These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#621 - 2015-03-03 20:43:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Lena Lazair
MuppetsSlayed wrote:
Why make the T2 module 10 times better than the T1 module.
Surely this is the opposite of what your trying to achieve with tiericide.
Why would anyone use the T1?


The T1 is basically a defender advantage. Fire up what will (presumably be) a couple of low skilled alts, sit them in a brick-tanked cruiser (I forsee Mallers everywhere!) with a T1 E-link, and park it with a fleet or some reps at 0 on the station/structure. You are now basically invulnerable to the shenanigans of a roaming gang of T2 E-link vandals flying around in inty's or T3 dessies trying to flip things from 250k away.

However, if you can't even be bothered to bring a low skilled T1 E-link alt to defend the structure, then those vandal gangs get to harass with T2 E-links from range.

EDIT: That said, I prefer making E-links a BS-only thing. And then maybe give black ops BS a role bonus that extends range of E-links for them, so they can still do the ranged harassment thing. Which seems like a really fun possible role extension for black ops, actually...
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#622 - 2015-03-03 20:45:27 UTC
Brakoo wrote:
If we are going to have the military and industry indexes matter for the "occupancy" bonus I would like to see the way they are measured overhauled.

The Industry Index needs to include PI, Industry jobs run, and maybe even moon mining/reactions done in those systems to truly reflect usage.

The Military Index on that same note should include some kind of pilots in space metric, maybe Isk value of PVP ship kills or something along those lines.

In their current state the occupancy bonuses will just encourage compulsory PVE ops to increase defense levels.


This seems like a really good idea. Include the industry cost indices in the Industry sov index. Include pvp stats in the military sov index.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Sylvanium Orlenard
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#623 - 2015-03-03 20:45:33 UTC
I've read like the first 6 pages of comments. And one of the prevailing comments was "Where is the bonus / incentive for owning sov?" Now I've never actually been a sov resident but please enlighten me. If there are no incentives to hold sov currently, why are there any systems in EVE that are currently being held by an alliance or an other? For that matter why is renting null systems a thing? I mean there are no incentives to holding sov right now is there?
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#624 - 2015-03-03 20:45:56 UTC
Winter Archipelago wrote:
I suppose if the super-fast, super-agile, super-long-target-range ships of legend ever became an issue, it would be possible to make three versions of the Entropic module, with the battleship-sized module taking the least time, then doubling as it went down to the medium ships, and doubling again into the small ships, with a lore reason being that "more electronics can be fit into the larger modules to do the job" or some such.

No need for extra modules

EWAR - Gallente sensor damps or Caldari ECM.

Can't kite and hack if you can't lock it anymore from your 250km orbit.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#625 - 2015-03-03 20:47:09 UTC
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Also regarding Command Node(s) and capture:

Re: Adding the need to scan down Command nodes:

Which equals diversity in game play.

If we're removing grinding then something has to be hard... right now it's attacker advantage the way populated Sov is currently used... i.e. BLOB warps in suddenly to system and griefs station by reinforcing everything services wise


Defender is at disadvantage because it's suprise attack, and the time to organize a defense ---


When it comes to actual Sov capture there isn't a decisive advantage for defender over attacker, which is fine, but once the command nodes start popping it's just a race to see who can come across the anomoly first


It would be nicer if some sill was involved of actually having to scan the things down instead of attacker just pre posiition in "spotters" in every constellation system and then via comms
deploy the fleet


____________

I mean I much rather have my Alliance leadership promoting scanner pilots as the saviours of our Empire, rather than the BLOB F1 monkey that only trained PVP skills

Envisioning FC's waiting for scanner results via scanner pilots, as well as scouts racing around updating on enemy activity (sharp uptick in local? or sudden cyno out ... where'd they cyno too)... having to manage the Meta, as opposed to how to get the BLOB to the next Command Node that's on everyone's overview

I think exploration/scanning has come of age and needs additional content - and this is a perfect content driver that would give that genre the next opportunity to make headway in the EVE online ingame culture.


