These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Elenahina
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2441 - 2015-03-05 15:19:41 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Violent Morgana wrote:
So I have gang of 20 ceptors, fit for extreme speed (20km/s for example and 150km locking range) and t2 Entosis Link. Who/What can stop my gang from reinforcing the whole region? The module needs to either disable any prop mods or make the ship stationary like siege does. That will give you the fights you are trying to force.

Also whats up with this prime time? Should we only have USTZ alliance, EUTZ alliance etc in huge blocks focused on very specific 4hour window in time?

20 (or fewer) Kitsunes.

So thats 2bil in intys countered by 400mil in ewar frigs.


Or you could use 20 Rifters and save yourself a couple hundred million ISK.

Remember - they can't reinforce it, if you have it linked up too. You don't HAVE to kill the attacker. Just deny him sole control of the field.

That said, kill him anway, if you can, because you can.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2442 - 2015-03-05 15:19:44 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:

Current method at least offers some initiative to the attackers to actually start a meaningful fight as the defender has to come on grid and push them off or remain on grid with them whilst risking a 20m module on even their cheapest ship.


Quite the opposite, actually. It encourages any prospective attacker to spread out as much as possible, and fight as little as possible, since the cycle time on these things is so incredibly low.

It actively discourages defensive fighting pre-reinforce. Which, in turn, basically puts a four hour per structure time tax on the defender.

I elaborated this earlier. I can get a separate monitor, put up a few clients on it with an "afk" cloaked ship each, wait until I have two minutes, reinforce half a dozen structures(because let's not even pretend that is feasible or reasonable to tell people to defend a system 24/7. That's not a game, that's a job), and then they have to guard each and every one for four hours to make sure I don't show up and cap their **** like I'm sniping an Ebay auction.

That is the optimal sov capture method. Barely more effort than afk cloaking, and I can capture sov from even determined defenders after a little while, since eventually they will get tired of it or their wives will kill them.

And then you'd have the Republic of Kaarous, and I didn't fight anybody to get it. At least until someone wanted to take it from me, then we'd take turns trolling each other until somebody gives up.

That's what made me laugh about the "weaponize boredom" line.



And this is precisely why the whole proposal is incredibly, ridiculously weak when it comes to risk-reward and game balance. Even worse, I'm not seeing an easy to way to make this workable. It would probably take less time to modify the existing mechanics and increase the null-sec life benefits to make this non-sense workable.

I'm betting that the majority of CSM already said no when this was revealed to them.

Sometimes, I feel as if my words are falling short to describe the level of incompetency here. I thought before, when the pre-Phoebe blog hit, that this shortsighted and shallow approach was an issue specifically with Greyscale. However, now I fully realize that it is not something that is isolated to Greyscale.
Yroc Jannseen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2443 - 2015-03-05 15:21:37 UTC
Papa Django wrote:
Chirality Tisteloin wrote:
Interesting concept.

Concerning the prime time:
Idea I support the idea that the width of the time window when structures can be reinforced should be tied into occupancy. System boni acquired from usage reduce the time window. Unbonused systems should have rather large window +-6h around the prime time (which becomes a point in time). The exit window should be unaffected by occupancy and tight around prime time (+-2h)
Fly smart, Chira.


And why not scale it regarding to alliance members number from 2 hours to 10.

Something like that :
- 2 hours for <100 members
- 4 hours for < 500
- 6 hours for < 1k
- 8 hours for < 5k
- 10 hours for > 5k

I think also RF duration should be lowered to only one day to allow more battle on week-end and holydays for people not single / unemployed / not student.


This would create an artificial cap on alliance size and as has been pointed out many times before, artificial caps just lead to "MyAwesomeAlliance1" MyAwesomeAlliance2" MyAwesomeAlliance3" and so on.
Super Stallion
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2444 - 2015-03-05 15:21:46 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Super Stallion wrote:
I do not see this changing how sov war is actually conducted. Shooting sov structures only occurs after the war is already won. swapping shooting a sov structure with missiles to shooting the sov structure/cap point with an entosis module doesnt change how the wars are actually fought.

look as the last war between Goonswarm Federation and Test Alliance Please ignore as a reference

For the initial RF fight, you're correct. For the actual defence of an RF'd structure the war now needs to be fought across many different battlefields concurrently with the defender having upto a 4x advantage in capture speed.


But, by the time an alliance is entering the phase where they are spreading out along the constellation to capture points the war is already in the clean up stages. If not, then that alliance is doing it wrong. The war has already been fought, and won, before capture speed and all of the other clean up operations proposed begin to be engaged.

I am really trying to see this working out, but I think the game designers need to place more emphasis onto how a war is actually won... not how to clean up the existing structures. These are two fundamentally different concepts.

I see changes to forcing a fight, and cleaning up structures. I do not see changes to how sov wars are actually fought today.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2445 - 2015-03-05 15:22:09 UTC
afkalt wrote:

I'd LOVE to see these "mighty trollceptors" deal with a simple maulus/caracal combination.


The issue is, as is obvious, not actually killing them.

It's that, since it only takes two minutes to complete a reinforce (which then forces you into a four hour sitdown on the structure), that you functionally would need to have said Caracal and Maulus sitting 50km off of the structure literally all the time.

Idk about you, but I missed the memo where EVE is supposed to be a job instead of a game.

"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.
Papa Django
Materials Harvesting Kombinat
#2446 - 2015-03-05 15:23:36 UTC
Yroc Jannseen wrote:

This would create an artificial cap on alliance size and as has been pointed out many times before, artificial caps just lead to "MyAwesomeAlliance1" MyAwesomeAlliance2" MyAwesomeAlliance3" and so on.


I see no issue with that.

People defending must be the real owners so ...

The goal is to localize conflicts and break big renting block.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2447 - 2015-03-05 15:24:31 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

Why the hell do you think you deserve to hold SOV if you can't deal with inties in your systems especially with the timezone lockout?


Why the hell do they think they deserve to hold sov if all they do is troll me with interceptors?


Quote:

If you only have enough people to defend 3 systems then how about you stop trying to control more than 3?


Hey, that's a great idea that nobody ever though of before! Oh, wait, except that it's impossible to do given the current income system. I'd be able to support about ten players with 3 systems.

Great plan, bro. Roll

That's what a bunch of my posts in this thread have been about, by the way. This MUST be accompanied with a full rework of individual level income in nullsec space.


I never said they deserve to hold SOV and if you are actually trying to defend your SOV, at best they will trigger the "king of the PLEX" event and lose it thus never actually own any SOV.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2448 - 2015-03-05 15:25:01 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:

Current method at least offers some initiative to the attackers to actually start a meaningful fight as the defender has to come on grid and push them off or remain on grid with them whilst risking a 20m module on even their cheapest ship.


Quite the opposite, actually. It encourages any prospective attacker to spread out as much as possible, and fight as little as possible, since the cycle time on these things is so incredibly low.

It actively discourages defensive fighting pre-reinforce. Which, in turn, basically puts a four hour per structure time tax on the defender.

I elaborated this earlier. I can get a separate monitor, put up a few clients on it with an "afk" cloaked ship each, wait until I have two minutes, reinforce half a dozen structures(because let's not even pretend that is feasible or reasonable to tell people to defend a system 24/7. That's not a game, that's a job), and then they have to guard each and every one for four hours to make sure I don't show up and cap their **** like I'm sniping an Ebay auction.

That is the optimal sov capture method. Barely more effort than afk cloaking, and I can capture sov from even determined defenders after a little while, since eventually they will get tired of it or their wives will kill them.

And then you'd have the Republic of Kaarous, and I didn't fight anybody to get it. At least until someone wanted to take it from me, then we'd take turns trolling each other until somebody gives up.

That's what made me laugh about the "weaponize boredom" line.



And this is precisely why the whole proposal is incredibly, ridiculously weak when it comes to risk-reward and game balance. Even worse, I'm not seeing an easy to way to make this workable. It would probably take less time to modify the existing mechanics and increase the null-sec life benefits to make this non-sense workable.

I'm betting that the majority of CSM already said no when this was revealed to them.

Sometimes, I feel as if my words are falling short to describe the level of incompetency here. I thought before, when the pre-Phoebe blog hit, that this shortsighted and shallow approach was an issue specifically with Greyscale. However, now I fully realize that it is not something that is isolated to Greyscale.




It would be, if that was remotely how the system worked.

But it's not, is it?

Not at all.

You have a 4 hour window. You have a MINIMUM of 12 minutes to RF a structure, potentially 42 minutes. All this time you can't warp and have an 80m module strapped to your hull. Still sound like a good idea if the locals are active?


tl;dr: You don't need to watch jack 24/7.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2449 - 2015-03-05 15:25:10 UTC
Papa Django wrote:
Chirality Tisteloin wrote:
Interesting concept.

Concerning the prime time:
Idea I support the idea that the width of the time window when structures can be reinforced should be tied into occupancy. System boni acquired from usage reduce the time window. Unbonused systems should have rather large window +-6h around the prime time (which becomes a point in time). The exit window should be unaffected by occupancy and tight around prime time (+-2h)
Fly smart, Chira.


And why not scale it regarding to alliance members number from 2 hours to 10.

Something like that :
- 2 hours for <100 members
- 4 hours for < 500
- 6 hours for < 1k
- 8 hours for < 5k
- 10 hours for > 5k

I think also RF duration should be lowered to only one day to allow more battle on week-end and holydays for people not single / unemployed / not student.



ANY and all mechanics that scale on number of members can be circuvented by spliting alliance in Joe's alliance 1 and Joe's alliance 2

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#2450 - 2015-03-05 15:26:03 UTC
Super Stallion wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
Super Stallion wrote:
I do not see this changing how sov war is actually conducted. Shooting sov structures only occurs after the war is already won. swapping shooting a sov structure with missiles to shooting the sov structure/cap point with an entosis module doesnt change how the wars are actually fought.

look as the last war between Goonswarm Federation and Test Alliance Please ignore as a reference

For the initial RF fight, you're correct. For the actual defence of an RF'd structure the war now needs to be fought across many different battlefields concurrently with the defender having upto a 4x advantage in capture speed.


But, by the time an alliance is entering the phase where they are spreading out along the constellation to capture points the war is already in the clean up stages. If not, then that alliance is doing it wrong. The war has already been fought, and won, before capture speed and all of the other clean up operations proposed begin to be engaged.

I am really trying to see this working out, but I think the game designers need to place more emphasis onto how a war is actually won... not how to clean up the existing structures. These are two fundamentally different concepts.

I see changes to forcing a fight, and cleaning up structures. I do not see changes to how sov wars are actually fought today.

Of course a larger, more organised alliance should win. But they have to devote time to: disrupting PvE to lower the indices, RFing the structures, fighting the actual battles

AND THEN holding the space afterwards: using the space to raise the indices, protecting it during their own primetime.

Otherwise you just flip it straight back 2 days later.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Doomheim
#2451 - 2015-03-05 15:26:11 UTC
What if only dreads or supers could fit the Entosis magic wand module?

- You mirror today's paradigm of SOV cap use without the structure grind, and capitals still get a role to play in SOV warfare. i.e. Why caps now?
- A SOV fight would always involve at least one valuable asset from both sides. An aggressor needs to risk at least one valuable asset, a defender needs to at least field one also to counter-entosis. No cepter' frackery. Delicious IMHO.


What if ISK generation (the heart of EvE IMHO) was nerfed across the board, and net-buffed in null SOV held systems?

