EVE Information Portal

So who gets to drop the new structures?
How do individual attacker"s" claim the prize, it is only 1 system where the "prize" can only be claimed by one individual attacker.
Seems a little unbalanced if a coalition can go take sov, then just hand the system to whoever they choose.



Persistent progress turns B) into an open invitation for blue armies to protect sov for absentee allies by simply removing accumulated progress. Removing persistent progress, removes blue defense for absentee allies.


Entosis capture progress should only be kept by actively making progress, excluding disconnects due to daily DT or other server related outages. If a group has made progress that is interrupted by DT, that progress is maintained for a set period of time, eg; for 1 hour after the servers are back online. If your attempting to capture a system and there is a period of more than 1 cycle with no active link, any progress made toward the capture is lost.
Partially capturing a structure then leaving it for extended periods of time should not be rewarded.

I am a fan of both of you, so don't take this as an attack to your work, that I have used frecuently. Thank you.

I agree with you that all information available in-game should be available via API. I realized that I forgot about in-game intel in that post and correct that some posts later.

Also, I think that most of the alliances that really appear in your maps will choose to have their sovereignty info public, so your influence map will continue to be completely relevant, with the interesting addition that some areas of space will appear blank (here be dragons and so )

What I am really afraid if this information is available is that in a few days we will have an app where you will be able to choose an area (like a the region where you live and the ones in contact with it) and receive an alert as soon as someone stablish a base there, so large alliances will have a very effective way of projecting force what will lead to great expanses of systems empty.

The need to visit the system to gather intelligence should be the same as occupancy to the indexes. If you want to control it, you have to explore it.

I have some questions on the entosis links:


1) Is there a difference between having 1 entosis link on a structure and 5 entosis links on a structure?
2) Say I have 5 links on a structure and 4 get jammed out, the timer still continues correct? Regardless of which of those 5 had initiated their modules first?
3) If I have 5 entosis links on a structure, it only takes 1 hostile with their link to stop the capture? Or do they need 5 to stop capture?
4) Just to reiterate, the penalty on capital entosis links doesn't make them capture any slower, it just makes the duration of the module longer correct?



Other concerns to look into:

*The lack of investment / skin-in-the-game for attackers. Attackers should have to ante-up.

In the old systems you had to invest in either POS' or SBUs, which could mean an investment of 200m -1 billion or more in order to attack the system. This turned into a negative because we had to grind through those items, and I do not advocate a return to that. But attackers should still be required to make an investment rather than just hopping in a T1 frig and starting capture. That's a bit unfair to the defenders and will lead to a ton of trolling / blue balling by attackers who have no interest in actually capturing the structure.

My suggestion would be to create a licensing system. I purchase a license for my alliance for a particular system (cost would be based on system sec level + modified by activity level) . License is granted instantly so I can immediately start capturing. Lasts a week or so.


* Fallow space will still take too much time to capture

If a system is fallow, players should be able to move right in and own the system in a short amount of time. Even with freeport, overlords will let a small corp move in and grind through the first timer of an unused system before showing up at the last battle of 2nd reinforcement to face-stomp them and reclaim the structure.

Thus I would like to suggest having the reinforcement timers be also modified by activity. Timers start at maybe a few hours, and get increased significantly based on activity level of the system. This allows small corps the ability to claim empty systems much faster but active systems are still very much protected.

No
Yes*
No Yes all links have to belong to one side
Yes


*Assuming they all had already completed their warmup cycle. If you had 4 links running, they get jammed and then the 5th ship turned it's link on, you are stalled for a cycle before progress continues. The ships that got jammed have to wait out their current cycle and do a new warmup cycle before they start contributing progress again. Don't get jammed.

No, one entosis stops the progress. It doesn't start again until all the entosis belong only to one side.

Capture work on neutral structures (apparently a freshly deployed TCU/Ihub), and command nodes for the second station timer. Reinforcement works on owned structures. They have different mechanics.

Here's examples involving three alliances: Sovowner, Ally, and Badguys. Sovowner owns the structures, Ally is an ally of Sovowner, and Badguys are the aggressor.

Badguys comes in and partly reinforces an operational TCU. If Ally uses entosis on the TCU, it gains *more* reinforcement progress. Only Sovowner can remove progress back to zero. I think if the TCU is fully reinforced the command nodes that spawn will have the same mechanic.

Sovowner gets their station reinforced and loses the capture event to save it. The station is now freeported and effectively neutral. The second capture event starts and Ally comes in to save their friends. Ally can use their entosis to remove Badguy's progress on capture nodes, but if they keep running them will build progress towards their own control. If Sovowner wants to regain control of the station they need to fully capture nodes themselves.

Similarly, if Sovowner needs to place a new Ihub and Badguys show up to try to steal it, Ally can reset their progress.

In summary, allied alliances can only directly contribute to saving your stuff when things have already gone wrong for you.

It's very badly written compared to Fozzie, who has been pretty clear about the whole owner vs everyone else thing. Possibly "same alliance" in Masterplan's post is referring to the owning alliance? Anyways it's spelled out in the devblogs that for reinforcement enemies and allies are on the same team, only the owning alliance can reset progress.


Thanks, fixed.

The important thing about newly deployed structures is that this is a third stage of combat.

Initial Reinforcement Fight

Capture Event

Structure Deployment fight.

Even if someone loses the multi system, multi node capture event, they could still basically win by contesting the single grid the new structure is being deployed on.

Thank you :)

1) As far as capture speed? No.
2) I think so. I'd like to see an official answer to this one. :)
3) Just one to pause the capture.
4) Correct.

I'm really sorry but what makes you so sure what Fozzie says in the blog is correct and what Masterplan said is wrong?
Do you think the devs who wrote the code would no less about it than their spokesperson?
I believe CCP Masterplan took his information from having worked on the project whereas CCP Fozzie is writing out a blog based only on information he is handed, which he can interpret and type out however he likes.

Of course 1 defender vs 20 attackers sounds balanced - Doesn't it?
Why have persistent capture points - So the next guy can come along and complete the job? That too sounds awfully balanced.

One of the proposed ways it will work is open to abuse in very specific situations, the other is open to abuse by everyone all the time. I know which I think will create the most long term content.

And just to save you typing out a whole lot of stuff not relevant to what I posted. Partially captured doesn't start anything, it has nothing to do with whether the station or iHub is already RF'd. Partially capturing is simply that, group fly in run entosis for X mins and leaves, no capture, nothing RF'd so no end result or next stage.
Except; going by the blog, anyone who then enters the system can finish the capture process by completing the cycles remaining from the guys who started the capture. (that's not open to abuse or manipulation, is it)

Funny but I think CCP Masterplan wrote it out very well, where the blog is just blanket, basic information, with many gaps.
Maybe, just maybe, in this case someone should officially put the issue to bed.
Does an attacker 1st have to remove capture progress made by someone else?
Is persistent capture progress available to subsequent attackers?
Does each attacker only gain from individual progress made, if so, where does that leave a defender?
Will the defender need 1 entosis link for active for each attacker or will 1 stall progress of all?