Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Let's see.

It is early August.
The theme of the winter 2013 release is being announced at GamesCom in 17 days.
I strongly doubt that the CSM will pivot away from whatever they have told CCP to announce, code and debug by November for Sisi testing.

But rest assured, the inherent destruction of high sec you so deeply desire is already assured.
That die was cast some time ago, and the current CSM just cemented it.

This game truly is run by a handful of players and devs.
That became clear at the AT, watching the incestuous behavior between the null sec cartel heads and the CCP employees.

High sec won't be completely gutted with the December release, but will be finished with the June 2014 release.

Ditto

And it won't help a thing. You can already make more money in low, null and especially WH space, yet people still do L4s. Why? Because they're "safe". Nerf level 4s and they'll keep on doing level 3s. In order to get more people to null, you need a carrot and a stick - just a stick won't do.

Problem is, as people perceive it right now, unless you have a huge coalition behind you, you can't really do much in null. So what reason does a small newbie corp have to come to null?

LET'S HAVE INSTANCED PVE

yep

afk cloaking whining crying again? Is it the time of the month again?

One of the most common CCP complaints regarding the sov system is that it would be so time-consuming to fix. A full overhaul would not only be a nightmare for CCP, but also the players that are still scarred from the Dominion handover as new structures replace old ones and everything changes overnight.

A while ago I came up with a model for a system that keeps all the current structures and mechanics as much as possible, while making the process somewhat simpler and fairer. The very core of the current system is full of odd caveats and restrictions, such as needing to win a sequence of timers in exactly the right order or face starting again. Remember when you accidently took an outpost before destroying the ihub, and the owner just took it back to get fresh timers? Yeah, that was fun!

Step 1 - Tweaks

So how do we fix it? First we make a few simple tweaks:

• Reduce hitpoints for ihubs to be on par with TCUs.
• Nerf shield regen time on TCUs and ihubs, so that they do not passively regen within the same timezone. Self-repairing without assistance should take at least 24 hours, if not more.
• Change the default reinforce timer variance to be +/- 7 hours (instead of the current 3 hours).

Step 2 - New upgrades

Then we introduce new ihub upgrades that affect timer reinforcement variances and TCU/ihub resists, but have exponentially increasing maintenance costs. So for example you could get a 5-6 hour variance fairly cheaply at low levels, but the highest level 5 variance of ~2 hours would be on par with cynojammer upgrade costs. The same would apply to resistances, with the best level of upgrade giving an effective structure HP around the current levels, while also being very expensive.

Example values:

Time upgrade | Timer Variance
Level 1 | 6 hours
Level 2 | 5 hours
Level 3 | 4 hours
Level 4 | 3 hours
Level 5 | 2 hours

Structure upgrade | Structure resistances (shield/armour)
Level 1 | 10%
Level 2 | 20%
Level 3 | 30%
Level 4 | 50%
Level 5 | 90%

Step 3 - Contesting systems

Under this new system Outposts can no longer be reinforced, only TCUs and ihubs* using the same shield/armour timer approach. However instead of the current "lose timer, start again" sequence for structures, make it so that beating any timer simply drops the sov level down by 1. This gives an avenue of progress for the attacker meaning they don't have to win 100% of fights in a row, and more importantly it opens up a new angle based on the upgrades above. Because the timer variance is affected by ihub upgrades, losing initial battles causes the better upgrades to go offline and become ineffective. If you fail to defend that first structure timer say goodbye to sov level 5 and any related upgrades. Timer variance becomes less dependable and things like jumpbridges and cynojammers can become useless.

The rate at which systems regain sov levels should be tweaked somewhat, possibly being linked to military/industry activity so that actively-used systems recover more quickly. Sov could also recover more quickly based on how much of the rest of the constellation that alliance controls.

So long as the sov level is above 1, online TCUs and ihubs will have 100% structure resists meaning they cannot be destroyed.
If the sov level is reduced to 1, those resistances go away and structures can no longer be reinforced. This means the TCU can be destroyed providing the system is at least 51% covered by online SBUs. Once destroyed, any remaining ihubs go offline and any outpost in system becomes owned by an NPC corporation that allows anyone to dock so long as the system is unclaimed. Successfully onlining a new TCU gives ownership of any outpost to that same corporation.
Note that throughout this process the outpost remains invulnerable, although its services can be taken out as normal at any time.

*Why these structures? Outposts bring some very risk-free opportunities for defense, such as sitting carriers in docking range to repair a timer. Their existence also means they act as a kind of 'shield' for system sovereignty, rather than the upgrade they should be. This change moves away from encouraging outpost spam to defend a region and instead puts the focus on what upgrades the alliance choose to maintain. A system isn't easier to defend because it has an outpost, it should be easier to defend because the owners choose to invest in systems that happen to have outposts.
It also paves the way for 'shoot outpost to wreck/destroy it' mechanics in future :v


Summary
Note that this isn't intended to be the perfect sov system, but rather a way of salvaging the current one without lots of messy swapping of structures or transition periods. It's built around making the current system a bit fairer and less grindy.

The main aim is to give the defender the chance to prioritise what is most important to them, while also allowing the attacker to make progress without losing it all to a single bad day. For all the issues with the old POS system, in that case it was at least possible for a stronger attacker to gradually chip away win by virtue of being the best over a longer period. Dominion sov makes it far too easy for a defender to sit back passively and reset all whole progress in a single day.

A secondary goal here is to help reduce the structure grind from abandonded regions. With the HP nerf to ihubs and TCU/outpost switch, it means that smaller gangs can threaten lesser-developed sov without the need to bring a horde of supercaps everywhere. Any alliance that wants to make their region horrible to grind through will have to shell out a fair amount of isk for it, as it won't be free anymore.

Look at all dem werds.

You mean they aren't two sockpuppets the CSM/nullsec entities have created to try and give the illusion of 'choice' and 'dicussion'?

You're breaking my mind Scatim.

Perhaps you haven't heard, but there are things called wars, which call us away from carebearing.
We shouldn't be honorably penalized if we are off shooting peeps.
Right now, sure, because we're not ratting we drop the index, but having our timers go away is complacently full nonsense.

All major blocks in eve would hate this. N3 had some sunburn (see what I did there?) while they were away. If they did what you are talking about, no one would leave there castle, and no one would fight in eve if they had something to lose.
So no, your idea is bad.


To the OP:
I really like the OPs ideas, and I think CCP should really consider them :)