These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE Information Portal

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

First post First post First post
Kyonko Nola
Caldari State
#1001 - 2015-03-04 02:27:37 UTC
I would strongly suggest you make the modules ship size specific. Otherwise there will be 100 inties circling around the objective all the time


Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1002 - 2015-03-04 02:28:40 UTC
Kyonko Nola wrote:
I would strongly suggest you make the modules ship size specific. Otherwise there will be 100 inties circling around the objective all the time

In which case you just plonk an atron at zero...sigh.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Robertson Nolen
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1003 - 2015-03-04 02:28:47 UTC
Wait, I just thought of a better system while reading the thread!
Instead of inti-wars entosis links, why not add a new class of ship! Call them starbase bashers or something. Their weapons are very powerful against starbases, but only do minimal damage to other ships. When firing they have to anchor (or something) reducing their velocity, preventing warps, and reducing RR received by like 75%. Send a bunch of these ships out and as soon as they begin attacking a sov structure, a warning is sent out to the alliance owner. The alliance comes to defend to station from destruction but oh wait the starbase basher is surrounded by bubbles. Now you need to fight through defenders to reach the starbase basher because its starbase bashing weapons have a range of 300 km (or something).

Prime time would need a bit of a rework, but alliances could split their attacking fleets to cover more systems and spread out defenders

Reduce jump fatigue to give caps a break

Boom, I came up with a slightly better system than CCP in 10 minutes.
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1004 - 2015-03-04 02:33:54 UTC
As far as what I think about the changes it's a pretty mixed bag, my first thoughts after reading the Dev Blog were positive though. Below are a few of my thoughts/ideas.

The Prime Time idea is in theory a nice idea but the idea behind it assumes that the alliance holding the space is predominantly in the same TZ. That's never happened in any alliance I've ever been a part of and certainly not in Darkness. One of the idea's I had off the top of my head on that was to make there be more than 1 timer per day, not for 4 hours each of course but maybe spread them out a bit. (with some minimum time required between each timer) Maybe a 90 minute timer 3 times a day? With a minimum of 3 hours between each? That way you make it much more likely that your own members in different time zones will be around for some of them.

The Entosis module having a range of 250km for the T2? I hope that was a typo and you meant 25km

For any alliance having a few supers it'd be too easy for them to deploy off a structure and just keep firing Remote ECM's on a rotational basis, since the Entosis module only has an effect as the end of the cycle you could make it so no one ever got to an end of a cycle.

I think the idea of the Freeport and the idea that all structures are now separate is a good one, the way structures will spawn throughout the constellation rather than just in the system is also good and that the way of bringing more people will not quicken the capture of a structure is also welcomed. All the stuff on occupational indices also looks okay to me.

I think that just having the messages going out to the alliance executor corp directors/ceo is a poor idea at best, many alliances keep the number of members in executor corps low for a good reason that the less people you have the less likely you are to be hit with a rogue director dropping all your sovereignty, much better to make sure that everyone from the ground up gets the message if a structure is under attack.

Aside from the ECM burst thing I mentioned before, it worries me that Titans/Supers now have no role, no reason for them to be used which I think means a sharp decline in their usage, I personally hope you have plans for them in the future about giving them something back that only they are really suited to do.

On the whole I'm say I'm about 60% pleased. 30% Disappointed and 10% flat out terrified about the changes (the 10% would be the prime time idea What?) But as CCP said this is just a first round of discussions, I have no doubt we'll all get to the a compromise in the end that makes no one feel satisfied (the sign of a truly good compromise)
Dradis Aulmais
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1005 - 2015-03-04 02:37:16 UTC
All I heard was the sky is falling

Bunches of hyperbole about a ceptor orbiting while link to the structure. Which prevents the ceptor fromwarping while the mod is active so basically a orbiting duck in a room full of hunters.

Dradis Aulmais, Federal Attorney Number 54896

Free The Scope Three

Goonswarm Federation
#1006 - 2015-03-04 02:38:42 UTC
Will the module make ships immobile as well, like the other modules it seems to behave like?
Lister Vindaloo
5 Tons of Flax
#1007 - 2015-03-04 02:41:09 UTC
Zip Slings wrote:
Lister Vindaloo wrote:
There is no excuse for being able to use your 'prime time' window to exclude entire time zones from participating in alliance/corporation activities, it is simply a divisive, segregating mechanic that will disillusion entire groups from attempting to participate in sov warfare, it HAS to go, i dont know how to respond to anyone who supports it as it only reduces content rather than increase it

Have a look at my post: and let me know what you think

Any mechanic based on TZ's segregates the community, as an AU player, why would i ever bother being involved in Sov if my chances of participating are base don the TZ i live in.

