Can't wait to see how the little guy is going to even get to his space when the power blocs mass in all the 0.0 ingress points.

claw, 10mn mwd, snakes, 249km mod.

20k m/s. good luck keeping up or applying webs long enough with a cruiser gang

Bubble immune 2-second align 250km locking 10mn MWD interceptors really are the bane of this new sov model.

I finally figured out the reasoning behind this change.

Pre- Jump Fatigue it was normal to see 50K + people logged in.

Post- Jump Fatigue you're lucky to see 40K

After this change I imagine it will be around 25K

Hence, they have finally solved the lag problem.

Uh huh. Pretty graphs say whatever they want to say. Doesn't make them true. I live in null, and I just disagree there are more players here..... If there were, in fact, more players in null, road trips wouldn't be a necessity.

"A clear visual effect shows which ships are applying Entosis Links." Will this also be apparent from brackets? Most large fleet fights require zooming out considerably. Even zoomed in, visual identification would become near impossible if the ship carrying the link is buried in a fleet of 100 - unless we're gonna get that Hot Pink Pony skin effect that has been clamored for!

Link

People logging in is in a strong downward trend. The graphs you are pointing at lack a y-axis, they are impossible to interpret the scale of those changes without it.

I suppose if the super-fast, super-agile, super-long-target-range ships of legend ever became an issue, it would be possible to make three versions of the Entropic module, with the battleship-sized module taking the least time, then doubling as it went down to the medium ships, and doubling again into the small ships, with a lore reason being that "more electronics can be fit into the larger modules to do the job" or some such.

Actually you can get a crow to lock up to 175k with implants and passive boost, and have a MWD. have not checked with links yet but most certainly about 220-230k

Forget renting. Extortion is where it's at now.

"Small Group" sets up shop. Reavers, PL, BL, NPC Dwellers (pick one, or more than one) extract bribes from "Small Group" to not reinforce their **** every day, forever.

Sounds fun.

i would also maybe insert a mechanic that allows the attacker to effect the timer for the structure once it is reinforced to make it better for the attacker.

Amateur.

10MN MWD Confessor. 11km/s without links or implants.

It'll be hilarious when literally every sovholding alliance in the game is having to pay off the CFC not to trash their space with an ento-ceptor horde out of boredom.

While that may be possible, Big Bad Giant probably isn't going to lose her system to those interceptors. In fact, effective harassment doesn't require rolling sov at all. It just requires making the sov holder do something tedious. Every day. Forever.

Why would anyone use capitals after this patch i think is the real question.

Ceptors can't get bubbled you fool.


Also no one is suggesting 1 ceptors to rule them all but instead 30-40 of them to re-enforce a whole region in roughly 40mins

Edit: And for those who keep saying "well you can stop their progress by putting your own sov lazor on it" are ********. Then it just becomes a battle of who is willing to stay logged on longer. The only way this could possibly work is if it was a cruiser size and above. If it can be put on an inty it's the end of sov warfare and the beginning of sov trolling.

Anyone who would bring a single inty for this job is bad and should feel bad. A cloud of 30+ interceptors would all be using their thingies so jamming out a few wouldn't make a difference.

If you think anything can engage a ceptor gang, then you don't play the game or have a relevant cognitive disability.

He literally never said any of those things.

Here's the new cheapo sov-taking ship of the future.

Aligns in 1.7s, locks out to ~117km, goes ~4km/s. Good luck stopping a fleet of those from running around and targeting every structure they can find.

Here's the new cheapo sov-taking ship of the future.

Aligns in 1.7s, locks out to ~117km, goes ~4km/s. Good luck stopping a fleet of those from running around and targeting every structure they can find.

I would strongly suggest you make the modules ship size specific. Otherwise there will be 100 inties circling around the objective all the time

All I heard was the sky is falling


Bunches of hyperbole about a ceptor orbiting while link to the structure. Which prevents the ceptor fromwarping while the mod is active so basically a orbiting duck in a room full of hunters.

