These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#3361 - 2015-03-07 16:31:01 UTC
I think some kind of sliding scale for vulnerability is definitely necessary...whether to base it purely on indices or make it more complex by also basing it on other factors:

number of sov systems
number of players in an alliance
truesec (higher truesec means it should be 'safer' and more easy to hold?)

Also potentially with fuzzy edges instead of hard limits - the defence multipliers get stronger the further you move away from the middle of primetime rather than having a hard cut off.

No idea on what the grand final equation might look like but something with those and other variables might be the key.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Eodp Ellecon
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#3362 - 2015-03-07 16:36:27 UTC
Yes, tie ALL industry activity to 'occupancy sov' - Invention, Research, Contracts, Manufacture - not just mining.

Reasons.

1. There are Station Taxes, System Index Costs, Contract Fees (isk sinks not set by players) and assets involved in stations used in systems that are not primary for ratting or mining.

2. Assets are moved in and out of these stations so 'no one undocks, no risk' is an invalid argument. The asset risk / reward ratio merits inclusion since a station flip and service denial is significant to the amount of resources held by industrial toons in the form of supplies & blueprints.

3. If you don't tie all industry activity to the Entosis resist factors then you are negating activity in a system design based on activity.


Small groups would be encouraged to upgrade and consolidate a system at a time strengthening defenses.

Large groups would still have to cover several systems due to their legacy of spreading out and prioritize system defenses or future station upgrades for consolidation.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#3363 - 2015-03-07 16:42:10 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Dracvlad wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
afkalt wrote:

Nope - but people need to adjust their expectations. It's ALREADY mostly worth it to live in, the problem is a wealth distribution one among grunts.


Yeah, how dare people expect that the most dangerous space in the game would pay off better than L4 missions in highsec.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.


People pick the best mission space like Osmon and blitzing it very efficiently and compare it to the worst ratting space in 0.0 which is low truesec and camped to hell and back.

We all agree that 0.0 at the grunt level needs improving, but level 4's in the main are not that good outside of certain select LP mission hubs. And I also disagree with safe, look at Inaya next to Osmon...


You're comparing optimal Highsec to least-optimal nullsec. That's apples to oranges. Compare a -1.0 system to Osmon L4s and you'd have a fair comparison.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#3364 - 2015-03-07 16:44:09 UTC
Since we appear to have gotten over the trollceptor we can finally have a proper discussion.


Industry index does need to be more than mining, because industry involves more. I wouldn't include moon mining or reactions though, because those can be done really easily, just a medium Caldari to react Atmo Gases and Evaporite Deposits and you immediately easy industry index, all you have to do is fuel it.

Research, manufacturing, and PI would be good though.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3365 - 2015-03-07 16:57:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
People pick the best mission space like Osmon
We all agree that 0.0 at the grunt level needs improving, but level 4's in the main are not that good outside of certain select LP mission hubs. And I also disagree with safe, look at Inaya next to Osmon...


You're comparing optimal Highsec to least-optimal nullsec. That's apples to oranges. Compare a -1.0 system to Osmon L4s and you'd have a fair comparison.

I hate to be that Pro Synergy salvage guy that knows what they're talking about (actually it's because one of my alts used to blitz missions for LP prior to the SoE ships being released, shhhh) - but - running in Osmon is actually less optimal than running SoE missions in Apanake or Lanngisi because there's higher LP rewards in lower sec systems for mission running...

But at the risk of being devoured by a blob of gankalysts should you exceed their shiny/ehp limits and without being able to use local as easily as you would in nullsec (you can still set reds from experience though) there is an obvious risk increase in taking your shiny (or not) mission boat into a 0.5 system and the relative blitzing speeds you can achieve... and you're further from Jita for when you want to sell your scanner probes.

Cool

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
flakeys
Doomheim
#3366 - 2015-03-07 17:16:21 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Kinis Deren wrote:

You do know there is a Phase III coming and probably will address the risk/reward issue with null sec after the null restructuring is in place?