Just increase the randomness involved in setting a timer so it may or may not fall the way the defensive fleet wants, and allow both parties to figure out how best to contest the timer.

The entire concept of 'prime time' affecting ANY in game maechanic is terrible, we already suffer from the much smaller number of pilots active in AU timezone, lets not add anyhting that further isolates us.

I understand you are trying to modify the concept to make it better, but the entire concept is fundamentally flawed

Living the Dream
#1008 - 2015-03-04 02:41:48 UTC
I guess I don't understand all your concerns as I'm not active out there atm. I will tell all this: if one controls a solar system you should have a loss at stake. The current system has some risk with sov mods but its really not much different then the old POS system. I purpose to up the stakes with my 3 tier station system. If you want sov, invest a station and prepare to defend. It will end these empty voids of null sec IMO
Illindar Tyrannus
Gallente Federation
#1009 - 2015-03-04 02:41:57 UTC
The prime-time Idea I still think is pretty terrible I am being punished for having friends in other timezone's that want to be apart of the alliance I'm in and I think that is pretty ****.

Also the regional spawns are a cool idea buts whats to keep the defender from just hell camping the entrances into the region and trust me the larger groups can do this pretty much unopposed so this only hurts the small groups trying to get into the Sov Game and punishes those that cant get the numbers for huge hell camps of gates.

The problem I see with asking for feedback is the whole system is build around the prime-time idea so I don't know how you can fix it without scrapping the whole system...the best I have seen is the prime-time only effects when it comes out of reinforce and can be put in any time is good but I still think there should be a bit more then a 4 hour window or its back to pile in for the fight just instead of max dudes here we put max dudes at a couple choke points and a few dudes to hit the sov buttons.

Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#1010 - 2015-03-04 02:42:03 UTC
Dradis Aulmais wrote:
All I heard was the sky is falling

Bunches of hyperbole about a ceptor orbiting while link to the structure. Which prevents the ceptor fromwarping while the mod is active so basically a orbiting duck in a room full of hunters.

Or an empty room that's got dust covers on all the furniture and which the owners had forgotten all about since Timmy had that accident.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager

Paula C Deen
SemteX Mining Inc
Memento Moriendo
#1011 - 2015-03-04 02:42:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Paula C Deen
The alliance-wide prime time mechanic is the worst idea I've ever seen. Widening the window does not fix it either as that would become self defeating.

This does not encourage small gang sov warfare at all if you really think about it. If you have to control all these control points in a whole constellation, then the system will result in a baseline minimum number of pilots spread across the constellation to defend/attack effectively. Again, the big alliances with most players will prevail. 1000 man fleet, 200 in each system, winning the "tug of war" by beating the other side who only have a 300 man fleet with 60 in each system. Congrats, you have split the big fight into potentially smaller parallel fights, but the end result will still be the same (1000 beats 300). Also I'm pretty sure TIDI still affects neighbouring systems, so I don't really see how the load will be reduced.

That being said, I'm seeing no detail around how this "tug of war" mechanic exactly works. Is it points based? or time based? What points/time is the limit? It's the major fundamental component to the whole sov system! How about some clarity please?

All of the components in this new system heavily rely on each other in order for it to work as a whole. It has some gargantuan flaws/lack of clarity (obviously it hasn't been fully thought out) that need to work properly, all it takes is one of these pieces to not work properly, and you wind up with a completely crap sov system.

This all basically sounds like a half-assed job... keeping the old indexes etc but essentially try to introduce a faction war style system to nullsec. Station services vulnerable at all times? So every morning I wake up in my TZ specific alliance in my TZ specific system (thanks to the prime time mechanic) and just to refit my ships in my own station I'll need to spend 10 mins recapturing the fitting service that some solo troll disabled during the night without contest. Great, just what I wanted, another daily chore to worry about.

Let's not mention dreads/supers/titans which will be pretty much useless after this...

Far too many plot holes here... this all needs going back to the drawing board in my opinion. But A+ for effort.

