These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#3001 - 2015-03-06 11:12:58 UTC
Well, the whole trollceptor thing has been effectively demolished as an argument (for those that do not agree, just go back and read why)

The Timing issue needs work, and Fozzie has stated he is open to that, and discussion will take place in another thread.
There is a real concern with whether the low truesec systems can support suficient residents, especially as some, when taking into account, increased potential disruption, may have issues with wealth generation to support independant operation,

The thread seems to have reached a sensible point.
Good luck to everyone.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3002 - 2015-03-06 11:13:37 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:

Cloackign is already not allowed since you CANNOT LOCK ANYTHING WHILE CLOACKED!!!


One wonders then if you can drop your target deliberately, and prematurely end the Entosis cycle and thereby it's debuff, enabling someone to disengage and warp off when they would otherwise be unable.

"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.
Miner Hottie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3003 - 2015-03-06 11:14:01 UTC
Papa Django wrote:
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.


You are not very good at math it would seem, try 40,000/(3,294-665 (CFC space)). We can put 5 inties in every other system in null sec and still have 20,000 for home defense.

As for primetime scaling with alliance size, that rubbish has been disposed of elsewhere.

It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3004 - 2015-03-06 11:17:29 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:

I would suggest more of a trade-off approach, rather than punish, punish, punish. Give players the choice of widening the window if they feel they can handle it, in return for benefits to doing so - say match the amount of Prime-time "stretch", with a commesurate stretching of capture time (For example, say a system would be a 10 minute capture against an Alliance with a 4-hour window, make it so having a 6 hour window means the same capture would take 15 minutes, 20 for a 8 hour window, 30 for a 12 hour, etc). Obviously, there would need to be a ceiling to this (to prevent Alliances making ludicrous capture times through advancing their indices to the max, then opening up for 24 hours to ramp any capture into a multi-hour torture), or more likely make it a case of diminishing returns.

I know the immediate knee-jerk reaction will be that I'm attempting to make life easier for the defender, but consider two same-sized alliances, one purely EU timezone, and one 50/50 split between EU and US (or EU and RUS, or US east coast/west coast). At present, the "pure" time-zone alliance has it easier, as their players are concentrated in their Prime, while the mixed alliance has in reality only got half the population to respond in their Prime, so are more likely to burn that segment out, and be unable to respond as swiftly to threats. By being allowed to stretch their Prime, they make up for the smaller population in any given segment of time by having more time to respond to a threat, and hence making lightening raids less stressful.


There must be a wide enough minimal time.

But prizes on the system enconomic troughput coudl be given.

Example: standard 4 hours prime.... standard economy. 3 hours prime (I would put this at the VERY VERY minimum) -33% income. 8 hours prime- 50% extra income.


Increasing value is certainly an alternative, however, my reservation with this is you are rewarding the wrong people. There is often a clear split between PVPers and PVEers, and a situation that makes life more annoying for a PVPer (since they want to be out roaming or brawling, not bug-hunting interceptors) to give benefit to the PVEers is only going to cause resentment ("Why am I having to chase Interceptors for 8 hours so the lazy bum multiboxing drone boats instead of helping out gets more isk. Screw him."). Sure, this might cause the fracturing of large groups that is a desirable aim, but fracturing it along this line would be hazardous to nullsec health (since if all the PVPers go "screw this" and split off and go in to NPC Null, the PVEers have no protection, and go back to highsec). Its certainly an alternative though (and potentially some middle ground that give a little boost in several areas might be the way)
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3005 - 2015-03-06 11:18:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:

Cloackign is already not allowed since you CANNOT LOCK ANYTHING WHILE CLOACKED!!!


One wonders then if you can drop your target deliberately, and prematurely end the Entosis cycle and thereby it's debuff, enabling someone to disengage and warp off when they would otherwise be unable.




That is NOT how TARGETED modules work. When you lose the lock on a target that you were applying a targeted module the cycle of the module does nto END IMMEDIATELY! Check it with a salvager for example. The effect is just checked at the end. I am pretty sure the debuffs will end only when the CYCLE time ends.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3006 - 2015-03-06 11:19:37 UTC
Miner Hottie wrote:
Papa Django wrote:
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.


You are not very good at math it would seem, try 40,000/(3,294-665 (CFC space)). We can put 5 inties in every other system in null sec and still have 20,000 for home defense.

As for primetime scaling with alliance size, that rubbish has been disposed of elsewhere.


LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3007 - 2015-03-06 11:20:17 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Well, the whole trollceptor thing has been effectively demolished....

