| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
CommmanderInChief
Unorganised Crime
   |
Posted - 2010.01.01 23:38:00 -
[1]
We have all been using the the verite influence map for quite some time now, to see who the space holders are. However people still view this as the SOV map and not really an 'Influence' map and even as a influence map i dont think it really is indicative of the real situation.
For example lets take Fountain at the moment, SOT and PL look like they control pretty much most of fountain still, well in fact they dont and actually PL hardly has any sov now there, however as they control a few stations in one const, and how the influence map gives extra influence points for stations it looks like PL still hold half the region, when this isnt exactly true.
People are so obsessed with the influence map, that people base an alliances worth on this, especially say when recruiting.
So Mr Verite can we make the map a little more 'real' either by substantially lowering the station bonus points or just have another map that is purely based on actual sov still with the nice blobs of space but showing real sov blots, personally i would find this more interesting and indicative of the situation in 0.0.
Many Thanks
|
Vaal Erit
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2010.01.01 23:51:00 -
[2]
CAOD is ----> way but I'll reply anyways. Influence map is fine. Successful invaders are always delayed on the influence map because defenders hold multiple stations with level 4-5 sov >>> a few systems freshly taken systems with level 1 sov. This is exactly how it should be, high sov trumps a few beachhead systems.
The Influence map seems to be delayed 2-3 weeks of whom actually owns the system, but that is the entire point of the influence map in that it cares about sov only and not anything else.
You shouldn't care at all about what a player generated map shows, you should care about what is actually happening. Whining about some inconsequential attention seeking map makes you as lame as paris hilton. htfu.
 Originally by: Jim Raynor
EVE needs danger, EVE needs risks, EVE needs combat, even piracy, without these things, the game stagnates to a trivial game centering around bloating your wallet with no purpose.
|
CommmanderInChief
Unorganised Crime
|
Posted - 2010.01.01 23:56:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Vaal Erit
CAOD is ----> way but I'll reply anyways. Influence map is fine. Successful invaders are always delayed on the influence map because defenders hold multiple stations with level 4-5 sov >>> a few systems freshly taken systems with level 1 sov. This is exactly how it should be, high sov trumps a few beachhead systems.
The Influence map seems to be delayed 2-3 weeks of whom actually owns the system, but that is the entire point of the influence map in that it cares about sov only and not anything else.
You shouldn't care at all about what a player generated map shows, you should care about what is actually happening. Whining about some inconsequential attention seeking map makes you as lame as paris hilton. htfu.
Firstly you need to take attitude elsewhere and get your head out of your ar$e its not a whine its just a request. and also ot a CAOD post either.
yes the INFLUENCE is fine but people really think that the influence map is the sov map this simply isnt true. So your saying that an alliance that has say 4 stations in just one const like say PL (sorry not picking on PL for any reason) should show that they hold half the region? when its simply again not correct.
Keep the influence map i still think its wrong, but be nice to have ANOTHER map that shows actually sov blobs that truly indicitive of the situation thats all thats being asked. not some whine or anything.
|
Steve Celeste
Caldari
Overdogs
|
Posted - 2010.01.02 00:11:00 -
[4]
Take a chill pill, Bill.
And by Bill i mean Vaal.
And by pill i mean cyanide.
(ingame) |
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2010.01.02 00:53:00 -
[5]
The influence map might need some tweaking, since the whole system is pretty new at the moment. That said, we have a regular sov map in the game, that has clear presentation, shows recent changes and tells what they were with many filtering options to make it all easy, so is there even any need for players to produce this info separately?
I can see newbies being overly impressed by the popular influence maps, but that doesn't sound like a good reason to alter how the influence map is calculated. I'm pretty sure there is a reason it is calculated the way it is. If one wants to see the exact data and changes, one can just open the map and take a look for themselves.
|
Baitin
|
Posted - 2010.01.02 01:26:00 -
[6]
You're probably pretty new to sov warfare by the sound of this post.
Lets go over a few things about how sov warfare usually works in practice.
Unless the defending alliance fail cascade any attack that takes sov should generally be considered temporary until the higher levels of sov start to tick in and probably even longer then that.
Most invasions start out with a gung ho attacker taking a couple of systems quickly, then stalemating, while fleet participation dwindles, and then they go home, proudly proclaiming victory or good fights or whatever, while the defenders quietly retakes the systems.
It makes very little sense to immediately change influence boundaries just because an attacker managed to take a couple of system. Let them get the sov level up and show they can hold the systems long term, then change the influence levels.
