Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I have suggestion to discourage blobs
Currently within the sov anyone can take control of any system if they manage to online a TCU, or through SBU > destro everything/win > TCU
I realize having no timers would solve nothing essentially, but something a little different might work, this relies on guerilla warfare.

First Decrease the online timers for both SBU and TCU by 50%.

change SBU, within the timeFrame of its onlining state a system will gradually degrade and become neutral BUT a LINKED system (discussed next) can't be captured unless the neighbour system(s) is also captured BUT you can still turn a system neutral therefore cutting off a system route completely this would disable the TCU.

afterwards if a link is established a TCU can be placed and within 4 hours the system will be captured, all stations/outposts will still belong to the entity that created them but disabled, and now you can destroy them after taking control of the system (structure hp should be reduced here).

Get rid of notifications and introduce a warning within the map, that is, one has to check the map and systems that are being captured will be highlited in a specific color.

Second Link MOST null systems together: (not all, entrances via low/high to null and systems that are edged alone are linked with others but they themselves are not considered linked systems i.e they can be captured alone to form a staging system)

They would be linked via their routes, what this does is for a linked system to belong to an entity you have to take control of another because they are linked, for instance in the case of an attack if a system is in the process of being captured and an SBU is placed, an alliance must come to defend it and the attackers will come as well, now the fight escalates, but another SBU is placed by the attackers in an adjacent systems, now that that system is turning neutral and it will cut off several others,
alliances can station in specific systems to cutt off others.

What is the benefit of cutting off others? at the moment not much except system acquistion, therefore, the current benefits of a captured system and the Ihub lvl should be adjusted/split across several systems and to gain certain benefits you would have to had captured linked systems.

Now when a set of linked systems is captured, an alliance can choose a mother/home system within that link, one per 12 or more within the radius of the systems captured and these will be the subsystems of it (home systems can't be close together and they are seperated by several other linked systems), each home system can be linked with another home system regardless of route (i.e a home system 100 hostile systems away from another, can field capitals to it and only to it if the two of them exist ) and capitals can ONLY be fielded cyno'd in to and from home systems, a home system is linked to and from its adjacent subsystems, so when a system is declared as the "mother" it can't be captured unless all of its subsystems are cut off and then a mother system can be attacked and if victorious captured.

Now the benefits of the current sov infrastructure should be increased tenfold BUT split across several systems... each system captured will give specific benefits and on obtaining a mother system you increase those benefits exponentially and now a coalition can choose which benefits to delegate within the subsystems of each home.

For this to work Coalitions will have to have a formal presentation within the game so the benefits can be used by all its members, despite of logo a coalition must choose a specific color to represent them and it will be highlighted for the cluster of systems it has captured along with the logo on capture of a home.

how so?
systems on the edge and entrance along with non linked systems can still be captured by themselves to offer staging system and the denial of capital in them relieves the smaller corps of this hassle, so in a worst-case scenario a coalition was able to capture all of null, small alliances/corps can still be a threat to them on several axis without the linked systems. Huge fleet fights are still maintained though for those who wish, around and in the mother system, they would be more divided around several subsystems though, adjacent or not.

The division of resources to be more specific per systems (not each system gives them all) is to incite the players to capture the system that is needed for their operations, and the combined effort of a large fleet wouldn't go unrewarded because they would be able to capture a mother system to increase their potential but are still at risk through the subsystem losing their links.

To gain the maximum profit? yes a large entity would have to conquer several linked systems but the rewards/profits would be much greater than it is now, fit for a coalition but just enough for some, not enough for all, good to fight for (so the blue doughnut wouldn't be viable). So it can still offer something for large and small entities if they choose so.

the reason you see the big blobs is because of the current sov mechanics make is so difficult for new alliances to take sov themselves.

how does this fight the blob?


With your half assed cyno jammed systems larger numbers are still favored.

You have this linked/mother system idea. Fine....goons or other large crew makes ghetto blue some corps/alliances (not official blue, but not neut grey for sure) and they are jsut cyno in caps for defence ops. Coalition level blob wins again. Or if rich enough hire mercs.


Or am I reading your "cyno jam" wrong and its complete lock down? IN which case you still help the blob. Sure its a pita to hump it by gate but at least PL dynamite fishing is off the table as a consolation prize. I'd see this ghetto cyno jam abused in this case. Have alt crew put up SBU and voila....attacker can't cyno in either and has to kill the sbu as well. Not sure of cost of cyno jam versus sbu. Would someone please tell me which is more cost effective?