Only in the heads of those who don't want to hear about it. How about leaving it to the Devs to decide whether its a problem or not, rather than the rather biased views of posters?
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3008 - 2015-03-06 11:20:57 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:

I would suggest more of a trade-off approach, rather than punish, punish, punish. Give players the choice of widening the window if they feel they can handle it, in return for benefits to doing so - say match the amount of Prime-time "stretch", with a commesurate stretching of capture time (For example, say a system would be a 10 minute capture against an Alliance with a 4-hour window, make it so having a 6 hour window means the same capture would take 15 minutes, 20 for a 8 hour window, 30 for a 12 hour, etc). Obviously, there would need to be a ceiling to this (to prevent Alliances making ludicrous capture times through advancing their indices to the max, then opening up for 24 hours to ramp any capture into a multi-hour torture), or more likely make it a case of diminishing returns.

I know the immediate knee-jerk reaction will be that I'm attempting to make life easier for the defender, but consider two same-sized alliances, one purely EU timezone, and one 50/50 split between EU and US (or EU and RUS, or US east coast/west coast). At present, the "pure" time-zone alliance has it easier, as their players are concentrated in their Prime, while the mixed alliance has in reality only got half the population to respond in their Prime, so are more likely to burn that segment out, and be unable to respond as swiftly to threats. By being allowed to stretch their Prime, they make up for the smaller population in any given segment of time by having more time to respond to a threat, and hence making lightening raids less stressful.


There must be a wide enough minimal time.

But prizes on the system enconomic troughput coudl be given.

Example: standard 4 hours prime.... standard economy. 3 hours prime (I would put this at the VERY VERY minimum) -33% income. 8 hours prime- 50% extra income.


Increasing value is certainly an alternative, however, my reservation with this is you are rewarding the wrong people. There is often a clear split between PVPers and PVEers, and a situation that makes life more annoying for a PVPer (since they want to be out roaming or brawling, not bug-hunting interceptors) to give benefit to the PVEers is only going to cause resentment ("Why am I having to chase Interceptors for 8 hours so the lazy bum multiboxing drone boats instead of helping out gets more isk. Screw him."). Sure, this might cause the fracturing of large groups that is a desirable aim, but fracturing it along this line would be hazardous to nullsec health (since if all the PVPers go "screw this" and split off and go in to NPC Null, the PVEers have no protection, and go back to highsec). Its certainly an alternative though (and potentially some middle ground that give a little boost in several areas might be the way)


Null sec alliances do not work like that. The COMMAND of the alliance will decide. and they will use the money from the taxes to help the alliance. Reinburse ships... etc... That is an issue for the alliance organization to solve.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Dark Spite
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#3009 - 2015-03-06 11:23:25 UTC
Miner Hottie wrote:
Papa Django wrote:
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.


You are not very good at math it would seem, try 40,000/(3,294-665 (CFC space)). We can put 5 inties in every other system in null sec and still have 20,000 for home defense.

As for primetime scaling with alliance size, that rubbish has been disposed of elsewhere.


This would also mean there are actually 40K PLAYERS in CFC, and the answer is that there isnt. I would like to see all players multiboxing all their alts for both these things. It would be killmail farming heaven for everyone else, unless they all have 4-10 monitors each.
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3010 - 2015-03-06 11:24:38 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Papa Digger wrote:
Entosis module mechanics definately need some changes.
Fitting - pg 200.
No cloak activation while module is active


Cloackign is already not allowed since you CANNOT LOCK ANYTHING WHILE CLOACKED!!!


Notably, you aren't supposed to be able to MWD while cloaked, yet clever use of activation times makes the Cloak-MWD trick a quite familiar and widely used tactic. There is certainly nothing wrong with highlighting where a potential carelessness in coding could create a hilariously stupid bug.
Rex Crendraven
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3011 - 2015-03-06 11:25:14 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:

I would suggest more of a trade-off approach, rather than punish, punish, punish. Give players the choice of widening the window if they feel they can handle it, in return for benefits to doing so - say match the amount of Prime-time "stretch", with a commesurate stretching of capture time (For example, say a system would be a 10 minute capture against an Alliance with a 4-hour window, make it so having a 6 hour window means the same capture would take 15 minutes, 20 for a 8 hour window, 30 for a 12 hour, etc). Obviously, there would need to be a ceiling to this (to prevent Alliances making ludicrous capture times through advancing their indices to the max, then opening up for 24 hours to ramp any capture into a multi-hour torture), or more likely make it a case of diminishing returns.

I know the immediate knee-jerk reaction will be that I'm attempting to make life easier for the defender, but consider two same-sized alliances, one purely EU timezone, and one 50/50 split between EU and US (or EU and RUS, or US east coast/west coast). At present, the "pure" time-zone alliance has it easier, as their players are concentrated in their Prime, while the mixed alliance has in reality only got half the population to respond in their Prime, so are more likely to burn that segment out, and be unable to respond as swiftly to threats. By being allowed to stretch their Prime, they make up for the smaller population in any given segment of time by having more time to respond to a threat, and hence making lightening raids less stressful.


There must be a wide enough minimal time.

But prizes on the system enconomic troughput coudl be given.

Example: standard 4 hours prime.... standard economy. 3 hours prime (I would put this at the VERY VERY minimum) -33% income. 8 hours prime- 50% extra income.