Otherwise just use the in-game sov map, It can show you exactly who has what systems.
|
Lork Niffle
Gallente
External Hard Drive
|
Posted - 2010.01.02 01:31:00 -
[7]
I think the above poster is correct. Sov although is objectively what is actually there the influence map does a better job of showing who owns the system since as stated shows power of each system in relative to each other. If someone has been able to keep a system long enough they have probably been able to build up a sizable force or commit skirmishes in the nearby systems to keep attackers at bay and can therefore by proxy can be considered to owning the next systems in any logical sense.
-------------------------------------
The system issues man. |
Verite Rendition
Caldari
F.R.E.E. Explorer
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.01.02 03:58:00 -
[8]
Generally speaking, individual systems are worthless. Having sov is as easy as planting a TCU and waiting 12 hours, and the costs of sov mean that a lot of smaller entities have sov (since the larger alliances don't want to foot the bill) even though they don't have any real military muscle to project their power elsewhere.
On the contrary, stations are analogous to strongholds. They give an alliance a place to base out of, safely store things, repair things, and most important of all, make the system very hard to capture thanks to the dual 48-hour reinforcement timers. It's one thing to throw someone out of a regular system, it's another thing altogether to throw them out of a station system. I grant a great deal of weight to station systems because they're a far better indicator of who can actually project military power in most situations.
With that said I don't completely disagree with you, and I am always looking for ways to improve the map. Right now I am waiting on CCP to integrate the various economic indexes in to the API, so that I can see how well a system is built up and attribute extra influence to heavily built-up systems. Such a change would be in conjunction with a general reduction in station influence, so that station systems that aren't built up would have less influence than they have today (and non-station systems that are heavily built-up would have more). I'd also like to work Infrastructure Hubs in to this (as a kind of mini-station) so that I can see if people are actually taking advantage of their strategic index (you can't install jammers, bridges, or cyno gens without an I-Hub) but I can't fetch that from the API either.
Of course the automated Influence Map is no replacement for a hand-drawn map, and I don't try to hide that. Something like Joshua's old map would probably do a better job of taking in to account the IT invasion of PL's space - but then again IT still hasn't managed to wrestle very many of PL's stations from them.
On a closing note, here's my usual disclaimer list about the Influence Map as taken from the main Influence Map thread:
1. This is not a war map. It'll not display any conflicts or ship loss.
2. This is not a power bloc map. It's colored for visibility, not for the relationship between various groups.
3. This is not an exact political map. Some systems and even outposts claimed by one alliance may appear on the territory of the other alliance, which is dominating here by influence.
----
FREE Explorer
Lead Megalomanic
EVE Null-Sec Player Influence Map
http://dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Veritefw/FWinf |
Cors
It's A Trap
|
Posted - 2010.01.02 04:41:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Cors on 02/01/2010 04:44:09
Edited by: Cors on 02/01/2010 04:43:33
I'll put my 2 cents in here..
I'll use fountain, as it was mentioned above.
Lets look at the actual stats, that DOTLAN shows as I type this.
Pandemic Legion - 22 systems(6 with stations)
Sons Of Tangra - 10 systems(3 being with stations)
IT Alliance - 14 Systems(3 being with stations)
HUN Reloaded - 9 Systems(no outposts)
I'll leave others out, as they're smaller (No offence) that between them control 21 other systems, but again, have no Stations, so don't show up on the map.
When looking at those 3 sets of stats, the IT "Influence Blob" SHOULD be the same size(Or close) to SOT's.
PL's SHOULD be bigger then both IT and SOT, but should NOT blot them out entirely.
I think the issue is that the Influence map is indicitive of SOV LEVELS, and not just who has sov in a system.
I think the map should be modified to just show who has SOV. NOT the level of SOV.
Or at least modify the multipliers so that when you have a situation like above, IT's Influence "blob" should be about equal levels to SOT's. Not completely hidded by PL's influence.
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari
F.R.E.E. Explorer
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.01.02 05:17:00 -
[10]
There's a heavy first-week penalty on sov, so that entities need to hold the space for some period of time before it starts counting. As of yesterday's map, IT only held 1 station for more than a week. Once the other two stations are held for more than a week, they'll gather more influence.
Also keep in mind that those 3 stations are all very far apart in terms of jumps.
