These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

sovereign timers and game mechanics?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
BEPOHNKA
Ner Vod Fleet Systems
Goonswarm Federation
#1 - 2014-03-08 19:10:34 UTC
Hello,

So this is one big send box correct? The space we try to fight for is all different? So why can't the fighting be different for all systems instead of this one bash sovereign and game mechanics? Eve online is going through the many changes and yet this game mechanic has not been rebalanced yet!

So what kind of rebalanced should their be? at this point the timers and reduce the hit points on the structures....

Alliance with 100+ system ... when attacked! 8 hours before timer comes out and system can be taken!
Alliance with 50+ systems ... when attacked! 16 hours before timer comes out and system can be taken!
Alliances with 24+ systems .. when attacked! 24 hours before timer comes out and system can be taken!
Alliances with 12+ systems .. when attacked! (2x) 12 hours with 8 hour cool down in between before timer come out and system can be taken!


Facts are big alliances should have harder time with smaller gangs trying to take their sov. But make it easier for smaller gangs to take it and big bigger alliances harder time. This gives many options and ideas of when to attack and one other...
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2014-03-08 19:17:09 UTC
Then everyone just splits up into whatever gives them the biggest bonus, and NOTHING changes...
BEPOHNKA
Ner Vod Fleet Systems
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2014-03-08 20:53:46 UTC  |  Edited by: BEPOHNKA
In this case this could be a good option in making problems.....




OPTION #2 ---- Small gangs come in and turn of renter space in hours! Who will defend them?

OPTION #2 ---- Since their more alliances for the bones, how do you know small group of people in alliance wont over threw you for the space? Only making it harder for you to take it back???

OPTION #3 ----- Will alliances be turn on one other or will they stick to one other and have higher chance of having stuff stolen or people turning on you!!!!




Whole idea is to make it harder to control things with adding more factors in to cause you more people problems..
Sigras
Conglomo
#4 - 2014-03-08 20:58:49 UTC
no, what she meant is that instead of "Goonswarm Federation" you'll have "Goonswarm Federation 1" which owns 12 systems and "Goonswarm Federation 2" which owns 12 systems etc etc all owned by The Mittani and literally nothing changes.
BEPOHNKA
Ner Vod Fleet Systems
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2014-03-08 21:12:31 UTC  |  Edited by: BEPOHNKA
I understand the point of if they made more smaller alliances. which is the point... here my point of view on things if this happens...

I would like to see bit more of a risk then it is set now.... locking alliances down wont be so easy if they allow only CEO of corps to allow people in the alliance... which would help turn votes from support. So having total control wont happen...

This whole idea is not to break up big blogs but add factor of risk... people sneaking in and causing problems.


People are ....

Greedy... Drama .... Back Stabbing.... how do you know they just wont turn on you over time? :)
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#6 - 2014-03-08 21:21:34 UTC
BEPOHNKA wrote:
People are ....

Greedy... Drama .... Back Stabbing.... how do you know they just wont turn on you over time? :)


Welcome to EVE. Find people you can trust and like then stick with them.

As to your idea, it really does not change much besides making large alliances easier to conquer by other large alliances.

A large alliance will still completely stomp a smaller one regardless of if the timers are an hour or a week, the only difference is how much time it takes.
BEPOHNKA
Ner Vod Fleet Systems
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2014-03-08 21:39:30 UTC
You are correct in time is the factor, one week it could be one alliance leading the show and other trying to conquer it. Time is the big factor. big blob war fair will never end, but days of know if you wont be stomp out by other group will keep you watching..

More people who don't see eye to eye on things, makes me wonder if things would change or not alliance why fight to lead...
Sigras
Conglomo
#8 - 2014-03-08 22:28:05 UTC
BEPOHNKA wrote:
I understand the point of if they made more smaller alliances. which is the point... here my point of view on things if this happens...

I would like to see bit more of a risk then it is set now.... locking alliances down wont be so easy if they allow only CEO of corps to allow people in the alliance... which would help turn votes from support. So having total control wont happen...

