Nariya Kentaya
Coalition Of Gentlemen.
   |
Posted - 2011.08.29 23:11:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Nariya Kentaya on 29/08/2011 23:11:18
 Originally by: Overs
Edited by: Overs on 29/08/2011 22:59:48
CCP said they wanted ideas about Sovereignty, or at least about null sec.
Why Sovereignty? Let me skip the history of POS spamming and how we got to where we are today. Basically Sovereignty was a system set into play to determine who controls a station or outpost.
CCP worked in a few perks like POS fuel economy, jump bridges, cyno generators and jammers, and super capital production. I think fuel economy is a nice perk but for the sake of this thread I'd like to ditch the sovereignty limitations on POS structures and instead have those structures influence Sovereignty.
In the current manifestation CCP developed a means by which occupied space could be improved. Conceptually I think this was a well received, but iHubs, TCUs, and SBUs feel forced and gimmicky - almost like capture the flag. I remember some of the first Sov fights were not fleet engagements, but who could shoot down the other guys structure first. This became an obstacle to a raw fleet fight, which CCP thought it would inspire. From hence forth I excommunicate any mention of sovereignty structures; any post harboring or in support of discussing such structures shall be met with chiding and ridicule.
Sov Indices provide some possibilities for expansion and reinterpretation. In general this idea attempts to base sov more on player activity than static structures. POS shooting will be involved, but hopefully not so much.
Industrial indices are based on all industrial activity. Volume of ore mined and refined, rarity of moon goo harvested, science and industry (including super cap production), and PI could all contribute and buffer the industrial index of a system. The Industrial Index should be the prime drive of Sovereignty.
Strategic Indices are based on jump bridges, cyno gens, and cyno jams and traffic (use of those structures). This should be a minor driver of sov. With the sov limitations removed from such structures, a hostile force could incap one of these structures and set up their own to challenge or reduce sov and facilitate their own logistics.
Military Indices. Instead of being based on how many rats players kill, it could be based on skirmish and fleet fight results. Major routes and victories should have a large influence. The data base exists for it, why not use it.
I'd also like to suggest the influence of market activity, but wether that should be it's own index or not? I do think it should have a significant impact on such a sov system.
High sov influences sov in surrounding systems.
As for "improving" space NPC Pirate Factions and Rogue Drones should be attracted to the surrounding space of high industrial activity, and perhaps shy away from war zones. The greater the industrial activity, the more weird stuff shows up on your borders.
When sov is won, a station simply capitulates to the management of the winning alliance holding corp.
Aside from implementation, there are a lot of loop holes in these ideas, but that's what criticism and ridicule is for.
some parts yes, some parts no
i really enjoyed the idea of pirates showing up to encroach on your high-value systems, maybe make it so that as well as industrial, your alliance's standings come into play, if you have major-negative with amarr for example, you might see some amarr task forces attacking your ****, or the like, would eb interesting to see the established NPC SOV at least TRY to interact with the rest of SOV, as it is it seems NPC and player empires are separate from eachother entirely, compleetly different universes, and the NPC's shoudl at least try to "harass" systems near them of their "enemies", even if it is something as little as making their belts an ass to mine in, null-sec should get that what with ABC being moved to them and them only, they could use soemthing to add a little extra risk and put a spin on things.
|