These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#2821 - 2015-03-06 02:41:30 UTC
Great, you're not risk averse and you don't mind defending for 24hrs a day, it'll be easy for you with multi-TZ coverage.

I guess the next thing is deciding how short a period small alliances need to deal with this for, maybe just 1hr a day for the single system guys?

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2822 - 2015-03-06 02:46:03 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Great, you're not risk averse and you don't mind defending for 24hrs a day, it'll be easy for you with multi-TZ coverage.

I guess the next thing is deciding how short a period small alliances need to deal with this for, maybe just 1hr a day for the single system guys?


They deal with it for as long as everyone else.

Having different rules for different people is just ******** and a great way to kill any sort of revival of null. Face it, interceptors fitting this sov laser is a terrible idea and needs to be purged.
Worfeh Dallocort
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2823 - 2015-03-06 02:47:34 UTC
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:

I am doing my damndest to catch up with this thread. But you lot keep writing faster than I can read. When I am full caught up I will start actual comments and answers but like ISD Ezwal, I am reading it all.

Every damn post.

m

Or...

Instead of reading all the posts happening now and gauging public opinion first as to how to spin what you did in the past, let people know now what your advice to CCP already WAS and to what level the CSM was consulted on this PRIOR to the dev blog announcement?

I think that's where people are disappointed with the CSM right now. We expected you guys to have immediate releases ready to go once the dev blog hit to say "we talked to CCP about this and we said 'X"', BEFORE seeing which way the wind is blowing...

Now you are just going to spin based on what public reaction is now, rather than divulge what your thought leadership with CCP was.

A pox on all of you.




Best post
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#2824 - 2015-03-06 02:48:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
baltec1 wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Great, you're not risk averse and you don't mind defending for 24hrs a day, it'll be easy for you with multi-TZ coverage.

I guess the next thing is deciding how short a period small alliances need to deal with this for, maybe just 1hr a day for the single system guys?


They deal with it for as long as everyone else.

Having different rules for different people is just ******** and a great way to kill any sort of revival of null. Face it, interceptors fitting this sov laser is a terrible idea and needs to be purged.

No, we were hypothesising about large groups having to defend for l-o-n-g-e-r periods because they have such great TZ coverage that it'll be easy for them to deal with every single drunken interceptor pilot flying through their space 24hrs a day and challenging them to hold their sov.

You sounded so keen before, what's up?

The only bad idea is allowing null blocs to setup checkpoint charlies all around their barren systems and prevent anything other than the only ships that can penetrate this wall from being able to do anything.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2825 - 2015-03-06 02:52:35 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Eli Apol wrote:

No, we were hypothesising about large groups having to defend for l-o-n-g-e-r periods because they have such great TZ coverage that it'll be easy for them to deal with every single drunken interceptor pilot flying through their space 24hrs a day and challenging them to hold their sov.

You sounded so keen before, what's up?


This would **** over the likes of brave who don't have our level of organisation. This is before we get to the simple fact that nobody would like your idea. We are at least trying to make CCPs idea work while you are trying to break Null even more than it is now. You aren't hypothesising anything, you are just trying to destroy goons because at some point we have touched you in a bad way and you don't care how badly you would break the game to do it.
Alcorak
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#2826 - 2015-03-06 02:54:33 UTC
While I'm all for killing off structure grinding fleets, these capping modules shouldnt be able to fit to a frigate. Also, one person alone should have a very difficult time capping a sov structure in really any subcap. At least force a gang of 5 or so for the initial timer.

Another question....what the hell are sov bills for anyways lore-wise (obviously they're an isk sink). I mean really, are we paying concord for the pleasure of controlling a region that concord wants nothing to do with anyways? Do sov structures use 1 ISK bills as a power source and need to be kept in perpetual supply? Here's a better idea: they pay for a gang of mercenary NPCs that defend your space. NPCs that maybe dont deal a ton of dps, but can at least melt a small frig gang, while 3 cruisers+ 2 t1 logi should be OK. Spawn them when one of these capping modules is activated. Maybe even link the spawn strength to ihub indecies.

