These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Dark Spite
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#2221 - 2015-03-05 11:22:32 UTC
"AngelDeMort" wrote:

But you are, m8.
You're going to have tools come in, system to system and give you a factor times more work fixing it than them causing it...
All these folk saying, I'll just undock my sniper and blat them are b#&lshitters! They'll do that if they've got superiority and eyes everywhere but not if they're logged on in sys alone... Even if they log on alts to scout it before engaging.. the timer has flipped (you have lots of work to do....).. If they undock a combat ship, they have to warp to site (assuming off scan) and then see an uncatchable inty flitting around... They then warp back to get another ship... timer has flipped...
I don't know mate, but all this hot-air bravado does nothing to get to the bottom of things...
The goons are saying they'll do it to show it's a flawed mechanic and even if it that means they're secretly afraid of it being done to them (which is a good reason to condone it), it's still annoying grief-type game play... Stamp it out!


Griefing is pretty much such a standard gameplay in EVE that hoping for mechanics which prohibit them is on par with hoping Russia or USA will disband their military power tomorrow. Gamers who havent played EVE usually know 2 things about us:

1. We f**k each other over constantly
2. Large battles

A lot of times the latter has been over Sov and others it has been because of jumping instead of Bridging. Number 1 is done because we can. I dont see any mechanics from ccp will change us in that respect.

At least this system will make it viable to invade Providence (why is another matter) that has 7 systems without a station. Entosis module allows for this without going apeshit crazy.

AU timezone seems to become the redheaded stepchild nobody loves though, since they wont have a lot of timers they realistically can touch. The only time would be Rus-Rus and there arent enough AU's to do that.
Terence Bogard
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#2222 - 2015-03-05 11:23:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Terence Bogard
As far as time zone mechanics I think a binary window is contrary to the spirit of eve, as many have voiced. Eve is a place where you can get your **** handed to you 23/7 and I don't ever want that to change. If my enemy wants to alarm clock all 1,000 members of their alliance to catch me at my weakest time, more power to em, that's the stuff that makes eve great.

That said, with how it easy it seems to be to reinforce a structure, I do think it should be more difficult (read not impossible) to do so outside of the set prime time. Off the top off i my head i can think of a few options to (potentially) improve on the system.


1) Alliance chooses a Prime Time as in the suggested model but outside of the time zone is a flat multiplier that increases capture time instead of disabling it completely.


2) Alliance chooses a Prime Time. The further away from that time you are the longer it takes to capture.

One issue with this is that fighting after the Prime Time would be fighting an uphill battle as capture time increases. The opposite would be true in the hours leading up to it.


3) Alliance chooses a Prime Time and an "Off Time", these could be any length. During Prime Time the defense would be a challenge and during Off Time it would be easy. The time in between the two would be a medium.

There's lots of room for tweaking in this option. Prime Time could be a super vulnerable 1 hour period during which structures could be reinforced super easy and you need max dudes every day on that hour, or it could be a 4 hour period much like the plan laid out by CCP.

I think there's potential in this if executed correctly. During Prime Time you would be forced to have high numbers online and to be ready to respond quickly to invading fleets. During the shoulder hours you could mange it with with moderate numbers and pings to people who are actually awake, and during Off Time a system with high occupancy could be defended with a skeleton crew.

The complexity of this option would probably warrant an increase in the cooldown before alliance timezone changes take effect. Also a minimum number of hours between Off and Prime times would probably be needed among many other things i would never think of.


TL;DR timezones = possibly a good mechanic binary attack window = the worst idea I've ever seen.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2223 - 2015-03-05 11:23:50 UTC
Papa Digger wrote:

I think you'll get bored to alarmclocking to grief euro timers every 2 days.. emm, in 1-2 weeks. :)



We have yet to get bored of grinding towers, what makes you think we will get bored of an activity that will cause even more damage?
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#2224 - 2015-03-05 11:25:55 UTC
Alex Boeing wrote:

Since i've started playing EVE in august 2014 every patch was making my game more interesting, but this patch WILL BE THE GREATEST! I'm not joking. Please, release IT! Don't listen for those old players who are crying about it, this is just because of their inertia.

