These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

[Discussion] - New SOV SYSTEM

Author
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2013-04-09 23:56:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
Now every one agrees that Sov need some rework, CCP Knows, CSM Knows and most of the good players knows.

So based on this (Death of a Dream) I decided to propose this discussion to find a way to improve the gameplay and bring the null-sec back to Glory!

The biggest problem is that SOV is something fragile to defend. And easy to capture, and need no effort but cash to hold. while the defenders can easily be erased completely by bigger alliances with no chance to fight back!

My suggestion.

1 - Remove the ISK fee for the sovereignty and add an "Effort" fee:

Quote:

To mantain the Sov players would need to keep the system on certainly operational levels. That would determine the Sovereignty level of the system. It would be interesting if these levels with a UI like the incursion, where a marker in a bar increases or decreases depending on the activity.

The main markers would be:
Military: Increases by running NPC sites and killing capsulers ships in the system.
Industrial: Increases by minning and producing stuff in the system.
Economic: By Selling/buying stuff and using services.

The Sum of these levels would determine the level of the SOV.

The level of the SOV will determinate the availability of some system upgrades, like allowing to use cyno jamer. and other stuffs that i will mention below.


2 - Revamp POS

Quote:

It is essential to change the POS in this point. Because the POS is the main unity of control in the system (No POS, No player, no real sov). So, it would be important to make it modular, and add the Infra-Structure Hub to the POS. So there will be a real point of defense for the system.

If you are interest in seeing a full idea of a revamped POS read this

The POS defense should work differently from what is today. In a Sov system it should get a "logistic bonus" in a way that every time it get in "Reinforced" by some attacker, part of the sovereignty is lost, and the POS get the option to get the shield repaired even while burning the strontium. (If the Sov is not enough to activate this, the pos will not heal and the next atack may destroy it.)

So this makes harder to take a system that is being well used and makes easier to take a nearly empty system.

I also suggest that CCP add the Starbase jump drive module, so that the loser can jump with their POS before the last combat.(probably to low-sec if there is no other place to go) so that they can get the chance to fight another day.


I think that these 2 changes can be a good addition to the SOV system, what would make it much more competitive, allowing smaller alliances to hold space in nullsec, with a bigger chance to succeed! Whille preventing the bigger alliances to hold more sov then they need to.

I will be glad tou hear your thoughts about It and modify if needed. Also All other Ideas are welcome here!




3 - Revamp BPO and BPC security

One of the main reasons why the industry don't dig as they should in 0.0 is the fact that is really vulnerable. Too expensive and almost defenseless. So defenselessness that if the BPO and BPC system would be used in our society today, we would return to the middle age in a generation...

so there is a proposal on how to make it workable: SUGESTION HERE



4 - Remove Most Stations

Not sure if this is really a good idea but a NEW POS SYSTEM should be able to turn them obsolete.

From the eve news: Seraph IX Basarab: THE FIVE POINT EXPLODING SOV FIXING TECHNIQUE
Felsusguy
Panopticon Engineering
#2 - 2013-04-10 00:24:40 UTC
I like these ideas. ISK fees are kind of strange, and Starbases are nice.

The Caldari put business before pleasure. The Gallente put business in pleasure.

Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2013-04-10 00:29:00 UTC
Is this another one of those 'You must shoot a hundred POS to take a system, but the defenders can just put up a hundred more' type suggestions? I don't know about you, but endless POS grind doesn't sound fun, and I'm sure it was removed for a reason.


On top of that, what stops me from killing my neutral alt in the system 500 times, then selling the salvage to myself for 1b isk? Wouldn't that bump up the levels quite nicely?
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2013-04-10 06:53:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
Danika Princip wrote:
Is this another one of those 'You must shoot a hundred POS to take a system, but the defenders can just put up a hundred more' type suggestions? I don't know about you, but endless POS grind doesn't sound fun, and I'm sure it was removed for a reason.


On top of that, what stops me from killing my neutral alt in the system 500 times, then selling the salvage to myself for 1b isk? Wouldn't that bump up the levels quite nicely?


In fact it would be much more then a grinding, as actual POSes have no way to fight back. But the Revamped one would offer pretty much resistance and probably more players willing to defend it.

