These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 Devoid
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#781 - 2015-03-03 22:48:56 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Well taking advice from the null posters who did everything within their power to troll up the Hyperion thread for wormhole space, and like them I know less than jack**** about your area of space, I must be uniquely qualified to pontificate about null changes.

Seems like an excellent series of changes.


Is it too early to utter the immortal cry "HTFU"? Too soon?


Phase Three of our Nullsec changes: WH can be claimed :trollface:
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#782 - 2015-03-03 22:48:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Soldarius
I have an idea.

The Prime Time thing will hurt multi-TZ alliances and not in a way that is good for customer relations or player retention.

What about being able to set a timer on each constellation? In this way, a large alliance with a multi-TZ player base can still generate content across all their players' timezones if they so choose, while a small alliance with only one constellation or less will have only a single timezone to defend.

The already announced change delay mechanic will prevent an alliance from rotating their timers across timezones just to frustrate attackers. It would promote player interaction, thought, actions, and consequences, rather than just reading the timer from an info screen and blitzing everything in one go with a thousand Rifters.

I understand this might be more difficult to make happen. But I think it's worth the effort.

Regardless of whether or not you accept my suggestion, I don't think these timers should not be public knowledge. Free intel is bad, m'kay? (ie: free perfect local chat intel) Important defensive details should be a closely held secret. Only with effort should an attacker be able to get that information.

Ofc, this would not preclude a spy from getting the information. This is the sort of meta-gaming that Eve Online is famous for and is perfectly viable in the new system.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar
Goonswarm Federation
#783 - 2015-03-03 22:49:16 UTC
Reading all those pages ...


I would like to State this Again
Sov Link Module Should ba banned on Interceptors and all ships that can use covops cloaks Attention
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#784 - 2015-03-03 22:49:16 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Killah Bee wrote:
Classic eve community dev blog rage.

Still no way you can put these changes in like that.

Groups like reavers will literally take regions in intie gangs while having like 0 risk.

RIP AU TZ / RUS aswell.

So I wonder what its gonna look like when you reinforce the entire const instead of just one system aswell .. gonna be like 50 beacons to claim and groups like the CFC can still just steamroll all beacons at once .. dunno how thats gonna split them apart.

and so on ...

CCP pls fix these changes.

tyvm


So if the cfc rolls into the drone region and reinforces stuff.... Really so what. If you had that much to begin with with no way to defend it, then what the hell are you doing there with all that wasted space? Cfc claims it, doesn't defend it, you get it back.

The tug of war continues.

Basically, shrink your empire into something defendable by your core groups. Owning 200 systems, 3+ regions and defending them with jump drive supers, bridging Titans and gangs across the map is over. Fights are now regional, constellation based or even just a few systems. The need for 100 cap steamroll armada is over. Now will they be able to go about and steamroll anyway? Sure.

Will there be a viable point in doing that? That's where I think they got this proposal right. Throwing everybody into 1 system is pointless. Spread the people out, but not so thinly or so far away from home that you yourself cannot defend it. You can't defend renters now. The threats dead. Will people still rent, sure. Will moongoo still matter, yes. You may own the moon but you won't own the home.

I applaud both CCP and the CSM for taking these steps. There is still more to go.


Yes, and mobile syphons will be delivered from every available wormhole with our best wishes :)
And I doubt we will be able to resist flipping a few stations just for fun, in those quiet places where only the bots go.......

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Proton Stars
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#785 - 2015-03-03 22:49:27 UTC
Funny thing is, all the isk space will still be taken. Cfc can defend their moons with capfleets and any system of worth will keep it's original occupiers.

Just all the 0.0-0.1 **** space that no one gives a **** about will change hands, bankrupting those who invest in it.


The more I look, the more ******** these changes are.
Diemos Hiaraki
Septentrion
#786 - 2015-03-03 22:50:14 UTC
This is a lot to take in at once, and sadly I'm not enthused by what I've seen because it isn't long enough; there's obviously stuff missing like a valid reason to bother holding sov in the first place. On it's own this blog is borderline trolling imo and I'm actually annoyed this blog didn't come out before the CSM voting process began.