----
FREE Explorer
Lead Megalomanic
EVE Null-Sec Player Influence Map
http://dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Veritefw/FWinf |
|
|
CommmanderInChief
Unorganised Crime
|
Posted - 2010.01.02 13:21:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Verite Rendition
Generally speaking, individual systems are worthless. Having sov is as easy as planting a TCU and waiting 12 hours, and the costs of sov mean that a lot of smaller entities have sov (since the larger alliances don't want to foot the bill) even though they don't have any real military muscle to project their power elsewhere.
On the contrary, stations are analogous to strongholds. They give an alliance a place to base out of, safely store things, repair things, and most important of all, make the system very hard to capture thanks to the dual 48-hour reinforcement timers. It's one thing to throw someone out of a regular system, it's another thing altogether to throw them out of a station system. I grant a great deal of weight to station systems because they're a far better indicator of who can actually project military power in most situations.
With that said I don't completely disagree with you, and I am always looking for ways to improve the map. Right now I am waiting on CCP to integrate the various economic indexes in to the API, so that I can see how well a system is built up and attribute extra influence to heavily built-up systems. Such a change would be in conjunction with a general reduction in station influence, so that station systems that aren't built up would have less influence than they have today (and non-station systems that are heavily built-up would have more). I'd also like to work Infrastructure Hubs in to this (as a kind of mini-station) so that I can see if people are actually taking advantage of their strategic index (you can't install jammers, bridges, or cyno gens without an I-Hub) but I can't fetch that from the API either.
Of course the automated Influence Map is no replacement for a hand-drawn map, and I don't try to hide that. Something like Joshua's old map would probably do a better job of taking in to account the IT invasion of PL's space - but then again IT still hasn't managed to wrestle very many of PL's stations from them.
On a closing note, here's my usual disclaimer list about the Influence Map as taken from the main Influence Map thread:
1. This is not a war map. It'll not display any conflicts or ship loss.
2. This is not a power bloc map. It's colored for visibility, not for the relationship between various groups.
3. This is not an exact political map. Some systems and even outposts claimed by one alliance may appear on the territory of the other alliance, which is dominating here by influence.
Mr verite im not disputing what the map is at all mate, infact its pretty much what everyone looks at now. However people DO SEE this as the SOV MAP, the ownership map whatever you may call it, and not really an influence map, people look at it now and think right lets say Insmother is totally owned by Atlas, infact its not its full of renters with the sov and atlas just has some of the stations. But people think this is totally owned by Atlas, well its not, Wicked Creek again look at actual Sov its totally empty, but gives the impression black isle have control over most of it just cos they have a couple of stations. This is simply not the case.
Now im not saying change the influence map whatsoever, but to have a more indicitive additional SOV MAP, that truly shows the sov blobs.
I mean its open source so if its a problem then I guess i could recode it myself to show real sov.
Yes one poster stated we have an ingame one, well yes but its not as graphical as the influence map..
|
UniToxic
Minmatar
Native Freshfood
|
Posted - 2010.01.02 16:30:00 -
[12]
I personally like one of the latest Eve Online web banner adverts that show hexagons over various systems and show SOV that way, however I have a feeling the map would have to be huge to show all that information.
_________________________
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari
F.R.E.E. Explorer
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.01.03 05:32:00 -
[13]
Originally by: CommmanderInChief
I mean its open source so if you will send me the code etc I guess i could recode it myself to show real sov.
The source code is always available in the Influence Map directory on EVE-Files.
----
FREE Explorer
Lead Megalomanic
EVE Null-Sec Player Influence Map
http://dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/Veritefw/FWinf |
Blane Xero
Amarr
The Firestorm Cartel
|
Posted - 2010.01.03 06:21:00 -
[14]
Originally by: UniToxic
I personally like one of the latest Eve Online web banner adverts that show hexagons over various systems and show SOV that way, however I have a feeling the map would have to be huge to show all that information.
Thats ingame, fyi.
_____________________________________
Haruhiist since December 2008
Originally by: CCP Fallout
:facepalm:
|
cal nereus
Cal Temp Agency
|
Posted - 2010.01.03 07:43:00 -
[15]
Edited by: cal nereus on 03/01/2010 07:44:01
First of all, I love Verite's map. But I gotta say, if you're depending on it for all your 0.0 information, you're not really trying to learn about what's going in 0.0 at all. However, I appreciate that you ARE making an effort to make a modified sov map. Good luck.
Anyone who lives in a given region knows what the real situation is, or at least knows more than someone looking at a map posted on the forums. Don't depend on Verite's map. Or any map. That's my advice.
---
Earning Isk
Basic Skills
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.01.03 08:21:00 -
[16]
Originally by: CommmanderInChief
People are so obsessed with the influence map
So it would seem.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |