These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
lilol' me
Comply Or Die
Northern Coalition.
#1721 - 2015-03-04 20:01:25 UTC
Kah'Les wrote:
Lena Lazair wrote:
Kah'Les wrote:
Yeah, that's right instead you will be paying protection ISk or you will have your SOV flipped every 2nd day and no way to fight back because NC. is still gone be stronger than your 10 man corp.


Sure, NC's 500 man T3 fleet will be stronger than the 100 man alliance trying to claim sov in a backwater. But to DEFEND, all they have to do is keep one defensive T1 E-link alive on their structures long enough to make it annoying for you. Which should be easy for them if they are living there. Can you eventually blow them up and flip sov? Sure. Of course, only one at a time; the other 50 renters were left alone that day. And you're going to keep doing this everyday, while Brave starts mounting a REAL war against your home systems because your standing supercap fleet is no longer any kind of deterrent to them?

I'm not trying to claim that somehow this change enables a 10-man alliance to suddenly hold sov in a place NC. actually wants to own. It IS, however, going to make it far easier for anyone and everyone to start real sov conflict/pressure with absolutely no worries over supercap fleet sizes. If this change drives conflict like it is intended to, you will frankly be too busy fighting real opponents to actually care about going back to flip a renter system that you don't actually want to own anyway. Which will be fine because you won't need the renter income to fight those real wars anyway, since you no longer need to be in a supercap race with your opponents and can actually fight sov wars in affordable ships that are fun to fly instead.

Supercaps will be part of endgame fleet battles required to totally nuke an opponent out of their final/home system. They WON'T be part of daily sov harassment because no structure grind means no structure grind fleets means far fewer fights escalating into cap battles because far MORE sov flipping hotpoints will spring up simultaneously across a warfront.


NC. don't own SOV so your whole argument is invalied. All sov is rented out they have some systems just so we got beacons or a importent JB.



Dont don't try that BS. NC./N3 own NA. which rents out hundreds of systems. Therefore by proxy NC. have SOV. Stop playing childish games its pathetic.
Jason Redfort
Optimistic Wasteland Inc.
Fraternity.
#1722 - 2015-03-04 20:01:36 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Here is a suggestion: CCP needs to actually listen to the nullsec CSM representatives (they are largely disregarding input from CSM reps with Sov changes). Or hire someone that is well versed in nullsec to actually work at CCP.


Suggestion for the most CSM Members: Log in and play the game
Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#1723 - 2015-03-04 20:02:44 UTC
Proton Stars wrote:
I'm not a 100+ mil sp player, but if I was id be pissed.


I have 195 mil SP and I can fly everything but the four titans (which I could also fly if I would bother plugging in the skillbook).

I am not pissed.

The system, as it is presented seems to need a little additional polish, however, the principles under it are better than Dominion or POS Bash system in my opinion. After thinking it through I believe goons and majority of other current sov holders will be able to adapt to the new system without very serious shocks.

The key change will be that instead of 1 to 3 "star" FC's they will need to find or train a number of NCO's - the guys who are able to lead a squad or two. The current large alliances do have the sufficient member base to find these guys as all it takes is couple of brain-cells to rub together, the will and little experience to do "decent enough" job at leading ~10 .. 20 ships against 1 to 5 ships.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.

Lady Zarrina
New Eden Browncoats
#1724 - 2015-03-04 20:02:52 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:


We would burn null to the ground.


And you seem to assume no one will be attacking all the empty space you leave behind. The more you take the wider spread you get, the easier it is to just take what ever you eventually decide is not worth defending.

I get how strong CFC is, and in the short term how much chaos can be inflicted. But sooner or later you will start acting rationally.

EVE: All about Flying Frisky and Making Iskie

Black Canary Jnr
Higher Than Everest
#1725 - 2015-03-04 20:02:53 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Black Canary Jnr wrote:
Suggestion: Limit the use of entosis links to valid squad commander/ wing commander/ Fleet command positions.

