These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

A message everyone in HED-GP can come together about

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#341 - 2014-01-20 08:46:15 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
The solution to this is something that not many of you are going to like the sound of.
...

Malcanis, is this an indication that there is a plan to fix null sov (that the incumbents won't like)? Or were you simply meaning that solution would not be well received?


The latter.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#342 - 2014-01-20 08:50:25 UTC
Zappity wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
The solution to this is something that not many of you are going to like the sound of.
...

Malcanis, is this an indication that there is a plan to fix null sov (that the incumbents won't like)? Or were you simply meaning that solution would not be well received?

Obviously the latter. CCP has no plan.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#343 - 2014-01-20 09:01:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Nooodlzs wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement.


Penalise but not reduce, reducing means the blob wins, check my post above for a solution, it needs padding out.

Sovereignty should not revolve around a structure with any hit points, but be determined by actions of that alliance in that system.


So the SOV should be decided by what? Presence in system? Activity? Amount of trash talk in Local?

Presence won't work unless you like the idea of SOV being held by AFK cloaker.

Activity would have to include some amount of PvE because you can't get all of your activity from PvP because the other side could just deny you endlessly making your SOV drop after some time because there is no activity. Are null player willing to need to do some form of PvE to hole SOV?

Before timers, POS, deployable structures there was a pure presence based system.

It basically worked like this: (Based on Stain Alliance)

SA claimed the Stain region as their area. SA members lived in Stain. If a non-SA came into Stain people formed up fleets and chased them off or killed them. In this way SA was a presence based alliance. Extremely complex I know.

In comparison what we have now is non-presence real estate based alliance system. My favourite example is Period Basis and Tribal Band / Goonswarm.

Fountain and Delve were held by Test. Period Basis by Tribal. When Test abandoned Delve, Tribal felt so threatened they abandoned PB. However even though no Tribal presence remained in PB, PB still belonged to Tribal. Tribal not willing to fight Goons sold the entire region including outposts to Lawns, Lawns joined Goons transferring PB to Goons. This all happened despite Tribal, Lawns and Goons not having a physical presence in that region.

The people who remained in PB, I was one of them, could have banded together and attempted to killed any Goons, Tribal or Lawns who entered (presence based control) but that would not have changed the outcome. There were only around 100 people, any attempt to prevent would have been squashed by timer blocking and cap projection from Goons 100s of jumps away.


The irony of the current situation is that all this sov crap exists purely so someone can have pretty colors on a map and claim areas they don't use.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#344 - 2014-01-20 09:23:00 UTC
Net Malone wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Net Malone wrote:
But there is easy way to resolve situation: make map bigger x3, x4 or x12 ! Ppls will scatter, blobs will get smaller. And managing empty system should be easy enought and CPU friendly.

You do realize that nerfing power projection by a factor of x3, x4 or x12 would achieve the exact same thing without having to increase the number of systems in the game right? Blink


You are wrong.

Limiting power projection - I understand power is damage in your post - do not make blobs smaller it make blobs BIGGER and fights takes more time.


"power is damage"?

No, try actually reading the post, then things will make more sense.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#345 - 2014-01-20 09:35:20 UTC
I'd also like to point out that you don't require sov to drop an outpost seed, build a capital, have a POS, own true sovereignty, you don't need TCUs or SBUs to have sov. Ping ponging is 100% avoidable without timers.

The reason people find these necessary is because they feel entitled to have a POS at every moon, an outpost in every second system, a jump bridge and cyno gen in almost every system, their alliance name displayed on everyone's screens. They want those things even when they don't reside in game anywhere nearby. They want timers so they don't have to be online to protect all that largesse. They want null to resemble high sec as much as possible.

There's no ping pong if you strategically deploy your outposts, POS, strategically recruit a global memberbase, but as Kaalrus once said "why should we have to recruit non-English speakers".

True sov is the systems you can hold with your membership around the clock. Fake sov are the systems the server holds for you with timers when your not even online. Fake sov is one of the main reasons we have aweful blobage and 10% + TiDi.

In my opinion.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
OldWolf69
EVE-RO
Goonswarm Federation
#346 - 2014-01-20 09:57:31 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
I'd also like to point out that you don't require sov to drop an outpost seed, build a capital, have a POS, own true sovereignty, you don't need TCUs or SBUs to have sov. Ping ponging is 100% avoidable without timers.

