These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1221 - 2015-03-04 11:36:10 UTC
interesting times, for every player threatening to leave, there will be two resubscribing, sitting on the bleachers, with hotdogs and popcorn (and beer) watching the show.....

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Jessy Andersteen
In Wreck we thrust
#1222 - 2015-03-04 11:38:49 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
interesting times, for every player threatening to leave, there will be two resubscribing, sitting on the bleachers, with hotdogs and popcorn (and beer) watching the show.....

TRUE.

and...

WTB ARCHON 600M. If u unscribe.... :D
Snoodaard Thrasy
Yulai Guard
#1223 - 2015-03-04 11:43:12 UTC
So overall I can live with most of the suggestions. Some minor tweaks here and there and this could work.

One big problem I think I have is that these changes make it too easy for hostile forces to reinforce systems and farm fights if they are not interested in actually taking sovereignty.

Especially if the intention is to have smaller entities gain sov, all the big boys (Goons, PL, etc etc.) need to do is send a large roaming gang in that are not easily counterable in <30 minutes by the locals, reinforce a load of systems and they are set 2 days later with tons of potential skirmishes over nodes in numerous systems. In the current system, an SBU takes 3 hours to online, which gives you a lot more time to defend your space from reinforcement and also requires a lot more commitment on the side of the reinforcer.

Seems to me that the defenders deserve more warning than a notification 25 minutes before their low index pipe systems go into reinforce. Hence, some sort of SBU system is still in order I think. Think of a module that anchores in 1 minute, onlines in 1 hour during which it can be destroyed and stays in an invulnerable mode for 24 hours after it onlines or so before it automatically despawns afterwards. Means defenders have an hour to prevent vulnerability to their system and they know they will have to be ready for attempts at reinforcement in a 24 hour window (during the vulnerable period only of course) allowing them to prepare.

Bottom line: you need to have a chance to actually prevent reinforcement of your system, much like the current SBU system. 20-30 minutes is too short for a serious fleet formation and impossible if the locals already have large roaming fleets out. (This new systems disencourages roaming!)
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1224 - 2015-03-04 11:44:38 UTC
You live there and defend it, it is home, nothing new about that concept. Why does it seem so hard to understand that?Roll

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#1225 - 2015-03-04 11:44:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
The fact that people cannot agree who this favours and how is a good sign.

Although the 4hr period is a bit restrictive, its probably one of the easiest things to tweak when the changes go live.

Snoodaard Thrasy wrote:


Bottom line: you need to have a chance to actually prevent reinforcement of your system, much like the current SBU system. 20-30 minutes is too short for a serious fleet formation and impossible if the locals already have large roaming fleets out. (This new systems disencourages roaming!)


You are aware that the takeover happens in two stages right?

First the initial reinforcing.
...48 hour period...
Capture event (where the real takeover mechanics are)


This is why its so easy to reinforce a structure at first. Because its not the main event.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1226 - 2015-03-04 11:49:15 UTC
Snoodaard Thrasy wrote:
So overall I can live with most of the suggestions. Some minor tweaks here and there and this could work.

One big problem I think I have is that these changes make it too easy for hostile forces to reinforce systems and farm fights if they are not interested in actually taking sovereignty.

Especially if the intention is to have smaller entities gain sov, all the big boys (Goons, PL, etc etc.) need to do is send a large roaming gang in that are not easily counterable in <30 minutes by the locals, reinforce a load of systems and they are set 2 days later with tons of potential skirmishes over nodes in numerous systems. In the current system, an SBU takes 3 hours to online, which gives you a lot more time to defend your space from reinforcement and also requires a lot more commitment on the side of the reinforcer.

Seems to me that the defenders deserve more warning than a notification 25 minutes before their low index pipe systems go into reinforce. Hence, some sort of SBU system is still in order I think. Think of a module that anchores in 1 minute, onlines in 1 hour during which it can be destroyed and stays in an invulnerable mode for 24 hours after it onlines or so before it automatically despawns afterwards. Means defenders have an hour to prevent vulnerability to their system and they know they will have to be ready for attempts at reinforcement in a 24 hour window (during the vulnerable period only of course) allowing them to prepare.

