These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Warfare & Tactics

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

A Noob's Logical fix for Null SOV grinding.

Author
Cameron Cahill
Deaths Consortium
Pandemic Horde
#21 - 2013-05-04 18:43:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Cameron Cahill
Dracvlad wrote:


I repeated myself because you obviously failed to address the point raised, as to your argument which is "Non player characters and by extension ratting/other PVE should have no effect on sov. I don't care that you have a shiny lore explanation as to why they might, it is still a bad idea." is a statement, with no backing to it, you feel its a bad idea, so what, others think its a good idea, an abstract effect on the EHP of the sov modules is to make it more vulnerable so that smaller entities have a chance of taking them down.

As for your comment "small alliances will still not be capable..." well I agree, if it was just one or two, but if over time more and more tried their hand because they could actually cross the threshold and take a system, it might snowball, as for the timers of course they will not win, but the trick is that multiple people do it, also and here is the rub, it removes the grind so that PL might get off their complacent butts and go for sov war, which will be a catalyst for change. Do you really want it to stay as it is, hmmmm your a Goon so yes you do!!!

I understand the use of it and the excellent tool the CFC has that reports new towers going up to all members so you can instantly react, talk about Eve on easy. I respect that you guys have created that and understand why you would want to react to towers, however it makes smaller entities have no chance of getting even a toe hold.

So in a nutshell, any changes that will weaken the hold of the current large entities that do not use their space assist people like PL to take your space and therefore CCP should not do it, HTFU, you are not the NC don't develop into them...


This is a point of principal and i have explained my reasoning earlier in the thread, however it is you who has to prove this is a good idea and you have posted absolutely no justification other than your opinion and a vague, false assertion that this will make it easier for small alliances to take sov which i will deal with below, fix this if you want to be taken seriously.

You say this will make small alliances able to take systems, as I have told you this is not the case. Firstly you have to anchor and online SBUs before you can shoot any infrastructure in the system, three hours of venerability, then assuming you manage to ref the ihub you have to shoot it twice more then kill the tcu (usually at a deathstar POS which can be a problem for small fleets), then you have 8 hours of it onlining after everyone knows sov has dropped. You really think the defenders wont turn up during any of this time? If you do you are horribly naive. In fact if this was the case why aren't you taking sov now? There is absolutely no difference from current mechanics except it takes you a bit less time to shoot things. As for PL they have just finished two major sov wars, one against solar, one against -A-, they have been at war for literally six months solid and you still think they are lazy and complacent? Or is it just because they've not been shooting us?

This would not change anything, you would still not be allowed to keep towers in our (or anyone elses space), it would mearly add hundreds of man hours of boredom to the poor sods who have to go round ~7000 moons and check for new towers ever week, so the same results but with added tedium, how is this good for the game?

All but one of the wars in eves recent history (since the first great war as far as I can remember but I may be mistaken) have been ultimately won by the aggressor (the PL/DRF coalition lost the exception to the CFC in 2011 if you are interested). The invading side (whoever that may be) does not need to be buffed to win a sov war so no CCP should not waste hundreds of man-hours of dev time on a change to sov that is wrong in principal and in reality will not change a thing.
Princess Bride
SharkNado
#22 - 2013-05-04 19:23:09 UTC


<---Assembly Hall. Instructions follow.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=6338&find=unread

http://eveprincessbride.wordpress.com/

Cameron Cahill
Deaths Consortium
Pandemic Horde
#23 - 2013-05-04 19:26:59 UTC
Wouldn't F&I be more appropriate?
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#24 - 2013-05-04 20:14:23 UTC
Cameron Cahill wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


I repeated myself because you obviously failed to address the point raised, as to your argument which is "Non player characters and by extension ratting/other PVE should have no effect on sov. I don't care that you have a shiny lore explanation as to why they might, it is still a bad idea." is a statement, with no backing to it, you feel its a bad idea, so what, others think its a good idea, an abstract effect on the EHP of the sov modules is to make it more vulnerable so that smaller entities have a chance of taking them down.

As for your comment "small alliances will still not be capable..." well I agree, if it was just one or two, but if over time more and more tried their hand because they could actually cross the threshold and take a system, it might snowball, as for the timers of course they will not win, but the trick is that multiple people do it, also and here is the rub, it removes the grind so that PL might get off their complacent butts and go for sov war, which will be a catalyst for change. Do you really want it to stay as it is, hmmmm your a Goon so yes you do!!!

I understand the use of it and the excellent tool the CFC has that reports new towers going up to all members so you can instantly react, talk about Eve on easy. I respect that you guys have created that and understand why you would want to react to towers, however it makes smaller entities have no chance of getting even a toe hold.