The reason people find these necessary is because they feel entitled to have a POS at every moon, an outpost in every second system, a jump bridge and cyno gen in almost every system, their alliance name displayed on everyone's screens. They want those things even when they don't reside in game anywhere nearby. They want timers so they don't have to be online to protect all that largesse. They want null to resemble high sec as much as possible.

There's no ping pong if you strategically deploy your outposts, POS, strategically recruit a global memberbase, but as Kaalrus once said "why should we have to recruit non-English speakers".

True sov is the systems you can hold with your membership around the clock. Fake sov are the systems the server holds for you with timers when your not even online. Fake sov is one of the main reasons we have aweful blobage and 10% + TiDi.

In my opinion.

Ofc, then remove npc null too. Roll
Lol
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#347 - 2014-01-20 10:04:14 UTC
OldWolf69 wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
I'd also like to point out that you don't require sov to drop an outpost seed, build a capital, have a POS, own true sovereignty, you don't need TCUs or SBUs to have sov. Ping ponging is 100% avoidable without timers.

The reason people find these necessary is because they feel entitled to have a POS at every moon, an outpost in every second system, a jump bridge and cyno gen in almost every system, their alliance name displayed on everyone's screens. They want those things even when they don't reside in game anywhere nearby. They want timers so they don't have to be online to protect all that largesse. They want null to resemble high sec as much as possible.

There's no ping pong if you strategically deploy your outposts, POS, strategically recruit a global memberbase, but as Kaalrus once said "why should we have to recruit non-English speakers".

True sov is the systems you can hold with your membership around the clock. Fake sov are the systems the server holds for you with timers when your not even online. Fake sov is one of the main reasons we have aweful blobage and 10% + TiDi.

In my opinion.

Ofc, then remove npc null too. Roll
Lol

What does NPC null have to do with my post. NPC null could function identically to non-NPC null except the arbitrary restrictions in regards to building caps, dropping eggs and so on prevent that.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Net Malone
Perkone
Caldari State
#348 - 2014-01-20 11:05:36 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Net Malone wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Net Malone wrote:
But there is easy way to resolve situation: make map bigger x3, x4 or x12 ! Ppls will scatter, blobs will get smaller. And managing empty system should be easy enought and CPU friendly.

You do realize that nerfing power projection by a factor of x3, x4 or x12 would achieve the exact same thing without having to increase the number of systems in the game right? Blink


You are wrong.

Limiting power projection - I understand power is damage in your post - do not make blobs smaller it make blobs BIGGER and fights takes more time.


"power is damage"?

No, try actually reading the post, then things will make more sense.


So, you want to stir Goons from the inside ? CCP should hire specialists to infiltrate SA and Redit and 4chan and other forums and do out-of-sandbox meta-game in their favour ? :)

Bat what "nerf power projection" actually is ? Some foggy, theoretical description of future course of actions. Nothing substantial.

But actually we all talking about same thing - reducing blocks influence.

CCP needs and (should) want(s) same thing, IMO.

Repeat: nerf "power", influence, control, mastery of few. Right ?

But doing this via nerfing poor players abilities and, actually, core of EvE as it is at the moment isn't a right solution !

We need a way to make players more free and independent form Vader like grip of coalitions. More power to corporations !
Sov favoring presence of corporation members. Non-aliance sov, or just crossroads owned by aliances. Change in minerals - south and north different minerals.

If someone abuse too many let roaming Sansha eat them ! - such NPC regulatory forces can be a part of sandbox - becouse it is bad for Sansha economy ;)

You was proposing putting into code some restrictions how players should breathe.

Work on sov system should be primary focus of CCP. And expansion to the new territories can magically cure many current obstacles - it's only similiar to jumping nerf.

You realy think 50 - 70 jumps is a problem for carrier and dreds blob jumping 1 system per jump ? This do not stop big coalitions from replacing free corps TCUs with their own.

Nerfing will do not change things into better state. Nerfing something on player level will make them MORE helpless vs coalitions. We need more power on low - player, corporation - level. We don't need to change iron grip into adamanite one.