It seems that the ultimate main objective in this patch is intended to artificially separate players, forcing them to fight for sov within specific times. Have you even considered how much your players' login patterns differ from one pilot to the next? Some people log in/log out on a very regular pattern. Ultimately it will affect them less. Other people (such as myself) might log in at 7pm one day, 11pm the next day, then 3am the day after. Guess it's time to choose a specific time of day to play eve and an alliance who will cater to that specific slot... thanks CCP.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Stay Feral
#1012 - 2015-03-04 02:42:45 UTC
Kyonko Nola wrote:
I would strongly suggest you make the modules ship size specific. Otherwise there will be 100 inties circling around the objective all the time

In which case an atron (to halt the inty's progress) and a few HACs will have a shooting gallery. I sincerely encourage WAFFLES to try that 100 inties thing.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Goonswarm Federation
#1013 - 2015-03-04 02:45:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
So the best way to take sov is by constellation-wide deployments. heh. I thought one of the main premises was allowing sov to be local to a system?

FC was the old hotness, now there will be a CC or Constellation Coordinator?
Jon Dekker
Dekker Corporation
#1014 - 2015-03-04 03:00:31 UTC
I've never been actively involved with sov-holding alliance gameplay myself, but it seems to me that everyone who actively takes part currently has mastered the system of, as so eloquently stated by CCP Fozzie, effectively "weaponized boredom". It's not surprising that those currently active in sov warfare will probably not like any changes made, just like the jump drive changes.

For myself, this looks like fun gameplay.

I am a bit disappointed by the UI, I think the Creative team should take another crack at that. To me it doesn't really conform to the new "modernized" UI.
high energy wormhole physics
#1015 - 2015-03-04 03:00:58 UTC
what if rather then locked vulnerability times you just have a 23(or N where N is less or more then 24 hours) hour cycle so over the course of a few days it shifts to a new time. This gives time to respond and gives value to all time zones.
Proton Stars
Gallente Federation
#1016 - 2015-03-04 03:01:46 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
So the best way to take sov is by constellation-wide deployments. heh. I thought one of the main premises was allowing sov to be local to a system?

FC was the old hotness, now there will be a CC or Constellation Coordinator?

Anyone would think they are trying to boost large alliance groups like goons
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#1017 - 2015-03-04 03:02:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Sabriz Adoudel
OK, a few more thoughts.

Firstly I need to think more about the primetime issue but my gut thought is that it will lead to a lot of stalemates, where a weak-but-viable AU TZ alliance has one constellation, a stronger EU TZ alliance has the adjacent two, and neither can dislodge the other. Stalemates could lead to boredom, or could lead to a system of (fun) permanent war. Existing coalitions will probably splinter into groups based upon their timezone and this is probably bad.

Secondly, the defensive bonuses for ratting and mining (but not for exploration?) need to be more interchangable. The idea of the overhaul is that you want people using space. If you own one system, mining in it, ratting in it, running non-combat exploration sites in it and killing hostile players in both your system and adjacent systems should all contribute to your defensive bonuses and should all be interchangeable.

To a mining-oriented nullsec sov holder, the present system says "We don't care that you'd rather be mining. You need to drop that and rat." This isn't good. Let players choose *how* they use their space and reward them for using it, don't tell them they have to focus on 50% ratting 50% mining.

Thirdly, if the present system goes ahead unchanged, there will be a massive flood of additional nullsec mining. A small change here would be a good thing as more mining fleets means more fleets to ambush, and more fighting over null belts means more fights that might escalate. But the economic effect will be a drastic devaluation of null minerals, and the game impact will be a dramatic increase in the number of bots mining in null. I will go as far as to predict that these changes will lead to a 20% (or larger) increase in the number of trial accounts running mining bots in ventures in nullsec, and nullsec wars will be won (in part) by having enough of these bots running to keep your defensive indexes maxxed out.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance.

Goonswarm Federation
#1018 - 2015-03-04 03:03:27 UTC
Proton Stars wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
So the best way to take sov is by constellation-wide deployments. heh. I thought one of the main premises was allowing sov to be local to a system?

FC was the old hotness, now there will be a CC or Constellation Coordinator?

Anyone would think they are trying to boost large alliance groups like goons

Most of the discussion assumes there will be conflict at all. I'm pretty sure there will be NEPs or Non Entosis Pacts.
Ser Berus
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1019 - 2015-03-04 03:03:42 UTC
Wow. Lotta words ITT.

I'm just going to say that I like, generally, the direction you're headed with this. That being said, as an actual "thing you want to implement" that this is fairly poorly thought out and shows that you're not taking proper advantage of the advice that the CSM has no doubt been trying to give you. I can see why Sion was so pissed off at you a couple months back.

