These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

[Galatea] First batch of sov capture iterations

First post First post
Goonswarm Federation
#241 - 2015-08-19 07:34:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Sjugar02
Fozziesov is inherently flawed because it does not promote meaningful conflict. These changes do not change this.

But let's see how fozziesov holds up to it's intended goals

Goal #1: As much as possible, ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved

If fatigue is spaceaids ,~sovwands~ are cancer. It's not fun to attack, it's not fun to defend. People that like the new system might like the small gang fights but I doubt anyone enjoys stroking their wand for an hour.

Goal #2: Clarify the process of taking, holding and fighting over star systems

Maybe? Who cares anyway, I don't value one system over another on how easy it is to understand. I do understand that this is an internal goal for ccp.

Goal #3: Minimize the systemic pressure to bring more people or larger ships than would be required to simply defeat your enemies on the field of battle.

Being able to attack space with very little risk is a serious flaw of the new system. This is a flawed goal because it contradicts with one of the foundations of eve: risk vs. reward.

Goal #4: Drastically reduce the time and effort required to conquer undefended space.

6 hours per sov event :rip:

Goal #5: Provide significant strategic benefits from living in your space.

I have heard very little complaints about this, except that the industry index only incorporates mining, and it seems to be working pretty good. Fortress Deklein though.

Goal #6: Spread the largest Sovereignty battles over multiple star systems to take advantage of New Eden’s varied geography and to better manage server load.

I still have to see how this plays out but there's very little reason to split up in small fleets. Just keep one fleet in a central location/on a titan and spread out sovwands in uncatchable ship.

Goal #7: Any new Sovereignty system should be adaptable enough to be rapidly updated and to incorporate future changes to EVE.

Let's hope so.
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#242 - 2015-08-19 07:41:00 UTC
I think the changes are sensible and are trying to get the balance right , though troll interceptors are not the issue if you have people in system, if you do not use that system then you deserve to have it reinforced. I am so so with the speed reduction, but like many will just say OK and adjust. The other changes I agree with because if people do not turn up to take that system or remove the sov then make it easier to grab back.

Pure Blind is developing into a fun area, the border areas of large empires should be exactly what is happing in Pure Blind, I noticed that the poor systems in Estoria are actually having their ADM worked on, this is working as intended, this means in Stain we can pick off more of them without getting blobbed, the impacts of this system make it so people can not rush off on deployment without any cares, stick with it CCP because that and the large blobs of Supers and Titans destroyed your game.

Finally the impact of this new system should only be fully assessed with the new structure, so I would advise CCP not to over do these tweaks while waiting for the structures to arrive, that is the real deal at that point.

CCP you should also listen to MOA players who are harassing the Imperium, not trolling them, there is a big difference by the way!

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

Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#243 - 2015-08-19 07:44:18 UTC
About the interceptor.
It's intended role is - tackling. They are pretty decent in that role, no nerfs or buffs needed.

There is also another role, not really intended, rather a result or ~emergent~ gameplay. A shuttle.
Shuttle-fitted ceptor can carry you anywhere fast and safe. (I even scan through wormholes with ceptor.)
It can light a cyno. But other than that, it is not (it was not) combat-capable.
There is no general consensus if fast and safe travel is good or bad for nullsec, but we can live with that.

Now, there is a third role.
It becomes a tool in sov warfare. And a powerful tool. We all know really well that in a world of jabber pings and rage-formups the best tank you can fit is speed-tank. Does it have any drawbacks for performing that well in this role, like being expensive, or hard to skill? No.

Furthermore, it can be fitted to fulfill two roles at the same time - sov shuttle.
Do you remember why CCP nerfed capships? Because of power projection.
The interceptor is the new capital ship, but cheaper. Either power or projection should be taken away of it.

Diagnosis: OP.
Treatment: on top of suggested MWD-jamming feature of enthosis, maybe reducing its cargo and increasing strontium consumption on enthosis would do a trick. Tackling interceptor - yes, shuttle - yes, cyno-shuttle - no, sov-shuttle - no.
Shiva Furnace
#244 - 2015-08-19 07:44:58 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Warmeister wrote:
troll ceptors aren't the real issue.
the real issue is that alliances still own empty space.
not ccp's fault that people choose not to actually live in the systems they own.

While I strongly feel that interceptors are way too powerful for this role, I wanted to point out another thing.
This IS direct ccp's fault that nullsec is not worth living in.
People are there to build empires. What tools do we have for that, if even jump bridges are useless and capships are not wanted? Like seriously. I know the alliance that gives away motherships to their members. And players are like - nah, I dont have spare characters for that coffin.

So why people pay to live there, and fight for their sov then? I use jump bridges every day, all the time, and we and our enemies use capitals in PVP. Do we play the same game?
Zloco Crendraven
Shadow Cartel
#245 - 2015-08-19 07:48:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Zloco Crendraven
These are quite good changes i have to say.

