These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#1541 - 2015-03-04 16:53:04 UTC
Hidden buff to Minmatar, "the utility highslot race" and drone boats, I lyke it.

RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1542 - 2015-03-04 16:53:30 UTC
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#1543 - 2015-03-04 16:54:11 UTC
Sael Va'Tauri wrote:

between 250 to 500 Grid would actually be a pretty good place for the Link. You could drop that on T1 cruisers and T1 BCs if you forgo either some weapons or tank on them, and you wouldn't be able to cram them on anything smaller. A BS would be able to fit them without too much worry about compromise as long as you can spare the high slot.

If someone isn't defending their space, you could roll in with a couple of Mallers and cap out a system pretty quickly, with low risk. However, if someone is defending their space, you're not going to be able to run away terribly fast while also maintaining a low risk setup.

yeah, this is reasonable: an undefended area can get whacked by cheap, disposable ships but if you try that on inhabited space you'll get whacked and lose your ship

i think the link itself should be more expensive as it's still too cheap, but if you want to try to put sov at risk your ship should at least be at risk as well, and an interceptor is never, ever at risk unless you've had one too many drinks
Benny Ohu
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1544 - 2015-03-04 16:54:30 UTC
the blog says the new mod'll have low fitting reqs but it seems like a bit of an assumption it'll be fittable on ceptors? surely the t2 250km version'd be a battleship mod?
Dirk Morbho
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1545 - 2015-03-04 16:55:04 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Entosis for 10 minutes should undock everyone in station.


That's about the only way .EXE would undock on a regular basis.
Aryth
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1546 - 2015-03-04 16:55:38 UTC
Princess Cherista wrote:
Aryth wrote:
Summary: This is so weighted to attacking and not the defenders I do not believe it will promote the real growth and sandcastle building you want. Instead it means anyone organized, big, and with manpower is going to grief the living crap outta smaller players. Reavers were already pretty laffo, but this is going to stick it into overdrive. Not the fight promoting overdrive either but the AFK cloaking until you have an opportunity to grief kind. You are making the same mistake you made with non-fight promoting siphons


I dont think the horror has set in yet as to what this system means for small "elite" groups and ping-based alliances that relied on one BIG TIMER to bring supers or slowcats to. Cool


This comes up in every possible thread about Null. I will repeat the mantra once more. Any system that allows a small player to "grief" a large bloc will instead be used predominately to grief the smaller players BY the blocs. You can mitigate this but to suggest that blocs are quaking in their boots right now would be hilariously misguided. If you take the time to research you are going to see Dek is the one region in the entire game that is essentially going to ignore this system as every system is populated almost round the clock, and not 1 guy either but many.

Provi might also be an exception. The worst case scenario is some alliances decide to go back to ice-berging and just griefing everyone else. That is the most likely scenario unfortunately. You cannot make it this easy for 100-200 dudes from a bloc to torch entire regions. No one cares about a little guy trying to stick it to the man. They don't. What is going to drive people to ice-berg/quit is blocs sending reavers into their homespace and burning it all to the ground. If this promoted fights it might be one thing, it won't. Faction warfare has proven this point out over and over.

Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal.

Creator of Burn Jita

Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#1547 - 2015-03-04 16:55:57 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
And the interceptors pose no threat as long as you aren't an absentee landlord.

the interceptors force you to go to the effort of reacting to that interceptor, at which point it buzzes away and starts hitting a system ten jumps away (because it is a sub 2s warping nullified ship) causing a great deal of effort to be expended on the part of the defenders at no cost or risk to the pilot

if it's actually an absentee landlord your t1 battlecruiser is at no risk: but you're terrified of using any ship that could actually get caught and killed if you miscalculate.

if you aren't willing to risk a single ship when you're generating timers you should be in highsec cowering under CONCORD protection


You don't get it that while there is a griefing element to it, its Eve after all, and why am I not surprised you just focus on that, there is a real need to have the ability to wear people down when you want to take a system, so making it more expensive or using easier to catch ships is just another way to defend your current position. No!

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp
Suede
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1548 - 2015-03-04 16:58:13 UTC
Entosis should be a ship

Entosis should only be brought with a plex

and ccp need a pay rise
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#1549 - 2015-03-04 16:59:15 UTC
Delt0r Garsk wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Karash Amerius wrote:
I am thinking the Troll Laser needs to be restricted to a heavier ship such as a battle cruiser or above.

Love the tears here...great work CCP.