Also I am not sure if you have ever did ops in a cyno jammed system. No hot drops does not hurt the blob, it makes it worse. As generally if you want it bad enough (the attack or the defence) its a cta night and all hands are on deck. Lose the dreads and carriers and such it jsut means bring moar subcaps. had me quite a few csaa system ops (edit: as generally its common to cyno jam these systems)...no caps/supers does not shrink the blob.

As attacker you are a one shot deal really as you need to flood in. As your only other option is place titan in a surrouning system nearby not jammed and your fleet reinforcements have to worry about titan to gate(s) travel still. As defender you want to be the majority in system before lag monster hits. PLus extra to find that system the titan is bridging to at least make the gates hostile if not get that titan off the field.


About the only good thing from this idea would be it make blops really relevant. Unless you have covert cyno shut down as well. I'd keep it in place, it be your only redeeming value to this idea to have blops blot out the sun which I think would be cool (as I fly them and it be nice to move up to large scale ops and not ninjya ops on ratters and unloved pos' ).

However....the blobs have would more of these so here we are back at square one, again.

or is a masochist.

Plain ole triage carrier ops (no hot drop gang bang, no dynamite fishing, jsut plain ole remote reps till pos healthy again) goes right out the window here for pos' not in "home" systems.

Guess he enjoys the prospect of lauching tons of logi's to rep the pos' between during the ref timer run out till it its round 2, the actual pos kill.

Or being on the support fleet that baby sits them as they rep. I personally have watched swarms of carriers traige this and thought it agonizing. And know the carrier pilots did not want to be there either as well, its no more fun for them. Waiting for logi's to rep this crap.....screw that noise. Didn't want that pos anyway lol.

edit: and I just noticed...to get the logi numbers and the fleet support to protect them, just reinforces the blob again lol.

didn't read, but I'm pretty sure its a bad idea anyway.

Just got that feelin', ya know?

spamming caps is bad yes, isn't it one the main issue in null that there is an abundant amount of caps and not enough of their deaths, they are spammed in every fight without hesitation ? how do they become useless since they are still good in the most vital system?

low sec and npc null remain the same because they are not linked are not "conquerable" you don't see thousands of blobs there in EVERY large fight so it's a non issue, the home systems was for the linked and a solution to the amount of caps present in battles, but I guess everyone complains for no reason.

the less timer is to encourage and give time to smaller alliances to be able to actually do something encouraging more action > more wars being fought over territory, null will forever remain the same dominated by the same forces no matter how much you change if the timers don't change there is not even 1% chance of causing a dent there, as I said sov upgrades would be adjusted with this system no longer the stagnant wait 100 days for it, become more important because rewards are more important and keeping systems alive are.



As I said in the OP the hp of structures will be changed with this, which is again a valid complaint made by many on the forums that the millions of hp and grinding is what makes numbers > tactics in null.


fights the blob by forcing them to lose vital systems if they do not divide themselves.. this suggestion in no way does it make blobs relevant at all you can't not huddle in one system or win by numbers since you will lose several in the process to several other entities.

Anyway this discussion is moot and was a mistake as there is no intention by anyone to change static null, just complaints on their side while keeping things the same or changed their way, blobs will remain dominant forever just like it has for the past 10 years, well that is accomplished. Even CCP recognizes how hopeless it is so there really is no issue (just complaints)

I guess the mass threads we see about hp structure grind/lag/tidi/fixNull/fixSov after every large fleet fight and how glad everyone gets the less caps their are is just a non-issue. Or how two major blocks will hold null for years, proving that numbers > strategy/tactics. As I said I guess everyone is happy with null (the ones holding it atleast)

The hp boosts were put in place to fix sov. If you recall the days of pos warfare sov....it was a massive pita. 5 large pos', make em deathstars and the night jsut sucked ass. has this solution been 100% ideal? No. Better than pos warfare all the time? I will say yes.


Goons vs test....was actually a fair ground numbers wise.


PL many times has shown if you had the billions to hire them they still are very effective. In the IT/NC war of years gone by they were more of threat against IT after they lost sov than when they had it. They made our life in delve garrison a massive pita tbh.

And you have crews like RK who have lived way longer than the blobs they have tangled with. I tangled with RK in 2 alliances. RK still lives today, the alliances I was in....are jsut place held by someones alt in the database now basically. RK's case shows 0.0 does not have to be SOV or death. they jsut like busting balls and getting good fights. Do well at both tbh.