of those players, and then selling at the price they're willing to bear--then you look at null sec and you see a glaring limitation. Is the solution really to make Uncle CONCORD pay out more? or is there something more, dare I say, emergent that should happen? How?

Vigilanta wrote:
fights like B-R took months to fully SRP. I have the advantage of being involved in some of these "massive" incomes once you put them into perspective not so massive.


And this is where you're right that it's relative: having never piloted anything more expensive than a Megathron into a conflict, I can't even imagine fielding the sort of iron that was fielded in B-R, and I can't imagine recovering from the loss in mere months.

So, to come back around to the topic: it seems to be one of the goals of this system to require less iron in order to challenge sov--although you may end up throwing a lot of iron at a hotly contested system, it's not an upfront cost of entry. Do you think there will be a cost reduction here, or not?

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#3233 - 2015-03-06 22:07:22 UTC
Suggestion: If you decide not to allow a vulnerability timezone on a per constellation basis, I'd like to suggest the possibility of letting alliances pick a vulnerability timezone of more than four hours.

Why? The larger their vulnerability window, the better a new multiplier would be. This multiplier would [b]multiply the occupation defensive bonuses
.

Example:
4h vulnerability per day = x1 multiplier
8h = x2
16h = x4

With any number of hours possible, and a multiplier proportionally changing.

The multiplier does not multiply the time it takes for a capture in itself, it multiplies to occupancy bonus. Meaning that if you're not using your space, you're not getting much additional time.

That's effectively a tradeoff of invulnerability time against added reaction time. It leaves small alliances the possibility to only be vulnerable for 4 hours, they have to react quickly to agressions, but again, they own a small space.

Larger alliances have more time to formup and defend their space, while at the same time exposing themselves way way more.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Nick Bete
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3234 - 2015-03-06 22:09:20 UTC
Vigilanta wrote:

...You know why people rent space in eve? because they dont want the hastle of owning an controlling sov. They pay us to deal with that hastle, your are trying to remove a relationship that both sides are very very happy with.


As the extortionist you may be happy with the current status quo but, I rather doubt that the people paying your blood money are.

While you may be profiting from a broken and stagnant system it doesn't mean that's good for the overall health of the game.
Papa Django
Materials Harvesting Kombinat
#3235 - 2015-03-06 22:09:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Papa Django
Vigilanta wrote:

No your way of life is closest to what CCP could have wanted for WHs, not nullsec. okay, so your in a lowclass wh, what class? because from what ive seen most of c3 and below is not inhabited, unironically not unlike nullsec. Difference is 1 wh system supports ALOT more people than 1 NS system.


C2 static HS/C3.

C3 doesn't have a wspace static but a kspace static. That's why they are mostly occupied by PI alt.

Low class wormholes with kspace static can sustain 1 maybe 2 pilots. No more. Or 3 casuals players, but 2 actives players will eat each others very fast.
Low class wormholes with wspace static lower then C4 can sustains maybe 10 pilots. No more.

That's because of the anomalies respawn system.

The nullsec npc respawn system makes perma-farming possible. Not in wormhole. If you farm your home you can wait days to get a single 20 to 30m spawn.

That's why i think nullsec systems, even with bad sec status can sustain a lot more players then any low class wormhole system (except C4 with 2 wspace statics).

The point is you cannot choose when you farm in low class wormhole. You farm when you can. That's a huuuuuuge difference. Everything is about opportunities in low clas, nullsec is a lot more stable and predictable.

It is the same for belt and industry.

And the better, in nullsec you have also wormhole connexions, so you can easily go farm them !
Dark Spite
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#3236 - 2015-03-06 22:10:41 UTC
Vigilanta wrote:


Guns, lots and lots guns. Really? have you ever talked to me about Darkeshi rental rates, dont call me a liar without a fact basis. What you dont get is that those same guns will allow me to extract rent from you in ANY sov system. I may not be able to own the sov but i can make sure you will pay me money by making your sov unusable. I can kill the ihub park a cloaky camper in your system with covert cyno for a few weeks ect. So your either going to rent or im going to extort you. CCP cant protect you from it without making the game not a sandbox.

You know why people rent space in eve? because they dont want the hastle of owning an controlling sov. They pay us to deal with that hastle, your are trying to remove a relationship that both sides are very very happy with.


Of course anyone can be annoying enough to make a system bad to live in but extortion models havent really worked out all that well in the past. Renting has worked because taking and threatening sov has been so difficult and time-consuming.

First kill defensive SBU's, then anchor SBU and then online SBU. Unless you have a supercap blob thats hours and hours of effort. The new system threatens all that, since challenging sov will be a whole lot easier and can now be completed in less than 30 minutes. When the pings for sov defence of renters go out I dont see all nullsec pvp alliances rushing to do that, even less if it means they have to go far. Given response times of large entities its not unlikely they wont form up in time before the events are finished.

Will renters actually pay a lot when they cant use their systems productively for x amount of days pr month? I dont see a lot of pvp alliances jumping to defend them either because they look at renters as worthlesss scrubs and have tolerated them only because of isk generated.

If you are director for rental agreements prepare for tons of complaints, convo's, rent rebating, pushing alliance/coaliton mates to respond to sov attacks.The latter will not be easy. The response to defending renters have in general been really bad because they are the lowest caste of eve players. The renter manager role will be the worst role to have and will lead to burnout of a lot of people.

The sov attacks wont only happen because someone really wanted that system, but because it might generate a combat situation. Look at what PL are doing in Catch with Brave. Not that I know the inner workings of PL, but I really really doubt they want Catch. But challenging Brave Sov forces a response and fighting ensues. PL farms for kills using the mechanics and given their amount of veteran players and massive cap/supercap strength its easy for them to do this under current mechanics. With Fozzie Sov a whole lot more will do just that, and not only to renters.