So in a nutshell, any changes that will weaken the hold of the current large entities that do not use their space assist people like PL to take your space and therefore CCP should not do it, HTFU, you are not the NC don't develop into them...


This is a point of principal and i have explained my reasoning earlier in the thread, however it is you who has to prove this is a good idea and you have posted absolutely no justification other than your opinion and a vague, false assertion that this will make it easier for small alliances to take sov which i will deal with below, fix this if you want to be taken seriously.

You say this will make small alliances able to take systems, as I have told you this is not the case. Firstly you have to anchor and online SBUs before you can shoot any infrastructure in the system, three hours of venerability, then assuming you manage to ref the ihub you have to shoot it twice more then kill the tcu (usually at a deathstar POS which can be a problem for small fleets), then you have 8 hours of it onlining after everyone knows sov has dropped. You really think the defenders wont turn up during any of this time? If you do you are horribly naive. In fact if this was the case why aren't you taking sov now? There is absolutely no difference from current mechanics except it takes you a bit less time to shoot things. As for PL they have just finished two major sov wars, one against solar, one against -A-, they have been at war for literally six months solid and you still think they are lazy and complacent? Or is it just because they've not been shooting us?

This would not change anything, you would still not be allowed to keep towers in our (or anyone elses space), it would mearly add hundreds of man hours of boredom to the poor sods who have to go round ~7000 moons and check for new towers ever week, so the same results but with added tedium, how is this good for the game?

All but one of the wars in eves recent history (since the first great war as far as I can remember but I may be mistaken) have been ultimately won by the aggressor (the PL/DRF coalition lost the exception to the CFC in 2011 if you are interested). The invading side (whoever that may be) does not need to be buffed to win a sov war so no CCP should not waste hundreds of man-hours of dev time on a change to sov that is wrong in principal and in reality will not change a thing.


At the moment the ridiculous amounts of EHP make it impossible for smaller entities to even try, if the EHP is lower as the space was not looked after and there was a chance of actually doing it rather than the certain death you have now which you correctly point out then we might see a change. Notice the word might...., you are detailing the current situation where there is no chance of RF'ing something or even taking it down due to the EHP. So no one tries, so that proves your point, of course smaller entities are not taking sov now, they can't, they can barely scratch the paint work. So if you have multiple systems all with low EHP that gets interesting, gets you fights perhaps. Of course defenders will turn up, but if that is happening in multiple systems attacked by multiple alliances things start to get spread out a bit. Obviously you will ignore what I just said here, but what the hell.

PL did hardly anything in the war against Solar, and -A- was some time ago, PL's recent Titan loss to RA shows their complacency. In terms of shooting the CFC, they spent some time dropping BLOPS in your ratting systems and killing carriers repping POS's from what i understand, bit of fun for them, apart from the one time you managed to catch them.

In terms of checking the moons, you own that space you have to look after it, if that is what is needed then why not, because at that point someone might not bother checking and that gives opportunities. Now its POS down, immediate report and bang, POS gone.

That was PL/Raiden and NCDOT, the DRF never went for the CFC, and the CFC played that very well, cyno jamming to create a **** cage, excellent strategic level thinking...

Anyway it hardly matters, Eve is so stale in 0.0, the most action is in FW now, which says everything!

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#25 - 2013-05-04 20:21:18 UTC
To make my point, just went on Dotlan, most ships kills, FW low sec, Jovainnon 943 ships, second is FW low sec Heimatar, 0.0 is boring!!!!!

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Cameron Cahill
Deaths Consortium
Pandemic Horde
#26 - 2013-05-04 20:36:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Cameron Cahill
You are just a bit stupid aren't you?

-A major sov war has just finished.
-A major sov war is just about to start.
-At least two other minor conflicts are happening in 0.0 just now as well.
-Look at ccps graph from fanfest about ships destroyed the ONLY point when lowsec exceeds 0.0 was when a battle between two 0.0 entities happened there.

so how is 0.0 stale again?

PL's titan loos to RA shows that one member of PL had a ******** moment and tried to dd an obviously baiting carrier, no reflection on the alliance as a whole, as for them doing almost none of the fighting in the war against solar (which started as -A- was still in its dying throws) this is just plain wrong.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#27 - 2013-05-04 21:13:09 UTC
Cameron Cahill wrote:
You are just a bit stupid aren't you?

-A major sov war has just finished.
-A major sov war is just about to start.
-At least two other minor conflicts are happening in 0.0 just now as well.
-Look at ccps graph from fanfest about ships destroyed the ONLY point when lowsec exceeds 0.0 was when a battle between two 0.0 entities happened there.

so how is 0.0 stale again?