To just sit at zero and do..what? Sit there with a 20/80M link fitted just to borrow a little time and wait for the interceptor's support fleet to pass by and shoot him down, while the interceptor is still pretty much untouchable at 100km@5000m/s ? (OR also play that interceptor game resulting in a stalemate)



I'm with the voices asking to limit those links to battleship or at least battlecruiser sized ships. (Black Ops could increase in application value that way, too)

I referenced the Trollceptor from TMC but I'm not attempting to parrot their view. I agree that that this would cause issues for them, but it would also cause issues for those seeking to take their Sov (i.e. Goons could just use Trollceptors for defense), so that doesn't automatically invalidate the point.

If you allow 'Ceptors (or any ship really, but they seem like the most likely ship to use) to use Entosis links to capture Sov with virtually no risk involved, then you haven't removed the mindless N+1 grind from Sov warfare, you've just replaced it with another one. Not to mention, it rather blatantly breaks the whole concept of risk vs. reward. Ships that are contesting Sov, be they attackers or defenders, should be at risk. Trollceptors won't be.

THEY only need ONE such fleet, because they can freely pick from the pool of X contesting ships OR completely ignore them and be happy with RFing 100-X structures.

The defending fleet(s) would have to be on red alert for ALL their link-contesting ships at the same time and make sure they arrive in time to prevent the loss - which in turn leads to the stalemate situation of having to use equally fast cep's for contesting the links.

The initiative is completely with the aggressor in this scenario.

The problem comes from the fact that the income of most systems doesn't even justify more than a couple of people living there.

The nullsec income system has to change along with this.

No longer can the CFC impose it's will with 1,000 megathrons, nor PL, strike fear into a sov holders heart with its super caps. No, now we must run around in interceptors and cruisers and engage in fights with similar ships in honorable brawl in some artificial node after we missed catching that last interceptor because CCP cares not about the relative advantages of living in the UK with a low ping vs being on the wrong side of the planet on ancient copper wires. We then dismount from our puny steeds after four hours of toil fending off the heathens looking for giggles, good fights and tears and mount up our trusty dusty mining ships to maintain the ancient honourable industry index which actually only measure rocks shot with a mining laser.

Maybe we should drop all of it and move near your highsec mission hub. That would be fun.

Sensor Boosters. Signal Amplifiers. Whatever the name of the rig that boosts targeting range.

Countered by even more ceptors, or just leaving that system and spamming the ones around it.

This will not turn out how you think it will lol.

Some systems are only worth their moons meaning there are no players in them doing active things, hence most systems in null are empty.

That sounds great on paper. lets bookmark this discussion and see how it really plays out?

Don't know if sacrasem or not? But unless there is a quicker way to get sov lvls I say no.

I am thinking the Troll Laser needs to be restricted to a heavier ship such as a battle cruiser or above.

Love the tears here...great work CCP.

why should you get to contest sov without even putting a t1 battlecruiser at risk? the issue isn't being unable to respond to an interceptor fleet, it's that an interceptor fleet has no risk whatsoever to its pilots

if you're too much of a coward to even risk a single t1 battlecruiser you have no business in the big leagues

the interceptors force you to go to the effort of reacting to that interceptor, at which point it buzzes away and starts hitting a system ten jumps away (because it is a sub 2s warping nullified ship) causing a great deal of effort to be expended on the part of the defenders at no cost or risk to the pilot

what makes you think i won't squash you for funsies

we spent three months squashing anyone who dared mine gallente ice in highsec, what makes you think that every shitlord who raises a flag isn't going to look like a nail to swing my massive hammer at

i didn't say take it, i said squash you

i then go off and squash the next guy who thought that empty space meant he could live there and delight in his squeals of rage, and then come back and squash you again once you think you're allowed to live in nullsec

you seem to think that if i can't have it that means you can have it but it is delightful to rip your tiny toys away from you and stomp on them even if they're too cheap and unfun for me to want in my massive toy box

see you've basically proven my point: the people who want entosis on interceptors are the people who are terrified of engaging in a fight

if this system is to provoke fights then inties can't have the link

The fact that the idea is dumb and will be a waste of time? Just because someone benefits from a situation doesn't mean that can't see what's wrong with it.