Tip (again): players play to achieve something, to develop something, to explore and to find HOME. They do not want to be helpless vs cruel powers of nature and especially vs more cruel humans. Now you must be plain ratter or plain F1 pusher on kind of photography from disco room... It's not so exciting. You can build a POS, that's all. So much for 'sov mechanic' accesible for every Eve player ;)

Btw. if you even rent a system, you have no rights to mine best moons there, you knew it ? ;) How you want to change this without introducing new systems ? Maybe there is time for that ? if CCP thinks it's technoligically to hard, tell me that. But. pleas, with explanation, OK ?
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#349 - 2014-01-20 11:14:16 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement.

While I love the idea to make EVE Galaxy feel larger (yes, do it!), I dont think it will solve anything.

The battle in HED-GP happened not because of it's strategic value. The same battle could have happened in any other system, even regardless of sov. Actually, it almost happened when Goons moved their super fleet to their southern staging system - both sides were ready to engage, but PL scouts screwed up. That fight happened because people wanted to crush each other, and crush hard. So that it would mean REAL consequences. We dont want to blow up each others frigates cause we know they cost nothing to replace. We can do those **** roams once in a while, but that's not the reason why we play nullsec sov wars. RvB, Brave Newbies - sure, they have their fun. But guess what? If we wanted to play like RvB - we'd have joined RvB.

We play sov wars, because stakes are high.

Find a way to play high stakes without dogpiling everyone - and it's fixed.


Would the CFC have been quite so eager to 100% commit to saving -A-'s system if it meant leaving their northern regions undefended for a week?

It's precisely because the stakes are high that there has to be a motivation for very large groups not to commit their entire strength to a single fight. At the moment they're free to do so, safe in the knowledge that they can move a fleet from one side of the map to the other in a few hours, while sov timers give them a week to organise this.

"Find a way"? What way? Should the opposing sides form up a fleet each and then the GMs lock the system? How else are you going to stop people as motivated as you describe? Describe your system. Because it seems that my proposal DOES give them that motivation, and you're saying "nuh uh, I don't like a real, concrete reason not to dogpile, I want some magical mechanism that doesn't cause any inconvenience or change but is still somehow effective enough to stop them doing what they really really want to"


That is why I think the solution is not Prevent movment. It is to PUNISH excessive commitement at long disanteces? How? A Derivation of your idea.

Make a capital ship able to jump and then it starts a double timmer. A 3 hours one... and a 6 hour one. When the 4 our one finishes. you can jump again. BUt if you do it before the 6 h one finihs. Then the next timers will ahve extra 3 hours on each.

That measn you can try to make a fast deployment. But you will not be able to return fast home to defend. That means excessive power projection comes to a high risk.


OF course the numbers must be compeltely recalcualted, and my proposal is just an example.


Other way is make capital jump drives have malfunction. Each time you jump you have 3% change the jump drive fails and you get strained in system for next 24 hours or until a special action (expensive and cubmersome) is made to make your jump drive repaired. Each time you jump again within 4 hours the fail chance doubles, cumulatively!!!

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Jill Chastot
WE FORM BL0B Inc.
Goonswarm Federation
#350 - 2014-01-20 11:31:35 UTC
Mah Boobz wrote:
I wonder, if CCP hadn't spent all that money on Dust and WOD, and instead, put it into the Eve servers (were the money was made) if we could actually have the fights CCP brag about?



Please stop splerging incorrect blabbering, TiDi is a solution for a single threaded ClusterF*** that is being used at ridiculous extremes that were not envisioned back in the hayday of eves birth. The problem is that eve is old.

Overhauling code is not easy, I dare you to disagree.


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=298596&find=unread OATHS wants you. Come to the WH "Safety in eve is the greatest fallacy you will ever encounter. Once you accept this you will truely enjoy this game."
Net Malone
Perkone
Caldari State
#351 - 2014-01-20 12:13:14 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Nooodlzs wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement.


Penalise but not reduce, reducing means the blob wins, check my post above for a solution, it needs padding out.

Sovereignty should not revolve around a structure with any hit points, but be determined by actions of that alliance in that system.


So the SOV should be decided by what? Presence in system? Activity? Amount of trash talk in Local?

Presence won't work unless you like the idea of SOV being held by AFK cloaker.

