These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#2241 - 2015-03-05 11:49:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Dark Spite
Dracvlad wrote:
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.


Still not said anywhere that an interceptor can fit an Entosis module, so keep harping the TROLLceptor is pretty futile at this point. I think CCP has gotten the point that allowing frigate size ships to fit one is a bad idea. Also, how would a frigate of any type or even a destroyer be able to use the t2 module effectively at max range. I would like to see the ceptor that both can fit a large module, keep up speed AND lock a target from 200km would even be possible.

How can you say that CCP isn't focusing on sandbox? They provide new ways for us to create conflict and engagement, but leave it up to us how to run that conflict. Be it going in with a 1000 man fleet or 1 ship sitting close to station (T1 entosis). Its a new way of doing this and it could work even with people griefing and harassing other players. When I was ganked on Jita undock and lost a few billion it sucked, but I didnt ask CCP to change those mechanics. They are there to provide us the choice and develop our own playstyle. No sucky do this, take that quest., run here and execute your sequence of abilities/powers rinse and repeat.

I for one would love to see CCP grow customer base and be as profitable as possible. In the end that is what will keep the servers running. Reducing need for constant renewing of HW just to handle the massive battles is a huge cost saver. Running that kind of serverfarm costs a whole lot more than renting a virtual server on Amazon.

Edit: Made one sentence provide meaning.
Worrff
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2242 - 2015-03-05 11:52:43 UTC
Papa Digger wrote:
Arrendis wrote:
Don't let us. Don't give us the tools to be worse than we already are. Because we will. And we'll enjoy it, for as long as CCP lets us ride that mechanic into the ground. And for every voice saying 'you'll get bored of being jackasses and start behaving rationally', I can only ask: After all these years, when exactly are we, the assembled bastards and griefers throughout nullsec, supposed to get bored of being jackasses?

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



You know that Goons have a large around the clock presence, yes ?

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

Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2243 - 2015-03-05 11:53:52 UTC
Dark Spite wrote:
Still not said anywhere that an interceptor can fit an Entosis module


But strongly implied by:

'Low fitting requirements, uses high power slot.'
Terence Bogard
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#2244 - 2015-03-05 11:56:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Terence Bogard
Arrendis wrote:

But strongly implied by:

'Low fitting requirements, uses high power slot.'

see
CCP Fozzie wrote:

I'll also probably be quickly spinning off a discussion of the module balance surrounding the Entosis Link, since that's an area where I expect we can calm some fears relatively easily. The short version is that we have all the tools of EVE's module design at our disposal to ensure that no specific tactics get out of hand. So if problems show up in discussion and playtesting we're happy to let players try to find a counter and then relatively easily step in if that counter doesn't materialize.



Nothing is set in stone and no, the world is not ending.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2245 - 2015-03-05 11:58:14 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
I completely agree with you.. I just hope CCP can see the problem too.
Small groups will only ever take and hold sov at the behest of the controlling large coalitions.

Nullsec's supposed to be the survival of the fittest, not survival of the smallest.

The only thing we can do is make it so you don't have to band together into 2kv2k fights to take a single system, with the most important ship being ships which can only be built in sov space, and try to limit things like just spamming someone's whole space with capture events, even if it technically is stoppable using a single character yourself.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#2246 - 2015-03-05 11:58:32 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Arrendis wrote:
Dark Spite wrote:
Still not said anywhere that an interceptor can fit an Entosis module


But strongly implied by:

'Low fitting requirements, uses high power slot.'


Well if the idea is to enable occupancy sovereignty, with active, alive, real people living there, they would of course allow the fitting of these modules to spaceships that were able to penetrate gatecamps.

If they did not the entire premis fails. And you would have empty space surrounded by impenetrateable borders.

Hence the interceptor hysteria. Interceptors and frigates are the tool that will deliver Sov2
Removing interceptors as a valid tool removes SOV2

Besides when we move out of reinforcement, then the big guns get committed.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#2247 - 2015-03-05 11:59:02 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
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.


First of all its not the real world, we are talking Eve mechanics, such as loot scooping in hisec as one example.

An assumption I am making is that the Entosis module no longer works outside of its range and all progress is lost. so blazing off the grid is good, op success and if he makes a mistake 80m module is tasty. If its a TCU it will be next to a POS, so that will be fun to see, they are quite good at blowing up interceptors.

If you make the interceptor pilot frustrated and unable to annoy you, he gets annoyed and goes somewhere else, that is how Eve is.

I hope all these low sec alliances set up honey pot systems to kill loads of bored 0.0 null bears, will be hilarious.

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

Miner Hottie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2248 - 2015-03-05 11:59:39 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Papa Digger wrote:
Arrendis wrote:
Don't let us. Don't give us the tools to be worse than we already are. Because we will. And we'll enjoy it, for as long as CCP lets us ride that mechanic into the ground. And for every voice saying 'you'll get bored of being jackasses and start behaving rationally', I can only ask: After all these years, when exactly are we, the assembled bastards and griefers throughout nullsec, supposed to get bored of being jackasses?

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



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.


So many people seriously underestimate the insane masochistic lengths we will go to to extract tears from someone, no matter how many times we demonstrate it to them. Confirmation bias is such a terrible human trait.

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

Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2249 - 2015-03-05 11:59:51 UTC
Terence Bogard wrote:
Arrendis wrote:

But strongly implied by:

'Low fitting requirements, uses high power slot.'

see
CCP Fozzie wrote:

I'll also probably be quickly spinning off a discussion of the module balance surrounding the Entosis Link, since that's an area where I expect we can calm some fears relatively easily. The short version is that we have all the tools of EVE's module design at our disposal to ensure that no specific tactics get out of hand. So if problems show up in discussion and playtesting we're happy to let players try to find a counter and then relatively easily step in if that counter doesn't materialize.



Nothing is set in stone and no, the world is not ending.


Oh, totally, but just saying that because it's never explicitly stated that the module will fit on interceptors means there's reason for someone to think it might... that's disingenuous, don't you think?
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#2250 - 2015-03-05 12:00:35 UTC
Arrendis wrote:

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...

And the thing stopping you from grinding literally everything with stealth bombers right here and now is?
Or why don't you go and hellcamp some random NPC null station for a month solid? Don't tell me you can't.

I've got news for you. You can come to a random cafe and steal all the sugar from the sugar bowl. Or **** in it. Or swap it for salt. Or washing powder. Or powdered laxative pillsTwisted Technically there's nothing stopping you from doing any of that. There's nothing stopping CFC from messing with anyone in any kind of sov system because if push comes to shove you can just get a couple of thousand rifters and crash a node. If tomorrow the majority of active server population decides to grief me for funsies, there's nothing short summary bans that can stop them. The only question is why would they. Besides proving a point.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#2251 - 2015-03-05 12:00:50 UTC
Alex Boeing wrote:
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)

Yes the sov map is huge and most of it is controlled by large groups who are all aligned by blue status or backroom agreements.
I wish you luck finding a constellation that is not within easy reach of one of the large groups. If you do manage to find one, be assured 50 other small groups will also have found it.. The large group can sit back and let the small groups fight for sov, then just move in and boot the winner out again.

As an old player, I am not resisting this change, merely pointing out the flaws with this change.
I want to see sov change, I want to be able to go out with a small alliance of 400 or 500 and take and hold sov. I don't see these changes making that possible.
The stumbling block is now and always will be the large entities, if they don't want you there or just want to do a bit of greifing and pad killboards, your small group is gone.

Sov timers? How many small groups of 400 or 500 can field a 200 man fleet at the same time every day to defend their piece/s of space?

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.

Gorgof Intake
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2252 - 2015-03-05 12:00:52 UTC
So this thread has literally broken down into a bunch of Goons, Goon alts and a few unsuspecting crusaders squabbling over different theorycrafting ideas about a feature that has not been detailed and is completely arbitrary. GG guys.

