These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

SOV - Combine New and Old

Author
Jenshae Chiroptera
#1 - 2015-03-07 17:06:19 UTC
Objectives of this discussion thread:

  • Spreading out fights to multiple grids.
  • Not turning Null Sec into Low Sec 2.0

Spreading people out
  • Lower the HP and resists of SOV structures.
  • Backward calculate it so that full indicies will give you current levels.
  • Implement a structure that gives team ratting sites (aka Team Hub for this thread)
  • Interconnect the SOV structures defenses.
  • Give people the ability to compete over who controls the timer.

Okay, so let us look at the things that seem to be generally liked from the new proposed changes
  • Freeports
  • Occupancy SOV linking to indicies
  • In some ways timer windows.

The weaknesses in the new proposed ideas:
  • SOV will be too easy to flip.
  • iHubs will be too weak.
  • Any ship can wave a magic wand
  • The wands can be waved at every SOV structure in your whole region at the same time
  • There is no satisfaction from shooting down your enemies' castles.

So, how about this:
  • Indicies raise your defenses and add 10% of their total to any system right next door (+10 standing) or linked via a jump bridge (can't move this when a SOV is being hit)
  • iHub shields SBUs (need to damp it)
  • SBUs repairs the Station (need to jam them)
  • Station raises the resists of the iHub (need to neut it)
  • Hacking the Team Hub triggers a yellow indicated anomoly
  • Stations are flipped to Free Ports first, with another timer before going red (so people can defend their free ports)
  • If a structure is beaten the effects on the next one in the chain drops, it can not be repaired until the timer window
  • If it is not repaired in the window then effects do not come back online
  • Maximum two SBUs per system
  • If you do not have a station then your Team Hub doesn't work for triggering the timer fight and the timer is completely random
  • Missing things in the chain obviously means the chain does not work.
  • Knocking down defenses in one system reduces them in the one next door or linked by a jump bridge

Team Hub:
  1. You have to maintain damage on the station or keep repairing it while it takes hostile damage (no lore reason - just to split up the fighting)
  2. You have to complete a raid against Drifters while your enemy is shooting you and get a token.
  3. Get the token back to the Team Hub and you set the timer for the system, any SOV in the system will be at that time in two days. (Yes, open to betrayal)
  4. During this raid, AI are pouring out to attack any players near the SOV structures.

Some of the possibilities.
You can focus everything on the iHub or the station to knock it out but this could be really slow and painful.
You can take down a system piece meal, maintain ECM long enough to knock one type of structure out, keep it under pressure during the next window and knock the next one after that down for the next window.

Yes, this does not cater to the immediate gratification crowd that feel their little band of misfits are entitled to some SOV. I see the new SOV changes as they are now as WoWification.
EVE holds a strong community because the adversity is on high levels and the satisfaction of beating that is so great.
We have an older player community and we prefer planned strategy over short term shoot, die, repeat game play.

.... and for the love of all that is good;
Attention Go
Attention Fix
Attention Low Sec,
in order for it to be a viable growing place for high sec corporations into alliances that can topple the Null empires.
Null stagnation is a side effect of a lack of alliances that can grow big enough outside of Null to then go fight for SOV in Null.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2015-03-07 17:08:28 UTC
You can take your heavy AI involvement in player sov, and shove it.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#3 - 2015-03-07 17:15:56 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
You can take your heavy AI involvement in player sov, and shove it.
Maybe it is a bit heavy but I want people to make all purpose ships. P

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2015-03-07 18:06:26 UTC
capture the flag against npcs during a pvp fight to capture player owned and operated infrastructure? please don't PVE my PVP.

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#5 - 2015-03-07 18:17:25 UTC
Zimmer Jones wrote:
capture the flag against npcs during a pvp fight to capture player owned and operated infrastructure? please don't PVE my PVP.
How do you keep one side active while the other gets there? There needs to be a way for one side to determine who has the timer or the other side always whines about their time zone.

Give solutions along with critisms

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2015-03-07 18:27:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Zimmer Jones wrote:
capture the flag against npcs during a pvp fight to capture player owned and operated infrastructure? please don't PVE my PVP.
How do you keep one side active while the other gets there? There needs to be a way for one side to determine who has the timer or the other side always whines about their time zone.

Give solutions along with critisms


Why does one side need to be kept active? Why would a defender need to play PvE games while defending his structure?

If the owner doesn't show up, why would an attacker need to play PvE games if the owner can't be bothered to show up to defend?

I'd give a solution, but I don't see a problem.

CCP's proposal is absolutely terrible, but yours is terrible in completely different ways. I don't see why I would offer "solutions" to a "problem" that cropped up in your attempt to propose another "solution" when I wouldn't use basically any part of your idea if I were proposing a system. That might give someone the idea that I actually supported your idea in any way.