Activity would have to include some amount of PvE because you can't get all of your activity from PvP because the other side could just deny you endlessly making your SOV drop after some time because there is no activity. Are null player willing to need to do some form of PvE to hole SOV?


It's hard problem but just placing tcu to claim system is not right. You need to live there.

Maybe amount of industry/manufacturing work done in system/constelation could mean something - peace makes time to craft -> industry lvl improves -> you can craft with quality, with gives % of adventage for hulls done there -> better NPC appear -> better bounty.

Then you need to protect your valuable systems.

More dangerous and agressive rats could attack such hi-industry systems/constelations ?

I am pretty sure ability of making better ships (few %) is worth to maintain.

Security status should determine only minerals available. And different minerals should be scattered around the universe.


Your proposition ?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#352 - 2014-01-20 13:19:12 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement.

While I love the idea to make EVE Galaxy feel larger (yes, do it!), I dont think it will solve anything.

The battle in HED-GP happened not because of it's strategic value. The same battle could have happened in any other system, even regardless of sov. Actually, it almost happened when Goons moved their super fleet to their southern staging system - both sides were ready to engage, but PL scouts screwed up. That fight happened because people wanted to crush each other, and crush hard. So that it would mean REAL consequences. We dont want to blow up each others frigates cause we know they cost nothing to replace. We can do those **** roams once in a while, but that's not the reason why we play nullsec sov wars. RvB, Brave Newbies - sure, they have their fun. But guess what? If we wanted to play like RvB - we'd have joined RvB.

We play sov wars, because stakes are high.

Find a way to play high stakes without dogpiling everyone - and it's fixed.


Would the CFC have been quite so eager to 100% commit to saving -A-'s system if it meant leaving their northern regions undefended for a week?

It's precisely because the stakes are high that there has to be a motivation for very large groups not to commit their entire strength to a single fight. At the moment they're free to do so, safe in the knowledge that they can move a fleet from one side of the map to the other in a few hours, while sov timers give them a week to organise this.

"Find a way"? What way? Should the opposing sides form up a fleet each and then the GMs lock the system? How else are you going to stop people as motivated as you describe? Describe your system. Because it seems that my proposal DOES give them that motivation, and you're saying "nuh uh, I don't like a real, concrete reason not to dogpile, I want some magical mechanism that doesn't cause any inconvenience or change but is still somehow effective enough to stop them doing what they really really want to"


That is why I think the solution is not Prevent movment. It is to PUNISH excessive commitement at long disanteces? How? A Derivation of your idea.

Make a capital ship able to jump and then it starts a double timmer. A 3 hours one... and a 6 hour one. When the 4 our one finishes. you can jump again. BUt if you do it before the 6 h one finihs. Then the next timers will ahve extra 3 hours on each.

That measn you can try to make a fast deployment. But you will not be able to return fast home to defend. That means excessive power projection comes to a high risk.


OF course the numbers must be compeltely recalcualted, and my proposal is just an example.


Other way is make capital jump drives have malfunction. Each time you jump you have 3% change the jump drive fails and you get strained in system for next 24 hours or until a special action (expensive and cubmersome) is made to make your jump drive repaired. Each time you jump again within 4 hours the fail chance doubles, cumulatively!!!


Those are interesting possible refinements of the basic concept.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#353 - 2014-01-20 14:13:11 UTC
Net Malone wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Net Malone wrote:
But there is easy way to resolve situation: make map bigger x3, x4 or x12 ! Ppls will scatter, blobs will get smaller. And managing empty system should be easy enought and CPU friendly.

You do realize that nerfing power projection by a factor of x3, x4 or x12 would achieve the exact same thing without having to increase the number of systems in the game right? Blink


You are wrong.

Limiting power projection - I understand power is damage in your post - do not make blobs smaller it make blobs BIGGER and fights takes more time.

CCP need to nerf big entities like coalitions not poor player toys. In current state of mechanic entities abuse mid-size player grups making them useless and worthless.

Political and economical reasons need to be changed. Bigger universe with different resources on each size. Proper economy need to be enforced via in-sandbox needs. Discover other ancient empire far, far from current one maybe ?

But if one entity like CFC is killing game whatever you do - deal with them ! Someone wrote: "We are here to destroy your game !". Let's go for beer with them ?