*(And for the record I myself am not a scanner pilot - all skills are only at Lvl 2 for this character)


As an ex-wormhole prober, I find this idea great- racing to the new static was a thrill. However, the sig should actually be hard to scan.

Princess Cherista
Doomheim
#626 - 2015-03-03 20:48:35 UTC
Sylvanium Orlenard wrote:
I've read like the first 6 pages of comments. And one of the prevailing comments was "Where is the bonus / incentive for owning sov?" Now I've never actually been a sov resident but please enlighten me. If there are no incentives to hold sov currently, why are there any systems in EVE that are currently being held by an alliance or an other? For that matter why is renting null systems a thing? I mean there are no incentives to holding sov right now is there?

Docking
O'nira
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#627 - 2015-03-03 20:49:03 UTC
This seems like an excellent change, big props to ccp for bringing change into the stagnant nullsec
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#628 - 2015-03-03 20:49:51 UTC
Javajunky wrote:
I'm going to say I'm somewhat disappointed, but I shall return to comment after I go throw up.


Cool cus now the gsf will have to tighten its belt... glad you are being proactive on the weight loss

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#629 - 2015-03-03 20:50:00 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Jacus Noir wrote:
hmm "Prime Time" goes a bit like this, Alliance mail goes out reading:

CTA Everyone! Structures are going vulnerable in 1 hour, drop what you are doing, come hug the station and defend the system from attack...btw we get to do this every day of the week same time, so get used to stopping what you are doing and not enjoying the "sandbox" and get used to playing king of the hill.



dev blog wrote:
Then Sovereignty structures exit their reinforcement period approximately 48 hours after the initial attack, they spark the beginning of a new capture event in which players fight over Command Node anomalies that spawn at random points throughout the constellation.

First, it's not "every single day." (maybe it is, see question below)

Second, you can petition CCP to adjust the timer during this feedback period. If you want to be lazy then make the reinforcement period 1 week. If you want to kick the alliance in the balls, then make it during the next available window.

Third, if there's no real attack in an active system, then it's really easy to defend. Just have 5 dudes run their systems for 10 minutes (or whatever) since the timers will be 4x faster than baseline.

Question: Is there a way for the reinforcement timer in a different system within the same constellation to be reinforced each day - making it a daily sov grind thing?
suicide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#630 - 2015-03-03 20:50:03 UTC
After some thought, one suggestion:

Perhaps some systems can be timed differently than the "Alliance Primetime". This will help distribute fights across timezones in a way that doesn't encourage people literally leaving alliances to get a better primetime.
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#631 - 2015-03-03 20:50:43 UTC
Overall I'd like to commend CCP for having excellent reasoning and goals for this revamp, there are obviously some details to be worked out, but the general spirit is great.

Summer is coming <3
Agent Known
State War Academy
Caldari State
#632 - 2015-03-03 20:50:55 UTC
Total Newbie wrote:
Agent Known wrote:
Jacus Noir wrote:
hmm "Prime Time" goes a bit like this, Alliance mail goes out reading:

CTA Everyone! Structures are going vulnerable in 1 hour, drop what you are doing, come hug the station and defend the system from attack...btw we get to do this every day of the week same time, so get used to stopping what you are doing and not enjoying the "sandbox" and get used to playing king of the hill.


I mean seriously CCP...the current system is miles better than this, are you TRYING to push people back into low sec? I mean Im sorry but these changes are absolute garbage, you guys really need to go back to the drawing board and take a look at this because this is very labor intensive and having to do it every single flipping day is madding enough for someone to go, eh not worth it just go back to low sec where I can fight instead of having to baby sit my station every 20 hours.


If you want your own little piece of New Eden, you have to fight for it. Pretty simple. No longer can half your alliance fool around in other parts of the universe knowing full well that all their systems are perfectly safe until almost a week of timers pass.


That's why you are CURRENTLY in Null doing that, right?


If you ran a locator agent on me in order to post that response, that really doesn't matter what I personally am doing (after all, ships need to be bought...). But anyway...
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#633 - 2015-03-03 20:51:00 UTC
Consider replacing the 4-hour prime time with an alliance-selectable variable-sized window, and tie defensive bonuses to the size of the window. Ie. a smaller window reduces the defensive bonuses, and a larger window increases the defensive bonus.