Since I think that needing to damp/jam/hack structures is a terrible mechanic for Sov warfare, and that AI intervention would be awful, my proposed solution would involve starting over from scratch.

About the only thing we agree upon is that CCP's system makes rapidly flipping systems with small cheap ships far too easy and rapid.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#7 - 2015-03-07 18:39:15 UTC
If one side determines the next SOV timer, people whine. So, they need a way to fight over when the next timer will be set and who can set it.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2015-03-07 18:45:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmer Jones
Alright you want some other absurd solution to counter yours?

To occupy the the attackers another entosis link has to be used for x% of the of the prime time, lessened by stacking buffs via conga line telephone style mechanic: entosis remote support.

eg, ship Z buffs ship Y, increasing Y's buff by some percentage, passing on the accumulated bonus to X who passes it on to W with further accumulated bonus, continuing all the way up to A, which buffs the ship with the entosis link.

The catch is the link does not repeatedly cycle and the bonus lasts a little longer than the cycle, forcing players to be at keyboard or mess up the chain and lose the accumulated bonus.

Enforcement of the conga line is that the link has a 1000m range and 1000m falloff. link bonus strength is skill based. one module per ship.

there you go, keeps players on grid, occupied, in an awkward formation and takes a utility high, restricting ships likely to have the link to those with highs to waste, or lose dps.

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2015-03-07 18:49:11 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
If one side determines the next SOV timer, people whine. So, they need a way to fight over when the next timer will be set and who can set it.


People are whining not because one side determines the time, but because it locks out everyone not int hat timezone from participating.

Turning a system where the defender sets the timer to a system where a stronger attacker can set the timer means that the attacker gets to set it in his own primetime instead of the defenders.

Do I really need to explain to you why allowing the attacker to determine timers in a system where systems flip at the drop of a hat is a terrible idea?

The entire primetime concept needs to be thrown out in its entirety and replaced with a system that doesn't allow the attacker or the defender to set the timer to their own precise needs.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#10 - 2015-03-07 20:10:17 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
.... where systems flip at the drop of a hat is a terrible idea?
My proposal is directly against this weakness in Fozzie's plan.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2015-03-07 20:19:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
.... where systems flip at the drop of a hat is a terrible idea?
My proposal is directly against this weakness in Fozzie's plan.


Your idea incorporates that, plus about three metric tons of terrible ideas.

It's like one of the US spending bills where politicians keep strapping extra pork projects onto bills that have to pass, because otherwise they wouldn't get it through on it's own merits.

Preventing super rapid sov flips by frigates: Good.

Allowing the attackers to dictate timers: Bad
Putting PvE into PvP sov war: ******* terrible
Requiring people to Ewar sov structures: Bad
Requiring people to keep repping station even if at full health and not opposed by anyone: Bad

Total count? 1 - 2 - 5 - 2 - 2 = -10.

And the reason your only positive counts as 1 instead of more is because it's more of a side effect of the terrible PvE focused mechanic than a result that could stand on it's own.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#12 - 2015-03-07 22:00:37 UTC
If I had a mostly Australian alliance attacking your SOV as it is now ... how would you enjoy that?

The required time to flip a station is a bit longer than now if system is used because of free port stations.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2015-03-07 22:15:16 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
If I had a mostly Australian alliance attacking your SOV as it is now ... how would you enjoy that?

The required time to flip a station is a bit longer than now if system is used because of free port stations.


I'd time all my timers into my primetime and shrug it off.

And the main issue with the new system isn't how long it takes to take a station, it's how ridiculously short it takes to kill an Ihub.

And how insanely hard it is to import Ihubs or upgrades to replace something that can literally be reinforced by one guy in a frigate, and then killed by a small gang winning one fight.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#14 - 2015-03-07 23:56:42 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
And the main issue with the new system isn't how long it takes to take a station, it's how ridiculously short it takes to kill an Ihub.
And how insanely hard it is to import Ihubs or upgrades to replace something that can literally be reinforced by one guy in a frigate, and then killed by a small gang winning one fight.
Greatest problem of many.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Jenshae Chiroptera
#15 - 2015-03-08 17:19:56 UTC
A friend of mine in a large worm hole alliance said that under the current system they can't get SOV but under the new one they can. I pointed out the following:

Quote:
The large coalitions are going to move into NPC space and Low Sec then hold moons from there
Stations will be full of jump clones and ships dormant to defend their moons
So you moving in, make the system "yours" shoot their POSes and a complete fleet undocks, defends their POSes and flips your system back to theirs before docking again and resupplying any lost ships.

Anyone taking SOV after Fozzie's plan is implemented, will be laughed at and attacked as easy targets.

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.

Lu Ziffer
Balanced Unity
Goonswarm Federation
#16 - 2015-03-08 18:18:57 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

Anyone taking SOV after Fozzie's plan is implemented, will be laughed at and attacked as easy targets.

They are already laughing.