NIPs proof that ppls prefer relative state of peace over conflict. Coalition liders fooled CCP that they (20 - 50 players) are representing whole playerbase. That liders hijacked EvE ! Is CCP such naive ?

Best solution is to escalate number of systems. CCP: ask marketing department how they can use that.

And sov rules need to be changed - sov OWNERSHIP needs to be divided. Simple solution: eliminate aliance owned sov, all power to CORPORATIONS ! Watch out for abusers - current coalitions. If you just nerf jumping/bridging ability it will slow down moving forces a bit BUT DO NOT DIVIDE THEM ! Nerfing jumping will make a week to roll cap-ball from Period Basis to Branch and effectively control half of the universe. No one would want to build there his own home, becouse once in month it will be cleaned to the dust.

So divide coalition and do not make player live worse.

Escalating system numbers with sov changes is perfect way.


What exactly would prevent them from using an un-nerfed power projection in it's currently limitless form to just control all that many more system? The coalition was created out of game to gove over some limitation to the alliance system. There is nothing stopping them from doing the very same even if SOV was to be held at a corp level. As long as people can always go from A to B no matter how far A and B are from each tohers, those large fights will happen because there is no logistical bottleneck making it a risky endeavor. They can come back anyway. If the universe was 2 time as big, it would take them more time but they would still do it. They do "nothing" for hours on end in soul crushing lag for the "I was there" feeling.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#354 - 2014-01-20 14:32:08 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Net Malone wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Net Malone wrote:
But there is easy way to resolve situation: make map bigger x3, x4 or x12 ! Ppls will scatter, blobs will get smaller. And managing empty system should be easy enought and CPU friendly.

You do realize that nerfing power projection by a factor of x3, x4 or x12 would achieve the exact same thing without having to increase the number of systems in the game right? Blink


You are wrong.

Limiting power projection - I understand power is damage in your post - do not make blobs smaller it make blobs BIGGER and fights takes more time.

CCP need to nerf big entities like coalitions not poor player toys. In current state of mechanic entities abuse mid-size player grups making them useless and worthless.

Political and economical reasons need to be changed. Bigger universe with different resources on each size. Proper economy need to be enforced via in-sandbox needs. Discover other ancient empire far, far from current one maybe ?

But if one entity like CFC is killing game whatever you do - deal with them ! Someone wrote: "We are here to destroy your game !". Let's go for beer with them ?

NIPs proof that ppls prefer relative state of peace over conflict. Coalition liders fooled CCP that they (20 - 50 players) are representing whole playerbase. That liders hijacked EvE ! Is CCP such naive ?

Best solution is to escalate number of systems. CCP: ask marketing department how they can use that.

And sov rules need to be changed - sov OWNERSHIP needs to be divided. Simple solution: eliminate aliance owned sov, all power to CORPORATIONS ! Watch out for abusers - current coalitions. If you just nerf jumping/bridging ability it will slow down moving forces a bit BUT DO NOT DIVIDE THEM ! Nerfing jumping will make a week to roll cap-ball from Period Basis to Branch and effectively control half of the universe. No one would want to build there his own home, becouse once in month it will be cleaned to the dust.

So divide coalition and do not make player live worse.

Escalating system numbers with sov changes is perfect way.


What exactly would prevent them from using an un-nerfed power projection in it's currently limitless form to just control all that many more system? The coalition was created out of game to gove over some limitation to the alliance system. There is nothing stopping them from doing the very same even if SOV was to be held at a corp level. As long as people can always go from A to B no matter how far A and B are from each tohers, those large fights will happen because there is no logistical bottleneck making it a risky endeavor. They can come back anyway. If the universe was 2 time as big, it would take them more time but they would still do it. They do "nothing" for hours on end in soul crushing lag for the "I was there" feeling.

The question to ask is what drives coalitions to form? In my opinion the answer is fear, convenience and connectivity.

Look at this image - with regional jumps removed and the inability to jump caps between those large regional jumps currently in game you reduce fear, you reduce convenience, and you eliminate connectivity to those far away regions which are currently only a single jump away with long regional jumps.

With such a system Branch, Venal and Tenal then become local political entities instead of Tenal to Period Basis being one contiguous political entity as it is today.

