These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kraken Exploration and Janitorial Services
The Initiative.
#141 - 2015-03-03 16:39:23 UTC
MiliasColds wrote:
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

none of those things are PVP immune......

true but has hardly any impact upon the actual sov warfare mechanic itself, i.e. ustz attacks sov au tz attacks pos and pocos and makes timers for the defender to chose wether to defend or not (again depends on the stront timer, which any decent allaince/corp will be able to change on the fly during an attack) which leads back to the main tz usually

W Sherman Elric
Argentum Holdings
#142 - 2015-03-03 16:39:28 UTC
Coelomate wrote:
Looks like an amazing start, although waiting for June killed a little bit of my joy.

My first major concern: The measurement of occupancy looks like it just takes the current system, which as far as I know means no credit for PVP or market activity - two things that actually happen in heavily occupied nullsec.

There are systems where tons of non ratting and non mining happen but are the most "occupied" systems (staging systems and the like).
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#143 - 2015-03-03 16:40:01 UTC
Baneken wrote:
That flashing crap under the first paragraph was so incredibly annoying that I had kill it with ad-block; since human eye is hard-wired to attract on flashy moving things do you have any idea how incredibly annoying it was to even attempt to read that text with that thing constantly whirling and flashing on screen ?

You clearly haven't logged into the client ina while; every single window changes colour when you activate or deactivate them.
Dirk Morbho
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#144 - 2015-03-03 16:40:05 UTC
The PrimeTime(tm) seems very artificial.

The 'lore' of the enosis link being tied to the drifters is WEAK.

What I see is a bunch of micromanagement and babysitting of sov structures. Sounds like an annoying load of crap where griefers get the upperhand.

Where are the benefits to owning sov? Also, since CCP is trying to push alliances into smaller footprints, when will high player densities be supported? I see no changes to support this. There is still a max # of players making isk that a system will support. And you have not addressed this issue at all.

tl;dr: WTF? Try again. Do you even understand nullsec?

ps. The temporary freeport is the only thing interesting about this system. :content: and :tears:

Quay Industries
#145 - 2015-03-03 16:40:36 UTC
Gypsien Agittain wrote:
Proton Stars wrote:
well i've no reason to have my 0.0 characters anymore. I can sell my isk making toons and be a super rich frigate pilot and save £70 a month on accounts, so good on that respect.

Bad because there will be no narrative to the combat in 0.0, its become world of tanks in space with lots of not really connected instance fights that will be between frigates and ships not really worth hunting. Im glad that CCp kept with its tradition of not actually thinking about the value of gameplay and instead decided that a t1 frigate must be able to do everything

And frigate pilots will fly to Elite Dangerous and Scam Citizen, and when they want to attract people back to the game with capital ships, what bringed most of the player base to EVE, it'd be too late.

ED needs to get rid of the hackers first as open play is dying a bit atm.
Goonswarm Federation
#146 - 2015-03-03 16:41:37 UTC
The big blocks will be richer.

Fewer sov bills. Strategic systems within a jump of an R-64. Pos's at every isk moon that will only get you blobbed..... awesome concept... please let the minnions come to null..... the tears in a year that they can't afford to live there will be epic!
#147 - 2015-03-03 16:42:21 UTC
I trully love this change, I can tell how much dynamic and activity it ill bring to eve.

Obviously not everyone can understand it, especially old vets that are accostumed to an easier way of eve.
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#148 - 2015-03-03 16:43:21 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
"Incentives? What are those?"

Incentives are something different from rewards and payments. It's a behavioural thing related to something known as emergent gameplay, you know - that stuff from the first decade when it was deemed more interesting to tailor the product towards a less costly model of venture development :-)
Saidin Thor
The Odin Conspiracy
#149 - 2015-03-03 16:43:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Saidin Thor
I'm not sure CCP has ever had to deal with IHhub logistics first-hand. Being easy to destroy may or may not be a good thing, but IHubs are a HUGE pain to place and upgrade right now. Bigger upgrades AND the IHubs themselves can only be transported in a freighter right now. There's no way a little alliance has the logistics capacity to regularly replace IHubs that roaming gangs will be destroying just for the lulz unless that changes.