- People ask 'why SOV'? I say follow the money. Problem is it might not be compelling right now. Nerf ISK generation across New Eden including hisec, incursions, losec -- every single aspect of isk generation. Then have the SOV held system indices at 'normal' levels of occupancy use yield a net buff to ISK generation in null from current levels.

Would you like to know more?
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2452 - 2015-03-05 15:26:15 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
afkalt wrote:

I'd LOVE to see these "mighty trollceptors" deal with a simple maulus/caracal combination.


The issue is, as is obvious, not actually killing them.

It's that, since it only takes two minutes to complete a reinforce (which then forces you into a four hour sitdown on the structure), that you functionally would need to have said Caracal and Maulus sitting 50km off of the structure literally all the time.

Idk about you, but I missed the memo where EVE is supposed to be a job instead of a game.



If someone live in the system it will not take 2 minutes. if someone live in sytem then they can neutralize the still ongoign Estosification of the structure with their own module.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2453 - 2015-03-05 15:26:16 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
afkalt wrote:

I'd LOVE to see these "mighty trollceptors" deal with a simple maulus/caracal combination.


The issue is, as is obvious, not actually killing them.

It's that, since it only takes two minutes to complete a reinforce (which then forces you into a four hour sitdown on the structure), that you functionally would need to have said Caracal and Maulus sitting 50km off of the structure literally all the time.

Idk about you, but I missed the memo where EVE is supposed to be a job instead of a game.



It takes two minutes to START a reinforce.


>>Before occupancy defensive bonuses are applied, exerting uncontested control over Territorial Claim Units, Infrastructure Hubs and Outposts will take 10 minutes (plus the duration of the first cycle) and enabling/disabling station services will take 5 minutes (plus the duration of the first cycle). Like everything in this plan, these numbers are subject to change based on playtesting and discussion.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#2454 - 2015-03-05 15:26:17 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Super Stallion wrote:
I do not see this changing how sov war is actually conducted. Shooting sov structures only occurs after the war is already won. swapping shooting a sov structure with missiles to shooting the sov structure/cap point with an entosis module doesnt change how the wars are actually fought.



There will be WAY less structures to shoot. The structure grind at the end will be a mere formality.

The new system takes the same amount of grinding time regardless of if you have fone person doing it or one thousand. That is huge, no longer are supercap blobs required to take space without putting your whole alliance on suicide watch.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Kah'Les
hirr
Pandemic Horde
#2455 - 2015-03-05 15:27:28 UTC
Elenahina wrote:

Or you could use 20 Rifters and save yourself a couple hundred million ISK.

Remember - they can't reinforce it, if you have it linked up too. You don't HAVE to kill the attacker. Just deny him sole control of the field.

That said, kill him anway, if you can, because you can.


Null is kind of supposed to be the end game, where dose people who have played this game for so long have to go to get away from the frigate game. SP should acually count for something, CCPs idea that newbro should be able to take sov is backwards. If you want to fly small gang pvp go do FW not null sec.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#2456 - 2015-03-05 15:27:30 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
ANY and all mechanics that scale on number of members can be circuvented by spliting alliance in Joe's alliance 1 and Joe's alliance 2

So make it so the Sov bonuses only work in favour of the holding group, no passive ratting bonuses etc for anyone that happens to be in the same system, only benefit the group that actually holds the sov.

Great we just split a big alliance into two. Working as intended.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#2457 - 2015-03-05 15:28:45 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
Alp Khan wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:

Current method at least offers some initiative to the attackers to actually start a meaningful fight as the defender has to come on grid and push them off or remain on grid with them whilst risking a 20m module on even their cheapest ship.


Quite the opposite, actually. It encourages any prospective attacker to spread out as much as possible, and fight as little as possible, since the cycle time on these things is so incredibly low.

It actively discourages defensive fighting pre-reinforce. Which, in turn, basically puts a four hour per structure time tax on the defender.

I elaborated this earlier. I can get a separate monitor, put up a few clients on it with an "afk" cloaked ship each, wait until I have two minutes, reinforce half a dozen structures(because let's not even pretend that is feasible or reasonable to tell people to defend a system 24/7. That's not a game, that's a job), and then they have to guard each and every one for four hours to make sure I don't show up and cap their **** like I'm sniping an Ebay auction.

That is the optimal sov capture method. Barely more effort than afk cloaking, and I can capture sov from even determined defenders after a little while, since eventually they will get tired of it or their wives will kill them.

And then you'd have the Republic of Kaarous, and I didn't fight anybody to get it. At least until someone wanted to take it from me, then we'd take turns trolling each other until somebody gives up.

That's what made me laugh about the "weaponize boredom" line.



And this is precisely why the whole proposal is incredibly, ridiculously weak when it comes to risk-reward and game balance. Even worse, I'm not seeing an easy to way to make this workable. It would probably take less time to modify the existing mechanics and increase the null-sec life benefits to make this non-sense workable.

I'm betting that the majority of CSM already said no when this was revealed to them.

Sometimes, I feel as if my words are falling short to describe the level of incompetency here. I thought before, when the pre-Phoebe blog hit, that this shortsighted and shallow approach was an issue specifically with Greyscale. However, now I fully realize that it is not something that is isolated to Greyscale.



Yea, the CSM overwhelmingly disagreeing with this is why we've seen so many CSM speak out against it--oh wait, they haven't.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2458 - 2015-03-05 15:30:52 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
afkalt wrote:

I'd LOVE to see these "mighty trollceptors" deal with a simple maulus/caracal combination.


The issue is, as is obvious, not actually killing them.

It's that, since it only takes two minutes to complete a reinforce (which then forces you into a four hour sitdown on the structure), that you functionally would need to have said Caracal and Maulus sitting 50km off of the structure literally all the time.

Idk about you, but I missed the memo where EVE is supposed to be a job instead of a game.


It takes up to 42 minutes to complete a reinforce, not 2 unless you were stupid enough to leave your structure with a pre-capped timer of only 1 second left.. You can use your own space and only be "defending" a particular structure when you get a warning about that one. If defender bonus get applied when you de-cap your own structure, then you will be able to reset the timer to a full 40 minute.

As much as I want to attacker to work to get SOV, the defender should work to keep his. Keep your index high and you would be allowed longer response window and faster de-cap timers. Not keeping your index up mean you are not using that space anyway so I don't see why you should keep it.
Super Stallion
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2459 - 2015-03-05 15:32:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Super Stallion
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Super Stallion wrote:
I do not see this changing how sov war is actually conducted. Shooting sov structures only occurs after the war is already won. swapping shooting a sov structure with missiles to shooting the sov structure/cap point with an entosis module doesnt change how the wars are actually fought.



There will be WAY less structures to shoot. The structure grind at the end will be a mere formality.

The new system takes the same amount of grinding time regardless of if you have fone person doing it or one thousand. That is huge, no longer are supercap blobs required to take space without putting your whole alliance on suicide watch.


I agree that there is far less grinding. I also agree that less grinding is good. But, this isnt being brought to us as a system to reduce grinding. This is being brought to us as a system which will change how sov war is conducted.

Sadly, this system does not change how sov war is conducted. It only changes the final stage, cleaning up our mess.

edit: also changes how defender is notified that the system is in danger. but that is superfluous in that, your trading one eve male notification of a blockaid unit being erected for an eve mail notification of an entosis module being activated
Papa Django
Materials Harvesting Kombinat
#2460 - 2015-03-05 15:33:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Papa Django
Kagura Nikon wrote:

ANY and all mechanics that scale on number of members can be circuvented by spliting alliance in Joe's alliance 1 and Joe's alliance 2


Again :

I see no issue with that.

People defending must be the real owners so ...

That mean ally member john doe from Joe Alliance 1 cannot defend a Joe Alliance 2 node wich is good to display people accross systems. If you want more flexibility you have to sustain a bigger vulnerability window.

The goal is to localize conflicts and break big renting block.