Nullsec powerblocs assertions that this wont harm them has no factual basis, and like the trollceptor should rather be seen as posturing. Saying nothing will be different under the new system is political propaganda, like the trollceptor. I honestly think it's a tactic to change the proposed system before its implemented.
Alavaria Fera
Imperial Shipment
#3237 - 2015-03-06 22:17:19 UTC
Dark Spite wrote:
Nullsec powerblocs assertions that this wont harm them has no factual basis, and like the trollceptor should rather be seen as posturing. Saying nothing will be different under the new system is political propaganda, like the trollceptor. I honestly think it's a tactic to change the proposed system before its implemented.

Yeah don't listen to those people, they're just dreamers who will soon be woken up from their 0.0 dream

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 ?

Dark Spite
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#3238 - 2015-03-06 22:21:45 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Dark Spite wrote:
Nullsec powerblocs assertions that this wont harm them has no factual basis, and like the trollceptor should rather be seen as posturing. Saying nothing will be different under the new system is political propaganda, like the trollceptor. I honestly think it's a tactic to change the proposed system before its implemented.

Yeah don't listen to those people, they're just dreamers who will soon be woken up from their 0.0 dream


The sarcasm is strong in this one...

Goons play the political meta better than ANYONE else in this game. CFC is the probably the coalition who will be hurt the least by all this to begin with, and maybe even longterm. But not all coalitions have your level of organisation and common culture. My biggest complaint being in the CFC was the mono-culture. I didnt perceive TNT, which I was part of, to have any culture of its own.
Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#3239 - 2015-03-06 22:24:49 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Vigilanta wrote:
Did he actually say that? lord of mercy help us if he did.


In response to a question about why he tackled the "taking and holding" of sov instead of the "reasons why we fight for sov:"

CCP Fozzie wrote:
For a couple of reasons. One is that we have been tackling why for quite a long time, like I said. The changes we've been making throughout the last couple of years have been aimed towards that. And they have been successful. I know there's a lot of people who claim that nullsec is completely useless. I mean, there's obviously ways in which the economic [?] could be improved in nullsec, especially in certain areas like mining. But we can see how much money people are making in nullsec, and it is [...] a gigantic amount.


Having watched the discussions about wealth in nullsec as an outsider, there are clearly a lot of assumptions made by various parties about the terms of the discussion--"optimal/suboptimal" becomes "possible/impossible," or ISK/hr is discussed without reference to the amount of preparation and effort and (character and player) skill required, and I'm sure there are many more ways in which the discussion gets blurred. Right in this thread, I've seen the assertion that any ratting opportunities in systems that might get traffic are worthless.

There are a lot of unstated assumptions flying around, and I don't think that helps to sort this out. So, unless you're prepared to go out and say that CCP Fozzie is lying or an idiot--in which case you might as well go fashion yourself a tinfoil hat--you have to start with the assumption that there actually is a gigantic amount of money being made in nullsec, and then figure out why it doesn't seem to be distributed or apportioned or available in a satisfactory way.


There IS a gigantic amount of money being made in null. That's because the main way to make (individual) money spews liquid isk rather than the LP, Deadspace/faction mods, blue loot etc of other ways.

But let me give you a personal and easily testable example.

I have 2 ratting characters in Delve. I fly double Rattlesnakes and do havens and sanctums. With that set up I generally pull in 25 mil per tick (ie every 20 minutes) per toon for a grand total (before double taxing) of 150 mil per hour. Ratters know that's pretty good.

Then I have a toon in the Minmatar Militia. I created this toon last year and trained her specifically for a Purifier. She can't even use tech2 torp launchers yet. I do fw lvl 4 missions in this manner and wait till Minnie is at least at tier 4 to cash out. you don't make 600 mil per hour anymore because of saturation of the market, but by my spread sheet I make between 200-250 mil per hour.

Now look my in the electronic eye and tell me with a straight internet face that you can't find the incredible imbalance in being able to make more with 1 toon in a stealth bomber than you can with 2 toons in faction battleships.

And I can the same thing with one toon in high sec blitzing lvl 4 burner missions for sisters of EVE with only a stable of 3 frig sized ships (Daredevil, Dramiel and Worm).

And as an individual pilot with a vindicator in a shiny fleet I can make 140ish mil per hour doing incursions with a fleet that has the FC doing all the work for me.

And I can take my carrier to low sec and run lvl 5 missions and make WAY more. Hell, my wormhole Gila by itself can almost make as much as my rattlesnake crew (if I don't die, wormhole space is the only space that actually does risk/reward right in the entire game).

It's not like CCP needs to up anomaly pay, they need to 100% totally rethink sov null pve to make it's rewards now tank the whole damn economy while being lucrative enough to give an actual reason to be there rather than in a stealth bomber in Black Rise... Replacing anomalies with some kind of mission structure would help.
Lady Zarrina
New Eden Browncoats
#3240 - 2015-03-06 22:36:16 UTC
Bleyddyn apRhys wrote:
Suggestion: Allow an alliance to set prime timezone on a constellation basis, rather than alliance wide. I would think that would make it easier for multi-timezone alliances to provide content in all timezones.

Sorry if this has already been suggested and/or shot down but 162 pages...


Could be useful, I see the advantage. But those damn Aussie's. It will come down to those with the largest Aussie contingent holds their borders.

But it adds an extra layer of strategy. It will be gamed, but it may add value.

EVE: All about Flying Frisky and Making Iskie