Definitely not. If you can't respond to a frigate fleet, you don't live locally enough.

Restricting it to larger hulls completely undermines the concept of using your space.

why should you get to contest sov without even putting a t1 battlecruiser at risk? the issue isn't being unable to respond to an interceptor fleet, it's that an interceptor fleet has no risk whatsoever to its pilots

if you're too much of a coward to even risk a single t1 battlecruiser you have no business in the big leagues


The entosis thing should be restrcited from nullified ships. Meaning you can put one on a t3 unless you use the nullifier sub. People can still put them on the rest of frig hulls but not ceptors.

Or putting it on costs you nullification?

Its already true that ACTIVATING it costs you nulification. Once on, you cannot warp at all, until you turn it off and the cycle ends.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Pok Nibin
Doomheim
#1550 - 2015-03-04 17:00:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Pok Nibin
My. Don't the egos come out in force when the intellectual content is absent? This discussion will be plagued by people whose mentality tries to overlay an old way of approaching EVE upon this more fully developed and comprehensive set of mechanics. That's not surprising, as the present condition lends itself well to goonery and thugs, pushing the more sophisticated and strategic play methods to the sideline. With the new method, the old hammer and tongs, pound things into oblivion and bully the rest method just won't do, and those people are squealing like the proverbial stuck pig.

Not surprisingly, what's behind this noise is the sure knowledge they do possess that their style of play just hit the cutting room floor and of course, being left to think of alternatives their little gray cells have met their match. I'm tempted to say the game of checkers just turned to chess...but saying checkers was what was being played gives that too much credit. Maybe the hippo stomp has been replaced with the ballet. Of course, the head thumping thug would want to "throw up". We expect that from them. They've been that way since kindergarten.

That being said, I'm very impressed with the inventiveness and elegance of this solution to SOV. The simplicity of the solution is what recommends it most highly. It's going to be interesting to learn who develops the expertise the quickest, and it's also going to be fun watching the so-called big dogs of today turning to the whining pups of tomorrow. What do they say? EVE is to feed on tears? Well, we can feed on theirs as well.

The purpose of EVE is to play EVE. We have the name "carebear" for one style of play. The other style is called "ganking" in the wider gaming world. Here, they like to call themselves the "true EVE players." We shall certainly
see about that, won't we?

So. Cry on! We love it.

The right to free speech doesn't automatically carry with it the right to be taken seriously.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1551 - 2015-03-04 17:00:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Lena Lazair
Lister Vindaloo wrote:
Exactly, let the TZ of the players decide when they can and cannot contest a timer, not an artificial mechanic that decides when a timer can even exist, let the laws of reality gate the tz's, not a CCP enforced mechanic. From what you have said there is still no purpose to declaring a prime time....


The new mechanic does not allow for this. It's not sufficient to come back and defend a timer; you want and need to be able to counter the initial offensive E-link with a defensive E-link as it happens to prevent a timer in the first place. Otherwise every station and structure in all of null will be in a state of constant reinforcement due to roaming troll gangs.

This is intentional. It's intentional to the design goals that people living in and active during their prime time should be able to trivially defend against troll fleets, while at the same time, with the same mechanic, far flung AFK sov holders can NOT likewise trivially defend against those troll fleets. The entire point is that flipping sov needs to be lol-worthy easy if NO ONE IS HOME.

Given that, it's unrealistic to expect an alliance to field defensive E-links 24/7. "Being home" CANNOT mean having a defensive E-link pilot on 24/7, unless we want to establish a baseline that the only alliances allowed to hold sov are ones large enough to cover all TZ's consistently on a daily basis. That's a pretty high barrier of entry to set. Hence the 4-hour primetime window.

You basically cannot keep the E-link concept intact and NOT have the primetime window.

EDIT: (That said, several of the other suggestions in the thread regarding primetime window tweaks are perfectly valid in this context. Setting the window by constellation instead of across an entire alliance to accommodate mutli-TZ alliances seems perfectly reasonable. 6 hour windows or scaling windows based on usage (e.g. 12 hours for totally empty/unused systems, scaling down to 4 for those with high usage/occupancy) instead of a fixed 4 hour window might also be workable. But the core concept cannot be tossed out entirely).
Sael Va'Tauri
Morgan Industry
Silent Infinity
#1552 - 2015-03-04 17:01:00 UTC
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
Sael Va'Tauri wrote:

between 250 to 500 Grid would actually be a pretty good place for the Link. You could drop that on T1 cruisers and T1 BCs if you forgo either some weapons or tank on them, and you wouldn't be able to cram them on anything smaller. A BS would be able to fit them without too much worry about compromise as long as you can spare the high slot.

