Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I like the idea of "require activity in constellations" to hold sov... I think it's impractical to require activity in "every system" you want sov in... as systems that are good for PvE are bad for PvP, and often vice versa...

Then again, it depends on how you define "system activity".

Furthermore... I personally like the idea of "fighting" for sov... IMO, Military effort should be a major part of the Sov conquering system.

Finally, I really don't care who uses a system so long as it's being used... and this system would punish an alliance that brings in outside corporations to use the system... as those corps might undermine their sov holdings.

It sounds practical.

A few thoughts on destructable outposts.

Obviously this is a huge change.

I think it is workable, but I would put in some means to transfer goods. No, not some freighter replacing mechanic.
Have the outpost dump the items into the nearest neutral NPC outpost in the event of destruction.

Call it whatever, explain it however.

My logic is this:
For serious game play, we need players to commit to having their characters live out in these systems, not just commute to work.
If they think their goods are at risk, they will end up being treated like fancy POS's, and keeping anything away they are not willing to risk losing.
At that point, their commitment to the space itself is shallow, and less likely to be as enthusiastic with conquering or defending.

I am under the impression that CCP equates loss of large amounts of personal possessions in the game to having the player lose a sense of connection to the game, or a sense of undesired loss in the game. I believe they wish to avoid this, which is why outposts have been indestructible to this point.

The problem I have with systems like this is the mechanics for actually taking sov. The big, epic fleet fights can be good fun, can you say the same about a fleet to wander into, say, Delve and chain belt rats for hours on end? Or worse, wander into hostile space and mine for hours on end?

It also means that conquering sov becomes all about the 23.5/7 hellcamp, which favours the existing powerblocs pretty hugely. They'll also have more people willing to rat than someone small, so again, easier for them to take and hold things.

On top of that, your system, with it's focus on preventing EVERYONE, including your blues, from ratting makes renting a bit harder, doesn't it? Also, there's the risk that it could wind up encouraging botting in the long run...

First off, read the post, the whole post, not just the parts you don't like.

"an alternative is to have an option to not have your activity count against the owners sov based on standings."

BAM. blue v blue sov issues solved. hell make it count towards activity counter.

your right, the helcamp would become (it already is) a way to take sov, which... ya know why is that bad again? they have the assets they can use them.

but if they don't use the space it's going to go unclaimed again shortly.

"can you say the same about a fleet to wander into, say, Delve and chain belt rats for hours on end? Or worse, wander into hostile space and mine for hours on end?"

as far as ratting for 24.5/7. sure you could do that, it would be boring as **** and no one would want to do it for the minimal gain. great. you took the const. why exactly did you want that if you just want to leave it empty? if your going to occupy it then occupy it, move the bears in let them do their thing.

the idea here would be that more people doing more things wouldn't make the system switch faster, it would just make it harder for someone else to come in and cap the system from you. so long as you are active in system it will keep at the same pace, which could show as a "timer" on the i-hub or something similar.

I get the worry that a 90 man pvp fleet camping on system in a const. wouldn't be able to out-influence a 120 man bomber fleet that is just running belts, or something equally stupid.


Possible Limiters on this kinda of game play:
PvE activity counts for X% of PvP activity.
PvE activity only keeps a system from going unclaimed. while PvP works in all directions. (Solution i think most effective)


The tracking of PvP activity would be rather hard to do which is the major pitfal of this proposal, because if it was just tracked by kills you could keep your sov by not fighting. which would be stupid.

Potential Solution:
Count pvp activity by number of neutrals in const and on grid with a celestial as well as, not currently in warp, docked, cloaked, or in a pod.
to keep this from being longer and more draining then current system you would have to make it so that PvP activity depleted the capture timer on the system drastically faster then PvE activity increased. You would also have to make it so that PvP activity for the owners only counted from kills.

To be honest, the timer system works, it allows defensible positions. but because so many people have complained of the timer system I thought i would put out this new idea.

The biggest trick with sov is allowing the defender a chance to actually defend him self, while not making it a huge ******* grind for the attacker.

that's more or less the reason i propose leaving the timer for the station, would create the structure for large fights, and for sov to be more related to those who lived there and less who happened to have the largest super block nearby, where as station control would represent the largest local powerblock.

with that in mind, it might be best to keep it with only one station per system and get the POS mechanics reworked so that people could actually live out of them.

It would definitely need more depth and balancing to make it a workable system that's for sure. And i rather doubt my iteration would be the most workable system. but i figure if ccp reads the forums on occasion they might be able to come up with a truly awesome system from ideas like this.

Activity shouldn't be a metric used to measure whether or not you should continue to hold a system. Make it instead, faster, with tug of war mechanics. Drop and Sbu, defend it, wait a timer, and start capping.. yes CAPPING as in point capturing planets. Doing it in a spesific sequence, with a short timer between each cap 30 mins to an hour, would basically turn each attempt to take a system into a lovely giant bloodbath. Dusties would get to affect how quickly/ slowly a point is capped depending onwhich side is winning/won. and it removes structure grinding. If an alliance has the abliity to hold an x amount of systems with pure military might, then they should be allowed to do so.

This destroys the old fashion: stratop once every few days to grind a structure, and turns it into a bloody deathmatch of attrition and skill, which is what sov warfare should be about. Did you lose a planet? Don't sweat it, as long as it wasn't the last planet you had, you have half an hour to reship, and get ready to fight for the next one.


This may seem to favour larger alliances, and it to an extent does. but because of the shorter timers, it means that chosing which systems to take, and which to abandon in a much larger scale conflict becomes of the essence. Sure, an alliance with a thousand people in it (counting alts and the indy guys) may be daunting to defeat for a 200-500 man alliance. but by targeting several systems at once, which with shorter timers, will have to be fought at the same time. the smaller alliance has a chance at taking a few systems. Larger scale strategy suddenly comes into play.

I feel this is unwise.

The station's value in null as a strategic staging area alone justifies it's value, and demonstrates the loss's impact.
At least, to the corporate or alliance level of thinking.
But this level of perspective is utterly dependent on the member players of that corporation or alliance.

For the player, only committing to the station resources you are willing to risk losing, devalues their sense of living in that station. It makes their perception of ownership lose that foundation.
And while some players like living with minimum resources, and only having things they use frequently, enough players like being pack rats that they never truly commit to the hotel room we effectively create.

You don't own it. Don't put your valuables in it. You can come back from vacation to find everything you own in EVE reduced to the ship you logged out in. Foolish? Bad planning? Maybe it is these things, but also a very human thing to do, which means it will happen a lot.

I don't see CCP accepting this without big pop up warnings about leaving valuables.
And the outpost with no valuables in it... simply isn't valuable. It's a campsite you visit or commute to.