Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Ok, this is a proposed tweak to sov mechanics.

It is an idea, not a finished blueprint, so I would appreciate any adjustments that would help improve it.


This would establish three types of environments for pilots in null sec.

About Local Chat & Free Intel
Friendly: For you, Local Chat works the same as it does now, since your alliance / corp has sovereignty over this space.
Contested: Everyone has local on delayed, where noone sees a name until they speak.
Hostile: You are in someone else's space, so they can see you are present, but for you others are on delayed.

Yes, this is a clear change to how Territorial Claim Units work. (TCU below)
Anchoring time would stay at 300s, but the onlining delay would be eliminated along with the daily upkeep for any system considered contested.

The frontier, or war zone, between hostile groups is where sov and it's control is determined.
Each side can anchor structures in this space, and it is considered uncontrolled so long as more than one group has a TCU structure present.

POS shields have NO TIMER in a system considered uncontrolled, so any system that becomes uncontrolled is at risk for rapid destruction.

To destabilize a system and make it uncontrolled, the invading force MUST have a direct gate connection to a system(s) where they are the sole force with anchored TCU structures.

NOTE:
NPC or Empire sov space can create a blanket exception, so that ANY alliance capable of fielding a TCU may substitute this NPC or Empire space for their own, as a connected system they control, in order to meet the requirement for direct connected systems.

This gives some newer alliances a starting point, as well as opening up any system connected to NPC / Empire space to levels of interest not present in deeper sov null areas.

Removing an opposed TCU can be done by first anchoring your own TCU, which requires the above described gate connection to a system where you have sole control.
Once you have anchored your TCU, any other TCU in the system becomes vulnerable to attack by your group.

I believe that this would clearly result in a frontier line between forces that would change often, with previously safe systems suddenly becoming at risk more quickly than before.

I would propose that they could not be taken by force, BUT...
They could be sold.

By explanation, I would describe this as an opportunity for the hostile invading force to make an offer to purchase an 'intact' structure, rather than need to destroy and replace it outright.

The defending force, likely on it's way out the door, could negotiate terms alongside ISK, so they could arrange for full evacuation.

Of course, the hostiles might be motivated to destroy everything, if they had a grudge.

Yes, I would propose that stations are destructible here.

This would make it even easier for us to defend our space than it is now.

All you have done is funnel attackers into a handfull of systems that are easily defended.

The problem lies in the week of repeating RF timers needed to take a single system's sov, not taking pos towers or local. See my signature.

So there are no timers in contested systems. Which means you can, starting from NPC or Empire space, contest and take the first system in the sov holders off-timezone, then the next, then the next - couldn't you actually steamroll into someone's territory practically overnight?

How about you must hold a system for a day or two before it makes you eligible for the next system?

Apart from that, I think I like this idea also.
Because large entities could be attacked on many fronts at the same time, without the timers that grant them the n+1 advantage.
Nice one!

It is more than a handful. Pure Blind alone has 10 such possible entry points.

evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Pure_Blind/

CFC, e.g., probably has several dozen of such systems right now.

Which means, the large blocs might not be confronted with a single timer at a time, where they can bring their superior numbers all into that one system where the timed structure is. They would instead have to deal with maybe dozens of attacks, made independently by several different groups, having to defend at several locations at once. Meaning, they would have to, for the first time in years, actually split their forces against several enemies. To me, that sounds as if the systems will not be as easily defended as they are now.

This doesn't remove existing conflict options, it just adds new ones.

If someone wants to pressure up an interior system and deal with timers, they can certainly do so.

Imagine the interest in defending a timer, with other players amping up system conflicts at the same time.

By diverting forces to defend this frontier, regular defense becomes more challenging.

I still like this idea.
(Minus the local chat changes.)
And I would consider only removing the timers on sov structures, not of POSes, in the war zones.

Nah, we've got concord reporting all ship beacons in all of known space, don't screw with that without allowing modules to be fit to cloak you from local in lowsec and hisec.

You haven't talked about ihub and station timers yet, how about those?