But seriously, dont allow one frig per system to **** an alliance in minutes. That is nonsense. "Sorry guys, we can't roam tonight. We should probably split up and jump in frigates in case all those faction war rifters log in and attack our sov again"
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#2827 - 2015-03-06 02:58:48 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
This would **** over the likes of brave who don't have our level or organisation. This is before we get to the simple fact that nobody would like your idea. We are at least trying to make CCPs idea work while you are trying to break Null even more than it is now.

Brave don't hold anywhere near as much Sov as you, they'd probably be down around 8hrs a day or something and I'm sure they'd love undocking to fight people contesting them - they already do that without needing supercaps on grid for them to n+1.

The reason YOU don't like the idea is because you realise that you'd have to consolidate down to a smaller area because in spite of your bravado you couldn't hold as much space as you currently do 24/7...which is the point of the idea in the first place.

And yes, there would have to be suitable rewards for your diligence.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#2828 - 2015-03-06 03:02:58 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Burl en Daire wrote:

Holding sov should be a job, not one that takes up all your time but it shouldn't be a cake walk either. I think making the prime time longer for larger groups would be a good change. Maybe a max of like 12 hours but the member count should be tied to prime time length.


It's already 4 hours, per structure every day.

All it takes is a few cov ops frigates cloaked in their systems. When I have a few minutes, I reinforce their TCUs and they have to spend 4 hours there the following day on the off chance I show up and ninja their stuff. Per structure.

I can do this with station services too, with basically no recourse for the defender. They can. not. stop. me. from reinforcing their stuff while they sleep, unless they just don't sleep.

And you would rather it was 12 hours, per structure, every day.


I'm not sure you understand. If you attempt to RF something, the entire alliance gets a mail. Then they have half an hour to get a single person to the structure you are attempting to RF to kill you in your cov ops. Then, tomorrow, they can go about their business as normal, nothing will have changed.

Nobody needs to babysit structures, if space is occupied all the defenders need to do is kill whoever is trying to RF their structure, no babysitting required.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
#2829 - 2015-03-06 03:08:51 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Burl en Daire wrote:

If a large group can field enough players to RF all of null each weekend and not reducing the home defense then maybe it should be longer.


That, or it means that they've succeeded in the objective of the rebalance, take only as much sov as you can reasonably defend.

The goal here isn't "make it unviable to have large groups", you realize.



I do realize that and if a large group can't defend it's borders it is either bad or too large to work as a cohesive group and should reevaluate it's sov holding.

Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2830 - 2015-03-06 03:09:10 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
This would **** over the likes of brave who don't have our level or organisation. This is before we get to the simple fact that nobody would like your idea. We are at least trying to make CCPs idea work while you are trying to break Null even more than it is now.

Brave don't hold anywhere near as much Sov as you, they'd probably be down around 8hrs a day or something and I'm sure they'd love undocking to fight people contesting them - they already do that without needing supercaps on grid for them to n+1.

The reason YOU don't like the idea is because you realise that you'd have to consolidate down to a smaller area because in spite of your bravado you couldn't hold as much space as you currently do 24/7...which is the point of the idea in the first place.

And yes, there would have to be suitable rewards for your diligence.


Us giving up space is a given. Brave infact have more pilots than we do so they need more space than we do so, they are ****** under your system. Infact, just about everyone in null would suffer more under your system than we would.
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
#2831 - 2015-03-06 03:11:31 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Burl en Daire wrote:


If a large group can field enough players to RF all of null each weekend and not reducing the home defense then maybe it should be longer.


That only means we can mess with even more people for longer. We are one of the few organisations that can effectively defend round the clock.



You would probably be one of the few organisations that has a 12 hour prime time.

Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2832 - 2015-03-06 03:12:19 UTC
Burl en Daire wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Burl en Daire wrote:


If a large group can field enough players to RF all of null each weekend and not reducing the home defense then maybe it should be longer.


That only means we can mess with even more people for longer. We are one of the few organisations that can effectively defend round the clock.



You would probably be one of the few organisations that has a 12 hour prime time.


Brave would have more than us.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#2833 - 2015-03-06 03:12:59 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
This would **** over the likes of brave who don't have our level or organisation. This is before we get to the simple fact that nobody would like your idea. We are at least trying to make CCPs idea work while you are trying to break Null even more than it is now.

Brave don't hold anywhere near as much Sov as you, they'd probably be down around 8hrs a day or something and I'm sure they'd love undocking to fight people contesting them - they already do that without needing supercaps on grid for them to n+1.

The reason YOU don't like the idea is because you realise that you'd have to consolidate down to a smaller area because in spite of your bravado you couldn't hold as much space as you currently do 24/7...which is the point of the idea in the first place.

And yes, there would have to be suitable rewards for your diligence.


Us giving up space is a given. Brave infact have more pilots than we do so they need more space than we do so, they are ****** under your system. Infact, just about everyone in null would suffer more under your system than we would.

Good, I'm not pointing a finger at Goons, it's the whole donut that needs to be chipped away at.

Also I'll point out that 24hrs was just to prove a point that it is completely unfeasible to hold the whole map and go around dicking about in trollceptors with no repercussions the whole time. Something like 1-16 hrs scaling by number of systems held could be reasonable though?

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#2834 - 2015-03-06 03:13:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Great, you're not risk averse and you don't mind defending for 24hrs a day, it'll be easy for you with multi-TZ coverage.

I guess the next thing is deciding how short a period small alliances need to deal with this for, maybe just 1hr a day for the single system guys?


They deal with it for as long as everyone else.

Having different rules for different people is just ******** and a great way to kill any sort of revival of null. Face it, interceptors fitting this sov laser is a terrible idea and needs to be purged.


I agree that different rules for different people is not a good system.

I do not agree with removing the sov laser from inties.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
#2835 - 2015-03-06 03:18:14 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Burl en Daire wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Burl en Daire wrote:


If a large group can field enough players to RF all of null each weekend and not reducing the home defense then maybe it should be longer.


That only means we can mess with even more people for longer. We are one of the few organisations that can effectively defend round the clock.



You would probably be one of the few organisations that has a 12 hour prime time.


Brave would have more than us.



Then they should **** or get off the pot. I don't care who it is. Defend it or lose it.

Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2836 - 2015-03-06 03:19:18 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:

Good, I'm not pointing a finger at Goons, it's the whole donut that needs to be chipped away at.

Also I'll point out that 24hrs was just to prove a point that it is completely unfeasible to hold the whole map and go around dicking about in trollceptors with no repercussions the whole time. Something like 1-16 hrs scaling by number of systems held could be reasonable though?


The blue doughnut doesn't exist.

Tell me, where does PL factor into your plan? What would you do if we move into NPC null? What is stopping RVB from doing exactly what we are warning you about with trollcepters?

Your idea not only makes the game worse for everyone in null but also ignores the problems we are pointing out.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2837 - 2015-03-06 03:21:24 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:


I do not agree with removing the sov laser from inties.


Then reduce the range on the t2 laser so we cant make the trollcepter.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#2838 - 2015-03-06 03:24:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
baltec1 wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:

Good, I'm not pointing a finger at Goons, it's the whole donut that needs to be chipped away at.

Also I'll point out that 24hrs was just to prove a point that it is completely unfeasible to hold the whole map and go around dicking about in trollceptors with no repercussions the whole time. Something like 1-16 hrs scaling by number of systems held could be reasonable though?


The blue doughnut doesn't exist.

Tell me, where does PL factor into your plan? What would you do if we move into NPC null? What is stopping RVB from doing exactly what we are warning you about with trollcepters?

Your idea not only makes the game worse for everyone in null but also ignores the problems we are pointing out.

Give better rewards for sov to balance it out.

If RvB want to come roam in intys and force fights it sounds great. It sounds a whole bunch better than them having to fight a static blockade on an entry system where they'll just get out blobbed because you don't require any depth to your defences unless you're vulnerable to ceptors penetrating them.

What's your idea to counter a walled defence around undefended systems?

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2839 - 2015-03-06 03:27:42 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Eli Apol wrote:

Give better rewards for sov to balance it out.

If RvB want to come roam in intys and force fights it sounds great. It sounds a whole bunch better than them having to fight a static blockade on an entry system where they'll just get out blobbed because you don't require any depth to your defences unless you're vulnerable to ceptors penetrating them.


The whole point of the trollcepter is to avoid fights.

Eli Apol wrote:

What's your idea to counter a walled defence around undefended systems?


Cov ops and small-mid gangs.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2840 - 2015-03-06 03:28:23 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:

What's your idea to counter a walled defence around undefended systems?


For my part, the same way I used to afk cloak people.

Wormholes.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.