EVE Search - Sov mechanics, are you happy with it?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Sov mechanics, are you happy with it?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.05.17 19:28:00 - [31] Originally by: Kronos Hopeslayer What I personally have found to be the worst problem for major fleet fights is the nasty lag we got from the Domion expansion. It's not a secret that the only tactic that is viable now is to bring in enough warm bodies into a system, get it lagged to nearly unplayable levels and then go about your objective (be it attacking or defending). It's worth repeating that the defender only has to do this once.
Wolfgang Jager Caldari Caldari Independent Navy Reserve	Posted - 2010.05.17 20:15:00 - [32] The "solution" of Dominion was to make SOV based on even bigger targets with more points to kill or repair...encouraging even bigger blobs because of the sheer scale of damage or repping required to achieve anything before everyone involved dies of old age. It was a bad idea from the start which has been made much worse by the horrible server performance that came with it.
Obsidian Hawk RONA Legion	Posted - 2010.05.17 20:28:00 - [33] IIRC The new sov system was suggested by players back in 06-07 cause pos spamming was stupid. so..............
Elder Man Gallente ATRISC	Posted - 2010.05.17 20:54:00 - [34] Originally by: Snel Ding Edited by: Snel Ding on 17/05/2010 06:05:00 NC and the SC have been fighting for weeks now.. Huge numbers (about 65000) of ships (about 4500B isk) died. Even supercaps and a titan got killed. When I look at the map and compare the before and after nothing has changed. I got one question to the players and CCP: Are you happy with the sov mechanics? You need about 6 months of POS fueling for a dozen systems in Null Sec., then come and post. It's the UBER LAG that Dominion brought that's keeping the fighting down right now. If and when it's fixed, then you'll see some changes in the map. If the new SOV mechanics are the cause of the lag.............CCP has a real problem then. Elder Man
Wolfgang Jager Caldari Caldari Independent Navy Reserve	Posted - 2010.05.17 23:34:00 - [35] Speaking as someone who spent far too much time placing, replacing and refueling POSs - yep pos spam sucked...but it's not like Dominion got rid of them...there are still tons and they are still very important to controlling systems. All the "new" SOV system did was consolidate all the POSes placed just to take/hold sov into "uber POSes" that are even bigger and more of a pain to beat down or rep - how exactly was that a significant improvement? More than ever, they guarantee huge fleets to attack or defend them.
Cozmik R5 Minmatar Chaosstorm Corporation Apoapsis Multiversal Consortium	Posted - 2010.05.17 23:57:00 - [36] Sov? Excuse me while I have to watch paint dry... ____________________ Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try.
Xious Caldari Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.05.18 02:27:00 - [37] Originally by: Night Epoch Edited by: Night Epoch on 17/05/2010 06:56:29 Having been in the D-G fight(s) (including the infamous one), I was there when the (then) new Sov mechanics were really put to the test - I do honestly think they're an improvement. Way better than spamming POS's. There's a relatively reasonable argument that the new Sov mechanics slightly favor the attacking alliance, as they can effectively control the timers. (An alliance of Russians, for instance, can make life a living hell for an alliance of UK and US players with regards to reinforcement timers ). And it's worth noting that, after the fall of 9UY, the rest of Providence fell with almost no appreciable resistance at all. But the fights engendered by the new sov system - when they're actually playable amid the epic lag - is ultimately a good thing IMO. What part of the sov mechanics are favouring the attacker, exactly? The fact that the defenders only need to win one engagement out of every timer to be victorious? The fact that the defenders set the time that their infastructure comes out of reinforce with only a slight variance timer? Going back to -A-'s invasion of 49-U while IT attacked Fountain, I can easily say that the attackers have a distinct advantage. We fought outside of our timezone, having to push numbers equaling our opponent in their prime via alarm clock CTA's and having to deal with a race against the clock every single evening to get into system and then be the first to win the DPS battle on IHUB's and SBU's. Ultimatly, the combination of the ability of our enemy to set the time for the fight (with a high degree of accuracy) and the need to only win one engagement of them all proved too much. The reason the Providence campaign seemed to favour the attacker was almost exclusively due to us having nothing but static structures to shoot. Originally by: CCP Shadow This thread has been cleansed of bodily fluid references.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.05.18 08:09:00 - [38] Originally by: Xious The reason the Providence campaign seemed to favour the attacker was almost exclusively due to us having nothing but static structures to shoot. Obviously the attackers have an advantage if the defenders choose not to, well, defend. No remotely plausible Sov system can overcome that strategy. Honestly, I dont think the current sov system is bad in principle. I certainly dont miss grinding Sov POS. I just think that the current mechanism is tilted too far in the defender's advantage. The simple changes I mentioned above - defender must be present to change the timer, timer can be kited, would make a significant difference. Making the victory/defeat ratio a little less one-sided would help too; the defenders being able to sleep peacefully through 4 "fights" while the attackers have to sit and wait, then turning up to fight the last battle and being able to reset the whole process back to zero is comically one-sided. Losing a battle should either set the defenders back a single stage (ie: have some kind of reinforce mode for SBUs) OR the defenders should only be able to claim back one stage at a time. (ie: if they wait until the final reinforce on their station, they can only rep the station back to full armour, then they have to wait 24H before they can rep the ihub, etc). Defenders who dont bother showing up to defend should lose something for it.