This whole idea is not to break up big blogs but add factor of risk... people sneaking in and causing problems.


People are ....

Greedy... Drama .... Back Stabbing.... how do you know they just wont turn on you over time? :)

Have you ever been involved in large alliance politics or leadership? because your suggestion seems to imply that you havent.

Control and leadership are all done out of game, the only thing at risk would be the corps deciding to rebel which could just as easily happen now. Also this would make things like what happened to BoB impossible.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2014-03-08 22:57:36 UTC
I think rather than change timers the automatic mail system on aggression should be done away with. It should be solely up to players to look after their systems, including all sov structures, POCOs etc.

Because the big alliances and coalitions have so much space they don't use it will be more difficult for them to detect aggression while smaller entities who actually use their space will notice it sooner.

Timers are a symptom of lots of broken mechanics and a bandaid solution to out of control cap growth and power projection. Will take a huge effort to fix.

The auto mails are something that should be able to be done with minimal effort and without huge consequences. Basically you have nothing to worry about if you're looking after your stuff and not taking what should be unmanageable amounts of space.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2014-03-09 04:02:51 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
I think rather than change timers the automatic mail system on aggression should be done away with. It should be solely up to players to look after their systems, including all sov structures, POCOs etc.

Because the big alliances and coalitions have so much space they don't use it will be more difficult for them to detect aggression while smaller entities who actually use their space will notice it sooner.

Timers are a symptom of lots of broken mechanics and a bandaid solution to out of control cap growth and power projection. Will take a huge effort to fix.

The auto mails are something that should be able to be done with minimal effort and without huge consequences. Basically you have nothing to worry about if you're looking after your stuff and not taking what should be unmanageable amounts of space.

Timer notifications and force projection are the two things killing nullsec for anyone who doesnt want to join one of the groups already living there. If an aliance was forced to manually check up on their POS's to see if they are still alive, instead of just going when they need to refuel and hotdropping with 5000 guys whenever they get a mail. which means in a week an alliance could go out to refuel their POS's to find tons fo hostiles in their place, woudl go a long way to allowing little guys to make their place.

TL;DR make nullsec actually SCOUT to see the condition of their assets,instead of getting an instant notification anytime someone dares try to live in one of their systems without SOV.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2014-03-09 13:22:27 UTC
BEPOHNKA wrote:
In this case this could be a good option in making problems.....




OPTION #2 ---- Small gangs come in and turn of renter space in hours! Who will defend them?

OPTION #2 ---- Since their more alliances for the bones, how do you know small group of people in alliance wont over threw you for the space? Only making it harder for you to take it back???

OPTION #3 ----- Will alliances be turn on one other or will they stick to one other and have higher chance of having stuff stolen or people turning on you!!!!




Whole idea is to make it harder to control things with adding more factors in to cause you more people problems..



Exactly the same thing that happens now would happen then, since the people in charge of all the new sharded alliances are the same, using the same out of game channels to communicate. Your idea would change literally nothing other than the name on the system.


You do not fix a game by making it more annoying to play.
Silvetica Dian
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2014-03-09 15:17:50 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
I think rather than change timers the automatic mail system on aggression should be done away with. It should be solely up to players to look after their systems, including all sov structures, POCOs etc.

Because the big alliances and coalitions have so much space they don't use it will be more difficult for them to detect aggression while smaller entities who actually use their space will notice it sooner.

Timers are a symptom of lots of broken mechanics and a bandaid solution to out of control cap growth and power projection. Will take a huge effort to fix.

The auto mails are something that should be able to be done with minimal effort and without huge consequences. Basically you have nothing to worry about if you're looking after your stuff and not taking what should be unmanageable amounts of space.


I liked this idea of getting rid of notifications. Would fit nicely with stopping sending mails to alliances when you anchor a POS on an empty moon. No reason at all they should know about this without going and looking.

Money at its root is a form of rationing. When the richest 85 people have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion (50% of humanity) it is clear where the source of poverty is. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/trickle-down-economics-broken-promise-richest-85