PL's titan loos to RA shows that one member of PL had a ******** moment and tried to dd an obviously baiting carrier, no reflection on the alliance as a whole, as for them doing almost none of the fighting in the war against solar (which started as -A- was still in its dying throws) this is just plain wrong.


If 0.0 was not stale, then what was burn Jita for?

Which major sov war, the Solar one, that was more like a blue ball session with the odd bit of combat.

The Sov war to start, really, lol, believe that when I see it

The two minor conflicts are so minor, no one knows about them, big deal...

Your complacent about low sec, in fact low sec is smaller in terms of systems than 0.0, what I was referring to was major ship loss in systems, for the last few months that I have looked, the majority of time low sec has more ships killed in a single system than 0.0, if you cannot work out what that indicates, well never mind.

PL did hardly anything against Solar it was N3.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Cameron Cahill
Deaths Consortium
Pandemic Horde
#28 - 2013-05-04 21:54:41 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:


If 0.0 was not stale, then what was burn Jita for?

Which major sov war, the Solar one, that was more like a blue ball session with the odd bit of combat.

The Sov war to start, really, lol, believe that when I see it

The two minor conflicts are so minor, no one knows about them, big deal...

Your complacent about low sec, in fact low sec is smaller in terms of systems than 0.0, what I was referring to was major ship loss in systems, for the last few months that I have looked, the majority of time low sec has more ships killed in a single system than 0.0, if you cannot work out what that indicates, well never mind.

PL did hardly anything against Solar it was N3.


Fun.

As i said major sov war.

Keep watching, you will.

Not actually that minor, certainly bigger than anything going on anywhere that isn't 0.0

Small/medium gang PvP happens in lowsec! Call the papers we must tell everyone! Seriously though when big fights happen in 0.0 (at lest 3-4 times a week) they dwarf anything happening in lowsec.

Because PL totally weren't flying with N3 right?
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#29 - 2013-05-05 09:43:22 UTC
OK you got me on the coming major war, Test leaving the HBC, OK now it starts to get interesting, at least I can go and muck around in Stain now without getting blobbed by a load of bored Russians!!!!

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Krax As
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2013-05-06 09:47:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Krax As
sov = control of space.

otherwise its just sticking a flag in the ground and leaving it there.


with time, stuff needs to decay.
refueling towers is a pita, but it reflects the idea. sov structures of all kind need
some kind of uphold / decay mechanism.

what about more incursions in 0.0 space, npc rats attacking sof structures and upgrades, POS´s and all ?

Cap and super cap rats ?

make 0.0 incursions a REAL threat which need to get countered.

do nothing and you lose sov . back to the system being NPC controlled.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#31 - 2013-05-06 17:54:07 UTC
Krax As wrote:
sov = control of space.
Thinking of current guerilla wars on earth (bad idea I know...), Formal sovereignty can be granted to a county by the UN in areas that it really doesn't control.

What would happen if CCP said that anybody can build anything anywhere in 0.0 and it's up to the players to remove them?

Multiple POS at one moon by different entities? Why not?
Multiple stations in one system? Why not? (once they allow for destruction of stations)
Cynojammers? why not?
Jumpgates? why not?
Shipyards? Why do you need sov to build titans?

Bottom line: If your side has the balls to build something in the other guys territory, then why not? Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the players, not some artificial mechanic, to remove them?

Cameron Cahill
Deaths Consortium
Pandemic Horde
#32 - 2013-05-06 19:33:17 UTC
Krax As wrote:
sov = control of space.

otherwise its just sticking a flag in the ground and leaving it there.


with time, stuff needs to decay.
refueling towers is a pita, but it reflects the idea. sov structures of all kind need
some kind of uphold / decay mechanism.

what about more incursions in 0.0 space, npc rats attacking sof structures and upgrades, POS´s and all ?

Cap and super cap rats ?

make 0.0 incursions a REAL threat which need to get countered.

do nothing and you lose sov . back to the system being NPC controlled.


We do control out space. My whole argument has been that it should be players that control what happens in sov space not NPCs.

Why should the rats be a danger to sov? It takes away from the whole player generated content philosophy. Aside from forcing a tedious grind on players when people already claim there isn't enough PVP in 0.0
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#33 - 2013-05-06 20:12:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
X Gallentius wrote:
Krax As wrote:
sov = control of space.
Thinking of current guerilla wars on earth (bad idea I know...), Formal sovereignty can be granted to a county by the UN in areas that it really doesn't control.