If you want to drop a super capital fleet on it, and grind it down you will probably have a hard time as you would need to repeat the process manny times untill the system gets captured, but if you use strategy, and roam the system preventing the players that call it home to run their sites, mine and have economic activities, then you would have to grind less. (since now you would not need to put a sov blockade unity nor to grind the I-hub). The Idea is to make Systems that are used by many players a place hard to take, while making empty space a easy target.

Despite it would be possible to put 1000 POS in a system, only one would be active as the SOV holder, and as this one get reinforced the last time, the SOV is drooped. All other POSes in the system are normal, with 1 reinforced time only and do not count anything for the SOV. So depending on your strategy, maybe it is interesting to get rid of them first, or not...

Once the SOV is down it becomes possible to be conquered if you put annother POS with the SOV related module in the system and online it before the bashed POS becomes operational again. (Possibly having a POS in a enemy SOV system could result in penalties, like reduced resistances based in the sov level, this would result in less grinding, and probably would make these POSes to Jump away if CCP had added the modules to do so, resulting in even less grinding.) So, if you captured the system, ginding enemy POS in your territory and killing their ships would only increase your SOV, reducing their defenses even more.

About killing neutral alts, nothing prevent you from doing that. But if the reward is proportional to the cost of the ship destroyed, it would become very expensive to keep a system this way... The best option would still be to be active killing NPCs, mining and doing stuff in the system. It would have the same effect and you will not spend tons of isk doing it..... The idea in this is to give defenders another good reason to kill the invaders instead of hiding inside the POS, whille you deffend the system you also increases the SOV, this would be heating up the PVP.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2013-04-10 12:33:18 UTC
But surely every ship you lose defending the system would lower your SOV score, thus ensuring that unless the defenders have overwhelming numbers, they're not going to fight anyway?

I don't know about you, but the thought of conquering a system by taking 500 guys in and ratting just does not sound fun. At all.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2013-04-10 17:22:42 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
But surely every ship you lose defending the system would lower your SOV score, thus ensuring that unless the defenders have overwhelming numbers, they're not going to fight anyway?

I don't know about you, but the thought of conquering a system by taking 500 guys in and ratting just does not sound fun. At all.


No, Every ship killed in the system counts towards increasing the Sov, including if the defenders lose their ships. This means that as long as they are fighting and the system is being used, they have hope to hold sovereignty. But if they start losing too many ships and stop fighting back, they will certainly lose it. So it is a matter of how important is that system for the people that live there.

Also this give a good reason to people put their ships in the field instead of hiding in a POS. So, more PVP, more people to kill and more fun!Twisted

Of course smaller alliances would employ much more effort to hold their last system then a bigger alliance to hold one of their many unused system.

But grinding just to grind It is not supposed to be fun... The point is that if you conquer it, you need to have people to use it, or else someone will easily take it away from you. It must be hard to take someone's home if they don't wan't to leave.

We should END this OLD Idea of SOV that "people can own all the empties they want"... else the nullsec will keep mostly empty... Like it is today, where you can sometimes roam 10 20 systems without finding anyone.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2013-04-16 23:58:41 UTC
Here is an other Page on EVE-News, that reinforces how sick the current system is http://evenews24.com/2013/04/16/mabrick-i-quit-eve/
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#8 - 2013-04-17 00:41:07 UTC
Stopping the "beat up a structure for 2 hours" gameplay is going to take a multiple objective approach. There should be multiple targets in a system, all of which affect sov to some degree. A small gang should be able to swoop in, knock a couple sov points off by taking out some easy targets, and move on, leaving the system a tiny bit more vulnerable, but still ultimately require a large invasion to fully conquer the system. Balancing this, designing the objectives and defensive counters, and keeping capital ships in mind while doing all of it is a little mind boggling though.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2013-04-19 03:43:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
I thought about that for a while. But If you put more targets in the system you will only increase the number of things that you need to grind...

In the Idea proposed here allow to minimize grinding by lowering SOV by preventing the players from running the system sites...

This small fleet that you are saying would be helpful roaming the system and killing "PVE" ships there preventing the SOV to go up...

If the system owners can't fight them back the SOV would keep naturally dropping until it reaches 0 and the POSes in the system loses all the benefits becoming more vulnerable targets.

Maybe one of this benefits could be bonus on all POS resistances, this would definitely affect the grinding...


