EVE Information Portal

Various feedback that I am getting, is that we are over reacting apparently.

It's the guys choice that he maintains more than five accounts (which I guess means 6 or so) to do what he does.

I maintain three accounts and live in null. That he maintains more than five accounts is his choice, independent of what anyone else does. It's pointless to compare, because he could choose to do something different, or like you, move alts to different locations to earn ISK to maintain whatever he wants to do in null.

Complaining about his situation because of what others manage to do is pointless. Good luck to whatever anyone else does.

Had an idea to address the timezone/primetime 'issue'

Split the day into four segments, six hours each. An alliance chooses a prime time, which is 6 hours wide (rather than the four currently, but this could be dynamic too)

Keep everything the same in terms of the prime time window - An attacker can take the objective entirely during prime time as the dev blog says. However, in each of the other three six-hour windows, attacking entosis link ships can make progress on the objective, which would reduce the timer during the prime time window.

For example: The capture time required for the objective is 40 minutes. You can capture this 100% during the prime time window, as normal. During each of the other 6-hour windows, the attacker has the option of reducing that time by using the new module, up to 25% per every six hours.

Lets say the prime time is 0000-0600. The attacker attacks in an off time (say 1200) and brings the progress to 25%. Six hours later (1800), a new fleet from the attacker hits the objective again and brings it up another 25%. If the defender does not respond, the attacker will only need 20 minutes during prime time to win the objective.

The attacker still must attack during the prime time to make the capture, but since they had the resources and timezone coverage, they get the advantage of a reduced timer during the actual capture.

At any time during the day, the defender can 'repair' or undo the progress made during that window. If they ignore the attack at 1200 eve time, they lose the 25%. If they respond to the second attack at 1800, they can undo the second attack by reducing it from 50% to 25%.

This would encourage a constant stream of attacking and defending fleets. The attacker can erode the defenders advantage by running fleets across multiple timezones. The defender still has the option of ignoring off-TZ attacks and repelling the final attack during the actual prime time, though they lose some advantage if they don't defend during the rest of the day.

If the defender is entirely dominant in one timezone, they have the option of ignoring all other attacks and just focus on defending within their prime time window, albeit with some eroded advantage. If the defender has full timezone coverage, they can respond to as many attacking fleets as they feel they need to.

If the attacker is biased towards one timezone, but has corporations or members within other timezones, those members can contribute to the sovereignty game by making the final timer shorter at the final event, within reason. If prime time is set to US, for example, AUTZ people can't actually take the objective, but they can assist their allies by eroding the timer length throughout the day to make the final assault easier.

This seems like a pretty reasonable way to make nullsec more attractive to hold as an alliance.

-Nerf mining in nullsec. If removing local is already going to be a thing, this is pretty much already done. Maybe just remove the super asteroids that were put into place recently. This has the net effect of buffing mining in highsec enormously. Move rare ores from nullsec to highsec (ABC ores)
-Implement ring mining as the primary source of moon materials, and this would be almost exclusive to nullsec
-Make the moongoo ore refinable. This lets alliances tax the ring mining as an income source. Maybe keep r64's minable by towers on moons, r32's and below ans ring-sourced.
-Keep reaction towers the same, at least for now. They already get the sov-null fuel bonus.
-(Optional) give wormholes some sort of advantage for the actual production of T3 ships, beyond just having the resources readily available. Maybe a POS mode with a faster build time which is only anchorable in wormhole space?


Since the industry expansion, nullsec has been particularly attractive for T2 production. You can build on that by letting line members mine the moon material required to drive this production. The alliance-level income is replaced by production research and refining tax in upgraded amarr caldari and minmatar stations.

Highsec mining gets buffed, because there is reduced supply of minerals from nullsec and increase demand for compressed ore for export to nullsec (for t1 hulls) Highsec becomes even more attractive for T1 production because of the ease of logistics moving massive quantities or minerals. The increase in profits from asteroid mining in nullsec would encourage this.