Increasing value is certainly an alternative, however, my reservation with this is you are rewarding the wrong people. There is often a clear split between PVPers and PVEers, and a situation that makes life more annoying for a PVPer (since they want to be out roaming or brawling, not bug-hunting interceptors) to give benefit to the PVEers is only going to cause resentment ("Why am I having to chase Interceptors for 8 hours so the lazy bum multiboxing drone boats instead of helping out gets more isk. Screw him."). Sure, this might cause the fracturing of large groups that is a desirable aim, but fracturing it along this line would be hazardous to nullsec health (since if all the PVPers go "screw this" and split off and go in to NPC Null, the PVEers have no protection, and go back to highsec). Its certainly an alternative though (and potentially some middle ground that give a little boost in several areas might be the way)


You come across as someone who thinks he knows how null sec alliances work while in reality you don't.
Papa Digger
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3012 - 2015-03-06 11:27:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Papa Digger
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Cloackign is already not allowed since you CANNOT LOCK ANYTHING WHILE CLOACKED!!!


No need for the other changes. IF the cycle does not end when the ship get out of range and jsut FAILS at its effect at its end, its enough.

If you allow cloack, you'll get 100500 Uncatchable Joe's.
davet517
Raata Invicti
#3013 - 2015-03-06 11:28:41 UTC
Damned if I'm going to read 150 pages. Has anyone addressed how caps and supers will play into all of this yet? I know you can make a theoretical argument that every serious fight will escalate, but I don't see a necessary escalation path, given the mechanics as they have been described here.

Will caps and supers only be necessary for contesting moons after this patch?
Aralyn Cormallen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3014 - 2015-03-06 11:29:26 UTC
Rex Crendraven wrote:

You come across as someone who thinks he knows how null sec alliances work while in reality you don't.

You are correct, my knowledge of the inner workings of the mighty sov-holding Federal Navy Academy is somewhat limited.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#3015 - 2015-03-06 11:31:38 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Well, the whole trollceptor thing has been effectively demolished....

Only in the heads of those who don't want to hear about it. How about leaving it to the Devs to decide whether its a problem or not, rather than the rather biased views of posters?


On the contrary, I cannot wait to farm the kills.

A 100m, self tackling 1800 EHP ship? Yeah, that is going to have a VeryBadTime™ indeed.

Sure, some might burn off grid, maybe. But a bunch are gonna die hard.
Dark Spite
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#3016 - 2015-03-06 11:34:04 UTC
davet517 wrote:
Damned if I'm going to read 150 pages. Has anyone addressed how caps and supers will play into all of this yet? I know you can make a theoretical argument that every serious fight will escalate, but I don't see a necessary escalation path, given the mechanics as they have been described here.

Will caps and supers only be necessary for contesting moons after this patch?


Towards structures like poco's and pos maybe. Still really good ships to kill other capitals with. And in the case of triage carriers as support for subcap fleets. Wouldnt mind seeing more oldschool BS and BC fleets (no, you cannot still cannot bring a Drake to an armor fleet and expect logi to rep you).
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
#3017 - 2015-03-06 11:36:46 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month.


I have said the same thing but it is GSF and they have all the everything. I agree that they can muster up a large portion of the player base but I don't think that they have enough pull to have much more than a few thousand players at any given time-that aren't alts-to put into action and defiantly not for more than a month or so. If that, organization goes a long way but people have lives and I don't think they have that kind of numbers or stamina.

Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
Rex Crendraven
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#3018 - 2015-03-06 11:39:09 UTC
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:
Rex Crendraven wrote:

You come across as someone who thinks he knows how null sec alliances work while in reality you don't.

You are correct, my knowledge of the inner workings of the mighty sov-holding Federal Navy Academy is somewhat limited.


Don't judge a player by his ALTs.
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
#3019 - 2015-03-06 11:45:02 UTC
davet517 wrote:
Damned if I'm going to read 150 pages. Has anyone addressed how caps and supers will play into all of this yet? I know you can make a theoretical argument that every serious fight will escalate, but I don't see a necessary escalation path, given the mechanics as they have been described here.

Will caps and supers only be necessary for contesting moons after this patch?



I've thought about this and I think that the most they will contribute will be a massive HP pool or aid in escalations, I hope that they find a better role for ships bigger that BCs. Maybe some type of bonus to the length of the E-link or something because if we continue down this path it seems to be subcaps online.

Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why. Hunter S. Thompson
Anthar Thebess
#3020 - 2015-03-06 11:47:56 UTC
Can we also diminish way current alliance holding corporations work?
So you put all sov, stations on one corporation that is managed only by few people.

I know that players can overcome every thing by just making more corporations , or by passing some of the sub assets to other corporations in alliance , and that is my goal.

More people will have feeling that they are home.
If some alliances will don't want to do it , but keep all stations controlled by just few people they will be forced to put much more effort into this.


Stop discrimination, help in a fight against terrorists

Show your support to The Cause!