These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1401 - 2015-03-04 14:58:58 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

Somewhat missing the point, once again. Interceptors are able to take uncontested systems into contention, if no one comes, you don't need to return with anything better.


And you're not listening, as per your usual you're just restating your basic point over and over again as though it meant something in the first place.

It's not that big of a deal. Interceptors have relatively pathetic dps, and they can't actually engage a contesting defender if they're in anything heavier than a cruiser.

There are a lot of reasons interceptors need to be nerfed. But this change does little more than serve as a platform to bring that point up to CCP.

"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.
Viserion Pavarius
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1402 - 2015-03-04 14:59:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Viserion Pavarius
Gevlon Goblin wrote:
The system is surprisingly good overall, but I see one critical problem: the price of Entosis links are low enough to allow trolling. I mean you park a throwaway ship next to the structure or command node and go AFK. If no one responds, you forced the owners into a command node whack-a-mole or took their home. If someone shows up, you lost a worthless ship.

We know that jump beacon gankers can kill capitals in the enemy staging system with 200+ in local, because everyone minds his own business. The VFK beacon was infamous for it. The same thing will happen here: a single attacker can take the IHUB from 200+ "defenders" as no one will interrupt his gameplay for a 30M kill report. So an FC must sit 4 hours every day on defense duty, grabbing players into the extremely boring job of "do N jumps because the station there is pinged, just to pop a single T1 cruiser. Now do N jump back, because the IHUB is on fire".

The problem is the extreme difference of risk on the sides: if the "attack" succeeds, the defender loses his home. If the "attack" fails, the attacker loses a T1 cruiser.

This can be fixed by increasing the price of the Entosis link enough to make Entosis kill reports a prized goal of PvP-ers. Like 500M, so defending home would be a wanted PvP event instead of a chore no one wants.


Even when Goblin is mainly known for his strong autism, he sometimes catches up the right points.

I never though i would +1 a gevlon post but i finally did it. Sov changes are somehow magic, aren't they? Big smile
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1403 - 2015-03-04 14:59:20 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
This is hilarious.

I have visions of 500 shitfit interceptors orbiting at stupidkm/s and a single defender linking the target and the inty FC foaming at the mouth over why it wont count down.

Also, all these hilarious fits - missile speed rigged golem/raven says hello. Even at a a mighty 10-20dps it'll wear them down. See, I can EFT dumbass crap up too.
Arrendis
TK Corp
#1404 - 2015-03-04 14:59:38 UTC
Cr Turist wrote:
Arrendis wrote:
Cr Turist wrote:
if you can take space and keep space u can have space it shouldnt take CCP giving it to you. provi is a great example of this they took the space they wanted and they defend it at all cost.


Right. If you can take space you can have space. But 'if you can take space' should be 'if you can take space', not 'if your account is old enough for CCP to allow you to try'.

Someone who's ballsy enough, smart enough, and busts his butt to do the work shouldn't be sitting around saying 'well, I'd love to hold sov, but CCP says I can't until I have X hull'. That's just bull.


so instead it should be because i have X amount of ishtars?


I'd say having enough people committed to putting in the effort should count more than the skill points they've got to throw at it, at the very least. Yes, obviously, having more experience and options in the game will make it easier for you to beat the other guy and take his space or hold your own, but it shouldn't be impossible to do it without the big toys.
Aineko Macx
#1405 - 2015-03-04 14:59:56 UTC
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Arrow I feel like the 4 hour window is to short. (I would recommend 6)

Even with 6 hour windows there would never be a US vs. RUS war with real consequences anymore. And it still sucks to be a player outside of the window. The only option being to look for an alliance that matches your TZ. Which on a macro scale means the end of multi-TZ (and multi-cultural) alliances, and the start of the focused single-TZ blocks (minimizing vulnerability by not having weak TZs at all).

iveeCore 3.0: The PHP engine for industrial activities and CREST library
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#1406 - 2015-03-04 15:00:02 UTC
I've had a couple of people asking why I haven't commented. so here's the reason, and comments:

Reason: When it comes to Sov, I'm a completely outsider. I can comment on things like people saying 'Large battles are really dull to fight in' , but not so much on the day to day living in Sov. While I did comment on things as I saw them, everything was prefixed with "I don't live in null, so take with a dose of salt"

Comments: The changes look (from an outsider perspective) promising. That they'll up the quantity of conflict in Null, and hopefully push towards a balkanized Eve. I see both of these as good. While huge coalitions are 'efficient', they're not 'fun'. And big battles may be good for marketing, but they're not so good for the players relegated to being F1 monkeys.

I want to see changes with the industry index (and with mining in general, though that's a far bigger change than just changing what adjusts the indexes) but I don't see it as a blocking problem.