The only feedback I can give is that as a rank and file alliance member I'd be extremely concerned that I'd be expected to be on cleanup detail all of my play time with no way of earning an income.
Sigras
Conglomo
#787 - 2015-03-03 22:50:20 UTC
Cheyennes wrote:
MiliasColds wrote:
a note for out of timezone players (from declared prime time)

you still raise indices which makes things easier to defend.
you can still help with capture events that are ongoing past prime time.
you can be useful attacking other alliances whose prime time aligns with your TZ
you can assist allies
you can contribute to general logistics
you can attrack and reinforces POS and stations services

doesn't seem like nothing to me


In other words, you are relegated to all the crap work, while the rest of eve enjoys PvP..... No thanks

Then form your own alliance and set your own prime time...

This is Eve, nobody is going to hold your hand and do it for you... it's time to grow a pair and do it yourself.
Sieonigh
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#788 - 2015-03-03 22:50:21 UTC
KelSaor wrote:
d0cTeR9 wrote:
#1 I hope this is a VERY basic idea going around, because it's extremely poorly thoughout.
#2 Why bother keeping space?
#3 Another slap to supercarriers... last thing to do was structure fighter bomber bashing or repping, gone!
#4 Here comes fleet of cov-ops going around trolling stations...

Well that was dissapointing...

Can my supers dock now? At least i can station-spin them... Maybe use their fitting service since station services are going to be near-perma disabled...

#1 its ccp........
#2 moon income, thats it
#3 Pretty much
#4 yup


then its ready to implement, ship it tomorrow!
Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#789 - 2015-03-03 22:51:29 UTC
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:
Aryndel Vyst wrote:
CCP, can you please address the point to living in null sec? I mean my logic is that because there is more risk to living in null sec there should be more reward, but as it stands this is not the case. Do you have any plans to address the gaping goatse-sized hole in the risk vs. reward proprotion of nullsec vs say high sec?

Thanks.

Yours in christ,

Aryndel Vyst
Director of Personnel Operations and Logistics
Goonswarm Federation



you do aroud 20-30 mil with one aacount runing lvl 4's in hi sec. You do 80+ mil with one account runing anoms in null sec.

What else would you like?

\
That's just a flat out lie, damn near broke the internet with that one, I make 90+ mil an hour simply living in Osmon flying a Rattlesnake doing Sisters of EVE lvl 4s. Hell, you can do better than that in lvl 3 missions. and I don't own an Incursion Vindicator in high sec with a 5 billion isk fit to make less than I could in null.

You must not PVE much.
Phig Neutron
Rubicon Cubism
#790 - 2015-03-03 22:51:30 UTC
Dixie Mason wrote:
Arrow So it would be logical to extend "Prime time" based on number of constellation where SOV is held. Base value remain same for 1 constellation but any additional system in other constellation would add 2 more hours of prime time. As an example: if alliance have systems with SOV over it in 2 constellation prime time will be 6 hours. If Brave have SOV in 14 constellations prime time will 24 hours. This will force alliances to more strategic placement of SOV system but if alliance feels strong enough to defend around the clock let them.


I support this notion. There should be diminishing returns to gobbling up more sov. This will make the big guys think carefully before expanding... is it worth it to make all of your systems more vulnerable just to grab one more that you aren't sure you need?
Green Medics
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#791 - 2015-03-03 22:51:37 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

I like the idea mentioned earlier, where unused systems have a wider window of vulnerability.

A heavily utilized system has only a 4 hour window of vulnerability, whereas a completely unused system might have a 12 hour window instead. I think this might be important for cross timezone assaults!

there is defiantly a problem with the suggested mechanic ccp brought us. we need flexibility for tzs that are not the main two to be able to have a chance to take sov. 4 hours is just not enough.
Altirius Saldiaro
Doomheim
#792 - 2015-03-03 22:51:48 UTC
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
and so begins the subbing of accounts.. month to month screw paying you guys months upfront.. EVER AGAIN.
take your plex and stick it.


Why dont you like the changes?
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#793 - 2015-03-03 22:51:51 UTC
I hope activating these links will give a 15m "capsuleer combat" log off timer. Otherwise you know, this could get stupid. Almost as stupid as 30km/s infini-kite svipul.
Hilti Enaka
Assisted Homicide
#794 - 2015-03-03 22:52:01 UTC
Quote:
These Command Nodes will be visible through the anomaly scanner, sensor overlay and overview, and will be clearly named after the structure that they apply to. Capturing a Command Node follows exactly the same process as reinforcing a structure, with players competing to make progress towards capture by applying Entosis Links to the Command Node structure.

- Factional warfare... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#795 - 2015-03-03 22:52:14 UTC
Hairpins Blueprint wrote:
Reading all those pages ...