I'm adding another reference found in eve-news

3 - Remove Most Stations

From the eve news: Seraph IX Basarab: THE FIVE POINT EXPLODING SOV FIXING TECHNIQUE
Tsobai Hashimoto
Perkone
Caldari State
#10 - 2013-04-20 02:37:47 UTC
i really like the base idea. just needs some tweaks. alot of it is all ready in place. there are SOV levels for industry and combat. just need to tie it into sov

i dont like that one POS gets deemed as the super pos for holding sov....keep the ihub and set it up exactly how your saying.

it becomes more vulrenable the less sov control you have. if you want make the ihub more modular and allow some sov upgrades to add weapon systems onto it


as for not having vast tracks of empty space. you need to fix incomes for low level 0.0 and raise overal all 0.0 income for each player.


no one is going to rat in -0.2 space if you have access to -0.9 and the amount of sites that spawn there would be smaller and make it harder to keep busy


and even if a small allaince got some -0.2 space from it they would quickly learn that high sec missions (70mill an hour) or factionwarfare (100m an hour) would give them much more isk lol with none or half of the risk
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2013-04-23 22:54:02 UTC
Tsobai Hashimoto wrote:
i really like the base idea. just needs some tweaks. alot of it is all ready in place. there are SOV levels for industry and combat. just need to tie it into sov

i dont like that one POS gets deemed as the super pos for holding sov....keep the ihub and set it up exactly how your saying.

it becomes more vulrenable the less sov control you have. if you want make the ihub more modular and allow some sov upgrades to add weapon systems onto it


There are some good points in Gathering all SOV structures into one. Especially if it is a POS. IF CCP revamps pos, the positive point would be that once the SOV would be in the verge of being taken from the POS owner, he would have the chance/option to JUMP out of the system with the POS and all his stuffs leaving the system for the conqueror, with no more bashing. A clean Victory for the attacker, and a second chance to start for the loser, that will have to seek other system...
This would heat up the SOV system and the PVP.

Tsobai Hashimoto wrote:

as for not having vast tracks of empty space. you need to fix incomes for low level 0.0 and raise overal all 0.0 income for each player.

no one is going to rat in -0.2 space if you have access to -0.9 and the amount of sites that spawn there would be smaller and make it harder to keep busy

and even if a small allaince got some -0.2 space from it they would quickly learn that high sec missions (70mill an hour) or factionwarfare (100m an hour) would give them much more isk lol with none or half of the risk


Truly one really important point here. The income from SOV also need a big re-balance. And the security status play an important role in it.

This would make the biggest alliances to move to deeper security systems (Assuming that the Technetium get fixed), leaving the shallow area for the small alliances and starters...

Having not enough anomalies to run, the alliance would probably want to expand by conquering a deeper system, add more "HUB UPGRADES" to the POS, or move one of the shallow system population into the new conquered deeper spaces... this system ensures that no alliance will bite more then they can chew. And will also make all big alliances struggle for the deepest spaces, leaving the highest security spaces behind ...
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2013-04-23 23:49:34 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:


There are some good points in Gathering all SOV structures into one. Especially if it is a POS. IF CCP revamps pos, the positive point would be that once the SOV would be in the verge of being taken from the POS owner, he would have the chance/option to JUMP out of the system with the POS and all his stuffs leaving the system for the conqueror, with no more bashing. A clean Victory for the attacker, and a second chance to start for the loser, that will have to seek other system...
This would heat up the SOV system and the PVP.




Why would anyone ever do that? A POS is cheap, dismantling it takes ages, and nothing stops the attacker from simply sticking a scout on it and dropping on the rorqual or whatever is trying to actually sneak it out. Why risk billions of your own ISK to save an object worth mere millions, and, more importantly, why would anyone ever want to make things easy for the invader?



Do you have any actual experience with SOV? Living in it, taking it, defending it, anything?
X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#13 - 2013-04-24 00:29:31 UTC
I'm not a 0.0 guy, but I think CCP is trying to get noobs like me into the 0.0 sov game at the entry level without getting cockblocked by large 0.0 alliances.

The only way to do this is to give "homefield" advantage to the guys who actually use a given system while also making Sov feasible for all the big boys out there.

Throw away SBUs. They are pointless. Assume the sov mechanics for a system revolve only around a permanently installed Territorial Claim Unit.

Principle No. 1: The strength the TCU and the length of the reinforcement timer should vary exponentially based on how much your alliances is "active" in the system.

This means that if your alliance does nothing in a system but puts up a TCU, then it should be trivial to take down - Timer should be 0 seconds, and EHP should be 10k (for example). If your alliance is fully active, then the TCU should be on the order of a Deathstar - Timer should be a week, and EHP should be in the bazillions or more (you 0.0 guys can determine the upper level). It should be on the order of "it takes a massive super capital fleet to take this system down". If the fleet can be formed up, then yes, it should be possible to take the system down.

Activity Level should be what people in 0.0 define it to be so that they can get the fights/ gaming experience they want. Some possibilities:
1. No. of rats killed in belts and anomalies over time
2 Amount of isk made in anomalies over time
3. Amount of minerals mined by POSes over time
4. No. of stations in system
5. Etc... you guys decide. I'd suggest "non-productive POS" not be included to reduce the amount of POS spam. They need to be productive, and their value should increase the more productive they are.

These effects should be multiplicative in some sense, not additive, so doing a little bit of each will be more important than just one. And they should exponentially increase based on the activity levels.

Principle No. 2: The owner of a system should have to actively patrol it: Get rid of "free intel"

Free intel includes jumps/hour, kills/hour, rats killed/hour, etc.. This will make it easier for guys like me to farm 0.0 systems, set up POSes, etc.. more easily without the owning side knowing what is happening. We can then take a TCU quickly and set up a decent sov that will require some sort of effort to take down.


--

So, here's how it would work: Megablock alliance owns a system but is never there. Small alliance comes in, sets up shop. Runs anomalies for a day or so, whatever it takes to build up a decent timer on a TCU. Then the small alliance "conquers" the TCU with their fleet of velators and now the small alliance owns it. The megablock swoops back in and reinforces the TCU. If they show the wherewithall they come back in a day or so and "conquer" it after the reinforcement timer is expired. But since the Megablock alliance hasn't bothered to "secure" the system, the small alliance comes back with their fleet of velators an hour later and does the same thing to claim the system yet again.

Bottom line is that the megablock alliance has to actively defend its system (secure AND HOLD) to some degree to ward off the small alliance insurgency. The more they secure a system, the easier it is to keep sov in that system.

Bottom Line: A megablock alliance should always be able to rip down a TCU if they have sufficient forces, but they should not be able to keep sov unless they secure it.

--

What does this mean? There are two ways to capture sovereignty - Quick strike hammer, and insurgency. If an alliance balls up in station and let's somebody else run their anomalies, then their TCU is going to be degraded a bit and the TCU of the conquering force will be stronger when it is finally installed.









Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#14 - 2013-04-24 09:52:32 UTC
Taking sov by ratting is really, really boring.

What do you think would happen to your small alliance once they've taken sov?

I'll give you a hint. Suddenly, titans.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#15 - 2013-04-24 11:00:38 UTC
Ratting should influence the security level. Where 138.447 Serpentis shis have just been killed yesterday, they surely won't terrorize that certain system so quickly again!

So when you rat extensively in a single system, the pirates flee into adjacent systems, decreasing the sec status over there, while the ratting system slowly goes from -1.0 (total pirate control) to 0.0 (nothing to see here, just a lot of wrecks).

So much to the effect of ratting.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2013-04-24 15:13:43 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:
Ratting should influence the security level. Where 138.447 Serpentis shis have just been killed yesterday, they surely won't terrorize that certain system so quickly again!

So when you rat extensively in a single system, the pirates flee into adjacent systems, decreasing the sec status over there, while the ratting system slowly goes from -1.0 (total pirate control) to 0.0 (nothing to see here, just a lot of wrecks).

So much to the effect of ratting.



Which pretty rapidly makes systems and even entire regions that already have poor truesec no-longer worth the cost of holding the sov...
Rudina
Black Omega Security
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#17 - 2013-04-24 16:05:48 UTC
Anything that links any kind of PVE to sov is a horrible idea and always will be.

Shoot people('s stuff) - not rats.
Rudina
Black Omega Security
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#18 - 2013-04-24 16:45:47 UTC
Ok, I suppose I should tell you why its a bad idea.