In my opinion of course.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Doji Okakura
#355 - 2014-01-20 14:39:26 UTC
You guys know you're playing a computer game, right?
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#356 - 2014-01-20 14:43:46 UTC
Doji Okakura wrote:
You guys know you're playing a computer game, right?


Uhuh and we like doing that for the next decade and onwards, which means some things have to change and not 2 years from now.
Ivana Twinkle
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#357 - 2014-01-20 16:16:10 UTC
Doji Okakura wrote:
You guys know you're playing a computer game, right?


They are too busy fulling all their proverbial buckets with old teared up memes to notice.
Net Malone
Perkone
Caldari State
#358 - 2014-01-20 17:52:30 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
[

What exactly would prevent them from using an un-nerfed power projection in it's currently limitless form to just control all that many more system? The coalition was created out of game to gove over some limitation to the alliance system.



It's very simple - "they", parties involved in blobs, will loose numbers. That will limit coalitions influence. Actually it's coalitions pressure...

Now half of the coalitions member have no way to go. Actual wars are forced to being their "own" wars.

How I know that ? Becouse coalitions are not monolitic - look what happens when cascading is starting: "some" members evacuate. If we have free space to explore then not core corps/aliances will go there. Same as with WH space. They will go and create new corps, new aliances and new coalitions but smaller this time. Ppls will scatter, capitals will scatter and blobs will get smaller.

Sov change is needed to prevent new territoris from being afk-collected (and prevented from habitating) by old coalitions. Here is nerf you want. Or you arguing that current sov mechanic is... OK ? Capitals, oh yes, capitals ! need ! to ! be ! changed !!! ;)

At the moment creation of new aliances senseless - there is no point in that becouse there is nothing new parties can achieve. New parties are insta-borged into current entities. THAT is what require a change.

Quote:

There is nothing stopping them from doing the very same even if SOV was to be held at a corp level.


That's not true. Corporations living long, long from conflict zone will ignore not-their conflicts.

Quote:

As long as people can always go from A to B no matter how far A and B are from each tohers, those large fights will happen because there is no logistical bottleneck making it a risky endeavor. They can come back anyway. If the universe was 2 time as big, it would take them more time but they would still do it.


Excuse me, but you arguing against yourself.

"Endeavor" part grows as range grow. And probability of such massive "comeback" trip falls (with range too). More, it is quite impossible that all forces will be back on some not-anymore-important-for-us timer. You see, you fly to timers to your enemies - usually to your neightbours ;) If that relationship is changed there is no reason to be "back anyway".

And more power on corporation level prevents creating gigantic coalitions, like 3 per whole Universe...

Space is very effective in dividing ppls :) Even mariages brakes thanks to different space and time. Some time in isolation
and there will be no reason to join current coalitions.

[quote}
They do "nothing" for hours on end in soul crushing lag for the "I was there" feeling.[/quote]

Ah, so Saturday "event" didn't create some negative emotions and some new topics on the forums ? Everybody was happy with engagement results ? Not counting titan pilots, they are alway primared... Maybe check some Eve forum, you will find walls of text with easy...
Stasis Leak
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#359 - 2014-01-20 18:28:25 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Nooodlzs wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement.


Penalise but not reduce, reducing means the blob wins, check my post above for a solution, it needs padding out.

Sovereignty should not revolve around a structure with any hit points, but be determined by actions of that alliance in that system.


So the SOV should be decided by what? Presence in system? Activity? Amount of trash talk in Local?

Presence won't work unless you like the idea of SOV being held by AFK cloaker.

Activity would have to include some amount of PvE because you can't get all of your activity from PvP because the other side could just deny you endlessly making your SOV drop after some time because there is no activity. Are null player willing to need to do some form of PvE to hole SOV?

Before timers, POS, deployable structures there was a pure presence based system.

It basically worked like this: (Based on Stain Alliance)

SA claimed the Stain region as their area. SA members lived in Stain. If a non-SA came into Stain people formed up fleets and chased them off or killed them. In this way SA was a presence based alliance. Extremely complex I know.

In comparison what we have now is non-presence real estate based alliance system. My favourite example is Period Basis and Tribal Band / Goonswarm.