I would like to State this Again
Sov Link Module Should ba banned on Interceptors and all ships that can use covops cloaks Attention



Correct me if I am wrong but I did not see anything preventing any sov holder from countering an interceptor with another interceptor, depriving them of their ability to switch control.

Or is there some reason why you are not able to counter interceptors?

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Hairpins Blueprint
CBC Interstellar
Goonswarm Federation
#796 - 2015-03-03 22:52:59 UTC
Proton Stars wrote:
Funny thing is, all the isk space will still be taken. Cfc can defend their moons with capfleets and any system of worth will keep it's original occupiers.

Just all the 0.0-0.1 **** space that no one gives a **** about will change hands, bankrupting those who invest in it.


The more I look, the more ******** these changes are.



I am amazed how people don't know the real value of null sec. It's amazing how igorant you people are.


And there are Dozens of very good sov in drone regions that will not be defended ......

making 200 mil+ per hour in Providence (carpy sov?) no no problem, you people are just too lazy to think.
LUMINOUS SPIRIT
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#797 - 2015-03-03 22:53:29 UTC
Devs, make sure you cant fit entosis links to frigates.

Intys, cov ops, bombers, nano dessys.... Thats bit too easy for griefers to exploit.

Let it be on cruiser and above hulls only.
Dave Stark
#798 - 2015-03-03 22:54:34 UTC
no, i haven't read the thread.

if i'm not repeating something that has already been said; i'll be shocked.

the prime time idea is ******* horrible.

oh look, that's an australian corp owning that station.... i'll just take a half day off work so i can capture their sov? (or wake up at 3-4am if i'm unfortunate enough to be an american).

are you serious? you want me to book days off work and/or lose sleep to be able to participate in sov warfare?
Phoenix Jones
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#799 - 2015-03-03 22:55:01 UTC
Proton Stars wrote:
Funny thing is, all the isk space will still be taken. Cfc can defend their moons with capfleets and any system of worth will keep it's original occupiers.

Just all the 0.0-0.1 **** space that no one gives a **** about will change hands, bankrupting those who invest in it.


The more I look, the more ******** these changes are.


Except you forget about this whole drifter thing. Their consolidation on the heat map is in all that crap space nobody wants.

That space is about to become A LOT less crappy.

Yaay!!!!

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#800 - 2015-03-03 22:55:06 UTC
PorkCleaner wrote:
A couple of points:

BAD
1) Been touched on a lot but needs to be re-iterated non-stop. Please give null-sec sov owners a better incentive to want null in the first place. The reduction in pos fuel is not even close to enough.
2) Too hard to get level 4/5 industry atm. Where as it is much easier to get level 5 military.
3) If you are not that worried about station services (any POS dweller has become used to that) then how does this motivate people to fight on any other time (beyond transfer one)?
4) clearly CCP wants to merry the benefits of PVE with benefits in PVP but in my opinion there are not enough. Why not give system more optional effects like in wh's with specific upgrade packages - the variety of fleet comps to suit system upgrades could make life very interesting?
5) Not sure how this deals with renting. If a renter now wants to revolt - only the distance from landlord determines that possibility? How will this effect a possible revolt? since he belongs to the alliance he can't. He has too quit first.
6) Giving the sov holder the ability to choose his TZ was meant to give an incentive and home advantage but doesn't it make it impossible as well for the attacker if it is in AUZ time zone for example?

NOT SURE
1) Did you intend to nerf Supers and Dreads? I don't see how they are used in sov change anymore and since they suck 'at pvp that is meant to be spread out'...This is a nail in the coffin for the Superclass. First they can't easily move, and now take away their purpose! Maybe that is the intent.
2) Is this not going to motivate the creation of super alliances? Since only members of the holding alliance can defend sov. Why does Mittens now not just order all his plebs to join the Goons? Is that the intent?

GOOD
1) The multiplier of levels to the sov transfer ease.
2) More can be a part of the process.
3) Removes the grind of structures.
4) Brings constellation back into game.
5) Allows for better planning by Alliance with new UI.
6) Love the freeport idea.
7) Love the fact you have the balls to actually tinker with this.

REQUEST
I would love to know how the CSM voted on this. in a democracy, knowing how people actually performed is more important then how often they smile or blog.

Porky


Make having sov mean you get mission agents... The higher lev occupancy the better agents come to your territory. If you have sov but no outpost you get ded agents at stargates like in delve. If you own a outpost tge agents will be found in the outpost. Also maybe make sov mean access to captial assembly array

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.