Sealiah Coffee Lovers Brewing Club Pipe Hitters Union	Posted - 2010.05.18 08:14:00 - [39] I'd say that I am happy. It allows smaller alliances to rent space out easier, it makes the fighting more dynamic than it was earlyer. Makes it harder to keep land, but that's a minus for everyone, right? And maybe, just maybe thanks to that I will have my personal solar system one day?
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.05.18 08:18:00 - [40] Originally by: Sealiah I'd say that I am happy. It allows smaller alliances to rent space out easier, it makes the fighting more dynamic than it was earlyer. Makes it harder to keep land, but that's a minus for everyone, right? And maybe, just maybe thanks to that I will have my personal solar system one day? More dynamic? Surely you mean less dynamic. The current sov system more than ever favours increasingly large coalitions. Once you have the ability and motivation to cram ~1000 pilots in to a system once a week with an even moderatly competent FC, then you will lose space very slowly if at all. You're dreaming. There is no plausible sov system that would allow you to personally own a system. That's not what Sov is for, nor was it ever meant to be. Even if there were more 0.0 systems than there were players, it would still be impossible.
Prt Scr	Posted - 2010.05.18 10:32:00 - [41] What would happen if ccp actualy 'embraced the blob', rather then trying to keep up with it...when enough #random number >500# are in a grid (my definition of a blob) the whole blob is removed from tranquility for a set period...say 4 hours and results of the combat are then posted and players returned to the game. This will possatively encourage the use of smaller blobs, and makes the use of large fleets a tactical decision with greater consiquences.
ShadowandLight Amarr 142nd GhostRiders	Posted - 2010.05.18 10:37:00 - [42] The new sov is a disaster, even worst when you figure in the inability to play the game when the servers crash or freeze up. The only thing I can see positive was the taxation system. 1) It cost WAY less in ISK to attack a system vs the old sov. SBU's are 250m each ( max of maybe 5 in a system ) vs 330m for large towers which you would need to deploy many of in the old system. 2) The alliance with the most ISK ( IE Titans / MOM's / Dreads ) win the day. Even if the defenders outnumber the attackers 2:1 they need to be able to field the same number of capitals or its a waste of time. Actually, if there is dis-balance in titans the fights over anyways. 3) Yes, the new system of taxation was probably a good idea. It stopped alliances from owning 50 systems they would never use. However everything else ( New Sov Mechanics / Broken servers ) is garbage.
altolemaeus	Posted - 2010.05.18 10:43:00 - [43] Originally by: Malcanis I certainly dont miss grinding Sov POS. Instead we got Outposts! And Ihubs! And you need to repair them! They have more HP than Pos! ...
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.05.18 11:23:00 - [44] Originally by: altolemaeus Originally by: Malcanis I certainly dont miss grinding Sov POS. Instead we got Outposts! And Ihubs! And you need to repair them! They have more HP than Pos! ... There are no resist mods on hubs. Or guns. TBH the actual shooting of those is not really harder than reffing a fully set up large POS. The EHP of a single faction large with 4-5 resists and a large set of various batteries isn't that mush different to a hub. Now with a System like P-2TTL, sure you only needed to kill 3-4 POS and you'd taken it. But some station systems have 80+ moons. F*ck that.