I'm living in nulls, I like claim wars, i like PVP, i dislike that enormous rent empires, those hours spended in atacks of Ihub or station. This will be the greatest patch ever. It will release unlimited opportunities in PVP tactics while defending or atacking a system, using the landscape of constellation, spies, week sides of enemy. I'm looking forward to see it very soon!

This is my first time i came to this Forum, and i came only to say this, because it is very important for me and a lot of new players whom i talked about this patch.

Appreciate your point of view but in this case, it is the older players who have learned over years of sov grinding that this will not work as intended.
By using the "landscape of a constellation", you mean warping to nodes in different systems and reinforcing them?
Yep that will be awesome, until the cloaky camper watching the nodes for the nearest large group, reports back that you are there. Then it is only a matter of time before your little bands of frontier sov takers are mutilated by the blok neighbours who don't want you there. Or did they just bring a 100 man fleet in to destroy your 20 man gang, just because they could and they got a laugh out of it.

It is clear CCP is trying but mini games and sov is just not a good combination.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#2225 - 2015-03-05 11:25:57 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
You are assuming that people don't know what the Goons are like, we do, which is why the first step is to plant a TCU next to a POS and troll you back, we know you don't want to hold that sov. And as the siphons proved you do get bored, and of course many people will be doing it to you, so many people from hisec could for example get into an interceptor and do this to get back at you, many won't but some might.

EDIT: And for good measure I don't ever expect to be able to put an IHUB in, but that is not the point is it...


Well, putting the ihub in is what's going to make your space reasonably profitable. You might also want a station at some point.

And see, you're looking at Goons. I wasn't. I'm looking at all of us. You think Pizza's going to not hit everyone they can with this? You think Black Legion won't? Or PL? You think Massadeth's gonna just mess with the CFC? Or that the Southeast won't be a wretched patchwork of N3 and the Russians trying to harass one another now that the supercapital blobs won't stop RUS?

We are not nice people. And honestly, we don't much care who we're not nice to.


The IHUB is what will be attacked and that is the weak spot in this change, I would advise CCP to make it so that the affects only get removed when it is destroyed. For things that rely on an IHUB I would have the Jump bridge require a IHUB in system for it to be anchored and onlined thats all. In terms of Super or Titan production the IHUB enables you to start a job, but if its removed once you started no issue. Then trolling becomes less of an issue, its the tweaks that really matter here.

I do of course recognise all the other entities that like having fun, you are not the only ones, but if you come to troll and only find a TCU next to a death star who is trolling who?

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

Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#2226 - 2015-03-05 11:26:40 UTC
Varg Krugar wrote:

On that note, I'm slightly surprised that the Entosis Link does not require some sort of Fuel? Was that thrown out because of the possible runaway nature of capture events or to lower the bar for entry into "casual" Sov games even further?


Nice idea, I wonder if noone came up with that before or if it was rejected.

A fuel requirement would also make stalemate situations less ignore-worthy and alleviate the interceptor concerns somewhat.
Alex Boeing
Sturm.
Inferno .
#2227 - 2015-03-05 11:29:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Alex Boeing
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Alex Boeing wrote:

Since i've started playing EVE in august 2014 every patch was making my game more interesting, but this patch WILL BE THE GREATEST! I'm not joking. Please, release IT! Don't listen for those old players who are crying about it, this is just because of their inertia.

I'm living in nulls, I like claim wars, i like PVP, i dislike that enormous rent empires, those hours spended in atacks of Ihub or station. This will be the greatest patch ever. It will release unlimited opportunities in PVP tactics while defending or atacking a system, using the landscape of constellation, spies, week sides of enemy. I'm looking forward to see it very soon!

This is my first time i came to this Forum, and i came only to say this, because it is very important for me and a lot of new players whom i talked about this patch.