Just don't diminish to much the number of nodes because ti really helps the blob, but on the other hand to big number of nodes it also helps it. I think this number of 10 nodes is actually really good. It still gives chances to defenders to work with their 6:1 faster node conquest advantage. 20 was really to much and heaven for the blobs and trolls. And ofc it doubles the chances of a fight to happen.

The timer of 4 mins will lessen some pain of sov maintenance. Although i am afraid when the true fight happens it will be quite hard for attackers to work around it.

But the change i don't like is the 4k limit. It does absolutely nothing.

The idea of Fozzie SOV is actually good but CCP 3 more things needs to happen to make FozzieSOV to really shine.
- Restrain Entosis link only for BCs to be able to equip it
- Partially captured structures returning to defender control at a slow constant regeneration pace
- And ofc better UI. But Punkturis is already on top of its game.

And a suggestion for the new structure "Obesrvatory array". Whoever has it installed in a constellation he get to see all places where the structures are installed, all the timers of the ongoing war and places and timers of all nodes. It will be a nice target to fight over.

BALEX, bringing piracy on a whole new level.

Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#246 - 2015-08-19 07:49:02 UTC
This is a good start!
Tactical Farmers.
Pandemic Horde
#247 - 2015-08-19 07:51:57 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:

Diagnosis: OP.
Treatment: on top of suggested MWD-jamming feature of enthosis, maybe reducing its cargo and increasing strontium consumption on enthosis would do a trick. Tackling interceptor - yes, shuttle - yes, cyno-shuttle - no, sov-shuttle - no.

it's only OP when no one shows up to defend.
if someone did show up, all they need is an entosis module to successfully prevent ceptor from capturing sov.
Syri Taneka
#248 - 2015-08-19 07:53:41 UTC
Amy Garzan wrote:
Wilhelm Knicklicht wrote:
Reagalan wrote:
Fozziesov is not engaging for the average fleet member, who has to wait around while the magical sov hackers do all the work. Under Dominion sov, your average fleet member got to contribute via DPS, and at least got killmails at the end.

TL;DR: fozziesov not attractive for the average goon member who just wants to get fleetwarped and press F1.

system working as intended.

News for CCP (and you since you cant think). When Goons and the Imperium make up one of the largest player blocks, and we all quit, whos paying the bills?

Think that over.

All the people who are going to join up because Sov is actually accessible again for the first time in years?
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#249 - 2015-08-19 07:55:47 UTC
Using an antosis module should either stop your ship completely or at least turn off any prop mods.

Syri Taneka
#250 - 2015-08-19 07:56:39 UTC
Like some of the suggestions I've stumbled across. I'd like to add one:

Fitting an Entosis Link, either t1 or t2, cancels Interdiction Nullifier effects AND prevents cloaking.
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#251 - 2015-08-19 07:57:55 UTC
Not good enough.
hanky1 panky2
My Wife's Son
#252 - 2015-08-19 07:58:42 UTC  |  Edited by: hanky1 panky2
i'm going to ignore the broader issues here and focus entirely on mechanics:

why don't nodes decay? why is this even a discussion? uncontested sov needs to return to the defender easily (sov used to defend itself in 9 hours)
will entosis notifications be improved to include attacker names or is this a 'technical limitation'?
any plans to allow structure unanchoring, offlining, or transfers? all of this used to be possible.
any plans to allow switching of IHUB upgrades?
any plans to reduce structure/upgrade costs (killing an ihub is very easy now)
any plans to provide more immediate benefits for sovereignty? (losing 35d indexes every time you lose a system is crippling for strategic indexes)
ps: jump bridges are fairly useless with fatigue anyway.
any plans to provide killmails for structures? this would help defenders and attackers.

and i guess my final question is how much of aegis sov was altered during duality testing? i feel like we are beta testing this on the live server and that these changes (which do not even scratch my concerns) are very late.

ps: this is wheniaminspace, my main is unsubbed
Aldjor Dayman
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#253 - 2015-08-19 07:59:43 UTC
Reagalan wrote:
The only solution to the problems of Fozziesov is to scrap the whole thing, return to Dominion sov, and iterate upon a proven system.

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#254 - 2015-08-19 08:03:09 UTC
Alendriana wrote:
So glad we will still see troll ships....... not

haha remember "not" jokes guys? ...Classic! Roll
Marvinovi pratele
#255 - 2015-08-19 08:04:42 UTC
...just as we start actually taking CFC systems... we have 3 under control now - Y-C3EQ,
7RM-N0, GA-P6C
When i look at dotlan, all this systems are reinforced. Sorry to say, but you have nothing under control.
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#256 - 2015-08-19 08:04:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Insidious
I'm sure null will be compelling one day, quiet a few things keeping me far far away from it until then though, considering the iterations, the grand vision and all.

Personally my vision of null sec would be fleets** of ships (any size). I dont see how single pidgin ships crapping over your capture points is compelling at all.
Sure they might be apart of a larger group waiting to warp in on any engagement, and that might lead to something greater. If thats the case then maybe thats ok.

I'd rather have defensive fleets put down a beacon affecting an AU/system radius of capture points.i.e. a attacking multiplier , you can still have single entosis ships.
Would just be an enabler for better sized fleets, and give something for people to-do in null other then prey for a station timer.