Thus, an alliance which chooses a narrow window of vulnerability will be at risk for a shorter period, but signifcantly more vulnerable during that window, compared to an alliance which chooses a wider window of vulnerability.

This should benefit alliances which recruit members across more timezones, and lower the effectiveness of alliances which predominately operate only within a narrow block of timezones and are currently relatively invulnerable during that block.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#634 - 2015-03-03 20:51:28 UTC
Princess Cherista wrote:
Sylvanium Orlenard wrote:
I've read like the first 6 pages of comments. And one of the prevailing comments was "Where is the bonus / incentive for owning sov?" Now I've never actually been a sov resident but please enlighten me. If there are no incentives to hold sov currently, why are there any systems in EVE that are currently being held by an alliance or an other? For that matter why is renting null systems a thing? I mean there are no incentives to holding sov right now is there?

Docking



Docking is linked to outpost ownership. I think if you own all three sov and have maxed out occupancy then that systeh should get combat mission agents

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Hairpins Blueprint
The Northerners
Pandemic Horde
#635 - 2015-03-03 20:51:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Hairpins Blueprint
Capqu wrote:
also rip supers LOL


Fighters and bombers should be able to shoot pos :< adn dock to the damn stations xd
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#636 - 2015-03-03 20:52:06 UTC
How will new outposts be built? Will I-hubs/TCUs be required? Or can anyone drop a station in a system that they don't have any form of control over?

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Ranamar
Nobody in Local
Deepwater Hooligans
#637 - 2015-03-03 20:52:47 UTC
Actually...
A thought on "prime time". What if we could set it in 2-hour windows that did not need to be contiguous? Then, if an alliance has, say, an EU contingent and a US contingent, they could set it for those two. Even with this 4-hour window, US West and US East are practically two different activity time zones. (They just happen to run up against each other.)
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#638 - 2015-03-03 20:52:48 UTC
After reading most of these pages, my main concern is nothing addresses the population density problem, you still can't run many players at once in a system, making it vastly harder to defend against these snap timers.
These aspects need fixing at the same time or before this system is implemented. A good Null system should look like Osmon does for standard size of local.
iP0D
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#639 - 2015-03-03 20:53:11 UTC
Total Newbie wrote:
Memphis Baas wrote:
Consider me a high-sec carebear, and feel free to treat my opinion as worthless, but what I'm seeing is:

1. Any roaming gang will entosis whatever they can while they roam, and eventually the defender's list of sov units that must be defended will include all of them. Turning the 4 hours "prime time" into "mandatory home defense time for 4 hours." You're presenting the dev blog from the point of view of one attacker and one defender, when in reality it's more like posting something controversial in General Discussion and then having to defend your views against the entire playerbase. I wonder how fun it will be having to counter-entosis all the potshots, every day.

2. Eventually, the system will be: If you want to mine, PVE, or go roaming in enemy space, you must do it at non-prime hours, because prime time is for home defense (and besides, enemy isn't vulnerable in your prime anyway). This does give pilots from other time zones something to do.

3. Bye bye capitals.


Exactly. A bit like putting the cart before the horse eh?


For a lot of categories of leisure type players that's going to be quite a bit of an issue.

Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#640 - 2015-03-03 20:53:33 UTC
Agent Known wrote:
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
REALLY IMPORTANT:


Entosis Link should trigger alert IMMEDIATELY - not after a 10 Minute delay when the damage is already done!!!!


*(Please like this post so Dev's will clearly see this)


If you're actively using the system they're contesting then intel channels would tell you well before they got to the structures anyway.


Intel channels don't tell you someone's fit or cargo.


No where in all of EVE's mechanics does an attacker of a POS or POCO or ANY player owned structure get a free 10 minute head start in contesting anything in this game....


@#$@ THAT! That's **** game design right there --- I'm all for what's proposed EXCEPT that!

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf