EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

First post First post First post
Author
Caldari State
#321 - 2015-03-03 17:52:49 UTC
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.

My blog: greedygoblin.blogspot.com

Brute Force Solutions
#322 - 2015-03-03 17:53:21 UTC
JohnMonty wrote:
"Defenders will also often enjoy the benefits of jump bridges,"

Best line in the whole thing lol


I very much like the proposal, but yea jump bridges won't be that much help with fatigue... just have to plan your use of them well I suppose.

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

Badfellas Inc.
#323 - 2015-03-03 17:54:08 UTC
Pie Napple wrote:
I see a problem with with the primetime thing as there is no actual way to make real coalitions in game.

For alliances with mixed timezones, like brave collective, there is no way of splitting up into timezones and splitting up the sovereignty. If the split would happen, nothing in the game ties the coalition together. It would not be one brave any more, it would be multiple. It would all have to be handled by standings. No common chat channels (has to be created and managed manually).

I think they should change sov warfare to be done on a corporation level, or add the ability for us to create actual coalitions.


This is explicitly designed to break up coalitions not encourage them.
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
#324 - 2015-03-03 17:54:21 UTC
Oh goody, my available gameplay just went to 0 if im not im my alliances "prime time"
Pandemic Horde
#325 - 2015-03-03 17:55:45 UTC  |  Edited by: SilentAsTheGrave
Despite it taking longer, I'm not a fan of a capital ship using that new module. Then again, they can't recieve remote repairs. Maybe not allow triage and siege modules to be activated if a Entosis link is also being used.
The Methodical Alliance
#326 - 2015-03-03 17:56:02 UTC  |  Edited by: MiliasColds
Milla Goodpussy wrote:
CCP in all their might.. still never even mentions on how they will deal with AFK CLOAKY CAMPING in null sec

as I previously mentioned "we'll all end up AFK CLOAKING left and right"


therefore with this plan.

A- Cloaky Camper begins camping a system.. dropping its indexes allowing for easy take over with frigate fleets

this is what CCP wants and calls it active gameplay


thanks for the direction to another game and company ill spend with them instead of you ccp..

congrats on losing money



i agree cloak invulnerability needs tweaks, do keep in mind that the target is june, and it is march, so there are plenty of opportunities to adjust cloaks and even capitals a bit before then
Gallente Federation
#327 - 2015-03-03 17:56:21 UTC
So if I'm part of an alliance that holds Sov, instead of doing different things every time I log in to keep me intrested and logging into the game.....I'm going to be constantly flying around chasing captor gangs griefing our sov?

Seems legit.
Adhocracy
#328 - 2015-03-03 17:56:38 UTC
knobber Jobbler wrote:
Prime Time thing is a terrible idea, you'll see alliances start to lose their multinational flavour. If GSF sets prime time to US, what do all the EU guys do right?
Contest EU-primetime alliances.
Gallente Federation
#329 - 2015-03-03 17:56:49 UTC
Mekenioc wrote:
Oh goody, my available gameplay just went to 0 if im not im my alliances "prime time"


Yup, nothing to do in this game other than sov warfare.
Minmatar Republic
#330 - 2015-03-03 17:56:53 UTC
Mekenioc wrote:
Oh goody, my available gameplay just went to 0 if im not im my alliances "prime time"


Yeah, isn't it great?

But don't worry, we still get to deal with the scutwork of bashing POS's so that they come out in our alliance primetime. Not that we will get to get on the KM's of those either, but still....l
#331 - 2015-03-03 17:56:57 UTC
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.


This is actually great. I'm contemplating possible "**** you"-fits right now. As I know from experience, there are a lot of empty systems all over sov.

And if I'm happen to find a completely empty system in an empty, unused and unloved constellation. Welp I guess I can teach them a lesson about defending their space against neutrals.

Looks like even a lone wolf like me can finally enter sov-warfare from the sidebenches! Pirate
#332 - 2015-03-03 17:57:03 UTC
Here's a twist: For the Attackers, some of the command nodes are duds. The defender knows which nodes are the effective ones.
#333 - 2015-03-03 17:58:30 UTC
The Zombie F1 pusher died today.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#334 - 2015-03-03 17:58:45 UTC
Pie Napple wrote:
I think they should change sov warfare to be done on a corporation level, or add the ability for us to create actual coalitions.


Adorable Brave Newbie, Eve already is corp-based. That is why every alliance (with a brain) has a holding corp that manages all the bills, sov structures, and standings.