Amazingly, there are actually more interesting discussions to be had than what you pubbies think your leadership is going to do (which btw is not going to be what you all seem to think is going to happen).

Can we get this thread divided into the "CFC circlejerk 3.0 edition" and the rest of us can discuss some issues of actual relevance?



Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2253 - 2015-03-05 12:01:37 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
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?

Will this "deathstar" really make a dent into a speedtanking interceptor?
M1k3y Koontz
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2254 - 2015-03-05 12:01:38 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
*Snip* Please refrain from using profanity. ISD Ezwal.

if you had said ishtars or tengus i might believe it

even then a group that can contest one beacon is going to have trouble contesting the 242 simultaneous timers that the other interceptors are making

75 stations + 2 * 84 systems btw


If the inties spread out, then the defensive fleet can spread out because a single inty isnt a threat.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Dark Spite
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#2255 - 2015-03-05 12:01:54 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Dark Spite wrote:
Still not said anywhere that an interceptor can fit an Entosis module


But strongly implied by:

'Low fitting requirements, uses high power slot.'


If there is one part of this feedback which should be clear for CCP is that too low fitting requirements will be a bad idea. And cruisers fitting a module would be OK in my book. Cynabals would be a pretty good choice given speed, midslots and extra highslot. It would also make a nice and juicy target that, for instance, an interceptor can tackle. Havent seen too many 100mn AB cynabals, so scram will take care of speed. Probably 1-2 dead ceptors before the cynabal dies, but thats a good trade off imo.

Large groups can do more than small groups, but that will be the case in all scenarious involving sov. Trying to take sov and be completely alone would be utopia and no system would be able to handle that without imposing artificial and sandbox limiting mechanics.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2256 - 2015-03-05 12:01:55 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

Well if the idea is to enable occupancy sovereignty, with active, alive, real people living there, they would of course allow the fitting of these modules to spaceships that were able to penetrate gatecamps.


Why? Shouldn't an attacker have to fight through the defenders instead of bypassing them by fiat?

Or are you actually making the contention that unless a single system is guarded 24/7 from interceptors and cov ops frigates, that whoever owns that system is undeserving of it? Because last I checked, this was a game, not a job.

I can't think of a better way to crowd any and all small groups than to force literally constant defense fleets.

"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.

Arrendis
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2257 - 2015-03-05 12:02:14 UTC
Torgeir Hekard wrote:
And the thing stopping you from grinding literally everything with stealth bombers right here and now is?


We didn't use bombers, for one. :)
Nami Kumamato
Perkone
Caldari State
#2258 - 2015-03-05 12:02:23 UTC
Terence Bogard wrote:


Nothing is set in stone and no, the world is not ending.


It's not ? Shocked
So you mean I bought all that canned pineapple for nothing ?
Time to get diabetes then ...

Fornicate The Constabulary !

Terence Bogard
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#2259 - 2015-03-05 12:02:50 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Arrendis wrote:
Dark Spite wrote:
Still not said anywhere that an interceptor can fit an Entosis module


But strongly implied by:

'Low fitting requirements, uses high power slot.'


Well if the idea is to enable occupancy sovereignty, with active, alive, real people living there, they would of course allow the fitting of these modules to spaceships that were able to penetrate gatecamps.

If they did not the entire premis fails. And you would have empty space surrounded by impenetrateable borders.

Hence the interceptor hysteria. Interceptors and frigates are the tool that will deliver Sov2


Umm ,you can't fly a fleet capable of taking sov through a gate camp in the current state. Not without bashing through it anyway. You will need a sov lazor in your fleet is all, it just wont be carried by your scout/tackle.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
#2260 - 2015-03-05 12:04:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
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.


The T2 module gives differing tactical options, that is why its there, its actually pretty smart, the functionality comes at a significant increased cost and I expect a lot of ships will die trying to RF.

EDIT: By the way, I do not think that the T2 version is meant for smaller ships, even though it may be used for them, I think that its a module thaht require lock so its limited to the targetting range, at least I hope that is the case.

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