Fountain and Delve were held by Test. Period Basis by Tribal. When Test abandoned Delve, Tribal felt so threatened they abandoned PB. However even though no Tribal presence remained in PB, PB still belonged to Tribal. Tribal not willing to fight Goons sold the entire region including outposts to Lawns, Lawns joined Goons transferring PB to Goons. This all happened despite Tribal, Lawns and Goons not having a physical presence in that region.

The people who remained in PB, I was one of them, could have banded together and attempted to killed any Goons, Tribal or Lawns who entered (presence based control) but that would not have changed the outcome. There were only around 100 people, any attempt to prevent would have been squashed by timer blocking and cap projection from Goons 100s of jumps away.


The irony of the current situation is that all this sov crap exists purely so someone can have pretty colors on a map and claim areas they don't use.

Having read all of your posts, I think I finally get it. You hate goons.
For the convenience of the rest of us, who may or may not have a similar desire for vengeance against the goons, could you please start a "I hate Goons" thread?
As for your suggestion here. If you simply want the old "hisec station docking games in nullsec" version of the game, it still exists. It's called NPC nullsec. Go there and stay. Your problems are solved.
Personally I would like to see a plan that will allow the players to actually play the game. Not one that will control system resources by preventing them from playing.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#360 - 2014-01-20 18:59:02 UTC
Stasis Leak wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Nooodlzs wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement.


Penalise but not reduce, reducing means the blob wins, check my post above for a solution, it needs padding out.

Sovereignty should not revolve around a structure with any hit points, but be determined by actions of that alliance in that system.


So the SOV should be decided by what? Presence in system? Activity? Amount of trash talk in Local?

Presence won't work unless you like the idea of SOV being held by AFK cloaker.

Activity would have to include some amount of PvE because you can't get all of your activity from PvP because the other side could just deny you endlessly making your SOV drop after some time because there is no activity. Are null player willing to need to do some form of PvE to hole SOV?

Before timers, POS, deployable structures there was a pure presence based system.

It basically worked like this: (Based on Stain Alliance)

SA claimed the Stain region as their area. SA members lived in Stain. If a non-SA came into Stain people formed up fleets and chased them off or killed them. In this way SA was a presence based alliance. Extremely complex I know.

In comparison what we have now is non-presence real estate based alliance system. My favourite example is Period Basis and Tribal Band / Goonswarm.

Fountain and Delve were held by Test. Period Basis by Tribal. When Test abandoned Delve, Tribal felt so threatened they abandoned PB. However even though no Tribal presence remained in PB, PB still belonged to Tribal. Tribal not willing to fight Goons sold the entire region including outposts to Lawns, Lawns joined Goons transferring PB to Goons. This all happened despite Tribal, Lawns and Goons not having a physical presence in that region.

The people who remained in PB, I was one of them, could have banded together and attempted to killed any Goons, Tribal or Lawns who entered (presence based control) but that would not have changed the outcome. There were only around 100 people, any attempt to prevent would have been squashed by timer blocking and cap projection from Goons 100s of jumps away.


The irony of the current situation is that all this sov crap exists purely so someone can have pretty colors on a map and claim areas they don't use.

Having read all of your posts, I think I finally get it. You hate goons.
For the convenience of the rest of us, who may or may not have a similar desire for vengeance against the goons, could you please start a "I hate Goons" thread?
As for your suggestion here. If you simply want the old "hisec station docking games in nullsec" version of the game, it still exists. It's called NPC nullsec. Go there and stay. Your problems are solved.
Personally I would like to see a plan that will allow the players to actually play the game. Not one that will control system resources by preventing them from playing.

Nah I have no particular issue with Goons. I spend a lot of time in their space and they're surprisingly decent comparatively.

The reason I use CFC as an example is because they are the largest bloc and I'm very familiar with the areas they have claimed. The reason I used the PB example is because it showed how a completely absent alliance managed to obtain complete sovereignty over Period Basis including all it's outposts.

It's a fail system because Tribal fleeing should rightly have created a vacuum somebody else could have filled, increasing the number of entities but all that happened was a bunch Goon blockade runners dropped TCUs enmasse and then left. There wasn't a Goon in sight. But anyone trying to contest, an automated email would have alerted them, 24 hours later from far far away the Goons would have arrived, crushed them and then left again. It's stupid.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)