What would happen if CCP said that anybody can build anything anywhere in 0.0 and it's up to the players to remove them?

Multiple POS at one moon by different entities? Why not?
Multiple stations in one system? Why not? (once they allow for destruction of stations)
Cynojammers? why not?
Jumpgates? why not?
Shipyards? Why do you need sov to build titans?

Bottom line: If your side has the balls to build something in the other guys territory, then why not? Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the players, not some artificial mechanic, to remove them?



That is something I would like!!!

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Krax As
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2013-05-08 05:23:27 UTC
Cameron Cahill wrote:
Krax As wrote:
sov = control of space.

otherwise its just sticking a flag in the ground and leaving it there.


with time, stuff needs to decay.
refueling towers is a pita, but it reflects the idea. sov structures of all kind need
some kind of uphold / decay mechanism.

what about more incursions in 0.0 space, npc rats attacking sof structures and upgrades, POS´s and all ?

Cap and super cap rats ?

make 0.0 incursions a REAL threat which need to get countered.

do nothing and you lose sov . back to the system being NPC controlled.


We do control out space. My whole argument has been that it should be players that control what happens in sov space not NPCs.

Why should the rats be a danger to sov? It takes away from the whole player generated content philosophy. Aside from forcing a tedious grind on players when people already claim there isn't enough PVP in 0.0



i understand the player generated content standpoint. but, NPC´s offer content too, (even though it might be lacking). imagine NPC incursions in 0.0 but with cap and supercap rats. yeah it might be scripted content, BUT it would make home defense necessary as these rats pose a threat to structures as well as to ships.

how does a government control its territory nowadays ? by presence or just by mere telling people "this is our territory" ?
imagine some districts and city parts of Los Angeles, where no police has been in years because of gang activity. who is in control there ? which territory is it ?

if someone just sticks his flag in the ground and says "this is ours now" but never shows up afterwards, why shouldnt some other entity being able to build a whole infrastructure like POS, hell even jumpgates and stations in there without the "owner" even knowing ? the flag sure as hell wont tell him...

it would mean empire being "smaller", but much more established and with much better infrastructure.

with implementing the need to protect and care for your space, you open the doors for really much much more player driven content. and only the largest and well functioning entities could hold really lareg areas in space... as it should be. but not with blobbing every decent enough enemy fleet, but with actively patrolling and securing their space.

Tinu Moorhsum
Random Events
#35 - 2013-05-14 11:43:08 UTC
Arvo Endashi wrote:


So back to my solution, reward players for being active in Null space and punish those who are not. ....snip.... . They can be attacked and destroyed anytime, but activity will actually strengthen them. Empty space, or more enemies in the space and they start decreasing. Have them go extremely low with no activity, or more enemy activity, to the point, that over enough time a five man small gang could Waltz through and destroy billion dollar system infrastructure in just a few minutes.



Ok....

SOV has two functions in EVE. It's an enormous ISK sink for nullsec alliances and it's a mechanic for representing something along the lines of property ownership.

Let's take these things one at a time.

ISK SINK: suppose a nullsec alliance claims an area of space and does nothing to develop or exploit it. They make no income from the moons, they don't rat for taxes, they don't rent some of the systems.... basically they do nothing. How long do you think they'll be able to keep paying the SOV bills?

To me the first part about "use it or lose it" is already implemented by the fact that alliances MUST exploit their space in order to pay for SOV. Could SOV bills be higher, thus forcing alliances to do more? Maybe, although I believe it would hae a negative effect on game play because it would divert people away from PVP into PVE in order to maintain SOV.

The point being, your idea about "use it or lose it" is oke, but it's already there.

On the second part:

So... in real life, if you don't cut the grass in your back yard for a while and the neighbour comes and does it, do you think he should be able to say, "now your yard is mine?". Of course not. The ownership of property is black and white. Either you own your back yard or you don't. You can't own it MORE if you go on a lawnchair and drink beer in your back yard and own it LESS if you go on vacation for 3 weeks to go drink beer in the Bahama's. Your back yard is yours and your neighbour has no claim to it whatsoever. If he wants your back yard, he can pay you for it or try to take it from you by force.

That second bit is where the SOV grind becomes a grind. EVE is world wide so you want alliances in different time zones to be able to defend their space at least once in their 24h cycle. Since SOV fights are also big and require some organisation, you also want them to be able to organise resistance and time to fight in their favour. You want the fights to be big and meaningful but you can't always organise it at the drop of a hat.