You are laboring under the false assumption that everyone in the game is willing to grind rats day in day out like (I presume) you do. This is not the case. The are many things to do in the game and indeed many ways to make money that do not require the endless shooting of red crosses, just because it's your entire game doesn't mean it should be the entire game.

The reason some 0.0 systems are empty is because those systems are terrible for one reason or another (location, truesec, level of traffic) and not worth living in.

Any system involving number of ships destroyed is very easily exploitable and therefor a bad idea.

Since not every system has a station (and for some daft reason you want to get rid of most of them, yes I have read the article it is also thoroughly nonsensical) your 'Economic' Idea is thoroughly flawed and is also hugely exploitable.

POS based sov was even worse than what we have today and creating some kind of bastard child system from the two old ones will not help in any way.

Your initial assumption that sov is much easier to capture than defend is also flawed, the attackers have to win SIX fights on timers dedicated by the defender while having there SBUs (and entire progress) venerable at any time. The defenders only have to win one of these fights and the attackers are back to square one. If you can't beat them on the field one out of six times why shouldn't the be able to take sov from you?

I'm going to ahead and presume that you have little to no experience of sov warfare, I would ask you to go and try it, from both sides if possible and then ask yourself if you still think these suggestions make sense.
Xavier Thorm
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#19 - 2013-04-24 17:03:35 UTC
Rudina wrote:
Your initial assumption that sov is much easier to capture than defend is also flawed, the attackers have to win SIX fights on timers dedicated by the defender while having there SBUs (and entire progress) venerable at any time. The defenders only have to win one of these fights and the attackers are back to square one. If you can't beat them on the field one out of six times why shouldn't the be able to take sov from you?


Seriously this. Please OP, do not propose overhauls to areas of the game which you do not understand.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2013-04-24 19:07:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
Danika Princip wrote:

Why would anyone ever do that? A POS is cheap, dismantling it takes ages, and nothing stops the attacker from simply sticking a scout on it and dropping on the rorqual or whatever is trying to actually sneak it out. Why risk billions of your own ISK to save an object worth mere millions, and, more importantly, why would anyone ever want to make things easy for the invader?

Do you have any actual experience with SOV? Living in it, taking it, defending it, anything?


Yes I do. That is why the second step is REVAMP POS. becouse POS actually sux. If you read the Linked Post you will see That CCP plans on getting rid of this " Cheap Fragile" thing, and maybe adding a Jump drive to the Whole POS, so you don't need to dismantle it.

Why you would make things easier to the invaders? If you attack other country to conquer it. it is a victory if the enemy troops retreat. If you are outnumbered and already lost the war you will run for your life. You are not making things easier. You are buying yourself another chance.

Danika Princip wrote:
Taking sov by ratting is really, really boring.

What do you think would happen to your small alliance once they've taken sov?

I'll give you a hint. Suddenly, titans.

No. As long as you have enough Sov to keep the Cyno Jammer upgrade active. But if you fail to keep this upgrade active you will probably be kicked from thesystem....

Rudina wrote:
Anything that links any kind of PVE to sov is a horrible idea and always will be.

...

You are laboring under the false assumption that everyone in the game is willing to grind rats day in day out like (I presume) you do. This is not the case. The are many things to do in the game and indeed many ways to make money that do not require the endless shooting of red crosses, just because it's your entire game doesn't mean it should be the entire game.

Shoot people('s stuff) - not rats.


That is exactly the opposite of what the idea says, that there are multiple approaches to keep SOV up. Every one should be able to do what they want to keep the SOV UP. You can kill people that enters your system. this would add points to your sov. There are people that like to mine, to shoot red crosses, to build stuff, to trade in the market etc... Every one should be able to contribute!!!!!

Maybe there should be a part of the SOV points that are related to Alliance kills not only in system kills... this would keep glad most of the PVPers... This would be a good reward for them.

I really don't get why you are complaining about different play-styles being included if the Current System Favors only the PVP.

Rudina wrote:
The reason some 0.0 systems are empty is because those systems are terrible for one reason or another (location, truesec, level of traffic) and not worth living in.


Yes, and mostly because if you try to live there you will get some titans bashing your stuff in no time. becouse the current SOV system sux. There are manny people that would like to live there if things were different....
123Next page