If someone isn't defending their space, you could roll in with a couple of Mallers and cap out a system pretty quickly, with low risk. However, if someone is defending their space, you're not going to be able to run away terribly fast while also maintaining a low risk setup.

yeah, this is reasonable: an undefended area can get whacked by cheap, disposable ships but if you try that on inhabited space you'll get whacked and lose your ship

i think the link itself should be more expensive as it's still too cheap, but if you want to try to put sov at risk your ship should at least be at risk as well, and an interceptor is never, ever at risk unless you've had one too many drinks


CCP could also have the link reduce the maximum speed of the ship that is using the link, and potentially warp disrupt it. A 40% (T1) -70% (T2) penalty to speed with warp disruption would be enough to put you at risk for using the link, even in smaller ships. Again, if the space is undefended, who cares if you're pointed and webbed. If you're trying to grief someone, they are going to be able to engage you. BCs and BBs won't care too much about the speed penalty, but the small ships sure would.
KC Kamikaze
Blue-Fire
#1553 - 2015-03-04 17:02:40 UTC
The "Protection" of tomorrow you speak of is todays rental agreement.

The new system will be great. Small groups can claim and hold sov. We have multiboxing alt corps holding down wormholes .. now some of those and more can move to holding their own piece of null. The only people who don't win are big coalitions .. and you have more than the means and resources to survive.
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#1554 - 2015-03-04 17:04:46 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
KC Kamikaze wrote:
The "Protection" of tomorrow you speak of is todays rental agreement.

The new system will be great. Small groups can claim and hold sov. We have multiboxing alt corps holding down wormholes .. now some of those and more can move to holding their own piece of null. The only people who don't win are big coalitions .. and you have more than the means and resources to survive.


what makes you think i won't squash you for funsies

we spent three months squashing anyone who dared mine gallente ice in highsec, what makes you think that every *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal. who raises a flag isn't going to look like a nail to swing my massive hammer at
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#1555 - 2015-03-04 17:04:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Soldarius
So, I have another idea.

You know how CBCs and Command Ships can fit links but never do? Perhaps only CBCs should be able to fit an Entosis Link. Would give them a purpose in life since they have had no purpose since 2013. They can also fit MMJDs. So bombers? What bombers? I just jumped away. Jumping does not break locks unless you jump out of locking range. vOv

edit: added CS

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Suede
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1556 - 2015-03-04 17:05:20 UTC
CCP Phantom wrote:
While the current sovereignty system worked fine for many years, we see the need for a fundamental overhaul.

We are excited to present the plans for a new sov system coming early this summer including:
1) No more grinding through hitpoints
2) Meaningful combat events distributed over the whole constellation
3) Space activity results in defensive bonus
4) Designated daily "Prime time" for alliances when their structures become vulnerable

Read all about this new sov system, the mechanics and the fine details in CCP Fozzie's latest blog Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two!


Entosis should be a ship

CCP only trying to do what is best for the game as eve online is CCP game to do what they see fit.

and we are only a paying customs paying for a service

CCP need a Pay Rise doing a fine job and they are working hard.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1557 - 2015-03-04 17:06:56 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
EvilweaselFinance wrote:
KC Kamikaze wrote:
The "Protection" of tomorrow you speak of is todays rental agreement.

The new system will be great. Small groups can claim and hold sov. We have multiboxing alt corps holding down wormholes .. now some of those and more can move to holding their own piece of null. The only people who don't win are big coalitions .. and you have more than the means and resources to survive.


what makes you think i won't squash you for funsies

we spent three months squashing anyone who dared mine gallente ice in highsec, what makes you think that every *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal. who raises a flag isn't going to look like a nail to swing my massive hammer at

And then 2 days later they just retake it back because you can't effectively defend the whole of nullsec.

Meanwhile all your empty systems are flipped by troll fleets every day because you're too thinly spread.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1558 - 2015-03-04 17:07:13 UTC
Seriously, this whole interceptor DRAMAQUEEN crap has to stop.

1) Fittings are unknown.
2) If you actually live locally and are active in YOUR 4 hour primetime that YOU DECIDE you'll pop these 100m pinyatas for jollies.


The "trollceptor" indeed, because a simple cerberus wont eat them for funsies in less time than it takes to reload the weapon.