So yeah, it takes a couple of days per system to be able to take it but with dreads, supers and titans, the structure grind itself only really takes a few minutes.... and it means you need to put big expensive stuff on the field if you want to keep it short, which means that the stage is set for epic battles to ensue. If you want to limit your risk and grind structures with, say, stealth bombers (believe me, it's been done) then sure. go ahead. But expect it take longer. Less risk, less reward and the longer it takes.

To my way of thinking, that's working just the way it should, with one exception.

I personally think that if you take away SOV in a station system that the status of the station itself should revert to "res nullius", a state of "open access" whereby the station isn't OWNED by anyone anymore. At that point two things should be able to happen.

Either:

1) the station can be destroyed and the contents of corp and personal hangars have a some (possibly small) chance of dropping. making stations into enormous loot pinjatas and implementing a "bounties of war" effect, but with the disadvantage that the station is destroyed and the newcomers will have to build a new one

and

2) Literally everyone can dock until some entity gains SOV over the system.

So while I appreciate the thought you put into that idea, part of it is implmented already and part of it is illogical to me. If you haven't been in EVE for long you might not appreciate how much BETTER sov grinding is now than it used to be. Killing 450 POS's was a real grind. It used to be that it take weeks to take a few systems.
Arvo Endashi
Perkone
Caldari State
#36 - 2013-05-14 20:45:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Arvo Endashi
Ok first I wanted to take the time to thank many of you for taking the time to read my thoughts or even skim them. While I certainly understand that more pvp is desired and not pve, my thoughts believe it or not are aimed at acheiving that. Whether you like ratting, mining, ect. using your space to support a war machine accomplishes two tasks. Number one the back yard comparison is missing the point completely. Think more fields surrounding a castle. The fields need to supply grain to keep the soldiers bellies full. In traditional war, many times sieges are won or lost based on supplies and logistics. If you have your vassels filling the stores, you can hold out against a force for longer until they weaken, lower the drawbridge and kill the campers. This is basically the same principle. A poorly stocked supply room and you can't hold out and the attackers win quickly.

If you want to look at the back yard example squatters actually can gain rights to unused land assuming they live there unnoticed for long enough. Check your local laws there are provisions that can be scary.

Back to the pvp point of this. I have taken roams through null and seen vast expanses of desolate space. Could time zones be a factor sure, but as it stands now it seems silly to have no one out and about. Reward being in space. Whether that leads to pvp or pve more ships in space will equate to more pvp in the long run versus ship spinning until a major op is declared. People roaming will have targets and those targets may have to switch to their fighting ships to mount a response or simply be wiped out. If attackers want to stay to eliminate the station they have to work for it and spend the time. Make the emphasis on defense so that with the right friends or mercs contacted they can fight for their homes. With a magnificiently high ehp level these small groups can stand a chance, as they have been using their space. Those that don't well they can still roam in impressive numbers and cause havoc, but the long run rewards will not be as high. Successful systems will draw new members to these active groups for the increased rewards which will lead to better "good fights of epic scale." Empty space will get used and when you go somewhere you will have the chance for action as more people equal more potential targets. You don't like pve defends those who do or murder those who do, but more ships in space active is the solution.

I do like the loot pinata aspect, reward the risk to attack. Just remember while you are doing so what is happening to your home space? If you don't intend to use the space, why take it?

Finally, because some group decides they have enough passive income to plex 5 accounts and buy anything they are entitled to space because they can log 100 titans and 500-1000 support vessels for an hour a month means that vast areas of space go unused, seems counter productive to finding fights. I am glad to see changes to tech to make absurb passive income less predominant. While these pve activities are boring, they are at least pilots in space that a. are doing something and b. can be attacked. As it stands many large groups ship spin and do little while increasing their wealth lead so that they can fleet a better force the 1 hour a month or a week when they log in that overwhelming force. To me the other fix was sort of implemented by eliminating a passive income in large amounts and b. make multiboxing a thing of the past so that 1 player equals one ship both of which lead to see entities being smaller in size naturally leading to more constant fighting rather than 1 or two "epic" fights a year if that. An I win button with no risk and all reward seems bad in the long run for the game, so I am glad for those changes so far. More balanced fights to me would only lead to more true subscriptions and an expanded player base. Multiplexing alts you can only play one at a time sounds reasonable. Keep it up CCP and our space will become more interesting to fly in.
Victor Dathar
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#37 - 2013-05-15 14:00:21 UTC
The current system should be replaced by how many POS you have had active in a system for over a week with Medium over ruling Small and Large over ruling Medium.

^^^ lol that post is so bad you should get back 2 GBS m8 o7

@grr_goons : Wisdom, Insight, GBS Posts

Previous page12