Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Thanks for the superficial input, but people still should be aware of the fact that you are a high-sec denizen with no proven track record of having a previous residence in sovereign null. I wouldn't consider you as being qualified to be able to make remarks like the one above, because you have never lived in a sovereign null system as a resident. The fact that you cannot see the balance problems inherent in your continued rhetoric and speculative suggestions about the new proposal is showing.

And no, keep your "I'm an alt of a null-sec resident" smokescreen for yourself, nobody is going to be deceived by it. Unless you post on your mythical main that is supposedly a character with sovereign null background, I don't believe you'll possess any credibility per your wild rhetoric.

No, because such scaling is senseless and stupid. Not all the sovereign null systems are the same quality, most of the sovereign null systems today with bad truesec cannot sustain a resident population. But of course, this is something you would have known if you weren't a high-sec resident with no sovereign null life experience. You have no idea what you are talking about, and you are lying to everybody when you claim that you are an alt of a sovereign null resident.

Besides, any such scaling is easily bypassed by the defender if it's unfavorable for defense. Creating multiple alliances and distributing members between them is easy. But then again, if you had any idea of what you are babbling about and if you had prior experience in sovereign null, you would have known.

Keep in mind tho that Entosis effects are tied to the alliance. I can't predict how much that matters but I'm sure it's a factor - when defending but also when attacking. After reinforcement / during the control node phase you can't group fleets based on those split alliances and in fact have to be very careful _only_ players of the right alliance use their links. (Oh, can't wait to listen in on fleet comms after the change)

What about systems that were just taken? After taking a system the indexes are 0, leaving the system extremely vulnerable. It takes time to build up those indexes, especially so for Strategic, requiring the space to be owned for X number of days, and industrial which is notoriously difficult to maintain.

That's something I'd like to see addressed by the advocates of the variable prime time idea.

That's a very good point. I wouldn't mind making 0/0/0 space attackable all day but that is a very fair point for contested space, maybe you can include a kind of "cooldown" or change the way iHubs and their upgrades work to gain indices faster. Another idea would be to use the 6h prime time window as buffer for a week and then go for indices based timer after these 7d. Problem might be abuse by certain entities to cover lower used space by holding alliances.

Always hard to tweak - imo the current ihub mechanics need to be changed (including volume, price, upgrades), then it'll be easier and simpler for smaller / newer entities.

That sounds convincing to you, but you'll have to be able to defeat the enemy on the field if you want to take actually used space from them. No sov change will change that particular problem, it'll only be easier to get your hands on the less loved space and edges of the bigger entities space.

50 or 500 or 5000 players, each entity should decide on their own what space they want to claim and utilize, then each stronghold constellation should be reasonably defendable and with a good short timer. The alliance size thing can be circumvented in so many ways, this won't solve your issue. You can put all pvp/entosis characters in a holding alliance, reducing the "pilot" weight of alts to blue sister alliances, yadda yadda. More territory can be split upon different alliances, I think that most alliances are probably considering keeping only the necessary systems and trimming the fat to reduce timers and vulnerability.

tldr: No matter what factor you tie it to, there'll be exploits and evasion methods used by 0.0 alliances, that's what we're all good at - looking at mechanics and trying to find loopholes and weaknesses to gain advantage. If you want to keep it simple, use the indices as general mark for reference - and you can always tweak how they work in general.

no problem, they broke up the long answer questions a bit which helped but tbh one of those i wrote a pretty detailed account of what i thought about the mechanics and how it interconnects with other aspects of the game in a very non-optimal way, and it took me a fair while to draft it, go through and clarify it and remove errors and tidy up the grammar.

answered.
imho PrimeTime is a mandatory feature for the gamers who are working and/or have families. 4h is a very good time. come home, eat, play, go to bed, be fit on next day.
But i understand the other guys, who think that there will be nothing to do for them. but this simply wrong/selfish. They can still attack alliances that are vulnerable at that time or go to hostile neighbors to disrupt their defence bonus.
And that brings me to my proposal: how to disrupt someone, who docks up as soon as a "nonblue" shows in local, and have fun/provoke fights while doing it?
1st: set nullsec local to show count of players in system. also show only those that have set their standings blue to the viewer/ the owner. ---------- no explanation needed
2nd: introduce a new deployable ("listening post"). it is similar to an anchorable FWplex, that reduces the defence bonu , when completed (on def side, no running timer needed. just destroy. low hp. no gate). 5-30 minutes time idk.----- this is the provoking part.
3rd: the listening post provides local for owning(=attacking) party.
4th: truesec adapts: industrial actions benefit truesec and security actions do it no good. number of finished listeninposts contribute to reduction. Now you construct a metric around this. The best 1% systems get -1.0. the next 1% get -0.99 and so on. (dev can tweak here easily) --- this is to balance security/ratting around nullsec and spread it. Now it is more disruptible!
4.1: Do a lesser variant of this and put it to lowsec. So players can get comfortable with the gameplay in a safer environment and can start moving on.
(also: LP to upgrade a FW system is bad. Please use the same contribution factors as in sov to determine its level.)
5th: If the effective System Level reaches zero it is Vulnerable regardless of owner's primetime. reduction should take a long enough time but also be fast enough . also, a system that is actively used should never reach zero. but disruption should hurt defence and economy. ---- now AUTZ can conquer land as well. wouldnt you, on the other side, like that?
6th: work out the bugs and flaws of 1-5th . though 1st is not so important.

Would you like something like that?

Their answer to this is "well you can AFK camp the system to bring defenses down"

FUN FUN.

So we fix a stupid design be making the module stupidly expensive? This Entosis Magic Wand Capture The Flag idea is just crap. The whole design is so artificially bloated, it isn't even fun to read about it.