These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2961 - 2015-03-06 08:44:28 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Torgeir Hekard wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

So, pop the first cycle, leave, if it's not contested again in ten minutes, it's reinforced. Unless that sentence means that you have to cycle the whole thing for that time, which if that's the case, they should just say that then. Because the flowchart suggests that you have to do it once, and that the other timer is for the defender to respond with a contesting Entosis cycle.

As far as I understand, The Module has a 2 minute spool up time after which it starts affecting the timer. So each time you enter the grid you have to spend at least 2 minutes on grid to start affecting the timer. If you leave the grid, the timer stops. If you return, you need to spool up for 2 minutes again.

Now if there are two of you and one leaves, the other one continues to spin the timer, but if you return, activate the module and your buddy leaves immediately, the timer stops until your personal spin up timer passes. So you can't do a rewarp relay race, and each and every person willing to affect the timer HAS to spend at least 2 minutes on grid.



Correct.

This flowchart should hopefully put this to the grave once and for all (with two in the head)


http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66967/1/entosislinksimple_(1).jpg


Bottom box - No links active, progress paused.


Fixed link. ISD Ezwal.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2962 - 2015-03-06 08:46:05 UTC
Torgeir Hekard wrote:

As far as I understand, The Module has a 2 minute spool up time after which it starts affecting the timer.


Yep, confirmed in the blog. (how does that not seem ridiculously low to you?)


Quote:

So each time you enter the grid you have to spend at least 2 minutes on grid to start affecting the timer. If you leave the grid, the timer stops. If you return, you need to spool up for 2 minutes again.


Okay, I can't find anywhere where it says that. Please quote it, because it sure seems to me that completing one cycle is enough.

What I'd like it to be, is that the attacker needs to keep an active Entosis module for the entire capture period. But that is far from clear just from what I'm seeing in the blog. So if you're seeing otherwise, I'd like to see it too.

"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.

Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#2963 - 2015-03-06 08:47:50 UTC
afkalt wrote:

Bottom box - No links active, progress paused.

Either I'm wrong or that flowchart is misleading in what counts as an active Entosis link.
That is, an entosis link is considered active AFTER it finished it's first cycle in an uninterruped sequence of it's own cycles.
Torgeir Hekard
I MYSELF AND ME
#2964 - 2015-03-06 08:50:28 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

What I'd like it to be, is that the attacker needs to keep an active Entosis module for the entire capture period. But that is far from clear just from what I'm seeing in the blog. So if you're seeing otherwise, I'd like to see it too.

The flowchart linked above (and in the original article) seems to imply that's the case.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2965 - 2015-03-06 08:54:15 UTC
Torgeir Hekard wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

What I'd like it to be, is that the attacker needs to keep an active Entosis module for the entire capture period. But that is far from clear just from what I'm seeing in the blog. So if you're seeing otherwise, I'd like to see it too.

The flowchart linked above (and in the original article) seems to imply that's the case.


They seriously need to hire a full time proof reader. I'd like to see a separate thread for each of the wackassed things that these do, laid out more simply.

"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.

Nami Kumamato
Perkone
Caldari State
#2966 - 2015-03-06 09:00:29 UTC
Question is : if this remains unchanged until Fanfest - how many of you are gonna "boo" Hillmar ? :D

Fornicate The Constabulary !

Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus
#2967 - 2015-03-06 09:06:39 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:

It's that, since it only takes two minutes to complete a reinforce


You seem to be under the impression, that it takes only one cycle to RF a structure. That's blatantly false.

It takes one cycle to START the capture process, after which you will have to keep it active to tick down the remaining capture time, which for a not yet entosed structure is 10*(1<=index modifier<=4).

The process is still trollish, but not to the extend you're making it.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2968 - 2015-03-06 09:10:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:

The process is still trollish, but not to the extend you're making it.


Seemingly correct, as was pointed out well before you. I'd still love CCP's clarification, however, as the dev blog leaves me with several confusions, and there's a pile of other things wrong with this besides just the one point I missed about Prime Time.

"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.

Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#2969 - 2015-03-06 09:39:21 UTC
Vigilanta wrote:
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Torgeir Hekard wrote:

The question is, how long is the actual capture time.


That's not relevant. The attacker doesn't have to be on grid for that, by all indications. The attacker only has to pop out for 2 minutes, then cloak up in a safe. If they come back and "rep" it, he does it again. If they don't, they have to waste four hours the next day, and the process starts over.

That's just an inordinate amount of babysitting.


By what indications? You don't even know and you're spouting misinformation.


as currently proposed he is right, there is far to much babysitting required because the vulnerability mechanics of systems are absolutely terrible. Yes his specific example is pretty meh, but the general gist of the proposal as written suggests that for 4 hours each day as a sov holder you really have to focus all your attention on defense, that is nto a good system because while many in nullsec like to focus on pvp, they do also want and need to make money, the risk versus reward equation is way out of whack and you wouldn't have goons and n3 agreeing with each other on this aspect unless it was quite bad which it is.

