Player Features and Ideas Discussion

That is very rude.

I would like to have my cake and also to eat it.

There are good parts of both sov 2.0 and 3.0 systems as proposed. I would like to keep the good parts, add some special sauce, and produce content for as many different species of player as possible.

What I would like to see, foremost, is a spatially-governed system for sovereignty. A level five sov system should be surrounded by level four or better sov systems. If one of these drops to a three, the level five system should drop to a four within twenty four hours. This will make pocket constellations very economically attractive, which doesn't present any real problems that I can discern.

The next critical thing I'd like to see is sov indexed defenses. This could be in the form of structure defensive amplifiers. They might be anchorable modules that require a specific sov level to anchor, or they could just be some general effect. Whatever is easiest. Base level equipment should be quite weak, vulnerable to just a handful of cruisers, and have significantly degraded reinforcement timers. Structure in higher level sov should be strong enough to make the use of even massed supercapital fleets both impractical and extremely risky.

The net effect of this to create both a player empire interior, and a periphery, which must always exist, and which is always vulnerable. This creates a tangible front-line in actively engaged conflicts between player groups. The periphery becomes the focus players actually contesting sovereignty, though probably not of much interest to players interested solely in catching individual ship targets. Such a system caters to either group, and a few others besides.

Entosis modules and constellation wide anomalies should only have a viable effect on structures or states in low level sov systems, should expedite the process of capturing uncontested space, and preferably should allow for rival groups to contest timers in order to allow even regionally concentrated engagement to be fought on a nearly continuous basis between timers. Ideally, they should enable contesting groups to push timers forward or backwards up to a total of twenty hours, but in non-uniform increments.

I believe there should also be a variety of entosis-type modules, and a greater diversity of sovereignty modules, especially as regards the ihub. I fear we will see a tremendous deficit of ihubs deployed, since the cost and tedium of maintaining them will likely outstrip the opportunity cost of not having them. As a WH daytripper, I already lament the low concentration of WHs near my home in null, and the lack of favor most alliance leaderships demonstrate towards WH upgrades. You can barely navigate highsec without tripping over a hole to the rather numerous C1-3 systems. But I digress.

Contesting an industrial sovereignty asset implies some kind of interest in the industrial aspects of such a system. I'm not entirely sure how this sentiment could be manifested, perhaps some kind of module like an SBU with some of the properties of an Entosis module, but which is so large that only an a battle badger could move it. Not really having an attack of cleverness on this point, but I am actively pondering it.

The entosis link should also be something that preps the field, allowing for larger, damage based ships to be deployed. The system should be littered with different sized obstacles, some suitable to lighter fleets, others to heavier fleets. The main function of an entosis module should be to bring stations or ihubs out of invulnerability states during non-reinforced times. If we, reasonably, assume that sov content is group content, then we really don't need to accomodate any need for solo players to Freeport a station, or explode an iHub or TCU. If we assume that a small force of subcaps is adequate to the task in a low level sov system in a 10-40minute window, engagement is always possible. To combat the n+1 problem of minimum time to down an hp-based target, we simply put them inside of a deadspace. This ensures a minimum slowboating time.

The advantages of having heavy ships should mainly be to expedite the process of sov contestation, but as a step function rather than as a continuous curve that decreases shield mining time at the same rate of adding dps. I would simply propose a capital version of the entosis link, which allows one to destabilize a system one sov level higher than would normally be allowed. This speeds the process of conquering uncontested space, but also expands the scope of the contested battlefield in the event of pitched warfare. Activating this module would be parallel with activating siege mode, to the point that we could simply make these the same module. Triage would not count, reinforcing the role of carriers and supercarriers as support ships. Titan doomsdays should also get a role in negating remote repping, ensuring there is never a lack of hazard to any deployment. Shields would still have HP, but actually shooting it wouldn't be required. A single seige/entosis module would be adequate to put it in reinforced mode, wholly negating the need for N+1, and creating an incentive to have capital ships operating in even small numbers as flagships of escorting subcap fleets.

