EVE Information Portal

I feel like the use of the phrase "the capture progress will be paused" hints towards a sliding scale system where any "work done" by an attacker could be easily "undone" by a defender after pushing off the attacker. AKA the progress would be "saved" until the structure was either captured or reset to normal. I expect this to have a gradual decay that might start after a number of hours but thats speculation on my part.

Since space will now be a chore to hang onto, and no real benefits of owning have been outlined, how about *Snip* Please refrain from using profanity. ISD Ezwal. and allow supers to dock. Maybe add a special station service for player owned stations only.

Your probably correct, which would be the way to go, but that said, its not actually stated, seems like an important part of the mechanics to have fleshed out when proposing a system.

I like these changes. As a member of a sov holding alliance I feel like this will make null a much more active place, with lots more fights and skirmishes. I welcome the idea of the station becoming "freeport" for a while to allow attacking parties to stage. Making it so wrecking ball fleets can't smash through entire regions in days and making the act of capturing a star system much more of a tug-of-war effort, spanning constellations, is a wonderful idea in my book. Can't wait to see all the chaos that erupts from these changes. :D

Why not make the vulnerability slot dependent on the size of the defending alliance? We want smaller parties to have a stake in null and doing their thing. To make the place more vibrant and bustling with activity. Smaller entities should have a smaller vulnerability slot than larger entities imo.



I just read this as nerf incursions and rightly so, CCP is always aiming for risk vs reward as such any high sec activity may not yield as much as a reward as the low or null sec variant of said activity.


In order to pull this off, null sec will need a serious injection of industry minded people. Current high sec industrialists will need a good incentive to move to null and the main way to do it is by upholding the holy rule "Risk vs Reward" since producing and mining in high sec is relatively risk free, the yields should be lower than mining in low/null sec. I'm naming mining now but the same should apply over the complete industrial palette.


You are correct that your approach would sever Jita ties, but the only thing it really would accomplish imo is that you'll see jita becoming a gathering place of marketeers stocking 'safe' border stations like Torrinos. Big alliances will just use neutral haulers to move the goods as close as they can to those places and make sure that their main staging point is in jump range from such stations (or max 2 jumps out).

I'm not in the loop whether the higher abundance of resources and great riches are really located in deeper/remote regions


I couldn't agree more. We all know that CCP employs statisticians to run some numberporn for Eve Fanfest each year. So surely they must be aware that with statistics and graphs you can prove any point of view on the data. In the presented case the statistics were used to prove your own point instead of reality.

As a FC who leads fleet fights regularly I can promise you the Battleship is well under represented in null sec PVP. Shield BS even more so. My alliance are one of the few making a BS doctrine work and it's a razor tight line we walk to be able to use them.

It only demoted battleships to second because nobody bothered to show that even frigate hulls outdamage battleship hulls in terms of usage. Stack frigs, bombers, ceptors, and AFs too. Battleship hulls are a joke in EVE's meta right now.

That's exploitable. I can have the station etc held by an alliance with 10 people or less in it, which obviously isn't desirable.


This can be dealt with by buffing something else, then increasing taxes for building stuff etc, for example.


This is definitely something which is required, and hopefully this'll be a part of phase 3 of the nullsec revamp. I'm not sure how they'll do it and not make hisec a content desert, but they'll still have to tackle it soon, and well.

However, I'm cautiously optimistic they'll actually do that, as long as they don't do too much of the following:

Agreed. I would be surprised if a lot of the "increased nullsec population" shown in the blogs wasn't also in part due to industrialists etc actually moving out to nullsec after phoebe made manufacturing not suck the fat one compared to hisec.

And the BS vs cruisers thing has been pointed out multiple times as a lie by statistics-massaging, where if you put up all the cruiser-sized hulls it would dwarf BS-sized hulls in usage (and I'm wondering how many of those hulls would be left if even hulls used while ratting were taken out of the equation).

CCP Fozzie's latest dev blogs are epic attempts to address the problem of stagnation in nullsec, what Crowfall calls "the Uncle Bob issue."

"[By year 10] Bob is now an unassailable tyrant and anyone who even tries to challenge him is crushed instantly. Nobody's having fun, not even Uncle Bob. A strategy game inherently has to have the chance to restart."

Is Null Sec at the stage of "unassailable tyrants?"

I think so. It's true that people coming into null sec are not always crushed instantly but that's because the big boys allow them to come in then farm them for pvp. Space is now 2 dominant factions: the CFC and N3/PL. There's also the Russians - traditionally left to do their own thing - and independent entities permitted to exist for farming. Gevlon went as far as to describe BRAVE as renters who pay rent in ship losses rather than isk.

Renters dominate nullsec. Even if we don't consider alternate arrangements which are renter-like - paying rent in ship losses or paplinks - a quick look at Dotlan shows the absolute dominance of renters in nullsec. The biggest sov holder is N3's renter alliance, next is xDeathx's renter alliance gifted to them by PL, then 2 real player alliances then 5th is PL's renter alliance and 6th is the Goons' renter alliance. Even analysed by population, renters make up 4 of the 7 biggest alliances in the game.

Renting is emergent gameplay a system where players manage a conflict driven high reward space by avoiding conflict, paying stronger people to do the conflict for them. This will become more or less impossible under the new Sov system. Sov structures will be continually tested by anyone who can reach them. The role of wormholes in accessing remote parts of null is not insignificant post-Phoebe either.

I'm in favour of seeing a sharp decline in renting. I think it tends to create boring space, where people mine or multibox in safety and seclusion rarely seeing a hostile. As an FC I consider most such space not really worth attacking because they'll just pos up and it's not like we can do anything to threaten the sov. Interceptor gangs targeting inattentive ratters are the only effective counter-measure and that's gnat bites in the overall scheme of things.

But what will happen to an Eve where most null sec residents have decided not to pvp, just to grind their next super in safe zones?

Well there will be some quite sharp economic effects.

We will see more ship destruction, a lot of destruction of sov structures, people spending time fighting instead of ratting and mining and people hiding in poses or stations when they could have been ratting or mining.

This means the economy will see less isk and less ore as well as a marginal reduction in ESS-related loyalty points. It probably won't effect nullsec exploration much as that's fairly safe. We may see less moon goo production and reaction as people feel less safe about erecting moon miner POSes. We may see less PI production as people are forced out of their space.

A big decline in the production of isk would lead to less money chasing the same goods, ie inflation. So all goods will be likely to become more expensive and particularly nullsec ores and their derivatives like Megacyte.

Loyalty point items, exploration loot and wormhole-exclusive materials will likely become cheaper, the latter being particularly true in view of the upcoming rebalance of T3 strategic cruisers (likely to be a nerf).

Will Eve be a better game? I think so. Conflicts abounding more reward for the people who manage nullsec successfully.

Will the Uncle Bob problem be solved? That seems less clear. If a big boy comes to a small sov holder and says "give us 20 billion or we'll wreck you" they will be likely to be able to extort money. So it will still be like renting except without the flagging. There is an out though - if someone becomes sufficiently bitter they can drop sov then spend all their time making their oppressors lives hell from NPC space.

What may solve the Uncle Bob problem and what shouldn't be forgotten is that there is still the prospect of a whole new type of space coming when the massive player-made stargates project is finished. So someone feeling oppressed by CFC and N3/PL would be able to move to what is pretty much a whole other game zone and forget them. That will be the real test of the sov revamp - whether the sov fixes keep players wanting to stay under the yoke of the blue doughnut when a viable alternative opens up.

So here's my prediction: the sov changes will make for exciting times in the short term but will ultimately fail to shake up nullsec and as soon as a new zone opens up on the other side of the player made gates all the farmable people will emigrate leaving a bitter bitter core of veterans sitting in their supers blaming CCP.

Is anyone remembering Trammel?

(originally posted on Stabbed Up http://stabbedup.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/nullsec-must-burn.html)

as a wormholer, 2 words :

'accidental sov'

* grabs a popcorn making machine *