Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Roenok Baalnorn
Sadistically Sinister
152
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 14:44:22 -
[1] - Quote
To replace the current sov system, i would use Citadels as sov holders. More specifically a different tier of citadels that were basically like a T2 version. The T1 version( current service version) of citadels provides you with flexibility and customization for whatever purpose you want the citadel for and are "service" citadels. The "command" version so to speak provides you sov and has the sole purpose of being a sov defense structure. So...
Command Citadels:
- These are special versions of the 3 citadels. They have the same material cost as their original counterpart. - No service slots,station services,tethering, and only sub capitals can dock here. This is to keep the cost down while providing maximum benefit to its primary function. - Role bonuses: *25% bonus to combat rig effectiveness *25% bonus to HP of S/A/H ( the damage limits are the same as the t1 counterparts) *25% bonus to citadel damage( all weapon types) *25% bonus to fighter HP and DPS *5% bonus to citadel DPS and HP(S/A/H) per level of active defense multiplier( Note: In alliance capital systems the ADM modifier is 10% instead of 5%)
- Command link slots. Service slots are replaced with citadel command link slots as follows: Astrahus-3, Fortizar-4, Keepstar-6
* Citadel command links allow the citadel to give bonuses to alliance/corp members on grid WHILE the citadel is manned by someone with the appropriate leadership skills. This is in addition to fleet bonuses members of the alliance receive from fleet boosters. This is meant to be a force multiplier.Command Links: ^ Shield- 3% to shield hp ^ Armor- 3% to armor HP ^ Damage Control- 2% to shield resistance,4% armor resistance, 8% to hull resistance( stacking resistance penalties apply) ^ Triage- 5% bonus to amount and range of remote reppers ^ Local Triage- 5% bonus to local repper amounts ^ Drones - 5% bonus to HP,tracking,and damage ^ Targeting- 10% bonus to targeting range and scan res ^ Tracking- 5% to tracking of turrets,optimal range, and falloff ^ Missile guidance - 5% bonus to explosion velocity and radius ^ Ewar- 5% bonus to effectiveness of ECM, sensor dampening,tracking disruptors. ^ Scram/web-10% bonus to range of focused scrams and webifiers ^ Weapon Damage -5% bonus to all weapon damage ^ Capacitor - 5% bonus to max cap and recharge rate
Other: - Command citadel is linked to the TCU.TCU is invulnerable as long as the command citadel is operational. - Only 1 command citadel may be anchored and onlined at a time in system(you will not be allowed to anchor if another command citadel has already started this process)
TCUs:
- Used to claim sovereignty - Invulnerable as long as a command citadel is online in the system. - TCU stats: *100k shield *100k Armor *250k Hull
- Anchoring * Must be no online command citadel in system. * Must be no online TCU in system * 10 minutes to anchor * Vulnerable while being anchored
- Vulnerability * Must be no online command citadel in system * Vulnerable for 3 hours immediately following the destruction of the command citadel * If it is not destroyed in this 3 hour window becomes invulnerable for another 48 hours. If the owning alliance/corp does not online a command citadel in this 48 hours the TCU will go offline and become unanchored. The system will then have no ownership until a TCU is anchored and onlined and another 48 hr window is given to that TCU owner to online a command citadel.
-How to claim Sov in a system that has no sov holder: 1) Anchor and online TCU. 2) Anchor and online a command citadel. Once online The citadel/TCU owner claims sov.
- How to take Sov from someone else. 1) remove the command citadel. 2) Remove the TCU 3) Anchor your TCU 4) Anchor and online your citadel 5) Sov claimed
Goals
- To inspire alliances to defend their territory rather than the current mechanic of sitting around waiting for the other side to go away. This inspiration hopefully comes in that they will be losing a valuable citadel( which can get costly quickly) as well as the system and that the citadel will provide them with a force multiplier that gives them an advantage over the attackers which will hopefully encourage them to attempt to defend.
- To make sov grinding less boring.POS bashing wasnt that exciting and honestly the systems that followed were actually even more boring( though shorter). Sov warfare should be entertaining, not feel like a job we have to do to live in null. Hopefully this will encourage more battles and entertainment.
|
Roenok Baalnorn
Sadistically Sinister
152
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 14:44:36 -
[2] - Quote
Transistion from current mechanics: - The release will be given a one month warning allowing alliances to make sure they have the assets and have those in place to convert to the new system.
- Sov holders will be given one week notice and a pre patch patch that allows them to select one of the current citadels( or anchor a new one) in each system to become the command citadel. This will done with a check box style or drop down( or whatever CCP prefers) box.
- All service modules must be removed from this citadel prior to the transistion patch. Any service modules not removed will destroyed. Other modules and rigs will be unaffected( assuming CCP can do this that is)
-Any capital and super capital ships( anything that cannot dock at a Astrahus basically) must be removed from the citadel. Any of these ships not removed from the citadel will be treated as if the citadel has been destroyed. However any instant recovery fees for these ships will wavied one time in this situation. All ships that can normally dock at an astrahus will be unaffected.
- All entosis mechanics will be removed during the patch.
- All TCUs will become invulnerable for the 24 prior to the patch and 48 hours after the patch.
- If an alliance manages to not select a citadel as the command citadel before the patch, they will have 48 hours after the patch to anchor a command citadel( this can be used as an option, if you do not wish to convert a current citadel) After this 48 hours, if no command citadel is in system sov will be lost and anyone will be free to claim it using the new mechanics. |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4511
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 16:23:27 -
[3] - Quote
There are not enough citadels in existance for this mechanic to actually work.
Just saying.
(EVE central lists 162 astrahus and 11 fortizars on the market. The biggest sov holding entity, shadow of death, holds 193 systems. Good luck sourcing what, 3000+ of the damn things to cover everything?) |
Roenok Baalnorn
Sadistically Sinister
153
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 18:19:40 -
[4] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:There are not enough citadels in existance for this mechanic to actually work.
Just saying.
(EVE central lists 162 astrahus and 11 fortizars on the market. The biggest sov holding entity, shadow of death, holds 193 systems. Good luck sourcing what, 3000+ of the damn things to cover everything?)
Silly goon.
1) it would take a while for the mechanic to be put in place like a few months easy. It has to go through the entire development chain and testing first.
2) Have you actually bothered flying around eve? My alliance alone has systems with 4-5 citadels in them already. In empire they are all over the place. Not to mention the 425ish that have been destroyed.
Dont worry i am sure goons can afford citadels for sov in their vast empire right now. Lets see, by my calculations you would need exactly ZERO to maintain your current level of sov. |
Do Little
Virgin Plc Evictus.
308
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 18:27:04 -
[5] - Quote
Create TCU and iHub service modules for citadel. Give players the option of fitting these to a citadel instead of using the stand alone variety. If alliances choose to replace stand alone structures with a citadel in a system where they hold sovereignty, the stand alone structures explode but the ADMs are unaffected. Eventually outposts are replaced with citadels and the stand alone TCU and iHub are removed from the game. You want Sov - you need a citadel in the system. |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4511
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 18:44:04 -
[6] - Quote
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:Danika Princip wrote:There are not enough citadels in existance for this mechanic to actually work.
Just saying.
(EVE central lists 162 astrahus and 11 fortizars on the market. The biggest sov holding entity, shadow of death, holds 193 systems. Good luck sourcing what, 3000+ of the damn things to cover everything?) Silly goon. 1) it would take a while for the mechanic to be put in place like a few months easy. It has to go through the entire development chain and testing first. 2) Have you actually bothered flying around eve? My alliance alone has systems with 4-5 citadels in them already. In empire they are all over the place. Not to mention the 425ish that have been destroyed. Dont worry i am sure goons can afford citadels for sov in their vast empire right now. Lets see, by my calculations you would need exactly ZERO to maintain your current level of sov.
...Yes, we have piles of the things scattered around. But since my alliance affiliation is completely and totally irrelevant to the current discussion...
I am saying that there are not enough of the structures in existence for a system like this to work. They are also too hard to build to be the mainstay of a sov system. You are also calling for a return to the 'you must have a giant supercap fleet to play in the sov sandbox' mechanics, which is probably not the best idea.
Let's boil it all down to a single, simple question.
Why? |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Escalating Entropy
10157
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 21:20:14 -
[7] - Quote
Gaiz! GAIZ!!
We have come full circle!!
This idea is more or less the old POS SOV system that existed before Dominion... which preceded Fozzy-SOV.
How did you Veterans start?
The Mustache and Beard Thread
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3366
|
Posted - 2016.07.03 22:41:03 -
[8] - Quote
The problem with this system is that it requires a command citadel in every system. This creates a god almighty grind, both to build and to destroy them.
What if instead Sov became by constellation. Would it then be feasible to have a constellation capital like this? Yes it would slightly up the ante and minimum entry size since you can't just take one system in the middle of nowhere but have to start at at least a constellation, but it would also make it a lot easier to keep an eye on your sov, since it reduces the number of systems needing active monitoring during vulnerability windows by a factor of 5 to 10.
That all said, there is something to the command node idea of spreading fights across a constellation also to encourage tactics and strategy rather than just F1 blobbing on the grid, so I'm not sure how to integrate that into the idea. The super cap fleet issue is a problem as well, but most people do seem to want some return to some form of DPS based Sov, so just have to keep the caps low enough that it's not impossible without the supercaps, and that over blobbing on one grid might cost you a different grid. |
Roenok Baalnorn
Sadistically Sinister
154
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 01:12:08 -
[9] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:
...Yes, we have piles of the things scattered around. But since my alliance affiliation is completely and totally irrelevant to the current discussion...
I am saying that there are not enough of the structures in existence for a system like this to work. They are also too hard to build to be the mainstay of a sov system. You are also calling for a return to the 'you must have a giant supercap fleet to play in the sov sandbox' mechanics, which is probably not the best idea.
Let's boil it all down to a single, simple question.
Why?
They are not hard to build. An astrahus require less materials than a dreadnought and alliances consider dreads disposable. Actually it requires about the same amount of material as a t1 battleship with a bit of advanced PI thrown in. They take quite a bit longer than a BS to churn out but not near as long as a dread, and again we consider dreads disposable now.
The Why? Well POS chess was a grind. People figured out ways around the mechanics without actually doing much fighting. It didnt encourage the defending alliance to actually defend. We will just put up more POSes and tear theirs down when they arent here.
Sov mechancis were changed to the TCU and then you played SBU chess. That was even more boring than POS grinding. Then we went to entosis which is as boring as the previous two just in a different way.
This system tries to encourage fighting more now than the current system which doesnt encourage fighting at all. In fact since POS bashing as sov warfare i do less PVP in sov fleets not more. My system is a hybrid of the two systems. It takes the simplicity of the TCU system with the defensive nature of the POS system and then makes it better.
Also you do not need a giant supercap fleet. you might need to dreadbomb an astrahus, but they have been killed with 4 people in battleships. And many KMs under 30 people. Also you are forgetting citadel mechanics only allow it to take so much DPS. So it doesnt matter it you have 5 dreads shooting it or 50 its still going to take the same amount of time and your just wasting ammo. Fortizars several KMs with less than 50 people on the KM. One as low as 15 and not one was in a capital.
Quote:Gaiz! GAIZ!!
We have come full circle!!
This idea is more or less the old POS SOV system that existed before Dominion... which preceded Fozzy-SOV. No its a hybrid of the two systems, simplified actually.
Quote:The problem with this system is that it requires a command citadel in every system. This creates a god almighty grind, both to build and to destroy them.
What if instead Sov became by constellation. Would it then be feasible to have a constellation capital like this? Yes it would slightly up the ante and minimum entry size since you can't just take one system in the middle of nowhere but have to start at at least a constellation, but it would also make it a lot easier to keep an eye on your sov, since it reduces the number of systems needing active monitoring during vulnerability windows by a factor of 5 to 10.
That all said, there is something to the command node idea of spreading fights across a constellation also to encourage tactics and strategy rather than just F1 blobbing on the grid, so I'm not sure how to integrate that into the idea. The super cap fleet issue is a problem as well, but most people do seem to want some return to some form of DPS based Sov, so just have to keep the caps low enough that it's not impossible without the supercaps, and that over blobbing on one grid might cost you a different grid.
You should have to work for sov, both to take it and keep it. It shouldnt be the boring grind it was with POSes, but it should be the nearly effortless fight it is now to actually gain sov. I dont really like it by constellation and spreading it out just reminds me of the current system. I wouldnt be opposed to an idea to spread it out a little more though.
Ultimately this is sov warfare. Sov warfare should require a commitment the same as taking over another country should require some commitment.
Capitals and super caps are meant to be used and blown up. So im fine with people wanting them use them. The citadels have blob protection themselves, so that doesnt bother me. And if you cant field a big enough defense fleet to take on the attacking fleet with a citadel, your not going to be able to save your sov without the citadel so that is a non factor.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3367
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 01:45:17 -
[10] - Quote
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:They are not hard to build. An astrahus require less materials than a dreadnought and alliances consider dreads disposable. Actually it requires about the same amount of material as a t1 battleship with a bit of advanced PI thrown in. They take quite a bit longer than a BS to churn out but not near as long as a dread, and again we consider dreads disposable now.
Capitals and super caps are meant to be used and blown up. So im fine with people wanting them use them. The citadels have blob protection themselves, so that doesnt bother me. And if you cant field a big enough defense fleet to take on the attacking fleet with a citadel, your not going to be able to save your sov without the citadel so that is a non factor.
These statements do not match up. An Ast does not have any significant defence to make a difference. To make a real difference in a Cap fight you need to be using a Keepstar. And Keepstars are not Dreads or BS, they are significantly more than an officer fit titan last I looked at prices (Ok, depending on fit). Expecting a Keepstar in every single system or even a Fortizar is both a joke and a massive grind. And expecting people to babysit hundreds of Ast is also a joke. They have no auto defence which POS did, and there are thousands of null systems. Hence my point about Constellation. CCP have already acknowledged Sov should be about more than one grid in one system with their command nodes spread through the constellation, this idea just takes it a little further and makes it a full fight by constellation. The trick is just working out a logical way that this interacts with citadels that allows a smaller force to outsmart a larger one, without making it too easy. When in a war you don't have to take every single village physically, you take the major centres and the hubs, and the villages fall into line. This matches that idea. |
|
Echo Mande
70
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 12:30:41 -
[11] - Quote
Do Little wrote:Create TCU and iHub service modules for citadel. Give players the option of fitting these to a citadel instead of using the stand alone variety. If alliances choose to replace stand alone structures with a citadel in a system where they hold sovereignty, the stand alone structures explode but the ADMs are unaffected. Eventually outposts are replaced with citadels and the stand alone TCU and iHub are removed from the game. You want Sov - you need a citadel in the system.
This sounds like an interesting halfway option that just might work. However, I wouldn't remove TCUs and iHubs from the game. Leaving them in would allow a cheaper option for alliances to claim and hold 'outlands' territory while being able to use Citadels for sov in their core systems. Citadels everywhere would IMO be a lot like the 'outposts everywhere' proliferation CCP is trying to get away from.
Wallet remarks everywhere
|
Frostys Virpio
Yet another corpdot.
2955
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 18:29:23 -
[12] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Gaiz! GAIZ!!
We have come full circle!!
This idea is more or less the old POS SOV system that existed before Dominion... which preceded Fozzy-SOV.
My first reaction was pretty close to that. It's POS SOV without moon limit. |
Roenok Baalnorn
Sadistically Sinister
155
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 21:34:20 -
[13] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote: My first reaction was pretty close to that. It's POS SOV without moon limit.
It has a limit: 1 citadel per system. So no bashing 100 structures per system. just 2 structures. The citadel and the TCU and any defense fleet.
Quote:These statements do not match up. An Ast does not have any significant defence to make a difference. To make a real difference in a Cap fight you need to be using a Keepstar. And Keepstars are not Dreads or BS, they are significantly more than an officer fit titan last I looked at prices (Ok, depending on fit). Expecting a Keepstar in every single system or even a Fortizar is both a joke and a massive grind.
First a citadel is meant to be a defense force multiplier not a solo unit. CCP stated this. Also you are very much incorrect in that you need a keepstar to make a difference in a fight. a single interceptor can make a difference in a fight. Fleet boosters can make a significant difference in a fleet fight which command citadels give stacking boosters with fleet boosters while you are on grid.
You are also stuck on capital fleets. You do realize we dont whip out the caps every time we want to go do something in null right? A majority of op fleets i am in do not have caps except a titan as a JB, if that. While caps are used more than they were, they are still used selectively because of force projection restrictions and they are simply a pain to move and babysit. Its actually easier many times to leave the caps at home and just bring a sub cap fleet.
Caps are still of limited use against citadels. As you can only apply so much DPS to a citadel. Also if you are bringing overwhelming force then its not going to matter if you have an astrahus or a keepstar. Citadels are meant to be used differently than a POS or a station. You have to take a more active role in defending them because one of CCPs main goals is to get us to destroy each others stuff. They actively encourage it.
You are also stuck on the cost, which when you live in high sec might be relevant. But it really isnt in null because we would build this not buy it. It is essentially no different than producing capitals. And we have no issue in null at churning out capitals. In fact i can literally build an entire citadel without actually leaving my home system.
Quote:And expecting people to babysit hundreds of Ast is also a joke. It is literally no different than the current TCU system. You have to "babysit" TCUs now as you say. Command Citadels actually makes you have to babysit less because the TCU is only vulnerable when the citadel is destroyed and how often are is an astrahus vulnerable? A fortizar? So you would actually do less babysitting and you wouldnt have a random small gang running around trying to steal a system. As a last note, you shouldnt take space you cannot defend. There is no reason for an alliance of 1500-4500 people to own an entire region. That is just being greedy and if you want to over extend yourself then suffer the consequences. CCP doesnt want big massive blob alliances own large sections of the map. That discourages fighting which is the main goal in Eve. That is why they spent a lot of time working on making a single system able to support dozens of people at a time. A well developed system can support 3-4 dozen active ratters. Unless their is something major going on most alliances have 5-15% of their members on at a time peak.
Quote:When in a war you don't have to take every single village physically, you take the major centres and the hubs, and the villages fall into line. This matches that idea. Um no, a large alliance could literally steamroll an entire region. The goal is to make people work for sov. Being able to take out 6-12 points in a region and claim the whole thing is ridiculous.
I understand where people come from in wanting to spread fighting out a bit. Entosis and SBUs were a big fail at this. They didnt spread fights out and the main group stayed together. You cant really spread the fighting out without making it super grindy because you need to force an alliance to have to grind multiple structures at the same exact time making them commit multiple ships multiple locations to destroy something. Doing this would also make it much harder for small alliances to take space. And that is the huge problem with sov warfare you have to make it easy enough an alliance with 15-20 people on field can take space and hard enough that an alliance that can put 300 people on field cant just steamroll a region in a week.
You also cant force people to fight a certain way. Your not going to force alliances to spread their fleet out across multiple systems unless you make it so its impossible to do anything but that. Why? Because that is poor military tactics. So FCs only do it when its absolutely necessary. |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4517
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 21:40:49 -
[14] - Quote
If I build it myself it's free!
|
Roenok Baalnorn
Sadistically Sinister
155
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 21:57:26 -
[15] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:If I build it myself it's free! Thats not what i was saying. However, i like how a goon places such high value on a citadel when your alliances actually just suicide dreadbombs. The irony is very amusing. And being in a ( former) 0.0 alliance you should know how ship production works. Null alliances rarely buy capitals, they just build them. Same with citadels. |
Linus Gorp
Ministry of Propaganda and Morale Black Marker
289
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 22:00:12 -
[16] - Quote
When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
3368
|
Posted - 2016.07.04 22:26:47 -
[17] - Quote
Roenok Baalnorn wrote:Quote:When in a war you don't have to take every single village physically, you take the major centres and the hubs, and the villages fall into line. This matches that idea. Um no, a large alliance could literally steamroll an entire region. The goal is to make people work for sov. Being able to take out 6-12 points in a region and claim the whole thing is ridiculous. You also cant force people to fight a certain way. Your not going to force alliances to spread their fleet out across multiple systems unless you make it so its impossible to do anything but that. Why? Because that is poor military tactics. So FCs only do it when its absolutely necessary. The rest of your statements were so ludicrous and uneducated I'm not going to bother addressing them, just these. Currently a large alliance does steamroll an entire region on 6-12 significant fights anyway. Since each Citadel has several timers if there are 10 constellations there are 20 fights on timers related to taking sov. These fights will be over a major asset of value that can not be evaced (Especially if it's a keepstar.) Having seen how much people threw into a battle simply to save one titan (Assaki), since a Keepstar is higher value we could expect these fights to all be heavily fought over.
Regarding splitting fleets, no it's not poor military tactics. It's actually very good military tactics. EVE fights are normally zerg rushes since there is only one objective. If you create multiple objectives relating to a Sov fight it will then make sense to split the fleet to some degree in order to chase those multiple objectives. These would obviously be smaller objectives and not 'needed' for the main fight, but would give you advantage in some way. Imagine for example fighting for a node, that once you get an entosis cycle on it triggers a 30 second/1 minute timer on the citadel that either makes it temporarily invulnerable again for that time, or doubles the DPS cap for that time.
You could also have 'remote' sov facilities spawn automatically in the other systems in a constellation that could be attacked by roaming gangs to damage things. Thinking last night about moons it would be a novel way to address the current logistics spam involved in moon mining. Rather than having to drop a POS at every moon, instead you drop a Moon Mining facility in the system somewhere (Ala citadel mechanics but industrial platform instead). You then fit it, and it has a number of 'moon miners'. You then allocate these using a menu to the various moons in the system, at which point it automatically spawns an attackable structure on that moons grid (After a short delay maybe). Now, while this is a side tangent, you could have the same thing happening from a 'Sov Citadel'. That instead of having to physically make, anchor & fuel every single sov structure in every single system, they are automatically created by the sov citadel and fuelled from a central point, but you can still attack them individually as harassing raids to deny services/ADM's/Industrial upgrades/etc in various systems in the constellation.
Idea being to avoid logistics tedium while still providing things in space to shoot, and to make the actual taking of sov hinge around a number of significant fights, but allow for smaller gangs to win by outplaying their opponents and winning all the smaller nodes. (Obviously if a larger entity is equally good at operating a split fleet, said larger entity is going to win but they were anyway, this is just about a skilled small group vs an unskilled large group). It also would provide roaming content which wouldn't trigger a massive 'You touched our sov' response but was still meaningful and annoying to the current users of the systems. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |