These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
the sargent
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#241 - 2015-03-03 17:19:34 UTC
Total Newbie wrote:
the sargent wrote:
Cheyennes wrote:
the sargent wrote:
It's funny, everyone tells CCP they want a occupancy based SOV system. When CCP comes up with a system that takes the basic concept of "occupancy" and uses it as a mechanic everyone start whining about how it will ruin everything. Seriously guys calm down if it doesn't work out guess what? it will be fixed in a couple of months because of the shorter release schedule. Give the system a chance first before going "IT'S THE END!"

I mean seriously every time CCP changes something to do will null sec its "the end of null sec as we know it," and yes that is true but just because it's the end of one system doesn't mean the new system is going to be complete trash.

Damn, sorry for the minor wall of text.


Says the guy with no 0.0 history in his employment history.


You're right I don't have any 0.0 employment history. Didn't feel like joining one of the big power blocs and small independent corps can't exist in 0.0 space. With some adjusting this system could actually allow smaller groups to effectively claim SOV somewhere and keep it. Is what CCP proposing perfect probably not.

However, for the first time I'm actually considering 0.0 space as a viable place i would want to go to and live in for an extended period of time, and isn't that the point of all this. To get more people to want to fly out to 0.0 space?


How can you comment about it if you haven't experienced it? If you do not understand it in its current form, then quite frankly you have no clue about the ramifications that will even more, negatively affect the little guy


Please explain how it will negatively affect the little guy. I'm being genuinely curious here not a smart a$$. like I said it could use some adjusting but as a basis to start from it seems easier for new people to get into the game of SOV since it doesn't require several capital ships plus full support fleet to take down one system.
Again i don't think its perfect but from the outside looking in it looks like it actually has some potential after some tweaking.
Mostlyharmlesss
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#242 - 2015-03-03 17:20:15 UTC
Aryndel Vyst wrote:
HEY LETS MAKE SOV EASIER TO TAKE FROM LARGE ENTITIES BUT GIVE NO BENEFITS WHATSOEVER TO THE RESIDENTS.

Do you want everyone to do high sec incursions or something?


~content creation~


Not emptying quoting.

Follow me on Twitter for the latest regarding GoonSwarm Federation and our recruitment drives!

Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#243 - 2015-03-03 17:20:25 UTC
I would like to correct the statement that it's a CTF. It is, in fact, a totally different gamemode - Domination.

Sooo uh, to provide some actual criticism instead of just saying how bad Domination was, I'll ask a few questions:

- How does the following system create an incentive to go and take sov?
- How does the following system in any way benefit "the small guy" who is "trying to carve out his own system?"

The effort to distribute one system being captured over a constellation to take advantage of its layout is a good idea, in fact - it might be the only good idea out of it. As it stands, unless I'm misinterpreting it, the entire system would reward evading a fight rather than encouraging it.

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph

MiliasColds
Strategic Incompetence
Blue Sun Interstellar Technologies
#244 - 2015-03-03 17:20:26 UTC
W Sherman Elric wrote:
interesting the more I think on it the more curious I am, how is this going to mess with the rental empires? should break them up nicely. But that just leaves empty space need more low sec connections to null regions. Such as branch and period basis for example.


it's continuing the slow push towards the "don't ship everything to high, and don't import everything from high" mantra, which primarily is only lacking because of t2 materials (which may yet be solved)
Tiberian Deci
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#245 - 2015-03-03 17:20:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tiberian Deci
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Tiberian Deci wrote:
Will notifications go out like they do now? Will the entire alliance get a mail that something of theirs is under attack so they can dispatch a fleet to go defend it? Or will it get RF'd and then we get notifications about RF status and the like?

This is a good question. If notifications continue to go out the moment someone invades/attacks another groups sov it will undermine this new system.


I don't think so necessarily. Depending on how far away it is from a staging system, formup and travel times may be just long enough that you could sneak off a hac before enough DPS arrived to kill you. And if not, there's conflict, which is good! woo!

Gorski Car wrote:
Xenuria wrote:
I support this.



I agree...