What I know is that it exists, not what it's content is.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

afkalt wrote:
The bottom line is NULL as a WHOLE has massive income.


No, that's not the point. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.SRP is not individual income. Moons are not individual income.

Individual income should not be worse than highsec.

Period.


Or so you are being told yes ...

''But but it is Alliance income'' , why yes and guess what an Alliance is made out off , individuals.

''But but we only fund SRP with it , it does not go into my wallet'' , why yes this means nothing goes OUT of your wallet too when you loose a ship in battle.

Sometimes i truly wish we could go back to ''the old days'' even if it was just for one week so that you could see the difference.


You could ask CCP to take away the moons and make them null-sec AND empire mineable belts.And in return they should favour you with a higher income then lvl 4's.But that wouldn't matter , you'd start complaining about incursions.And then forget to mention that you have BETTER incursions in your home system but no one does them.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
Seven Koskanaiken
Shadow Legions.
Insidious.
#3367 - 2015-03-07 17:27:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Seven Koskanaiken
Zappity wrote:
I have been looking at the timezones. Now, I know that EVE is not only played in these countries but the main timezones of relevance would probably be:

UTC for Europe
Moscow +3
Australia +11
PST -8 (USA west)
EST -5 (USA east)

For prime times, the 24 hour distribution looks something like: 

 UTC   RUS           AU          PST   EST    
  | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
  0    +3            +11         -8    -5


I honestly don’t think 4 hours is adequate. You can see a couple of large zones around AU for a start, and even Europe and USA are too far apart.

What about a system whereby the prime time concept is still active but this is a peak time, rather than cut-off? Perhaps according to Greygal’s suggestion of the extent of this window being defined by sov indexes.

Or what about having it fade in and out, with a sliding percentage of structures being available for an hour or two either side of prime time?

I am concerned about the AU timezone. I think AU players will become second class citizens in null. And yet I agree that sov shouldn't require a 24h defence. Perhaps a graduated approach could work.


It's kind of a stealth admission that the single shard has failed. Narrowing or widening the window is just moving deckchairs.If you have a system where realistically the only wars that can be fought are between 2 identical TZ alliances you may as well give them their own server to do it on. The single shard is a sacred cow but if they really wanted to take risks and make real fixes then, well.

As it stands minority timezones will be relegated to the worst space to play with each other and be ignored, while the privileged time zones can play the "real game" over fountain, delve etc.. The alternative like you said you just have a caste system where certain TZ are always stuck doing the one job of defending (being blueballed), or repairing services (yawn), or whatever. This already happens etc etc etc but now they are concreting it into design so are one step closer to admitting the failure.

This will become obvious when these changes are deployed onto the Chinese sever and everyone wonders what the point of this TZ window is.
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3368 - 2015-03-07 17:28:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Aralyn Cormallen
M1k3y Koontz wrote:

You're comparing optimal Highsec to least-optimal nullsec. That's apples to oranges. Compare a -1.0 system to Osmon L4s and you'd have a fair comparison.

You are aware that that every guy in Nullsec can't do an anomoly in a -1.0 right? Whats the upper limit on people who can recieve missions in Osmon? (answer = there isn't one)

Also, I assume you realise that the more people doing anomolies the more dangerous it becomes for each one (since the rats-per-hour glow on the map is intensifying and drawing carrion-birds, and as numbers reach a certain point, clever (Z-named) enemies can creep in system without being noticed)? Whereas each extra ratter in Osmon creates greater protection as there is more targets for the finite number of gankers?
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#3369 - 2015-03-07 17:38:25 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:

You're comparing optimal Highsec to least-optimal nullsec. That's apples to oranges. Compare a -1.0 system to Osmon L4s and you'd have a fair comparison.