To offer some constructive criticism in no particular order:

- The prime time thing really needs to be completely rethought. For details see, well, pretty much every other post in the entire thread, but I'll just say about it that one of the biggest appeals about eve's single-shard nature is that anyone, anywhere in the world can exert an impact on everyone else in the universe. That's something that makes eve truly unique, and balkanizing the eve universe by time zone in any way is a really, really bad plan.

- Something that needs to be emphasized is that this is really not going to work without some major rework of the sov indices at the same time. I know you said you're planning on iterating on that, but you need to pay more attention to it than you currently appear to be. As it stands, there are exactly two measurements for "using your space": Ratting, and Mining. This of course ignores the countless other ways that those of us who live in null use our space.

For military, you're ignoring things such as PVP, home defense fleets, erecting tower defenses, PVP, oh, and did I mention PVP? PVP kills should really have a much greater impact on the military index than ratting.

For industry, having the only measurement be mining is even more ludicrous, as it ignores things like manufacturing items in stations, manufacturing in towers, supercap construction, keeping towers fueled and online, shipping things, importing from hisec, exporting to hisec, running jump freighter services, buying and selling on the market, buying and selling on contracts or planetary interaction. You do any of those things? Sorry, you're not contributing. In the meantime, mining in nullsec is just about nonexistent, which I feel constrained to point out is something you've promised to fix in the past, and then proceeded to halfass. Please take a look at how many systems in nullsec actually have a high industry index, and reconsider how you're measuring "industrial activity".

If we have to maintain the industry index solely through mining, that sounds about as fun as being the recipient of an hour long ball-kicking session.

- The biggest thing pissing everyone off is how you've been putting the cart before the horse where nullsec changes are concerned. For several years we've been hearing promises about how the null changes are going to incentivize living in your own space, but the only incentives that appear to be left here are a 25% fuel bonus on towers (that will probably go away as soon as you iterate on POS), the ability to build progressively more useless supercaps, and the ability to have a spinning bee in the middle of the system.

Really, woop dee ******* doo.

You still haven't given any indications that you understand that sov needs to be valuable, both for the line member (so that they want to live there), and for the alliance (so that they can provide things like ship reimbursements and newbee handouts). To be clear, I'm not talking about some philosophical notion of "value" here; its all about the cold, hard isk. There is a reason that alliances are increasingly resorting to renting; there are very few ways left to actually make significant amounts of isk on an alliance level.

- The various sov upgrades need to be easier to handle. Making them physically smaller (JF / BR size) has been one suggestion; making them constructible locally would be another way to handle this. I'd really recommend talking to someone who actually does nullsec logistics on a regular basis (i.e., things like fueling towers, handling sov upgrades and the like). Please have one of the CFC members of the CSM put you in touch with someone in GSOL; I'm sure any of them would be happy to give you autistic levels of detail on how much moving alliance-level things around null currently sucks.

- Add to the above: there need to be more ways to upgrade sov, that actually make a difference to people living there (and that hurt more when someone tries to knock over the sand castle)

- Eliminating the current tons o' sov structures meta is good, but what about going a step further and wrapping the TCU into the IHub? There's no particular reason why you'd need a separate TCU other than for the fuel bonus and displaying a spinning bee to everyone, and both functions could be included in a revamped ihub.

Aivlis Eldelbar
#1020 - 2015-03-04 03:04:36 UTC
Tons of griefing is what I see come June if this is not significantly improved.

Please start by making those Entosis modules cost upwards of 100m for T1, 250m+ for T2, so they cannot be used for throwaway griefing. Cost and fitting requirements should be much stronger than what is on the table so that they aren't used to just annoy the **** out of locals for funsies. Those things are set to be a sure way to force a fight, so make them cost accordingly, so that the defenders get some sense of achievement for blapping the pesky troll. The attacker is guaranteed to get some pvp, make him risk something beyond a sub-50m interceptor.

Secondly, afk cloaking. It can nuke mil/indy indexes anywhere but the most populated staging systems over a course of a week, and it's about to become a totally legit sov warfare weapon; "weaponized boredom", like you call it. I hope there are either changes to stealth coming, or the indexes will get reworked a bit so they either don't decay as fast or include things other than ratting.

Thirdly, what do we get from sov? 25% discount on pos fuel sounds kinda lame in a world where systems need to be defended for 4 hours straight every single day. If you're going to make sov harder to keep, make it worth the effort.