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Eli Porter
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1407 - 2015-03-04 15:00:52 UTC
Obvious "Prime Time" issue aside, there needs to be more risk involved with Entosis.

I hope the module uses like 5k PG so only BC and above could use it.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1408 - 2015-03-04 15:01:33 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

Somewhat missing the point, once again. Interceptors are able to take uncontested systems into contention, if no one comes, you don't need to return with anything better.


And you're not listening, as per your usual you're just restating your basic point over and over again as though it meant something in the first place.

It's not that big of a deal. Interceptors have relatively pathetic dps, and they can't actually engage a contesting defender if they're in anything heavier than a cruiser.

There are a lot of reasons interceptors need to be nerfed. But this change does little more than serve as a platform to bring that point up to CCP.

So, your point is you do not generally like interceptors? And nothing to do with this thread in any way otherwise?
Thank you for sharing that with us.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1409 - 2015-03-04 15:01:46 UTC
afkalt wrote:
This is hilarious.

I have visions of 500 shitfit interceptors orbiting at stupidkm/s and a single defender linking the target and the inty FC foaming at the mouth over why it wont count down.

Also, all these hilarious fits - missile speed rigged golem/raven says hello. Even at a a mighty 10-20dps it'll wear them down.

And even if that's the case, if you just have, say, 11 guys, 1 to use his own module on the station and the other 10 to be in, say, instacanes which spread out evenly to cover the station etc in an even sphere, one of them will eventually get off a shot and blow him up.

Or any variant thereof.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#1410 - 2015-03-04 15:02:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
So, you're proposing changing the current meta, which requires large numbers of large, expensive ships to engage in Sov warfare involving mindless grinds to a new meta which allows large numbers of small, inexpensive ships to engage in Sov warfare involving mindless grinds.

Well, at least the defenders would get to choose when their mindless grinds are going to happen, so that's a step in the right direction.

As a point of reference, I am referring to the concept of a Trollceptor as mentioned on TMC.


CCP, unless you want Sov warfare to devolve into massive blobs of 'Ceptors, please either reduce the range of the T2 Entosis links or make their fitting requirements high enough that they cannot be fit to 'Ceptors.



Well It seems the the authors of the article have understood how interceptors will enforce active residence in the systems within an alliance area, and they are not subject to being defused by distant border controls. Of course a large area of protected undefended space is all very nice, but this is designed to change all that. But naturally an attempt must be made to prevent the new system succeeding.

So interceptors ensure occupants, active, and engaged.
Banning them reinforces current sovereignty stagnation.

Don't think you are going to get your way.


This is the standard mistake people make when judging others motivations. The unrealistically optimistic types (that always think anything is a great idea lol) don't understand that criticism of an idea need not be tied to selfish motivation.

For example, I think the new system will be a worse disaster than Dominion:

- Too many moving parts (the more moving parts, the more likely people will find flaws they can exploit, Faction Warfare is the perfect example)

-The wrong 'focus' (it's like it's trying to turn null sec , which is organized fleet space, into low sec, which is small gang space, CCP doesn't seem to understand that many null sec types are 'soldier' personalities that tent to like big fleets rather than the 'gladiator/pugilist' personalities that inhabit wormhole and low sec space and like small gangs and solo)

-Really bad assumptions about what people want (even in a video game, people, especially null people, don't want 'fun' and 'lots of fights' they want power)

-Not seeming to learn from the past (I'm being totally honest when i say the language used in this dev blog reminds me of Dominion)
Quote:
Sovereignty Evolves

The system of territorial control in EVE advances, providing more tactical, capture-based gameplay. Alliances both large and small will find more opportunities within their grasp and an engaging conquest system in place to seize them. Rulers will now have to actively defend space they have claimed.


If that sounds familiar, it should, It's what CCP said in December of 2009....


It's not about maintaining the status quo. It's about wanting to not be on the same Merry Go round for another 6 years.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1411 - 2015-03-04 15:02:34 UTC
Eli Porter wrote:
Obvious "Prime Time" issue aside, there needs to be more risk involved with Entosis.

I hope the module uses like 5k PG so only BC and above could use it.



Why? Just park a bigger boat to defend it.

How are people not getting this?


Attackers bring 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 links.

Defenders bring 1

Result? Stalemate.
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#1412 - 2015-03-04 15:03:00 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Speedkermit Damo wrote:

Which is another point. The fighting for sov is all very interesting, but I don't see many reasons to bother fighting for sov. Most nullsec space is virtually worthless. The best nullsec space is actually the NPC pockets with pirate level 4 missions.


That's my second post in the thread.