Appreciate your point of view but in this case, it is the older players who have learned over years of sov grinding that this will not work as intended.
By using the "landscape of a constellation", you mean warping to nodes in different systems and reinforcing them?
Yep that will be awesome, until the cloaky camper watching the nodes for the nearest large group, reports back that you are there. Then it is only a matter of time before your little bands of frontier sov takers are mutilated by the blok neighbours who don't want you there. Or did they just bring a 100 man fleet in to destroy your 20 man gang, just because they could and they got a laugh out of it.

It is clear CCP is trying but mini games and sov is just not a good combination.


The map of EVE is enormous. I will just find that constelleation where i won't be atacked with fleet of 100+ members, and leave this big fights for those who possible to summon such big fleet) cloacked camps are really no problem. Open your imagination and u will find all answers u need.

And yes!! This will work, because of new players, new types of mind. Old players will resist, try to make things going like it was before, but will loose)
Papa Digger
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2228 - 2015-03-05 11:29:46 UTC
Arrendis wrote:

Really? What makes you say that? I just spent a month in Delve in a carrier doing nothing but functioning as a mobile supply depot for 40 other CFC guys living down there and fleeting up 23/7 just to produce timers.

And next time we deploy, I'll do it again.

Capturing claim require doing something. :)
People ready to alarmclock for important things. People don't like to alarmclocking for grief.
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2229 - 2015-03-05 11:29:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Alp Khan
Ugly Eric wrote:

ppl worried of the "trollceptors" or any superfast ships attacking from 200+km. Wake up lads! All the defender needs to do, is that they undock 1 ship per structure to sov-laser their own structure. If a sov entity having 50+ structures cannot undock 50+ defenders on their primetime, they simply do not deserve those amounts of sov.


What you are saying is patently false. Interceptors can kite and deal DPS to ships of any size. Undocking one ship per structure will never be enough even if we assume there will be one unstoppable, uncatchable interceptor per structure. The Interceptor trolling with sovereignty components will either kite the responding 'one ship' and easily deal with it, or if the one responding ship poses a realistic threat against it, will just speed out of that grid before it can be caught.

There is absolutely nothing that an attacker needs to commit, there is zero risk that any contestant needs to take while the defender needs to commit and risk everything. Even assuming that the asset involved in contesting (Interceptor) is actually risked here, it looks ridiculous as a fitted interceptor is just a throw away ship, while gains that can be contested in sovereignty take time, a lot of collective effort and ISK to materialize.

This is why Fozzie & Co needs to wake up, stop pretending to be sociologists attempting to change human behaviour and propensity to collude and collaborate for mutual gains, and instead, smell the ashes of risk-reward balance they have burned here.

Developers need to focus on good sandbox design, not pretending to be spaceship-Marx, spaceship-Engels, spaceship-Arendt or (even though she isn't an accepted sociologist like the names I mentioned) spaceship-Rand. Human nature is what human nature has always been. Let's not kid ourselves, a rag tag team of game developers such as yourselves are not going to change it in this game by railroading the sandbox principles and any tangible risk-reward balance that was established previously in EVE's design.

Now, any EVE player worth their salt and carefully following CCP as a company know very well that they are bleeding out subscribers (therefore, revenue) and even the Phoebe changes that were supposed to stop this bleed out did not end up alleviating it. What I'm saying here is that the development philosophy that seems to be taken up at CCP which hilariously reads out as "we will change human behaviour, we will cause more spaceships to explode over no tangible benefits to be had, and this will create new revenue for us".

Contrary to what Fozzie, Seagull and the rest seems to believe, we, the player base that actively play, invest in and influence the world of EVE are not a congregation of stupid sheep. We will not suddenly start to spend our in-game and real-life resources for meaningless destruction and conflict that offer us no rewards just because a developer like Fozzie or an executive producer like Seagull decided that they prefer that we should in order for CCP to raise more revenue from an already dwindling player base in a 10+ years old game.