Nullsec becomes the go-to for all T2 production in the game. Alliances occupy sov to get the stations and ring-mining access in order to build T2 ships, which the rest of the game requires. Nullsec already has a built-in advantage for T2 production due to the station bonuses and access to moons. The difference here would be that the gathering of moon materials would be up to the ring miners and not alliance level logistics people.

Wormholes stay the same - the primary source of materials for T3 ships.


All you would need is new mining anomalies in nullsec which have moon material belts - at least for the start. The mining barge f1 mechanic for ring mining could be replaced later with something more interesting, but for now it would give nullsec a tangible economic reason for occupancy.

Usage of the stations to refine and build ships would also contribute to the industry index and increase the security of your space. Of course, the activity of ring mining would also increase this.

tl;dr - Highsec = T1 production, Nullsec = T2 production, Wormholes = T3 production.

Did you just look at my alliance tag and post, or can you just not read? What I said as-is would be a buff to the attacking side if anything, to the extent that I think you'd have to increase the base timer to compensate for the additional vulnerability.

I did read what you said and it is not by any means a good proposal.

Your idea is just bad and totally biased to mega alliances and coalitions.

- - - - - - - - -
How many hours does the average person get to play eve?
How much time per day should that person have to commit to "home defense"?

What chance does any group smaller than Goons for example, have of taking and holding sov if their assets can be gradually depleted while you are unable to protect them?
What chance does a group smaller than Goons have if they need maximum numbers online for at least six hours per day to defend their assets.

Gee, lets see here, is your proposal biased towards - Goons, for example?

If you weren't a Goon my responses would have been exactly the same and had you read more than the last page of the thread you would have seen that. I have been very set in my views on these changes not helping small groups take sov since about page 6 of the thread.
Don't care what alliance you belong to, advocate to make it harder for small groups to take sov (as CCP have promised) and I will do my best to shoot down your post.

Take your "I'm a Goon and getting picked on" to the other corner - I hadn't noticed your alliance, until you brought it to my attention, I was responding to your post.

Contrary to popular opinion, Le Martini does not control every aspect of all of our lives.

After reading Fozzie's comments on EVE Down Under, *snip* Abuse of CCP employees will not be tolerated. ~ ISD Decoy

He wants supers to be some kind of force multiplier giving some type of bonuses, instead of damage ships.
He wants delayed local in nullsec.
He wants to remove fleet warp.
He wants to nerf combat probing.
And he thinks nullsec has enough incentives as it is.

I'm starting to get seriously pissed off at CCP. Way to completely flip the bird to some of your most loyal subscribers.

I agree that the numbers aren't quite there, but in general this idea is interesting.

I may be wrong, there are quite a few old players who have been in 0.0 and have a lot of ISK that did not like how the Sov game developed, I seem to be in that group of people and most of my contacts want to own a system or two to say that they have done it, though I have done that, but in the main to have small fun fleet fights.

Yes we can afford to throw ISK at this, many of us have enough ISK, but it in no way compares to the major alliances, however I personally could do this 50 times before I run out of ISK, there are others I know who have way more than me.

The key part is in selection, it has to be either a system close to hisec or something very deep which requires good WH scouting skills and it has to be far enough away from the major alliances capital fleets, this makes it tricky...

I did not bother looking at a station or an IHUB, the IHUB is just going to get blown up no matter what you do and stations are a trap in my opinion. What you are looking to do is be hardly worth attacking in strength, so POS and a TCU will be enough, well there is more but I am not going to talk about that part.

Perhaps in doing this more people will do it and over time create a patchwork of small alliances that form a coalition that can be effective, however lets not kid ourselves in any meaningful way, if the Goons decided to clear that group out there is nothing they could do to stop it, so its a case of wait for the Goons to leave and re-build.

I expect that it might take longer than two days at times, maybe a month or two tops, some times it will be brutally quick, the thing is you go in light and expect to lose it, maybe the player base is not up to it, I don't know, I for one will give it a go.

One of my hopes is that the Mercs in hisec see this as an opportunity to develop into a new area.

And yes it will be throwing ISK away, but if you can starting making it stick who knows, it could change the game a fair bit...