Or you know, the mighty, all impossible to acquire ..... maulus....yup....good thing they're not dirtass cheap. Really dodged a bullet there.
cpu939
Eternal Darkness.
The Initiative.
#1559 - 2015-03-04 17:07:22 UTC  |  Edited by: cpu939
you know i think for a dev blog thread this has the least replies from the devs 4 inc the op and that was in the 1st 5 pages might be good if ccp reply to some of the questions here, you know that thing called good discussion you know you posted it in your blog

we here at CCP believe that Sov is a big deal that deserves to be discussed thoroughly.

questions that has come up a lot (some are paraphrased)

Sov still sucks what are you going to do to make it more rewarding to hold?
How do you see this helping the little guy take sov?
Why should people hold sov under these new rules?
Are command nodes linked to the prime time i.e. 4 hours then its done?
Why a freeport mode?
Why 250km on the t2 module?
What are you plans for supers and titan now?
How do you see this new mechanics breaking the existing mega-coalitions?
Are you going to change SBU BPO to Ensotis link BPO?, if not what are you doing with the sbu blueprints?
What are you going to do about the cloaky campers now that defense is tied into pve roles?


I went over a good few pages and these came up a few times i didn't go over every page but i'm hoping ccp Fozzie or another dev will reply but i'm not holding my breath. more and more i see CCP attitude being we tell you and that is it they are going back to their old ways again.

p.s. vote Thoric Frosthammer for csm.
SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1560 - 2015-03-04 17:07:48 UTC
Calorn Marthor wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Next I would seek to create incentives for people to reside in nullsec. One of the biggest is the ability to be self sustaining via local resources. I would then give the orca , jump freighter , bowhead & rorqual the same fatigue as other ships. I would reduce the JF range of that to all other ships. Doing this would make nullsec so much healthier. A real sense of community when the welfare & supply of the alliance is shared by all. Instead of what we currently have " A few guys and some cynos whisking off to Jita to procure everything players need" When you do this you end up with more players in space doing things to supply the alliance and its members with all the goods and materials they need to function.

CCP has already said this is planned. The reason why industrial ships received the 90% bonus to Jump Fatigue is to buy them time until they are able to do a proper resource gathering balance to allow groups to live off null instead of relying on Jita so much. Once that happens the bonus to Jump Fatigue will be removed.

One step at a time my friend. Blink


For the record:
When these changes were announced I argued that Nullsec ressource distribution is in dire need of rebalancing.

However, we did the test. And it turns out I was wrong.

Went to remote nullsec with the goal of trying to set up full T2 production. T2 has the most complicated production chains, so that would be a good indicator to whether it is possible to be self sufficient or not.
And we said no matter what happens - we will NOT use jump freighters.
We are 2 industrialists with no extra indu alts.
We operate equivalent 4 Large Towers for reactions and from time to time some extra small ones to get certain ressources.
The operational area is roughly 1 constellation (8 systems).
R64s and R32s are traded from our friendly moon overlords who are also happy to buy the final products for their fleets.
There is a bit of alchemy involved and in the end we only need to import 1-2 sorts of moon goo from empire.
13 PI colonies produce POS fuel components.
Running the thing now since 5 months, production capacity is like 6 T2 cruisers per week (or 25 frigs or a mixture) which is enough to supply a small corporation or alliance.
Logistics are easier than expected. We are dependant on empire (no local Caldari Isotopes and several other materials available plus we import all the other ice stuff because no one likes mining), but we only need about 5 trips to empire monthly in a DST.
Those are easily manageable since we use wormhole connections. One basically needs ONE dedicated scanner/explorer and will get a decent connection every other day. And getting the scanner is not an issue since exploration easily yields 100-200M ISK/hour while searching for the empire connection.

Basically the only downside is that you need to reconfigure the reaction towers all the time.
And this is configuration HELL.
There is so many little things that make this task incredibly complicated (put nicely: "challenging") that you almost instantly go insane.
It needs tons of spreadsheets, container and bookmark systems etc and still you make mistakes all the time and cause inefficiencies.
And the ISK gain is less than what you get from running optimized reactions with a dedicated tower for each one.

I would have liked to present these results to CCP Greyscale, but sadly he's gone meanwhile... :-/

TL;DR:
JFs are already unnecessary, people just need to be a bit creative ;-)

Could you present the results to the community? Maybe there can be some easy (lol) changes to the POS to make it less of a configuration hell?