Automatically off my ballot for agreeing with Xenuria. XD
Slaver73
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#246 - 2015-03-03 17:21:23 UTC
so, this is a nice highsec sov system

but where is the nullsec system?
Anslo
Scope Works
#247 - 2015-03-03 17:21:48 UTC
o7 2 ur sov m8r

[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]

Maya Cinderfort
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#248 - 2015-03-03 17:22:07 UTC
CCP pls pls don't make me cry.

ok enough QQ

i think the idea of having an event to capture something is good in it self, but BUT the mindnuming bordom we had while we grided down our first few systems was & still is needed. you allways knew when someone attacked your TCU for lols he couldn'T do that much alone. or any structure for that matter, now a single person can come in and troll the living **** out of you.

we have some ppl roaming our systems who would fit into that role quite well. but i don't want to check on **** every 10 minutes just to avoid a stupid dragged out node capturing event.

can't we just all agree that null is together with incursions w-space one of the most profitable areas to be around. now getting new players there without much effort isn't gonna help anyone except those looking for easy kills. maybe make lowsec more entertaining for pve purposes, flood some ppl out & leave null for those who want to play longer than 4 hours a day.

if you go through with this then i hope it brings the goldenfleet times back, but probably unlikely since powerplayers can still drop a few caps on each node there is to capture.

Here's my Idea: Use those capture events for something more fun, more engaging, not life threatening, maybe make it somekind of pvp anomaly spawning in a constellation similar to incrusions giving defenders a bonus (small one). when someone wins the event:

Defender wins = no upkeep until next event spawns
Attacker wins = upkeep is doubled & the doubled part payed to the Winner

when no one engages in this at all (talking far out systems) upkeep stays normal. (by not at all i mean no hostile actions taken after reinforcement ends)


BUT (again i know):

if you want to use the node event for sov:

make lets say 1 cap & below node 2 BS and below node 1 BC or cruiser and below (no T3) & 1 destroyer frigat only node.
that way alot more ships get used & even expierenced frigat FWers can find a place in an alliance, that is not tackle.

Tiberian Deci
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#249 - 2015-03-03 17:22:38 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Tiberian Deci wrote:
GOB the Magician wrote:
Still little reason to actually live in the sov. Perhaps update #37 will address this.


I can think of several:

You enjoy living there
You enjoy living with the people there you live with
You enjoy fighting your neighbors nearby

.
And the most important one of all - epeen.


We meet again, my doppelganging friend...
Lena Lazair
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#250 - 2015-03-03 17:23:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Lena Lazair
Mo'Chuisle wrote:
How the ******* **** can anyone think up a new sovereignty concept that relies on a four hour prime time window per day for the only interaction between players and not stop and scrap the whole system at that point?


It's a game. Artificial mechanics are a necessity.

I'm actually happy to see CCP finally taking a more pragmatic approach to this and loosening their historically obsessive ties to lore and realism. We don't actually live in space, we aren't in the military, and defending small pieces of EVE should not require players to maintain 24/7 vigilance or 12 hours of AFK structure grinding. Some form of artificial/gimmicky mechanic is a simple reality in the face of this fact.

And this doesn't really do anything to negate the advantages large blocs gain from being able to behave like no-lifers in aggregate, it just allows some smaller niche stuff.

That said, I agree with other comments made so far... the real key will still hinges on providing benefits to occupancy that allow higher-density life in nullsec. Larger blocs must be able to maintain their member base in smaller/denser regions of space, and in theory reward occupancy/defense/large bloc behavior with the ability to concentrate more members into fewer systems in a manner that cannot be gamed/manipulated by smaller groups (and therefore not break/allow for abuse of ISK/hr/player/system).

In particular these benefits should be roughly on par with the income/player of smaller alliances in backwater constellations. The idea should be to neither encourage nor discourage large OR small alliance sov. If you want to be a large alliance you should be able to scale up your space roughly linearly with your membership so you don't NEED to sprawl in order to maintain pilot income levels. But likewise your system income/player shouldn't be harshly punished for NOT being a massive bloc, or else we just end up with the pressures to blue we have today.

EDIT: which pretty much all comes back to carrier ratting and anomaly distrubtions, since moon goo is not a line member income stream.
HarlyQ
harlyq syrokos investment station
Goonswarm Federation
#251 - 2015-03-03 17:23:58 UTC
Looking to buy supers to refine into minerals for these new mods.
MiliasColds
Strategic Incompetence
Blue Sun Interstellar Technologies
#252 - 2015-03-03 17:24:05 UTC
Maya Cinderfort wrote:
CCP pls pls don't make me cry.

ok enough QQ

i think the idea of having an event to capture something is good in it self, but BUT the mindnuming bordom we had while we grided down our first few systems was & still is needed. you allways knew when someone attacked your TCU for lols he couldn'T do that much alone. or any structure for that matter, now a single person can come in and troll the living **** out of you.

we have some ppl roaming our systems who would fit into that role quite well. but i don't want to check on **** every 10 minutes just to avoid a stupid dragged out node capturing event.

can't we just all agree that null is together with incursions w-space one of the most profitable areas to be around. now getting new players there without much effort isn't gonna help anyone except those looking for easy kills. maybe make lowsec more entertaining for pve purposes, flood some ppl out & leave null for those who want to play longer than 4 hours a day.

if you go through with this then i hope it brings the goldenfleet times back, but probably unlikely since powerplayers can still drop a few caps on each node there is to capture.

Here's my Idea: Use those capture events for something more fun, more engaging, not life threatening, maybe make it somekind of pvp anomaly spawning in a constellation similar to incrusions giving defenders a bonus (small one). when someone wins the event:

Defender wins = no upkeep until next event spawns
Attacker wins = upkeep is doubled & the doubled part payed to the Winner

when no one engages in this at all (talking far out systems) upkeep stays normal. (by not at all i mean no hostile actions taken after reinforcement ends)


BUT (again i know):

if you want to use the node event for sov:

make lets say 1 cap & below node 2 BS and below node 1 BC or cruiser and below (no T3) & 1 destroyer frigat only node.
that way alot more ships get used & even expierenced frigat FWers can find a place in an alliance, that is not tackle.



everyone keeps saying 10 minutes, ITS ONLY 10 MINUTES IF YOU HAVE 0 INDICES. so yes they can take the systems you have but don't use, if you use them no it's more like 30-40 minutes. which you should be able to kill him in.
Touchie Mc TwiddleHands
Chesthair Waves When The Wind Blows
#253 - 2015-03-03 17:24:41 UTC
First off: great stuff, finally at least SOME way for small gangs to provoke a response.

However, there are some issues:

With these changes it is about time to implement a proper "Coalition" system.
A lot of players are complaining about the prime time issue, preventing them from taking part at huge sov battles of their alliances due to timezone restrictions. This is a valid point of course, but there is also a very easy solution (that has been mentioned here multiple times already) - splitting current alliances into timezone branches. You can still be a member of Goonswarm, Brave Collective or whatever - your alliance name simply changes to "Goonswarm EU" etc.
Of course this is still effort and does not have the greatest looks, but people are going to have to, and WILL adapt as usual, just like after Phoebe.
However, CCP should support this transition as much as possible, by adding a proper Coalition system. Alliances should be able to create and join Coalitions (Hey, you could even name your coalition Brave Collective etc so you can still 100% identify with your buddies in other timezones!). They would be visible in-game just like alliances, and provide basic management features such as a Coalition chat, an overview state ("pilot is in my coallition"), standings and, maybe, shared access to the new sovereignity overview.
This would allow the current big alliances to keep their names and identities aswell as provide sov combat to members of all timezones.

Another issue I see are Entosis links, particularly the T2 version on Frigate and (T3) Destroyer hulls.
10km/s Interceptors with lockrange mods are bad enough, but a 20+ km/s Svipul with T2 Entosis would be close to invulnerable. Therefore these links (or, at the very least, the long range T2 version) should be limited to Cruiser hulls and above - smaller ships would still play a big role in the new sov fights by scouting Command Nodes and intercepting hostile ships with Entosis links.
Elona Solette
Innsmouth Innshore Lifeboat Service
#254 - 2015-03-03 17:24:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Elona Solette
Could I suggest that the 'prime time' setting is optional?

Forcing some alliances who may be comfortable with defending across all time zones into a form of TZ apartheid seems a little counter productive in a social game.

I understand the logic behind the TZ setting but don't think making it optional, providing more choices, whilst retaining the overall aim of allowing smaller groups to hold space wouldn't be a problem.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
#255 - 2015-03-03 17:25:13 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
Tiberian Deci wrote:
Will notifications go out like they do now? Will the entire alliance get a mail that something of theirs is under attack so they can dispatch a fleet to go defend it? Or will it get RF'd and then we get notifications about RF status and the like?

This is a good question. If notifications continue to go out the moment someone invades/attacks another groups sov it will undermine this new system.
I can see how groups can be baited into fights if they are too quick to react to an attack. Also, minimal time investment by "attackers" to bait a fight as well.

Small groups will not be able to hold sov indefinitely, but they will be able to take sov or at least get some fights. If the large alliance brings too much, then they just bugger off and blue ball. Over time, after several rounds of blue balls, the larger alliance will forget about non-critical systems and prioritize which systems they want to spend effort.

Every now and then they'll steamroll an area they don't use, but eventually those systems will flip back to the locals who will use blue balling + easy timers to get what they want.

Also, cockbag gate camps FTW.


Baneken
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
#256 - 2015-03-03 17:25:42 UTC
I have finally read all of that blog and so far the proposed system seems like a solid proposal for replacing the current sov system.
Altirius Saldiaro
Doomheim
#257 - 2015-03-03 17:26:42 UTC
I really like these changes a lot.
Rita Zechs
Large Rodent Hunters
#258 - 2015-03-03 17:27:31 UTC
The important metric regarding the success of a sovereighty mechanics change was the amount of goon tears.

This looks like an awesome change.
Tiberian Deci
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#259 - 2015-03-03 17:28:06 UTC
Touchie Mc TwiddleHands wrote:
First off: great stuff, finally at least SOME way for small gangs to provoke a response.

However, there are some issues:

With these changes it is about time to implement a proper "Coalition" system.
A lot of players are complaining about the prime time issue, preventing them from taking part at huge sov battles of their alliances due to timezone restrictions. This is a valid point of course, but there is also a very easy solution (that has been mentioned here multiple times already) - splitting current alliances into timezone branches. You can still be a member of Goonswarm, Brave Collective or whatever - your alliance name simply changes to "Goonswarm EU" etc.
Of course this is still effort and does not have the greatest looks, but people are going to have to, and WILL adapt as usual, just like after Phoebe.
However, CCP should support this transition as much as possible, by adding a proper Coalition system. Alliances should be able to create and join Coalitions (Hey, you could even name your coalition Brave Collective etc so you can still 100% identify with your buddies in other timezones!). They would be visible in-game just like alliances, and provide basic management features such as a Coalition chat, an overview state ("pilot is in my coallition"), standings and, maybe, shared access to the new sovereignity overview.
This would allow the current big alliances to keep their names and identities aswell as provide sov combat to members of all timezones.

Another issue I see are Entosis links, particularly the T2 version on Frigate and (T3) Destroyer hulls.
10km/s Interceptors with lockrange mods are bad enough, but a 20+ km/s Svipul with T2 Entosis would be close to invulnerable. Therefore these links (or, at the very least, the long range T2 version) should be limited to Cruiser hulls and above - smaller ships would still play a big role in the new sov fights by scouting Command Nodes and intercepting hostile ships with Entosis links.


If all these people are so similar and want to do everything together, why don't they either (a) fold into the same alliance or (b) fold into the same corp?

Also they said the entosis links would make you stationary while active I believe, much like a cyno except you can't receive remote reps.
EvilweaselFinance
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#260 - 2015-03-03 17:28:37 UTC
MiliasColds wrote:
everyone keeps saying 10 minutes, ITS ONLY 10 MINUTES IF YOU HAVE 0 INDICES. so yes they can take the systems you have but don't use, if you use them no it's more like 30-40 minutes. which you should be able to kill him in.

systems with mining indexes are few and far between so you're looking at systems with mil5 and sov5 as your best-case scenario, and most important systems actually have too many people in local to effectively watch local while ratting so their mildex is not at 5