Bottom line: you need to have a chance to actually prevent reinforcement of your system, much like the current SBU system. 20-30 minutes is too short for a serious fleet formation and impossible if the locals already have large roaming fleets out. (This new systems disencourages roaming!)



and then they cannot keep that territory later.. so no point taking space that you cannot hold. With time ccp can adjust the time lenghts and make this system work quite well.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Worrff
Enterprise Holdings
#1227 - 2015-03-04 11:55:40 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:


If they succeed, they will celebrate their plan and CCP will look stupid.




I don’t think CCP need any help in that area

CCP Philosophy: If it works, break it. If it’s broken, leave it alone and break something else.

Snoodaard Thrasy
Yulai Guard
#1228 - 2015-03-04 11:56:51 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:


You are aware that the takeover happens in two stages right?

First the initial reinforcing.
...48 hour period...
Capture event (where the real takeover mechanics are)


This is why its so easy to reinforce a structure at first. Because its not the main event.


My point is that it's too easy to generate events. I think you should have to put some effort in to force a sov holding coalition to come and defend their space. As suggested now, sov holders will be constantly farmed for fights over nodes. And considering the nature of the command node event there will be plenty of opportunity to play it out in such a way that you get kills without having to face the full force of the defenders.

I don't want to come back from an alliance roam to a reinforced system each time. Sov should not be merely about providing permanent content for farmers.
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#1229 - 2015-03-04 11:57:08 UTC
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!

The Rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.


5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Suede
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1230 - 2015-03-04 12:00:31 UTC
Snoodaard Thrasy wrote:
So overall I can live with most of the suggestions. Some minor tweaks here and there and this could work.

One big problem I think I have is that these changes make it too easy for hostile forces to reinforce systems and farm fights if they are not interested in actually taking sovereignty.

Especially if the intention is to have smaller entities gain sov, all the big boys (Goons, PL, etc etc.) need to do is send a large roaming gang in that are not easily counterable in <30 minutes by the locals, reinforce a load of systems and they are set 2 days later with tons of potential skirmishes over nodes in numerous systems. In the current system, an SBU takes 3 hours to online, which gives you a lot more time to defend your space from reinforcement and also requires a lot more commitment on the side of the reinforcer.

Seems to me that the defenders deserve more warning than a notification 25 minutes before their low index pipe systems go into reinforce. Hence, some sort of SBU system is still in order I think. Think of a module that anchores in 1 minute, onlines in 1 hour during which it can be destroyed and stays in an invulnerable mode for 24 hours after it onlines or so before it automatically despawns afterwards. Means defenders have an hour to prevent vulnerability to their system and they know they will have to be ready for attempts at reinforcement in a 24 hour window (during the vulnerable period only of course) allowing them to prepare.

Bottom line: you need to have a chance to actually prevent reinforcement of your system, much like the current SBU system. 20-30 minutes is too short for a serious fleet formation and impossible if the locals already have large roaming fleets out. (This new systems disencourages roaming!)



Most of this is not yet set to stone and by the time june comes might all change again.

CCP devs only trying to make it fair for all the other players and not just one sided, end of the day CCP are trying to do
what is best and it only a game we are only are paying customers to CCP for a service

CCP devs have done a very good job over the years in the updates

Like to see what CCP have in plans over the (Player Own StarGates)


ORLICZ
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1231 - 2015-03-04 12:00:39 UTC
Edward Olmops wrote:


Suggestion:
FORCE alliances to choose one DIFFERENT time window for each constellation where they hold sov.
Implications:
-I am a small group, 1 timezone: I can hold sov in one constellation, people will have to fight in my prime time.
-I want to be bigger and hold multiple constellations: I need to be able to defend multiple 4-hour-windows in different
timezones
-if I want to attack CFC or N3 with a small group, I will always find a constellation where they are vulnerable in my timezone. The other way round does not work. They have to fight me where I am strongest.
-if 2 large entities battle each other, there will be all sorts of shenanigans. They will have to carefully choose which constellations get vulnerable in which timezone, but generally they will be vulnerable somewhere 24/7.
-basically, the more territory you have, the longer your vulnerability time gets
-maybe even narrow the vulnerability window down to 3 hours and create 8 non-overlapping fixed timeslots. Own up to one constellation: you must be ready to fight for 3 hours each day. 2 constellations: 6 hours... and so on. If you have 8 or more constellations, at least one constellation will always be vulnerable.
-in very large alliances, people from all timezones will have "their" constellations they can/have to defend
-if an entity wants to attack a small sov holder, place AND time are in favour of the defender
-if attacking a large entity, the attacker has the choice of EITHER choosing a strategically important constellation OR attack something less valuable in a maybe slightly better timezone (assuming the vulnerability windows would be visible on the starmap or the like and assuming the defender did his homework and assigned the most important constellations to his best timezones)
.