Wake up, and smell the ashes CCP.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#2230 - 2015-03-05 11:37:00 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
Ugly Eric wrote:

ppl worried of the "trollceptors" or any superfast ships attacking from 200+km. Wake up lads! All the defender needs to do, is that they undock 1 ship per structure to sov-laser their own structure. If a sov entity having 50+ structures cannot undock 50+ defenders on their primetime, they simply do not deserve those amounts of sov.


What you are saying is patently false. Interceptors can kite and deal DPS to ships of any size. Undocking one ship per structure will never be enough even if we assume there will be one unstoppable, uncatchable interceptor per structure. The Interceptor trolling with sovereignty components will either kite the responding 'one ship' and easily deal with it, or if the one responding ship poses a realistic threat against it, will just speed out of that grid before it can be caught.

There is absolutely nothing that an attacker needs to commit, there is zero risk that any contestant needs to take while the defender needs to commit and risk everything. Even assuming that the asset involved in contesting (Interceptor) is actually risked here, it looks ridiculous as a fitted interceptor is just a throw away ship, while gains that can be contested in sovereignty take time, a lot of collective effort and ISK to materialize.

This is why Fozzie & Co needs to wake up, stop pretending to be sociologists attempting to change human behaviour and propensity to collude and collaborate for mutual gains, and instead, smell the ashes of risk-reward balance they have burned here.

Developers need to focus on good sandbox design, not pretending to be spaceship-Marx, spaceship-Engels, spaceship-Arendt or (even though she isn't an accepted sociologist like the names I mentioned) spaceship-Rand. Human nature is what human nature has always been, a rag tag team of game developers such as yourselves are not going to change it in this game by railroading the sandbox principles and any tangible risk-reward balance that was established previously in EVE's design.

Now, any EVE player worth their salt and carefully following CCP as a company know very well that they are bleeding out subscribers (therefore, revenue) and even the Phoebe changes that were supposed to stop this bleed out did not end up alleviating it. What I'm saying here is that the development philosophy that seems to be taken up at CCP which hilariously reads out as "we will change human behaviour, we will cause more spaceships to explode over no tangible benefits to be had, and this will create new revenue for us".

Now contrary to what you guys might believe, we, the player base that actively play, invest in and influence the world of EVE are not a congregation of stupid sheep, and we will not suddenly start to spend our in-game and real-life resources for meaningless destruction and conflict for no rewards just because a developer like Fozzie and his team decided that he prefers that we should in order to make more money.

No.



An interceptor will not kite with a T1 module, as it has a limited range if it wants to put the sov module or station into reinforced, so it will need to be a T2 module and at 80m a pop that is a nice drop, in fact 20m on the T1 is not bad. For a possible 80m drop its actually a good target.

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

Papa Digger
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2231 - 2015-03-05 11:41:51 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Papa Digger wrote:

I think you'll get bored to alarmclocking to grief euro timers every 2 days.. emm, in 1-2 weeks. :)



We have yet to get bored of grinding towers, what makes you think we will get bored of an activity that will cause even more damage?

Why you think that you will be playing only in offence every day? :)
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2232 - 2015-03-05 11:42:54 UTC
AngeDeMort wrote:
afkalt wrote:
AngeDeMort wrote:
Black Ambulance wrote:
AngeDeMort wrote:
AttentionAttentionAttention

Please consider a minimum ship-size for this new module.. Maybe cruiser or battle-cruiser and upwards..? Maybe only HACs and upwards? Maybe a new cruiser and upwards? P But please keep low-fitting requirements, so as not to gimp a pvp fit..

Please do not allow these trollceptors to exist.

These changes look fantastic!

Thanks for your time..

Eve IS the best game. Always was, always will be. Cool

xx

AttentionAttentionAttentionPirate



NO WAY , Ceptors are fine , if you can't counter them , move back to jita or new caldari !

Adopt or die , I want to fit that mod to my ibis too.



