Reinforcing an IHub in null sec should disable all its upgrades

EVE Technology and Research Center Player Features & Ideas
1

Hello! This is a proposal for a change to the Aegis sov system.

When an Infrastructure Hub goes into reinforce mode all the upgrades that are installed in that ihub will be disabled. The upgrades will be enabled back if the defenders manage to defend the next ihub entosis timer.

This mechanic will give the attackers more options to generate figths, because defenders will have to form up and defend the ihub if they want to keep their infrastucture operational (Jump Gates, Cyno Jammers, Cyno Beacons etc.). Figths that will be generated in this way, will have a strictly defined goal in the form of entosis ships. Role of the attackers will be to defend the entosis ships until the timer is done, while the defenders will have to push back the aggressors.

Based on the nature of the aggression, the attacking force may vary from a small gang to a full fleet (or few). Objective of the small gang group might be to force defenders to undock and take a fight. For the larger fleets, their objective might be to disrupt supercapital construction operations.

The vulnerability window of the ihub will prevent the attackers from attacking in odd time zones. Systems with lower ADMs, which usually are border systems, will be more vulnerable to attack while the ā€œcoreā€ systems with high ADMs will be fairly easy to defend.

This mechanic will also streamline the behavior of different systems in-game by saying ā€œif it is reinforced then it does not workā€.

Please share your questions and comments!

2

So no change for goons except they can cripple an enemy alliances income?

3

Weird silence.

1 Like
4

This proposal gives both goons and their ā€œenemiesā€ an option to criple each others income. Itā€™s main goal is to give the defenders more incentive to undock and fight the attackers. This is to avoid frustrating blueball scenarios on which attackers only form-up for the initial reinforce and the defenders form-up only for the second timer.

5

In theory, sure. In practise?

In practise do defenders not need additional incentive to fight attackers, because they already have enough. ā€œNot being forced to leaveā€ is the best incentive when you want to settle in nullsec. People who do not wish to defend themselves out of their own will, aka survival, deserve to die.

No one is going to nullsec not willing to fight, unless heā€™s a renter and theyā€™re trash anyway.

I understand where youā€™re coming from. You want them to fight more. No incentive is going to change the fact that they donā€™t actually want to. Line members are crying about a lack of war, etc, but those who matter ā€¦ leadership ā€¦ donā€™t really care. The only reason why there is no big war happening is because those who could make it happen donā€™t want to make it happen.

If The Mittani wanted his alliance to wage war, then he would be doing so. If The Mittani wanted his alliance to crush literally everyone else, then he would be doing so.

But the biggest reason, why thereā€™s a lack of war in nullsec, is the fact that CCP simply does not actually want that to happen. For several years now they only cared about making big empires stronger. They made nullsec self reliant. They gave them new gates to allow them to grow closer together and to be able to move around better.

Everything points at CCP wanting nullsec empires to become the new player-driven empire space, with the little skirmishes between alliances being a form of faction warfare.

Itā€™s a lot like Bread&Circus. They can rat themselves into spoiled richness and can get their PvP fixes, too. I believe that itā€™s fair to say that nullsec space has pretty much devolved into a themepark, intentionally so. Itā€™s CCPā€™s money maker.

Anyhow ā€¦ tt makes sense, because colonizable space eventually has to be colonized by those who win. Thatā€™s the natural progression of things. Some win eventually, which means that new colonizable space has to be introduced. Before that happens, though, CCP has to make sure the empires are ready for actually being empires and they appear to be continuously working on that.

Your idea would add an interesting tactical option in theory, but in practise apparently such things are not desired by those who matter.

6

This actually makes sense. Since getting through part of citadel defences completely disables its services and fittings.

7

:joy:

8

I think itā€™s a fab idea: there could be a step reduction as opposed to a complete shutdown of the hub upgrades.

9

When is the ā€˜oddā€™ time zones according to you @Asana_Akachi ?

10

Iā€™m guesisng here (me being a noob and all), with the chinese slowly populating tq, and fleets to be Fced in many tz, new strategies are wip. I guess in some months, youā€™d have to reconsider this OP (if it last that long).

11

Initial reinforments of IHubs are currently ā€œtime zone tankedā€ (the defenders set the vulneravility window), preferably to their strong time zone), while Upwell structures are vulnerable 24/7.

So, if defenders are USTZ based then they donā€™t need to wake up in the middle of night to defend agains AUTZ alliances.

12

Hey good call man :grin: can I bring my drake in those iHub fights?

13

Drakes are unironically good entosis ships due to their tank ( Ķ”Ā° ĶœŹ– Ķ”Ā°)

14

I really wish I could take part in entosis warfare. Null sov control is like the crux of the game.

15

Your willpower to participte have to overcome that of negative thoughts and fear. Just jump into it, lose some, win some, have fun, itā€™s a game afterall. :partying_face:

16

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.