Sorry to the solo people who want to go out and screw with sov, but sov shouldn't be pingable by a solo troll inty. Requiring people in fleet leadership positions limits the amount of Entosis links you can bring with you and incentivises multiple fleets.


You realise I can make a fleet with an alt and put myself as squad leader and my alt as wing commander right?


Yes i do, but then you are not a valid squad commander because you have no-one in your squad. If people want to lug alts around with them (squad member must be in same system to be valid/ receive boosts) to harass sov i don't mind, it's better than being able to do it with 1 account or even using your 2 accounts in different systems.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1726 - 2015-03-04 20:03:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
Geddon Kabaal wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
You understand completely wrong.

Only 1 link per side matters so one defensive link counters out all the offensive links - meaning the ceptor gang has to nullify the defensive link to continue the grind.

Marauder works well because it can't just be jammed out by ECM and because it can tank a huge number of interceptors meaning that they need to bring something bigger or just give up and move to the next empty system.

You can also add pulses that hit out to 120km with a little fiddling on that fit :)


If this is true I totally agree with you.

Introducing Entosis links wrote:
Crucially, the process of exerting control over a structure using an Entosis Link cannot be sped up by using more links or more players.

If two or more Entosis Links belonging to different “sides” are operational on the same structure at the same time, neither will have any effect and all capture will be paused. This remains true even if one side has more Links operational on the structure than the other side.


Welcome to the team :)

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

lilol' me
Comply Or Die
Northern Coalition.
#1727 - 2015-03-04 20:04:25 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
lilol' me wrote:
er mm have you checked the sov map lately? like northern associates?


Been down in NA. space a lot in the last few months. Querious, Immensea, Omist, etc...

So let's look at Querious.

Querious has 95 systems, with 30 stations. If you want to be able to defend all of Querious for 4 hours, you need to have at least 1 guy sitting on all of those structures w/a sov laser. You want to be pro-active here, because it only takes 2 minutes for a T2 module to cycle once, and then start rendering the structure vulnerable - if it's still vulnerable when Prime Time exits, it can still be attacked.

So that's 220 guys, right there.

What're they in? Carriers? Something big, so it can survive being attacked? Well, no remote assistance, so if it's going to work like that, you need to be able to defend yourself against what the other guy's going to bring to bare. So maybe something big.

And maybe your enemies use that knowledge to start killing your solo caps.

Ok, but obviously, your caps aren't required to remain solo - you can bring in 2 more carriers, and trade off on the defensive sov lasering. And now that you've jumped, the enemy flakes off into a different system.

How many capitals are you commiting to this? How many capital pilots are willing to just sit on their butts killing maybe a half-dozen cheap interceptors after 4 hours?

The capital blobs aren't going to be the hammer they've been.


The threat is bigger.. Its like AFK clockers. People probably don't need to worry about them, but they won't do anything 'just incase' they do
St'oto
Hell's Death Squad
#1728 - 2015-03-04 20:04:47 UTC  |  Edited by: St'oto
Eli Apol wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Here is a suggestion: CCP needs to actually listen to the nullsec CSM representatives (they are largely disregarding input from CSM reps with Sov changes). Or hire someone that is well versed in nullsec to actually work at CCP.

Because the opinion of someone with a vested interest in keeping the blue donut is exactly what's needed to shake up null right?


Couldn't have said it better myself. I do agree that some of the changes do need additional iteration. Like the Prime time thing. As it does screw ALOT OF people. But pretty much every other portion of this change is doing what it is intended to do, ENTIRELY shake up nullsec sov warfare. Which is an AMAZING thing. Sov null warfare has been boring as hell for 11 years now. (That's when I joined the game under my first, now sold character which is linked in my bio.) So I'm GLAD they are absolutely tipping sov warfare on it's head. It's PERFECT!