Your ability to counter a troll fit with a troll fit of your own, in numbers, is not what is being sought here.. It is content and gameplay...
Time-wasting, while it may float some peoples boats, is not really, I don't believe, something CCP wants, necessarily. By having a minumum ship-size fitting requirement the probability of actually engaging in combat/content increases...
With trollceptors, the concept is NOT to engage in combat but rather in griefing-type activities! Smile You wanting to fit one to your ibis says a lot... Oops
So, hopefully, it is not necessarily "no way.."



At a 100m a pop, trollfits are going to get old fast. Lose 20, that's a carrier hull right there.

I repeat, the only people with anything to fear here are people who do not live in their own space in their OWN prime time. It's not like you're going to get ninja hit whilst you're all sleeping for goodness sakes.


But you are, m8.
You're going to have tools come in, system to system and give you a factor times more work fixing it than them causing it...
All these folk saying, I'll just undock my sniper and blat them are b#&lshitters! They'll do that if they've got superiority and eyes everywhere but not if they're logged on in sys alone... Even if they log on alts to scout it before engaging.. the timer has flipped (you have lots of work to do....).. If they undock a combat ship, they have to warp to site (assuming off scan) and then see an uncatchable inty flitting around... They then warp back to get another ship... timer has flipped...
I don't know mate, but all this hot-air bravado does nothing to get to the bottom of things...
The goons are saying they'll do it to show it's a flawed mechanic and even if it that means they're secretly afraid of it being done to them (which is a good reason to condone it), it's still annoying grief-type game play... Stamp it out! Blink


I doubt it. All you're going to need is a cruiser with a tank and a link.

"oh but the inty will just warp off!" What, with a module that blocks warp? Let me know how that works out for you.

If you're so spread you can't keep tabs on your own sov in your OWN designated PRIME window, you shouldn't have it in the first place.

People didnt keep doing it with siphons, they're not going to do for long with these either.

There will be no magical drive bys when your whole alliance is sleeping, there will be limited use of 100m trollceptors because they'll be farmed for fun in short order once people adjust.

Hell, everyone will just toss the T1 mods on cyno alts in punishers. Voilla, system defended. A 100m interceptor isnt going to come in for the kill in case it gets popped.
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Goonswarm Federation
#2233 - 2015-03-05 11:45:30 UTC
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2234 - 2015-03-05 11:45:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Alp Khan
Dracvlad wrote:

An interceptor will not kite with a T1 module, as it has a limited range if it wants to put the sov module or station into reinforced, so it will need to be a T2 module and at 80m a pop that is a nice drop, in fact 20m on the T1 is not bad. For a possible 80m drop its actually a good target.


That assumes you will be able to catch the said interceptor, which will be on the move at extreme velocities and will be able to evade everything that's coming his way by blazing out of the grid at MWD speed.

To cite a real world example, back in the 70s and 80s, Soviets tried to intercept SR-71 sorties with surface to air missiles too, but the standard procedure for the SR-71 pilot to evade the missiles was simply to change course and increase velocity. Needless to say, no SR-71s ended up getting downed by Soviets.
Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2235 - 2015-03-05 11:45:47 UTC
Papa Digger wrote:
Capturing claim require doing something. :)
People ready to alarmclock for important things. People don't like to alarmclocking for grief.


like I said: fleets active, dropping SBUs and hitting IHUBs, 23 hrs a day, 7 days a week, for a month solid. This will just make our lives easier - no need for all the dps to kill an ihub, only 1 timer instead of 2...

I do hope we continue to kill a defending supercarrier with every deployment, though.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#2236 - 2015-03-05 11:46:11 UTC
Papa Digger wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Papa Digger wrote:

I think you'll get bored to alarmclocking to grief euro timers every 2 days.. emm, in 1-2 weeks. :)



We have yet to get bored of grinding towers, what makes you think we will get bored of an activity that will cause even more damage?