Looking at what was posted in the devblog, I'm pretty sure this is all contingent upon alliances becoming actual entities within the eve universe, not the current pseudo-status that they currently enjoy. The word "corporation" was not mentioned even once that I recall.

So here's a doozy of a question: What is going to happen to holding corps and sov transfers? And those renter corps that won't leave their own system unless the entire region is burning down around them? Does anyone think they will willingly defend their sov?

In this new system, even if 1000 titans came to defend, not one of them will be able to rep up the renter alliance's structures. The options are to shoot the attackers or annex the sov structure. I'm intensely curious to see how landlord alliances change their rental schemes to adapt to this new system.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

The Methodical Alliance
#335 - 2015-03-03 17:58:55 UTC
Owen Levanth wrote:
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.


This is actually great. I'm contemplating possible "**** you"-fits right now. As I know from experience, there are a lot of empty systems all over sov.

And if I'm happen to find a completely empty system in an empty, unused and unloved constellation. Welp I guess I can teach them a lesson about defending their space against neutrals.

Looks like even a lone wolf like me can finally enter sov-warfare from the sidebenches! Pirate


note if it isn't a station then you don't actually take the sov you just kill theirs, you would still have to drop a tcu to claim it, or an ihub to get upgrades :P
#336 - 2015-03-03 17:59:06 UTC
So I've only skimmed it, will give it a good read later, but is the crux of this "Sovereignty will now be a game of king of the hill"? That's pretty underwhelming.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Goonswarm Federation
#337 - 2015-03-03 17:59:15 UTC
KIller Wabbit wrote:
Here's a twist: For the Attackers, some of the command nodes are duds. The defender knows which nodes are the effective ones.


then the attacker knows which ones by waiting a bit & seeing where defenders go
Goonswarm Federation
#338 - 2015-03-03 17:59:40 UTC
Lena Lazair wrote:
Shilalasar wrote:
Also this system favors alliances over both corps and coalitions. While now a defensivefleet consisting of 5 different alliances is viable after these changes you could just target the one sovholding alliance and then they can´t use capture anything. It will probably kill coalitions but not because they split into smaller groups but because f.e. the entire CFC could just join GSF. Just for safety and sharing of the defensive workload.


The idea that people with disparate identities, goals, and histories will smash together their alliances at the level that current blue coalitions exist today is invalid. It's why shifting the focus back to alliance level control is key to curbing bloc creep. People happily and willingly blue up to any and all coalitions on a moment's notice because there is really no disadvantage. You don't give up your identity, your command/control structure, or put your alliance in ANY kind of risk. And yet you get huge advantages because the existing mechanics fundamentally reward large blue coalition structure grinding fleets (EDIT: or more accurately, rewards supercap blob deterrents to large structure grinding fleets).

By refocusing this mechanic to alliance level control ONLY and removing the benefit of belonging to a blue coalition, suddenly there is much less benefit to hitching your wagon to a large blue group. More importantly, the idea that the disparate alliances of, say, CFC, would all suddenly join GSF alliance to consolidate is insane. There are many and varied reasons why those alliances aren't part of GSF already, and forcing them to actually put on the GSF tag if they want to benefit GSF sov is going to be a HUGE negative pressure on growing bloc sizes. A lot of people in blue coalitions don't actually like each other very much and only the overwhelming advantages to structure grinding (or deterrent to such) are sufficient to get them to willingly identify with a coalition; force them to adopt an actual alliance mantle while removing the scale of the benefit and rivalries will flare up.


There always is, has been and will be a benefit of being in a coalition. Be that RSF, DRF, CFC or any other, it is a simple one: you have more dudes than the other guy.

And yes, evolution will take care of those who will make a claim for sov under the watchful eye of an AFK cloaker. They will quickly pad his killboard, having been hotdropped for not adapting and not obeying a rule set in stone: don't rat with an AFK cloaky in local.

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph

Amarr Empire
#339 - 2015-03-03 17:59:54 UTC
Mekenioc wrote:
Oh goody, my available gameplay just went to 0 if im not im my alliances "prime time"


You can contract your stuff to Olya Tsarev, I look forward to what assets you seem to have deemed unusable as a result of this change that is still being worked out.

Thanks in advance sweetheart.
#340 - 2015-03-03 18:00:12 UTC
Professor Headmash wrote:
So if I'm part of an alliance that holds Sov, instead of doing different things every time I log in to keep me intrested and logging into the game.....I'm going to be constantly flying around chasing captor gangs griefing our sov?

Seems legit.

No one forces you to do so.

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude

Forum Jump