EDIT: But if they keep the prime time thing. When I eventually go back to nullsec, I will be picking a heavy US focused alliance. Considering I'm in the US. That way I won't have a headache every time something needs to be defended.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#1729 - 2015-03-04 20:05:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Skia Aumer
Lena Lazair wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:
Lena Lazair wrote:
Sure, you only needed 1 supercap per structure grind. Each of which was a gigantic hotdrop magnet for anyone with a standing supercap fleet. And that still means you NEED 1 SUPERCAP PER STRUCTURE GRIND.

Of course you will be hotdropped in an empty system 30 jump away from civilization (which is a typical renter system).
Cool story bro.


Have you seen the lengths people go to to get supercap kills? Are you shitting me? The only reason you'd NOT get hotdropped is if 1) they think it's a trap or 2) you managed perfect intel/opsec and no one knew it was going down.

facepalm.jpg
Explain me exactly how your super gets tackled and who will light a cyno IF THERE IS NO ONE IN LOCAL (except for your alts and corpmates)?
I dont have a super myself, but my corpmate and my ally mates did use supers ninja-style many times. They are still safe and sound.
Also, there is no such thing as "standing supercap fleet", FYI.
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1730 - 2015-03-04 20:06:28 UTC
Kah'Les wrote:
Lena Lazair wrote:
Kah'Les wrote:
NC. don't own SOV so your whole argument is invalied. All sov is rented out they have some systems just so we got beacons or a importent JB.


You think these semantic talking points will stop CFC from flipping all renter sov in NA., and you think NA. renters will keep paying fees to N3 when they are being daily harassed by CFC and Brave and any other ragtag cruiser fleet that comes their way, because suddenly NC.'s supers have no ability to prevent this just by existing?


So you saying no one gone be able to defend SOV from big enteties?


Yes, no one will be able to defend their sov from a big entity that wants to take and HOLD their sov.

BUT, the people living there will have the overwhelming advantages. Who cares if someone from the other half of the map roams through and flips your sov today? (if they even can... a 50 man inty fleet won't even START the timer on anything if you stick a T1 E-link on a brick tanked BS). Worst case, you can flip it back next week like nothing happened with your 50-man T1 fleet. It's not like that large foreign entity is actually going to show up and defend the timers on every system they troll flipped last week. And then they probably won't be back for a year, because null is pretty big. It was a minor inconvenience, not an invasion of your home. Sov flips will be a random inconvenience of daily life that are easily reset.
Princess Cherista
Doomheim
#1731 - 2015-03-04 20:07:30 UTC
Lady Zarrina wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:


We would burn null to the ground.


And you seem to assume no one will be attacking all the empty space you leave behind

Except goons dont leave empty space behind even in full blown total eve sov war, theres still hundreds of plebs back in deklein/branch/vale
Corey Lean
No Vacancies
No Vacancies.
#1732 - 2015-03-04 20:08:45 UTC
In the rear with the gear Smile
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1733 - 2015-03-04 20:09:06 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Explain me exactly how your super gets tackled and who will light a cyno IF THERE IS NO ONE IN LOCAL (except for your alts and corpmates)?
I dont have a super myself, but my corpmate and my ally mates did use supers ninja-style many times. They are still safe and sound.


I didn't say it couldn't be done, I said it was not safe. And it isn't. And it's definitely not something your average 1 year old 30-man or 50-man group can afford to try and do. And certainly not something a large alliance can allow their line members to try and do on a regular basis as part of their sov conflict with another large alliance.

Skia Aumer wrote:
Also, there is not such thing as "standing supercap fleet", FYI.


Just because you may not have a red batphone doesn't mean they don't exist.
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#1734 - 2015-03-04 20:09:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
Looking at the dev blog again, I'm sensing apologies for game design based on hardware load balancing? Spread everyone out over a constellation to reduce Tidi?
lilol' me
Comply Or Die
Northern Coalition.
#1735 - 2015-03-04 20:10:57 UTC
Lena Lazair wrote:
lilol' me wrote:
er mm have you checked the sov map lately? like northern associates?