Why you think that you will be playing only in offence every day? :)


We have the numbers.
Worrff
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2237 - 2015-03-05 11:46:25 UTC
DeadDuck wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Guys- there are 39 likes on the OP, this must mean that this is a good change and everyone likes it, thanks to Phoebe, right?


41 actually and counting.. the dev blog is so dense that you really need time to digest him. I just did, I was the 41st one to put a thumbs up. I will not be the last one. Roll


Shame there isn't a dislike button, it would be in the high hundreds

CCP Philosophy: If it works, break it. If it’s broken, leave it alone and break something else.

Miner Hottie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2238 - 2015-03-05 11:46:31 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Hey Dark Spite, I didn't mean for it to make anyone upset. I mentioned it for anyone interested in proof of how Entosis sov will be used by goons.

The summary of Mittenz' talk was how to run sov warfare. So it is very relevant. He also mentions that Sov is EVE's best / only undeniable win condition. You can measure battles in ISK and ships, but the final flag that is planted is Sov. So. Sov has ISK benefits, but it's not about that, it's about planting that flag.

The other interesting thing about his talk is the date. 2012. At the time, his example for griefing was fake-out cynos, for days on end. Light random cynos in the space you intend to invade, and bring nothing through it. They'll respond and get amped up initially, but over time it will just wear them down.

Not sure if you're aware, but groups in EVE fall apart without so much as a shot fired, due to things like stress.

In 2015, it won't be cynos, it will be Entosis modules. The tactics he discussed in that presentation work even better with Entosis sov.

And then you have the people who have posted in this thread. They are warning everyone that Entosis sov will be bad. Gevlon included, and his comments can be taken as acknowledgement that it will be abused by you know who. Goon comments can be taken as gloating, or whatever you like.


I think a lot of people are missing a very important point here: most goons and gevlon would most likely be unable to agree on the colour of an orange. In this thread, goons and gevlon are both pointing out this is a bad idea and they are saying so for sound reasons. Talking about shattering the time space continuum right there.

It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2239 - 2015-03-05 11:49:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Dracvlad wrote:

An interceptor will not kite with a T1 module, as it has a limited range if it wants to put the sov module or station into reinforced, so it will need to be a T2 module and at 80m a pop that is a nice drop, in fact 20m on the T1 is not bad. For a possible 80m drop its actually a good target.


Part of the issue I'm having with this is that the T2 module, even if it does turn out to have ridiculous training requirements, is just such a significant step up in terms of functionality from the T1.

The T2 is a 120 second cycle time, with a range that is frankly ridiculous. Compared to the 300 second cycle of the T1 module, with a tenth of the range. But the tiny cycle time is a prickly problem.

It just leaves very little window open for pre-reinforcement defense. Yeah, once the thing is reinforced, bring the fleet until the 4 hr window is up and the timer goes away. But then they finish the timer, and I just login my cov ops alt to pop it again and they have to come back the following day for four hours. In exchange for a few minutes of my time per day(because, once again, I can just sit in their system on an alt on another monitor until they give me an opening), I cost their defense fleet a guaranteed four hours per day.

This isn't cat and mouse. This isn't even conflict. This is pointless repetition. I thought we were going away from weaponizing boredom.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2240 - 2015-03-05 11:49:57 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
Ugly Eric wrote:

ppl worried of the "trollceptors" or any superfast ships attacking from 200+km. Wake up lads! All the defender needs to do, is that they undock 1 ship per structure to sov-laser their own structure. If a sov entity having 50+ structures cannot undock 50+ defenders on their primetime, they simply do not deserve those amounts of sov.


What you are saying is patently false. Interceptors can kite and deal DPS to ships of any size. Undocking one ship per structure will never be enough even if we assume there will be one unstoppable, uncatchable interceptor per structure. The Interceptor trolling with sovereignty components will either kite the responding 'one ship' and easily deal with it, or if the one responding ship poses a realistic threat against it, will just speed out of that grid before it can be caught.


Interceptors are not as invulnerable as you make out. Stop the melodrama.