The argument I have seen the most of so far is that the 4 hour vulnrability is the "occupancy" factor of the system. Its really not, if alliance could survive on only owning 1 or 2 constellations of sov trust me we would, but the cold hard fact is that 90% of systems are 100% useless in most regions. In order for a system to be worth using in a PVE capacity it needs to be off pipe/or far away from your borders, have -5 or better truesec, and preferably be a deadend of some sort. This is the requisite amount of safety required to be on par with other isk making methods see highsec, missions in general, incursions ect. If you make space worth owning that alone will create a large amount of PVP content. I.E. see just about every moon rebalance and how fast it has ignited wars. Tech led to the fall of the NC, then the fall of raiden. WN and the tribute war. The r64 rebalance created the fountain and delve wars.

Nothing in this game creates conflict better than money making incentives. Wars have been over moons and renters more than any other reason in the game. Money talks, this system does not speak to that equation so you are missing the inherent conflict driver. The only driver that exists as written is the pain in the butt factor.

Whats even more hilarious is if all the people in this thread who are not part of incumbent nullsec and keep saying ya the empires and coalitions will finally fall had banded together under the old system of sov dominion or pos warfare they would likely own a region or more of space ALREADY. The key to nullsec is in fact not fleet numbers, supercapital count or even the amount of money in your warchest. It is and always has been organization. The other 3 factors help and yes there is at least some fleet numbers required but by in large it is organization that controls sov ownership. Under the new sov system this doesn't change, organized powers will always beat unorganized powers and control more or better space. The only thing the new system controls is how many people will want to bother with sov at all.

What many of you may fail to realize just because you were not involved or not at a level to know is that most sov wars are lost by the organization, not disparities in fleet numbers or capitals. Fountain war is a key example, as is the halloween war. Test didn't lose because of numbers it lost because its leadership fell to pieces under the organization stress of fighting the war. The halloween war very very similar, the russian leadership of the coalition fell to internal strife. Its likely that the war could have gone 6 months or more in immensea under russian ownership had this leadership strife not occured. The likely reason you are nto seeing a war between the coalitions now is because we know there are sov changes coming, we have known since july and as such no one wanted to commit to stress of sov war until we knew whether or not we even had a reason to fight. No sense in starting a war over space if you dont even know if the new system will allow you to keep what you took.

CCP take heed.
linkback
Guttripper
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2970 - 2015-03-06 09:45:36 UTC
If CCP was smart, then instead of just rolling this out onto Tranquility, they should let it run (at least) three to six months on the test server to see how null sec ebbs and flows.
AlexKent
Lowlife.
Snuffed Out
#2971 - 2015-03-06 09:50:05 UTC
In its current form I doubt there are many small entities looking at capturing and holding sov outside of griefing purpose. Although that will always play a major part in eve, the end-goal should be to make people WANT to live in null, build a home there, defend it and growing as an organization (not necessary in numbers). Renters who just want to PVE will feel unsafe, NPC null residents will never consider capturing systems to actually live in, the skilled corps will prefer the wormholes or lowsec, the major coalitions will abandon the useless space and the problem of empty regions will remain untouched. Why? Because so many systems are not worth owning and there is no possibility to make them any better.

I strongly think a basic concept of phase 3 (giving value to nullsec) should be formulated (not implemented) before we can analyse the current proposed changes. Post a thread with a few hints and let people's ideas flow.

Most of nullsec in its current form is not worth defending. I understand the current changes need to come before a potential null buff, but some hints about the future should be posted for consideration. This would give us a bigger picture of where the game is heading.

It does not need to be detailed and specific, just a few guidelines and the possibility to make our voices heard. It would calm the spirits and allow us to asses the full future of a nullsec scenery.

The same for a potential supercap re-balancing or re-purposing. All we need is a thread from a dev confirming they are looking to implement changes and are looking for feedback.



Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#2972 - 2015-03-06 09:50:46 UTC
Guttripper wrote:
If CCP was smart, then instead of just rolling this out onto Tranquility, they should let it run (at least) three to six months on the test server to see how null sec ebbs and flows.

That's not gonna do ****.
Sit in the corner and think about it for a few minutes. You can come back to the discussion when you think you have the answer why.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2973 - 2015-03-06 09:53:51 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:

CCP take heed.
linkback


Thank you Rifter! That is, more or less, the summation of several of my concerns with this proposed system.

"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.

tlmitf
Please Insert Girder
#2974 - 2015-03-06 09:54:12 UTC
http://www.themittani.com/features/proposed-sov-changes-rise-trollceptor

In reply to the issues raised in this article about interceptors being used to "troll" alliances, the answer is simple.

You add a fitting restriction.
Simple lore drivin fitting requirement stating that any ship that has bubble immunity cannot fit the sov-laser due to incompatible tech.
This eliminates them being fitted to inties, nulli-T3's and at a stretch, supercarriers.
Simple gate camps at choke points with bubbles will provide security against griefing runs, but a gang can still push through for a 'real' attack on sov.

Think about it for a moment.
Any ship carrying the module cannot simply flee a bubble, making them catchable in a simple gatecamp.
Any sov holding entity should have functional intel reporting systems, alerting people to an inbound gang. OR, once a system starts to get captured by someone that slipped in, defences can go up, alerts raised and people caught and killed.

The lore would be simple. The advanced electronics that grant interdiction nullification abilities is at odds with the new sov-laser and will not work. This is why I mentioned supercarriers. While they only get caught in bubbles, they still have interdiction nullification technology. I just works backwards to the T3 or inty.

The means that a gate camp will pick up any ship coming in with the intent of disrupting sov. We all know that a small gate camp will be overwhelmed easily enough with a bit of effort, which even the smallest sov-desiring entity would be able to muster.
That, or you just slip a inty in with a cyno and jump a gang in that way. Which has range limitations. Unlike the interceptor with a sov-laser.
Papa Django
Materials Harvesting Kombinat
#2975 - 2015-03-06 09:55:00 UTC
Miner Hottie wrote:
Mike Azariah wrote:

3) Goons will ruin everything. How is that different from any other point in the past few years. The do because they like to.


Actually on point 3 we couldn't ruin everything before, there were limits imposed by timers and EHP. Now we can conceivably make every sov-null system outside of the homeland burn in the space of a month.


12 000 / 3294 = ?

Mmh seems you could not.

Either you miss the point here or you are just trolling.

Miner Hottie wrote:

10) All night shops are open 24 hours a day by rotating their staff. A large multi-timezone organization could do the same for the prime time to make things interesting for different parts of its membership.

11) If I were an Aussie alliance I would hire mercs to drag a late night prime time over to my slot so we could finish it off. Remember prime time is when the battle has to start, not end.


The primetime should be scaled with alliance size. The bigger you are the bigger should be your primetime.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2976 - 2015-03-06 10:01:32 UTC
tlmitf wrote:
http://www.themittani.com/features/proposed-sov-changes-rise-trollceptor

In reply to the issues raised in this article about interceptors being used to "troll" alliances, the answer is simple.

You add a fitting restriction.


Paws off my 100m killmails which I'll splash for funsies.
Papa Django
Materials Harvesting Kombinat
#2977 - 2015-03-06 10:01:54 UTC
tlmitf wrote:
http://www.themittani.com/features/proposed-sov-changes-rise-trollceptor

In reply to the issues raised in this article about interceptors being used to "troll" alliances, the answer is simple.


The answer is : there is no issue with trollceptors. It was discussed extensively in this thread it is so easily counterable when you live in your space.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#2978 - 2015-03-06 10:08:24 UTC
Papa Django wrote:
tlmitf wrote:
http://www.themittani.com/features/proposed-sov-changes-rise-trollceptor

In reply to the issues raised in this article about interceptors being used to "troll" alliances, the answer is simple.


The answer is : there is no issue with trollceptors. It was discussed extensively in this thread it is so easily counterable when you live in your space.


And what that really means is that, during your "prime time" you are automatically on the back foot, and have to babysit each and every structure in your alliance.

You'd be spending your peak hours guarding your sov instead of using it. To me, this seems remarkably hostile to small groups without the necessary numbers to have a presence in numerous timezones. (because large groups have more ability to manipulate their prime time to their advantage)

"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.

Kah'Les
hirr
Pandemic Horde
#2979 - 2015-03-06 10:10:37 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Papa Django wrote:
tlmitf wrote:
http://www.themittani.com/features/proposed-sov-changes-rise-trollceptor

In reply to the issues raised in this article about interceptors being used to "troll" alliances, the answer is simple.


The answer is : there is no issue with trollceptors. It was discussed extensively in this thread it is so easily counterable when you live in your space.


In your mind.

Trollceptor is not there to take SOV the main concerne it is there to promt a groupe to respond to it, and then just fly off and do it somewhere else. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2980 - 2015-03-06 10:13:44 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Papa Django wrote:
tlmitf wrote:
http://www.themittani.com/features/proposed-sov-changes-rise-trollceptor

In reply to the issues raised in this article about interceptors being used to "troll" alliances, the answer is simple.


The answer is : there is no issue with trollceptors. It was discussed extensively in this thread it is so easily counterable when you live in your space.


And what that really means is that, during your "prime time" you are automatically on the back foot, and have to babysit each and every structure in your alliance.

You'd be spending your peak hours guarding your sov instead of using it. To me, this seems remarkably hostile to small groups without the necessary numbers to have a presence in numerous timezones. (because large groups have more ability to manipulate their prime time to their advantage)



Depends, loot fairy odds suggest killing even 2 of these per hour is 80m per hour. And they're not hard to kill, that's pretty solid income.

1) Cerberus
2) MTU
3) ?????
4) PROFIT!!!

Alternatively, we can use the literal armies of cyno alts to guard things if required.