Spurty Caldari D00M. RED.OverLord	Posted - 2010.05.18 11:59:00 - [45] Far too many RF timers happen with this new Sov mechanic. Can take a week 'easily' logged into one system to take it if all stront timers get set for a full 2.5 days. When you 'have' to play a game that hard core, its no longer a game CCP, its 'work'. I wonder just how many people have dropped out of school and lost bonuses at work because they were needed to login? 1 is too many. As for no changes to the map, are you crazy? Check again .. actually OP, I'll just lay it out for you: Mostly Nothing going on here either Bigger picture stuff Certaily, nothing to see here Originally by: Hurley I WAS NOT QUITTING SoT AND WAS NOT THINKING ABOUT JOINING IT. PL/SoT MADE A MISTAKE AND ARE NOT MAN ENOUGH TO ADMIT IT OR FIX IT.
Batolemaeus Junior Free-Space-Ranger	Posted - 2010.05.18 16:36:00 - [46] Originally by: Malcanis Now with a System like P-2TTL, sure you only needed to kill 3-4 POS and you'd taken it. But some station systems have 80+ moons. F*ck that. Have you ever repaired an Outpost or destroyed Sbu? An Sbu is basically the Ehp equivalent of a large pos, an Outpost can require you to rep 100m Hp. It's worse than the old System. Much worse.
Xtover Amarr	Posted - 2010.05.18 16:42:00 - [47] Edited by: Xtover on 18/05/2010 16:43:32 The problem isn't with the sov mechanics. The problem is the lag. The reason no sov has changed is due to horrible leadership decisions on the SC side. Plain and simple. Originally by: Spurty I wonder just how many people have dropped out of school and lost bonuses at work because they were needed to login? 1 is too many. If anyone puts a game ahead of RL they have bigger problems than the sov mechanics.
Batolemaeus Junior Free-Space-Ranger	Posted - 2010.05.18 17:24:00 - [48] Originally by: Obsidian Hawk IIRC The new sov system was suggested by players back in 06-07 cause pos spamming was stupid. so.............. You're wrong.
Professor Tarantula Hedion University	Posted - 2010.05.18 18:37:00 - [49] Well, the majority of the game is still made up of unpopulated systems held simply to have a bigger spot on the sov map. I can only guess that devs and GMs have characters who are members of large sov holders themselves, and that's why they backpedaled on any plans for Dominion to make it harder to keep. Lost a lot of respect for CCPs vision of EVE over that. But i enjoy the game in my own way, and like the majority of players, that doesn't involve 0.0. I only ask that they stop giving handouts to alliances in 0.0. For instance, if the only way to make good isk with planetary interaction is through planets in 0.0, that'll be pretty ignorant of them. We already know greater profit doesn't lure more people into 0.0, it just gives better funds to already entrenched alliances. My deepest sympathies. Prof. Tarantula, Esq.
Hakaru Ishiwara Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2010.05.18 20:30:00 - [50] Originally by: Professor Tarantula Well, the majority of the game is still made up of unpopulated systems held simply to have a bigger spot on the sov map. ... While a great deal of null and low-sec is relatively empty of high-intensity use, the Sov game has changed greatly with Dominion. A null-sec entity may hold Sov in station systems and those systems of key strategic value, but most other systems are left without a Sov claim. Sov and system upgrades cost ISK and current alliance claims reflect that added expenditure. It is true to say that most, if not all, of the high-end moons are claimed across all of null and low-sec, regardless of Sov claims and intensity of use of a given system. Originally by: Professor Tarantula I only ask that they stop giving handouts to alliances in 0.0. For instance, if the only way to make good isk with planetary interaction is through planets in 0.0, that'll be pretty ignorant of them. We already know greater profit doesn't lure more people into 0.0, it just gives better funds to already entrenched alliances. No question, creating instantly-valuable planetary assets in pre-claimed Sovereign null-sec systems is akin to providing just one more ISK printing press. The rich get richer. That is assuming that planetary interaction generates something of value, of course. TBD until stuff goes live on Tranquility. But what about NPC Sov low and null-sec systems and regions? Syndicate, Curse, Stain and Great Wildlands come to mind as some examples of decent expanses of null-sec where pilots have a chance at higher-value resources while not getting locked out by Sov-holding, player-run alliances. And what about the couple-thousand w-space systems that can not be claimed and are accessible to any pilot with a sense of adventure? There is great opportunity to those who look for it and take a chance -- again, assuming that PI produces something of value.