You are aware that that every guy in Nullsec can't do an anomoly in a -1.0 right? Whats the upper limit on people who can recieve missions in Osmon? (answer = there isn't one)

Also, I assume you realise that the more people doing anomolies the more dangerous it becomes for each one (since the rats-per-hour glow on the map is intensifying and drawing carrion-birds, and as numbers reach a certain point, clever (Z-named) enemies can creep in system without being noticed)? Whereas each extra ratter in Osmon creates greater protection as there is more targets for the finite number of gankers?


I have had this one thrown back at me before, when I see only people from the same alliance doing missions in Osmon I will let you know...

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
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3370 - 2015-03-07 17:44:37 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
You are aware that that every guy in Nullsec can't do an anomoly in a -1.0 right? Whats the upper limit on people who can recieve missions in Osmon? (answer = there isn't one)

Also, I assume you realise that the more people doing anomolies the more dangerous it becomes for each one (since the rats-per-hour glow on the map is intensifying and drawing carrion-birds, and as numbers reach a certain point, clever (Z-named) enemies can creep in system without being noticed)? Whereas each extra ratter in Osmon creates greater protection as there is more targets for the finite number of gankers?

Completely ignoring that LP gets watered down as more and more people saturate the market with SoE items.

So no, the LP suffers from free market economics and devalues for every extra person running them. Whether or not that has reached it's peak yet is unclear due to market manipulations and the launch of the SoE ships just over a year ago massively inflating the LP/isk return.

Nestor prices: Been in free fall for the last year
Probes: Pretty much static
Astero/Stratios: All over the place but most definitely down year on year.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#3371 - 2015-03-07 18:04:22 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:

You're comparing optimal Highsec to least-optimal nullsec. That's apples to oranges. Compare a -1.0 system to Osmon L4s and you'd have a fair comparison.

You are aware that that every guy in Nullsec can't do an anomoly in a -1.0 right? Whats the upper limit on people who can recieve missions in Osmon? (answer = there isn't one)

Also, I assume you realise that the more people doing anomolies the more dangerous it becomes for each one (since the rats-per-hour glow on the map is intensifying and drawing carrion-birds, and as numbers reach a certain point, clever (Z-named) enemies can creep in system without being noticed)? Whereas each extra ratter in Osmon creates greater protection as there is more targets for the finite number of gankers?


And yet not everyone runs missions in Osmon or the other two SOE hubs. If we're comparing incomes, use a fair comparison. Max to max, min to min, or median to median (averages can be misleading so I prefer medians for income).

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3372 - 2015-03-07 18:51:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
Yep, a lot of mission runners also do 'stupid' things like run for the bounties rather than LP blitzing - and these guys might also be trading in the LP they do earn in stores that directly compete with FW items. I even know of some mission runners that have the same 'free ore' mindset of bad industry players and use their LP to buy faction ammo because it's 'free' and helps them shave a few seconds off each site (did the math once and they were losing 5m/site doing this)

If EVERYONE in highsec that runs missions minmaxed for the best isk:LP ratio you'd see a very different market and the peak incomes would be a lot lower as a result of the increased competition.

edit: also for your 'herd protection mentality': Osmon prior to the SoE ships being released (which was when I ran SoE missions myself). Profit seeking gankers killing anything that was approaching optimal incomes as well as non-profit gankers killing LP competition for their blue mission runners to get better conversion rates.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#3373 - 2015-03-07 19:05:24 UTC
afkalt wrote:



Calling me a troll because it dfoesn't suit your viewpoint doesnt make my points invalid.

The bottom line is NULL as a WHOLE has massive income. If that income is not making it down to line members - that is an issue to take up with your leadership.


The problem here is that you are completely off base. You've convinced yourself that alliance boss types are keeping all the isk and that somehow they are the problem.

They aren't.

The problem is that I can go an make WITH A BOMBER elsewhere more than I can make with TWO faction battleships.

The problem is that I can go and blitz burners WITH A FACTION FRIGATE as long as my faction standing is about 8 and make more than I can with TWO faction battleships.

The problem is that I can make more (several times more) with 1 TOON IN A TECH2 FIT CARRIER blitzing lvl 5 missions than I can with 2 deadspace fit faction battleships. Hell, the carrier to carrier comparison between null and low sec lvl 5s is equally unbalanced.

The fact that legions of scrubs of using afktars to make 60 mil per hour on alts all the time (making null sec look like this huge great income generator) has nothing to do with the above testable and observable facts. The fact that you can crunch rocks oor do pi is also immaterial , most 'grunts' do 'combat pve' for income and that's what we are talking about.



The discussion about the obvious imbalances always gets obscured by the nonsense naysays who haven't even taken the time to test and observe for themselves.
Because of this, the same people who spend all this time posting about how the imbalance (that they haven't even tried to test) doesn't exist thus don't understand how the imbalance WARPS everything CCP trys to do with null sec (and this is the prefect example, had it not be fore the existence of extreme alternate income generating activities outside of null like high sec incursions and mission farming and mission blitzing, what CCP believed would have happened might actually have happened and instead of being a rental desert, null might have been a more fun place).

And because so many of you are too blind to see the obvious (as CCP is, as evidenced by Fozzie thinking null is 'valuable' because someone wants to rent it), this new system will fail just as hard as dominion did as people remove PVE alts to other places rather than try to rat in congested systems (inviting pve ship losses thus exacerbating the already existing imbalances).
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#3374 - 2015-03-07 19:06:44 UTC
More prime time questions:

Would the prime time timers on sov targets be blanket times covering all alliance/corp sov assets or would there be individually assigned prime time timers for sov targets so different time zones can take part in defense?

Any adjustment of prime times by calendar for weekday/weekend player behaviors?

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3375 - 2015-03-07 19:12:42 UTC
There's no need to be fancy and say Osmon for level 4s. The common / popular CN variety yield a bil a week for just a few hours a day. Point being that's one account in high sec supporting five accounts via PLEX.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Lupe Meza
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3376 - 2015-03-07 19:14:39 UTC
If they're really dedicated to shaking up the ant farm, which they seem to be, I don't know why so many are assuming resource allocation is going to remain as is.

Even if an alliance owns the most valuable space now, doesn't mean that in Phase 3 or 4, other areas are made more valuable or Null itself normalized in terms of value to encourage flow of players and undoing years of stagnation.

I wouldn't be surprised if some resources got shifted around to make it just about impossible to monopolize them, so that every organization has to worry about their logistics and industry on some level. The "who cares about x space" and "small organizations will only get 'useless' space" mindset assumes that resources are not going to be looked at as well; and I doubt if a change is made it is going to be to buff the space of the mega rich.

Don't shoot the messenger, just saying that is a strange expectation given the paradigm ship I'm seeing; which seems to be promoting more inclusive, smaller, and distributed entities conflict and dynamics. The large entities can of course remain large, but there will pressure from capable members just going off and raising their own flag elsewhere rather than wait for scraps at the table. Take the whole trollceptor idea. Now it is conceivable that players can be ordered to go out and harass others on their own game time with no intent of actually holding the space.

But I agree with the folks that believe that will get old fast. I'll go further and say once all these guys see how empowering the new system is in claiming space, the next step to just breaking off entirely and just living in the space, keeping what they earn rather than being a drone. There will always be followers, but I see the potential here for a lot of grunts capable of doing better for themselves go out and do just that.

It'll be interesting to see if the powers that be can not only keep the galaxy under their thumb, but their even more valuable now line members and "pet" organizations. Keeping 1000's "in line" just got harder especially when the subcap guys got a whole lot more valuable.

Again there are some serious forces making it seem like the bigger you are the more likely you are to eventually break apart due to the stress of your own mass.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3377 - 2015-03-07 19:16:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
I don't really know the full extent of null income but I know my CFC friend laughed at me for having to actively point and click and be on TS running incursions in highsec whilst he watched a movie with his afktars spinning around on a separate monitor.

And he showed me their SRP program spreadsheet once, oh my days, free PvP whenever you want it (edit: remind me how this isn't a player income when I have to buy and replace my own ships from my personal income in highsec!)

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#3378 - 2015-03-07 19:25:39 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Jenn aSide wrote:
afkalt wrote:



*Snip* Removed a reply to an edited out part of the quoted post. ISD Ezwal.

The bottom line is NULL as a WHOLE has massive income. If that income is not making it down to line members - that is an issue to take up with your leadership.


The problem here is that you are completely off base. You've convinced yourself that alliance boss types are keeping all the isk and that somehow they are the problem.

They aren't.


I know.

In my alliance, I know where that isk goes: into an extremely generous SRP and ship subsidy program.

However I'm not so foolish as to discount that as "income". I want a fitted BLOPS BS - half paid for. A fitted dread? Half paid for. I lose them in a fight? Paid for.

THAT'S where that income is going - I don't think it is being trousered by a few. SRP and subsidies are SO generous I could get by on half assed PI alone and never want for anything.

To ignore the alliance propping us (line members) up like that, to not understand how that is an equivalent to income quite simply beggars belief.


I've never contested the bounty farming doesnt equal other areas of space - but who said it's meant to? Sure, risk/reward and all that....but that makes sense ONLY if we absolutely ignore the SRP and subsidy programs out there. You cannot look at a single income stream and ignore the others.


I dont actually want them to change it, either. If they racked up bounties to replace moon goo then I'd need spend more time doing soul destroying ratting instead of the fun stuff I enjoy today. The situation today is that the actions of many pay for us all. In return for this we defend these assets tenaciously in between casual pewpew - that's where the fun is at. Not sitting shooting red crosses looking at Osmon with envious eyes.

And you know what, no-one bitches about being poor either. Funny that.
Freelancer117
So you want to be a Hero
#3379 - 2015-03-07 19:33:04 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Kumar WhiteCastle wrote:
Why is the one and only CSM discussing nullsec and sovereignty in the forums a hisec CSM known to dislike nullsec and all those that live there? Azariah is almost certainly trolling the thread.


I don't hate null, I just am not cut out to take orders from other people for fun. I also do poorly at yoga.

I am the one, here, engaging you. I am taking notes and asking the devs questions based on what you ask, here. Did that last night on Eve Down Under. But if you would rather I stepped aside to make room for other CSM to talk to you.

/me steps to one side

oh, look









yeah



I represent players of the game. ALL the game and anybody who thinks the upcoming sov changes will only have an effect on null is a class A fool. So I am here, not trolling, not joking around, doing what I said I would do for one more week.

If I wasn't the person you voted for it does not matter. I am still here.

and as I said before . . . I am already talking with NPSI folks about roams once this goes live. I don't like to LIVE in null. Doesn't mean I don't drop in for a visit now and again.

m


CSM members are ordinary capsuleers who sometimes make themselves extraordinary, thanks Mike for focusing on what needs to be done o7 Cool

Eve online is :

A) mining simulator B) glorified chatroom C) spreadsheets online

D) CCP Games Pay to Win at skill leveling, with instant gratification

http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg

http://bit.ly/1egr4mF
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3380 - 2015-03-07 19:49:56 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Since we appear to have gotten over the trollceptor we can finally have a proper discussion.


Industry index does need to be more than mining, because industry involves more. I wouldn't include moon mining or reactions though, because those can be done really easily, just a medium Caldari to react Atmo Gases and Evaporite Deposits and you immediately easy industry index, all you have to do is fuel it.

Research, manufacturing, and PI would be good though.


Yeah, no.

It's obvious that you never lived in null, because if you did, you'd know that due to each racial/specialty outpost carries an exclusive, specific role related bonus, you have systems with an outpost you exclusively use for either research, manufacturing, or reprocessing. You don't do it all in one system. Therefore these activities alone aren't good candidates for solely basing out industry index on.

And you can't change outpost types, or destroy them once you deploy them.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong, and that's probably related with your lack of prior experience of life in null.