Yeah. Did you read the dev blog? Explain how NA.'s 9000 members will defend 500 systems every day during prime time? All the titan bridges and caps in the world will not allow NA. to project all 9000 members to every constellation that requires defense during every 4 hour window every single day. Supercap fleets will lock down one or two constellations at best. OR supercaps will be spread around to raise the cost/barrier to flip a constellation, while at the same time isolating them and making them vulnerable to anyone willing to commit to that cost.

And if NA. CAN, then power to them. They should be rewarded for their military effort with control over a lot of systems.


OK look, NC/N3 rent ONE SYSTEM PER GROUP at least some may rent a few more systems. Pretty much nearly every system, is rented. Therefore there is someone renting EVERY SINGLE SYSTEM and paying ridiculous amounts of ISK to do so. Therefore they have those people already living in the system, therefore no one has to travel anywhere to defend anything. You forget NA. is a renter alliance with hundreds of different corps that are not really an alliance its just a holding alliance effectively.
If you are paying billions of ISK to rent, then you are going to defend it, if it only takes a small sub cab to do so. before renters wouldn't get involved because you needed a super cap fleet.

The only thing that will change it all, is if the renters grow some brains and balls, stop paying rent and flip the sov. Lets hope so eh!
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1736 - 2015-03-04 20:10:59 UTC
Princess Cherista wrote:
Lady Zarrina wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:


We would burn null to the ground.


And you seem to assume no one will be attacking all the empty space you leave behind

Except goons dont leave empty space behind even in full blown total eve sov war, theres still hundreds of plebs back in deklein/branch/vale


I don't think anyone has a problem with that. If the alliance has line members living in the system, of course they should be able to hold that system. That's kind of the entire point of this mechanic; it pretty much boils down to occupancy == sov, where occupancy is now anyone who can fly just about any reasonable subcap fit; instead of supercap == sov.
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1737 - 2015-03-04 20:11:16 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Looking at the dev blog again, I'm sensing apologies for game design based on hardware load balancing? Spread everyone out over a constellation to reduce Tidi?


Considering it was outright stated in the intro...
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1738 - 2015-03-04 20:12:05 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Looking at the dev blog again, I'm sensing apologies for game design based on hardware load balancing? Spread everyone out over a constellation to reduce Tidi?

Game design based around gameplay, who would have thought of such a dastardly plan? :)

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1739 - 2015-03-04 20:12:23 UTC
lilol' me wrote:


OK look, NC/N3 rent ONE SYSTEM PER GROUP at least some may rent a few more systems. Pretty much nearly every system, is rented. Therefore there is someone renting EVERY SINGLE SYSTEM and paying ridiculous amounts of ISK to do so. Therefore they have those people already living in the system, therefore no one has to travel anywhere to defend anything.


Why would ANY of these people keeping paying rent to N3 after this change? Rent is a supercap lease. After this change, exactly 0 of these groups need a supercap lease to hold sov. They won't be renters anymore, they'll be independent sov-holding alliances.
lilol' me
Comply Or Die
Northern Coalition.
#1740 - 2015-03-04 20:13:26 UTC
Lena Lazair wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:
Explain me exactly how your super gets tackled and who will light a cyno IF THERE IS NO ONE IN LOCAL (except for your alts and corpmates)?
I dont have a super myself, but my corpmate and my ally mates did use supers ninja-style many times. They are still safe and sound.


I didn't say it couldn't be done, I said it was not safe. And it isn't. And it's definitely not something your average 1 year old 30-man or 50-man group can afford to try and do. And certainly not something a large alliance can allow their line members to try and do on a regular basis as part of their sov conflict with another large alliance.

Skia Aumer wrote:
Also, there is not such thing as "standing supercap fleet", FYI.


Just because you may not have a red batphone doesn't mean they don't exist.


no such thing as a standing super cap fleet? Hmm perhaps not, but there is usually a standing super cap channel, and a standing jabber channel, which is effectively the same thing.