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse	Posted - 2010.05.19 06:07:00 - [51] Edited by: Neutrino Sunset on 19/05/2010 06:08:45 Imo the new sov system sucks horribly and the old one was far better. POS spam as it's called was (compared to the current system) another way of saying more smaller sov related objects to attack, which promoted smaller fights, which was good. The current system of a couple of very high hp structures to shoot doesn't scale the challenge of taking/holding sov to the size of the protagonists, overly favours the defenders due to the timer mechanics, and promotes worse blobbing than Eve has ever seen. In the old days there were more choices which made sov warfare interesting. Towers could be kited. Defenders and attackers could choose how much effort to expend on spamming towers compared to aggressively destroying the towers of the enemy. Constellation sovereignty not only provided meaningful security for cap ship arrays it also provided terrain creating meaningful 'fronts' and safer rear areas adding a bit of richness to the campaign strategy as a whole. Under the current system the battle for every system is practically identical and any system is just as vulnerable as any other, which is dull. Shooting massive hp structures that don't even fire back is even more dull. Having only a couple of structures involved in sov with 48 hour timers leaves the attackers with great chunks of time with nothing useful to do, which is incredibly dull. Having to pay CCP isk for sov sucks arse, having to pay CCP isk for the privilege of being allowed to attack someone elses space sucks even worse. Sov should be something useful/valuable for PvPers to fight over not something you need an army of renters grinding PvE (or whatever) to pay for. Instead of introducing this dog food of a system CCP should have built on the exisiting system instead, maybe limiting the size/number of POS that could be used to hold sov (50 points max per system per protagonist, large tower is 5, medium is 3, small is 2 or something like that). Also introducing system upgrades as external POS modules which could be attacked by smaller fleets, especially including defensive system upgrades to provide smaller but still meaningful targets for small fleets. The players had no meaningful input into this new system, it was dropped on us as a finished design about 10 weeks before go live with no collaberation or forewarning and only tweaked insignificantly thereafter. The end result is that it's horrific and should be scrapped, but of course it won't be. Instead we'll just have to live with sov warfare being as dull as ditchwater for at least a few years (best case).
Celeste Coeval The Gosimer and Scarab	Posted - 2010.06.13 01:29:00 - [52] Originally by: Hecatonis Originally by: Celeste Coeval Originally by: Hecatonis sorry i could care less about 0.0 politics So you do care a bit, but you'd rather care less? I'm sick of this error on these forums. Like the bane of turrents that haunted us. You mean you couldn't care less meaning you don't care at all. stop trying to create arguments, your attempt IS weak. and i could in fact care less, my words were accurate, but you WERE able to glean that i do care a bit because i "love" (that sarcasm btw, just so you know) reading whine threads about lag. i would add a sentence or two about if you have nothing of value to contribute, but this is general discussion 90% of what is said here has very little value. and chill bro, if THAT is what bugs you then you need to let go(, here) life is too short. hug? Yes ineffective communication bugs me. I'm not picking an argument i'm trying to make you communicate better: I could care less: You care, but you'd wish to care less than you currently do. I couldn't care less: There is no way I could possibly care. As for hugs I get plenty. I also fixed your spelling. Sarcasm doesn't need spelling out if you understand what it is. Life is too short and I like to make people communicate better. You are arguing, I'm correcting. PI POS fuel process flow chart v1.0
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2010.06.13 02:03:00 - [53] Zombie Necro Thread IS Necro "A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox, and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game."
Cadde Gallente 221st Century Warfare	Posted - 2010.06.13 04:41:00 - [54] Edited by: Cadde on 13/06/2010 04:41:15 From my viewpoint all i can say is... Make sov mechanics work in a way that attacking sov has to be done in all systems of the target alliance at the same time. Then we would see less blobbing as it would effectively force attackers to spread across many systems to nudge it... As a matter of fact, remove the whole sov claim node thing and make sov happen based on which alliance is actually causing the most damage in a particular area. Did the attackers just wipe out 1,000 ships while losing just 50 themselves? Here you go, take sov of system X, Y and Z. The rest is just stuff placed in space to boost certain qualities of systems such as rat spawns like it does now. It's doesn't matter who has sov in regards to these things. Only thing sov would be good for is e-peen waving rights and cyno jammer/jump bridge stuff. EDIT: Oh, and PI rights... My opinions belong to me, you can't have them!
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2010.06.13 04:54:00 - [55] How the crap can anyone make a judgement call on the sov mechanics when lag tactics are still the norm due to the horrible crushing inability to fight in a meaningful way due to the lag? Originally by: CCP Zymurgist Get off the forums and go kill someone! Originally by: Marchocias + = +

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.