very nice idea

+ The Entosis Link only for certain ships- command ships ?
+ Longer timers for Entosis Link ? min 20min? and for capital 40 min
+ Add easier way to obtain lvl 5 industry index- but less mineras in single gravi
+Add 30% discount pos fuel consumption with sov (there should be reward for owning sov)
+Add 15% increase pos fuel consumption during Freeport Mode ( motivate to keep sov longer- fliping stations too often should cost more)




Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
#1232 - 2015-03-04 12:05:31 UTC
Page 62 and the last Dev comment for this topic was about that stupid gif on page 5!.

How about, hum, interacting with this disgrunted part of your player base CCP? Pirate
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1233 - 2015-03-04 12:11:10 UTC
I didn't see any mention of whether 'tosis modules will make the ship immune to ewar. Otherwise I can jam myself with an alt to exit cycle and catch reps.
Anthar Thebess
#1234 - 2015-03-04 12:12:25 UTC
Stuff will be epic.
This is how the nullsec should look like from the beginning , constant fight.
I wonder how long it will take for players to find a hole that will allow to overcome this.

Again big groups will prepare for this.
NA will be spited to smaller alliances just to have less systems vulnerable at the same time.

There must be a benefit for owning all structures in a system.
Without of this i make 3 alliances.
TCU holding alliance
Station holding alliance
Ihub Holding alliance

I will setup different timers on each alliance so someone cannot come and ref every thing.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1235 - 2015-03-04 12:14:41 UTC
Coolest Space wrote:
Is it only me that felt that groups like reavers also kind of broke SOV when they could take SOV or at least disturb SOV with only 10 people in one system. And now you say 1 guy with a Entosis Link can disturb sov for a whole alliance.

That only happened / happens when there's no one around to defend other than PVE farmers.
AlexKent
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#1236 - 2015-03-04 12:19:13 UTC
Entosis Link should only fit to Bcruiser/Bship and above to prevent abuse. It will also give people a reason to fly these over cruiser and frigate hulls.

P.S.

RIP capital warfare, not sure if a bad or good thing.
Gypsien Agittain
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1237 - 2015-03-04 12:23:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsien Agittain
Anthar Thebess wrote:
Stuff will be epic.
This is how the nullsec should look like from the beginning , constant fight.
I wonder how long it will take for players to find a hole that will allow to overcome this.


I will setup different timers on each alliance so someone cannot come and ref every thing.


I think that's what you think and what dev's think, and that's what's gonna doom nullsec. People in nullsec (most) likes fighting, people in nullsec don't wanna spend 4h/day chasing ceptors around the constellation.
With the upcoming change when a group of 20 bored space gypsies decide to attack 20 systems with 20 entosis links they're gonna harass the whole operations of hunreds of guys at the cost of nothing. And the harassed people who lived for years in null is gonna unsub or go back to lowsec/highsec.

One of the greatest issues with this change, as you can see by checking a bit posting in this thread, is that the people (most) whose happier with the changes, actually never lived in sov null nor tried to.

CCP's Achilles heel is that they change things on the game based on feedback from people who, actually, never tried those things. That's why the game is on it's way to doom and, unless devs erase their delusion of "we see things you don't", we'll be seeing ~20k players on tops by christmas.
Royaldo
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.
Clever Use of Neutral Toons
#1238 - 2015-03-04 12:25:05 UTC
"While the current sovereignty system worked fine for many years" Good joke man
Lurifax
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1239 - 2015-03-04 12:27:18 UTC
All I see with the current version of the sov changes, are ceptors rolling around griefing the **** out of ppl. It will be FW without the LP and worse mechanics.

Also all hail the return of the moon empires.


Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#1240 - 2015-03-04 12:27:50 UTC
Shodan Of Citadel wrote:
Freeport Mode... Gives the aggressor docking rights and turn every battle into high-sec station bullshit.

Goal 6... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I'm sure Goons will only bring 2-300 people instead of system crushing 2-3000.

Entosis Link -turned EVE into some twisted king of the hill system where sheer number of Links win.



CCP, give machariels a bonus to juggling and the middle lane.


Did you read it. The number of links is not important. 1000 links from an attacker and 1 link from a defender and the timer does not count down.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.