The shining jewel of sov 3.0 is the blob-breaking instrument of constellation-wide sov anoms. These should be critical in opening a system to sov games, shoving around timers, and/or deciding the progression of objectives from invulnerability to reinforcement in vulnerable systems. I think they should allow for capital escalation as a directly rewarded mechanic, but as one which is not benefited beyond a single seiged capital in each of the anoms. I also think the number of anoms should be variable, expanding as the numbers of pilots involved increases by some function triggered by simultaneous interaction.

also unless changed I see where this is coming from...last I roiled in a crew with them they were cap and super heavy. Some self serving interest here really.


Also lost me at good old days of pos based SOV. CBA to e-stalk....did they play in this time frame? It sucked ass. Tied to SOV by pos, yes, he who had more pos's won...but a non blue dropped pos was a ding against the SOV regardless.


My first pvp corps long ago in the days of apoc had a ceo when bored...or drunk...would ninjya in and drop pos' just because it was a day ending in y. No desire to claim the system or even try. It was just his thing to **** on people's cornflakes this way.


Not up to speed on the new entosis and such tbh...may be easier than bash to clean this crap out if another person has my old ceo's hobby. Its still a boring repetitive process all the same I gather.

Game had caps and super online which is how it got the stale environment it is now. At their highpoint just looking at the Russians the only one's who could take them down were themselves.. Goons same thing...kartoon didn't pay bills, internal failscade, purging of the pubbies...now back at square 1 again. Waiting for goons reformed to break themselves again. Since NC in the house...well you all know how you got the . (dot) at the end. YOu all reformed up after old boy robbed you blind....and hard among other factors. internal failscade ensued, worked itself out now you all back for next round.

This is what caps and supers online got us. Same ****...different name. And the name not even different with dot at the end for those that do it imo.

First, if this were true, and I doubt it is...how is it different from now?

Second, I don't think this is true. At least not in the sense of piling bodies into a single system.

Eve will always be a number game. So if they think the sov changes will affect the big alliances, nope. Already heard talk of taking captor fleets to wipe out smaller alliances. For the well organized alliances like bastion, bleh, there are some really excited over it. I just dread having to spend 4 hours in fleets just to defend territory over nano fleets.

So in the end who do you think are going to win ? More casual groups, or groups that spend half their life on here ? And no, I got over the game thing years ago, but I do still enjoy it. It is just a bad idea as it is now and very ludicrous ? Magic fairy wand for flipping sov ? Come on guys you can do a bit better than this.

Honestly the fix for this is to have the entosis module turn off your MWD... nano kiting problem solved.

That said, cap ships are supposed to be support ships not fleet ships. There should be no such thing as a capital fleet, it should always be a capital SUPPORT fleet

I agree the fighter nerf was a bit heavy handed, and I hope they revert it at some point, but I can understand why they did it... People will take any chance they can get to be risk averse. Its dumb

So how should a small alliance or some new alliance be strong enough to handle a full attack. The big blocks could form fleets and destroy their assets so fast without reinforce. Second you have to defend your station 24/7. Seems to be a big trollpost.

-1

OP, I'll freely admit I know nothing of null sov from firsthand experience.

But I hear that it's not so much fun atm for anybody (including supercap pilots), so something's got to change.

Change = old strategies, tactics and assets get screwed.

Think of it as a fresh start.

Lets all stop crying and look forward to the next logical step.

Allow capitals to be disassembled (reprocessed) into their constituent cap-ship components without the usual 50% loss of material (allow the assembly array to also do disassembly?). If you decide that you have too many supercaps than you can reconfigure most of the material investment into carriers, jump freighters, ...Orcas, etc. You won't get your SP back, but this would be better than nothing.

I would have no issue if CCP offered a one time "Dock your super for reprocessing" event for all those people who feel they are now useless. We could call it "Cash For Coffins".