I know I know hahahaha maybe Supercarriers act as the anti/entosis beacon :)))))

Not sure though, i find the hole null sov thing now very convoluted ccp has turned station ping pong, to stale mate, now to tcu ping pong... how is that any better?
Minty Aroma
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#257 - 2015-08-19 08:05:41 UTC
4k m/s? Still far too quick if you take in the head start the entosis ship will have from when the pilot sees the spike in local to things landing on grid.

2k m/s max sounds a lot more like it, or just remove the activation of prop modules.
Tish Magev
Pyke Syndicate
Solyaris Chtonium
#258 - 2015-08-19 08:09:33 UTC
Warmeister wrote:
Tish Magev wrote:

Nullsec is pretty much completely devoid of content, no one is going to invade anyone because who wants to play Sov mining, and less and less alliances are even bothering to defend space when some randomer decides to toss it, because again sov just isn't worth the ballache of this mechanic.

yeah, and before fozziesov there were sov wars left right and center, right? Roll

More than there is or will be now yeah.

No ones saying nullsec wasn't stale, but if you think this is the solution to reinvigorate it then you're a bit of an idiot.
Aldjor Dayman
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#259 - 2015-08-19 08:16:18 UTC
Nevil Kincade wrote:

NO ! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!

You are being told a fairy tale!
We have taken a couple of systems (and lost them again) but never due to a single 'trolling' ship. This stuff just doesnt happen in reality against an organized alliance/coalition. It always involved fending of ewar and controlling access to the system. Perhaps stalling for time to get the entosis done but ultimately because the defenders CAME IN TOO LATE. And whos fault is that ?

I cant believe you are giving into this whining of people who just DONT WANT TO PVP. You should see the reality of 'Entosis Trolling' with your own eyes before you make such decisions. The defender comes in, jams the Entosis ship and your warm-up cylce goes to **** wasting you 20 minutes. And if you fit a ship to counter that kitsune or falcon by outrunning it they scream "Unfair! Unfair! Fozzy nerf it pleeeease !!!"

What is this bullshit ? Sov defence by crying for nerfs ? And you play along ???

Entosis links seriously need e-war immunity or be able to keep running without a lock-on !

What do you think how many successfull jams a falcon can get off during the warm-up cycle, 20, 200 ? Because thats the amount of Entosis ships you will need in the future to capture a TCU against a defender who is actually on the ball.
And what if you field 20 ECM ships or 100 ? That gets us to a number the server cant even handle.

And how dare those that own sov to define that kiting is not a proper strategy to fight over a system ? They could easily have put on their OWN ENTOSIS onto the TCU and stopped the attackers progress. If they were TRULY holding the field that shouldnt be a problem right ? Our 9k m/s Entosis ships never could stay on grid with an actual force arriving by the way.
Again: Fozzy bro is believing a fairytale.

What was happening the last few weeks was EXACTLY what Aegis Sov was meant to do: Make power blocs realize they cant occupy all the space themselves. They were supposed to feel the pain of an empire overstretch and make a tough call about what space is worth the effort.

THEY WERE MEANT TO LOOSE SPACE ! And not only the part they choose to. Now they are starting to loose their face in being outplayed and loosing Sov so they throw all their political power at CCP. Of course on the cost of the entire player base.

Please grow a spine you lush sack of potatoe meal ... im so ******* disappointed, you were the last hope for content and conflict in Eve.

Aegis Sov has made Pure Blind a content garden of even. Sure the Sov holders don't like to get slaughtered in skirmishes now that they are forced upon them but the content generation part of the new system is absolutely working.

Congratz on that part CCP!
Please don't give up. All the criticism is purely political and certainly not about fun and explosion.

Unfortunately this post has no credibility because you come from the bottom of the dumpster.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#260 - 2015-08-19 08:28:18 UTC
Warmeister wrote:
Skia Aumer wrote:

talking about ceptor successfully fulfilling 3 powerfull roles
Diagnosis: OP.
Treatment: on top of suggested MWD-jamming feature of enthosis, maybe reducing its cargo and increasing strontium consumption on enthosis would do a trick. Tackling interceptor - yes, shuttle - yes, cyno-shuttle - no, sov-shuttle - no.

it's only OP when no one shows up to defend.
if someone did show up, all they need is an entosis module to successfully prevent ceptor from capturing sov.

"They need..." "to prevent [a lone] ceptor".
Proves my point actually. Interceptor is powerfull enough to in sov warfare to counter a group of ships. Not necessarily it wins, but it will keep them busy for sure. It has the power, without associated risks.
Also, do you even read? The "diagnosis" was deducted from the fact that it has 3 (three) powerfull roles. In one hull. Cheap. Not skill-intensive. Risk-reward anyone?

Warmeister wrote:
you don't see people evacing their assets and dropping sov

PL member talking about not dropping sov. You might have missed some game events.
Renting empires do give ISK, but where do we spend it? If ISK dont work, they are just pixels in you imaginary wallet.