They've created what seems to be an improvement on a system that generates and enables conflict.

But where are the farms and fields? Where is the incentive to actually live there, besides just the **** trophy of planting a flag?

As for the CSM, there are two possibilities here. Either they already knew and had their say by now, or they got caught with their pants down and haven't formulated a response yet. Pick whichever you please until someone corrects me.


You guys still don't get it? There's nothing in this game more valuable than fights. Go look in C5 space, literally oozing true apex-level ISK just waiting to be farmed, and yet it's a deserted wasteland- and the reason is that nobody enjoys 23/7 NPC grinding, no matter how much it pays.

My chair is soaking wet at the thought of non-stop PVP during my prime time, it's like FW but not only limited to T1 frigs.
Cr Turist
Arcana Noctis
#1413 - 2015-03-04 15:04:02 UTC
Steve Ronuken wrote:
I've had a couple of people asking why I haven't commented. so here's the reason, and comments:

Reason: When it comes to Sov, I'm a completely outsider. I can comment on things like people saying 'Large battles are really dull to fight in' , but not so much on the day to day living in Sov. While I did comment on things as I saw them, everything was prefixed with "I don't live in null, so take with a dose of salt"

Comments: The changes look (from an outsider perspective) promising. That they'll up the quantity of conflict in Null, and hopefully push towards a balkanized Eve. I see both of these as good. While huge coalitions are 'efficient', they're not 'fun'. And big battles may be good for marketing, but they're not so good for the players relegated to being F1 monkeys.

I want to see changes with the industry index (and with mining in general, though that's a far bigger change than just changing what adjusts the indexes) but I don't see it as a blocking problem.



Way to toe the company line m8. someone get this man another trip to iceland.
Kah'Les
hirr
Pandemic Horde
#1414 - 2015-03-04 15:04:11 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

-The wrong 'focus' (it's like it's trying to turn null sec , which is organized fleet space, into low sec, which is small gang space, CCP doesn't seem to understand that many null sec types are 'soldier' personalities that tent to like big fleets rather than the 'gladiator/pugilist' personalities that inhabit wormhole and low sec space and like small gangs and solo)


This is a good point.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1415 - 2015-03-04 15:04:38 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

So, your point is you do not generally like interceptors? And nothing to do with this thread in any way otherwise?
Thank you for sharing that with us.


And once again, you prove that you can't actually read. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

"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.
Arrendis
TK Corp
#1416 - 2015-03-04 15:05:02 UTC
Eli Porter wrote:
I hope the module uses like 5k PG so only BC and above could use it.


Man, what battlecruisers are you flying?
Cr Turist
Arcana Noctis
#1417 - 2015-03-04 15:05:08 UTC
Arrendis wrote:
Cr Turist wrote:
Arrendis wrote:
Cr Turist wrote:
if you can take space and keep space u can have space it shouldnt take CCP giving it to you. provi is a great example of this they took the space they wanted and they defend it at all cost.


Right. If you can take space you can have space. But 'if you can take space' should be 'if you can take space', not 'if your account is old enough for CCP to allow you to try'.

Someone who's ballsy enough, smart enough, and busts his butt to do the work shouldn't be sitting around saying 'well, I'd love to hold sov, but CCP says I can't until I have X hull'. That's just bull.


so instead it should be because i have X amount of ishtars?


I'd say having enough people committed to putting in the effort should count more than the skill points they've got to throw at it, at the very least. Yes, obviously, having more experience and options in the game will make it easier for you to beat the other guy and take his space or hold your own, but it shouldn't be impossible to do it without the big toys.


and after all these post we finally agree
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1418 - 2015-03-04 15:06:15 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

So, your point is you do not generally like interceptors? And nothing to do with this thread in any way otherwise?
Thank you for sharing that with us.


And once again, you prove that you can't actually read. Y*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.


You have proven over thousands of trollish posts to have ample time, what you do not have is a valid argument.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1419 - 2015-03-04 15:07:30 UTC
Behr Oroo wrote:
So with the prime time thing... what stops a group from just making their prime the same as one of the big blocks like Goons or NC, or whoever.

Then you havent created content. Just a stalemate.



If you make your prime the SAME as the enemy then you will get ROLFSTOMPED! If you set your prime to ANY time other than your REAL prime you will not be able to defend and any small group will defeat you.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1420 - 2015-03-04 15:07:42 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

So, your point is you do not generally like interceptors? And nothing to do with this thread in any way otherwise?
Thank you for sharing that with us.


And once again, you prove that you can't actually read. *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.


You have proven over thousand of troll posts to have ample time, what you do not have is a valid argument.


I do, you just didn't bother reading it. You were too busy restating your talking points*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

"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.