If you want to stick with the "but sov logistics should be hard" mantra, then at least resizing them for jump freighters would be better than nothing. Ideally, making IHubs and their upgrades Blockade Runner size would open up a lot of options for the little guy.

Another change related to IHubs I would suggest is allowing IHubs to be placed on moons (so you can place them next to POSes). This gives an alliance the OPTION to have a VERY LOW barrier to messing with system upgrades. A POS isn't particularly difficult to defang even with a small group, but gives an IHub some level of protection against marauders that are just trying to salt the fields.

Also the premise that defenders will regularly use jump bridges during capture events has to be a joke, right? Have the CCP employees that live in null sec ever tried chaining jump bridges since the fatigue changes went through? Let us know how that worked out for them for the subsequent two weeks.
Goonswarm Federation
#150 - 2015-03-03 16:43:29 UTC
2Sonas1Cup wrote:
I trully love this change, I can tell how much dynamic and activity it ill bring to eve.

Obviously not everyone can understand it, especially old vets that are accostumed to an easier way of eve.

almost snorted coffee out of my nose..... last time I checked, the gates to 0.0 didn't require a key.
Andre Vauban
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#151 - 2015-03-03 16:44:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Andre Vauban
I'm currently a FW pilot and haven't been in null since 2008, so take this comment with that in mind. What I currently love about FW sov is the ability to make progress towards the goal across all time zones. The 4 hour "primetime" goes against this concept (ie farms and fields), as if you are not in that prime time you are not capable of attacking your enemy in any way or defending your own assets in any way. I would highly suggest that you change the prime time window in some way.

For example, instead of defining a single 4 hour block, each alliance is required to pick three 2-hour blocks that cannot be adjacent (ie 15:00-17:00, 18:00-20:00, and 21:00-23:00). This will force the fights to be spread across more time zones with a minimum of a 8 hour span.

Another example would be to keep the 4 hour "primetime", but force setting a different value for each of the IHUB, TCU, and station such that there can never be a one hour period of time where all three overlap. This would result in a minimum of a 9 hour window where SOMETHING was vulnerable.

Another example would be to introduce a "random" hour to each structure individually. In this example, each structure would have a random 1 hour window (calculated at downtime) each day where it was vulnerable. When a structure becomes vulnerable, it picks a random time somewhere within the the 4 hour window plus that days random hour (not the random hour when it was reinforced as that would benefit the attacker too greatly). As an optional enhancement, let the structure owner specify 8 unique 1-hour blocks (disjoint from the prime time) which restricts the times where the "random" hour can be.

EDIT: Another example I stole from another post here is to force setting a disjoint (non-overlapping) "primetime" per constellation. A smaller entity can force everything into their primetime if they hold a small amount of space. However,the larger the amount of space you hold, the more timezone you have to defend against.

I think the current system will drive alliance to form around dense 4-hour timezones. If that happens, those alliances will only be effectively fighting other alliances in the same blocks while just staring at alliances outside their 4-hour primetime with zero ability to impact them in any meaningful way.


Tiberian Deci
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#152 - 2015-03-03 16:44:38 UTC
What about the following scenario:

Person A from one corp starts hacking (time 0:00). At 2:30 an enemy gang appears and starts shooting him. Person B (from the same corp as Person A) arrives and starts hacking right before Person A dies (time 3:00). At time 5:00, a full 5 minutes have hacking has been done, but person B has 3:00 left on their cycle (let's assume he tanks them long enough to live till time 5:00). Will that count as hacking the structure or does it need to be 5 minutes completed by a single entosis link. I feel like letting people chain hacks together could be abused so i hope it ends up requiring a single ship to live for the entire 5 minutes.
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#153 - 2015-03-03 16:44:46 UTC
Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:

1) Expand the window to 8 hours
2) If you pick a 4 hour window, you also get a 2 hour window 10 hours from the end of your chosen window. This would mean that a US TZ window would have an opposite time that would be RUS friendly and an EU window would have AUS friendly times.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

the sargent
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#154 - 2015-03-03 16:45:25 UTC
It's funny, everyone tells CCP they want a occupancy based SOV system. When CCP comes up with a system that takes the basic concept of "occupancy" and uses it as a mechanic everyone start whining about how it will ruin everything. Seriously guys calm down if it doesn't work out guess what? it will be fixed in a couple of months because of the shorter release schedule. Give the system a chance first before going "IT'S THE END!"

I mean seriously every time CCP changes something to do will null sec its "the end of null sec as we know it," and yes that is true but just because it's the end of one system doesn't mean the new system is going to be complete trash.

Damn, sorry for the minor wall of text.
#155 - 2015-03-03 16:45:55 UTC
I've been posting about the old CCP coming back...still not convinced? Fail a few more game projects and keep wasting time making half-assed nullsec changes....let me know how that works out for you.

Recruitment Officer: What type of a pilot are you? Me: I've been described as a Ray Charles with Parkinsons and a drinking problem.

Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#156 - 2015-03-03 16:47:24 UTC
Two step wrote:
Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:

1) Expand the window to 8 hours
2) If you pick a 4 hour window, you also get a 2 hour window 10 hours from the end of your chosen window. This would mean that a US TZ window would have an opposite time that would be RUS friendly and an EU window would have AUS friendly times.

Sure, let's come up with more variance in mechanical rules and interactions, as if EVE has not demonstrated consistantly that any such system will get min/maxed to hell and back.

We've had timezone wars in the past, with the exact same crap of interaction windows. It ended up so badly gamed to hell and back that CCP thought POS was a good idea to attach sovereignty to :P
Proton Stars
Gallente Federation
#157 - 2015-03-03 16:47:26 UTC
what is the reason to ever own a titan or super in this meta?
Goonswarm Federation
#158 - 2015-03-03 16:48:38 UTC
Two step wrote:
Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:

1) Expand the window to 8 hours
2) If you pick a 4 hour window, you also get a 2 hour window 10 hours from the end of your chosen window. This would mean that a US TZ window would have an opposite time that would be RUS friendly and an EU window would have AUS friendly times.

this system is already hilariously biased in favor of the attacker, what would make you think they need more
Master S
DramaQueens with Pacemakers
#159 - 2015-03-03 16:48:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Master S
If they proceed this update in the summer the game will die. (good for economy then, people get out more, finally we all see some sun and get some Vitamine D, instead of EvE stars and suns on our screens) Or most people who dont want to be in a big alliance, they go gank Hisec.

CCP proceed this and your core gamers will be gone, congratz! So instead of being different and original then other MMORPG's they will just be the same as WoW or other popular mindnumbing MMORPG's for people who don't want to use their brain and start complaining when the game gets harder.

- NRDS will be killed with this update (bye bye NRDS as we know it) since carebears won't protect their space, they go Hisec
- alliances (big or small) will be even more awesome, the hard work, hours and hours of boring grinding in Bashfleets, the billions of isk that goes into infrastructure and what more, can be taken over in 10 mins, WOOT WOOT got to love that

and more stuff that will make it more dumb to get new players in

So next step in August will be pay for your system or your officer modules! Pay to win EVE, is what they are building towards!

Glad that i paid till June, see u guys after June in another game

gg CCP
Jack Haydn
Magellanic Itg
Goonswarm Federation
#160 - 2015-03-03 16:48:47 UTC
So you fortified the need for even bigger coalition building. The one who can field the most players in fast, agile ships is the one who can lock down the most systems (for either attack or defense) and run the most concurrent RFs or Command Node takeovers.

If you're a small timer, you'll get crushed by the coalitions who will always have more people available to chase and cockblock you, all while running their own Entosii in the meantime.

Pretty chastening.