EVE Information Portal

Name calling? Seems you ran out of any decent argument and had to resort to childish behaviour. Trying to compare what is happening today in nul to how the new system is likely to play out, is like trying to compare it to how it was 10 years ago. To be honest, BL found a lightly defended section of space controlled by an alliance that has enough internal problems to sink the titanic and decided to capitalize by invading. More power to them, that is what sov wars should be, not a series of mini games.

Yes larger numbers should always win but your analogy is far from what i am talking about.. Again you skimmed and responded to what you thought I wrote and missed the point completely. (You seem to be good at doing that)
My proposal removes, to a point the ability of a coalition to just steamroll a smaller alliance.
It makes the Entosis link a command module, as that is what it will be (the most powerful command module in the game). The criteria for its use should be meaningful. Not some throw away module on a throw away ship.

Your in a 700 man alliance, who do you think the targets will be for the mega coalitions, with thousands of bored members, when these changes go live?
Coalitions like Goons/CFC, BL/N3 or an alliance like TRI?

CCP has an opportunity here to make a difference to how large groups interact with others. If your too thick to understand what I am trying to convey, then maybe it is better CCP don't bother listening to players and these feedback threads stay simple lip service.

If you believe the scenario you painted of BL/N3 vs CFC you are deluded. What makes you think the CFC is only going to field 4 X 250 man fleets? BL/N3 aren't stupid and isn't going to go on the offensive until they have the numbers. Or more likely, they just won't fight each other at all on any large enough scale to risk losing anything worthwhile.

And if you honestly believe the Entosis link should be allowed to be the ultimate troll module and introduced as it is proposed, then i would start packing for your alliances move back to lowsec.

Destructible stations and ease of proposed RF mechanic, which would lead to destruction - You would soon end up with only the biggest groups owning stations and everyone else living in pos's or npc nul. Loads more undesirable sov systems sounds like just the ticket to get smaller groups into nul.
Does your alliance have 80 to 100 bil laying around to replace a station when you lose it? The way the mechanic is proposed, no-one has to take your sov, just camp your station and keep it RF'd. Make them destructible and you can keep your sov on the backside of nul, you just won't have a station to live in.
Be careful what you ask for, you might just get it.

Yes I am aware TRI is a small griefing alliance and the module as it is may suit your play style well. Until it is used against you that is, then you simply have everything to lose.

The real sov system:
The owner of a system is the corp that has the most activity and pays the ccp tax.

Advantages:
This system is easy to understand and easy to modify.
This will move many highsec corp's into null. Even more if you push the low systems.
Provide a way for weekend and part time player to live in null.
Remove the need of 1000+ battles (including supercapitals).
Remove renting fee's.
Remove the 'blue donut'.
Bring back industry to null (because of more customers).
The larger group will win only if they intend to live in the target systems.
Bring thousands of possible targets into null.
Make eve attractive for new and newborn player. They won't hear 'don't go to null' all the time if they ask in helpchat.

Disadvantages:
Remove the need of 1000+ battles (including supercapitals).

Btw. converting every sov null into npc null would be by far better than this sov phase 2.

Good old Fozzie - Breaking Eve 1 patch at a time.

Matters little how fast or slowly the indexes decay, when the only available space (that the large coalitions don't want because it holds no value) won't be able to get them to start with.

anyone have a link to the video?

This isn't a full replay?
It seems to start in the middle of CCP plugging out of game paraphernalia.
Which I believe occurred after the keynote presentations.

.,.Would have been so much better without the TS commentary so you could hear what presenters were saying.

That is 2014 Keynote

Day 1 replay is here: http://www.twitch.tv/ccp/b/638754943
Day 2 replay is here: http://www.twitch.tv/ccp/b/639159817

Check the stream schedule at the bottom of the main CCP Twitch page (http://www.twitch.tv/ccp) to find approximate time stamps for the various streams.

The main problem which I see is that CCP attempts to introduce a fundamental change to one of the basic basic principles of the game paly. I am not saying it is bad. I am saying that it is too massive and sudden. Most, if not all of the players in Eve will have difficult time coping with it. And given that Eve has introduced too many changes during less than 6 months, not giving everyone sufficient time to adjust, this new change delivers additional stress to everybody. The stress that nobody really wants or needs.

I have no doubt, that yes, Sov system does need some adjustments. But do it carefully. There were many years of gameplay, when this system was mostly intact, and most of the Corporations and players got used to it. Chagin geverything at once - this looks like a very stupid idea. Do you really want to create a havoc in Eve universe? You are very close to it.

I propose to completely revisit the concept of introducing the change. Make it a step-by-step process, and extend it to at least a year. And keep on with wide discussion on planning and results of every step. And have guts to make a reverse, if you see that something completely bad goes on. Reverse it BEFORE the consequences of your change are beyond the point of non-return.

And as a bottom line, on a personal side, I don't like and I don't support this change, in a way it is introduced to us now. I guess I am not the only one.

Too much pride has been invested in it for them to drop it.

If you are really going to make all these new changes, why not just make a new game?
We keep our skills and isk and stuff and join that new game.
See how many people join that.
And see how many don't join that.

Tweaking here and there is fine, but the proposal is revamping this game.
I'm personally against this.