Mercs still won't have much of an effect, really. It'll mostly be standing defense fleets, which already exist in many places, they just don't get a lot of press.

Yup! I do!

And if people need to use 28 hours a week to stop scrubs from taking systems, it sounds balanced how? The sov system we have now even thou it's grindy at least you only needed to spend 1 hour to stop someone from taking one system compared to making eve a second job with the new system.

It's a place of comidment and time

Please CCP make sure to avoid the TrollCeptor

I agree something stupid like this will happen:

Canaris:

Reactor Control Unit II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II
Cap Recharger II

Entosis link thing


Small Ancillary Current Router II
Small Ancillary Current Router II
Small Ancillary Current Router I


or


Trolletto


Capacitor Power Relay II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

1MN Microwarpdrive II
Sensor Booster II
Sensor Booster II
Sensor Booster II (120km locking Range)

Entosis link Thing 250km

Small Ancillary Current Router II
Small Ancillary Current Router II
Small Ancillary Current Router I

Yeah and u Need to risk like 800M for every 100M(if the Link does cost about 80M)Ceptor on Grid if Attackers have a fleet on Standby...

you might TANK 56 Ceptors, but as I understand u can fit 1 of these new Links and you Need 2 Ceptors to take sov over 1 whatevertanky ship, So will Need to bring like 50 Ships with 50 Links if the Attacker brings 50 Links to attack. Or did I missunderstand anything?

Suggestion: Limit the use of entosis links to valid squad commander/ wing commander/ Fleet command positions.

Sorry to the solo people who want to go out and screw with sov, but sov shouldn't be pingable by a solo troll inty. Requiring people in fleet leadership positions limits the amount of Entosis links you can bring with you and incentivises multiple fleets.

Here is a suggestion: CCP needs to actually listen to the nullsec CSM representatives (they are largely disregarding input from CSM reps with Sov changes). Or hire someone that is well versed in nullsec to actually work at CCP.

If this is true I totally agree with you.

Crucially, the process of exerting control over a structure using an Entosis Link cannot be sped up by using more links or more players.

If two or more Entosis Links belonging to different GÇ£sidesGÇ¥ are operational on the same structure at the same time, neither will have any effect and all capture will be paused. This remains true even if one side has more Links operational on the structure than the other side.

Looking at the dev blog again, I'm sensing apologies for game design based on hardware load balancing? Spread everyone out over a constellation to reduce Tidi?

We're talking about defending every single target versus a contestant-removal fleet of easily 40+ people.
Just how many players do you expect to live from the revenue of a single system?

The minimum competitive force would IMO consist of everyone living in that whole constellation - which would then again face the problem of defensive points being spread over that constellation's systems *3 structures each (*30! command nodes in case of RF timer)

I like this man.

Personally i think the whole prime time idea is ridiculous. The system should be vulnerable anytime of the day. It just gives more of an advantage to the defenders especially large alliances to out blob anyone who tries to do anything in their prime time. I hate this idea.

It doesnt work like this. Let me explain.
Party "A" is holding sov, party "B" wants to take it. "B" moves to a staging system near region "R". "A" creates a dummy alliance, puts all sov in region "R" into this dummy and sets its prime to the weakest time zone of "B".
Weaponized boredom, as thay called it.

You do realize that sov-holding alliance usually have more ISK than ~little guy~ to hire mercs? Maybe even accept them to the dummy alliance to woop sov lazers.

The problem with the Entosis trolling isn't that it cannot be countered. It can. The famous "trollceptor" can all be countered by a Rifter with a T1 Entosis link orbiting the structure at 5 km, freezing the timer.

The problem is that countering Entosis trolling is so boring gameplay that you'll wish you'd still be grinding stations in Drakes. Either a mobile group needs to run up and down in the region whacking moles, or every system needs to have guards who just do nothing (or mine/rat at the keyboard) for 4 hours and respond to the ping. If they fail, everyone yell at them because 2 days later 10 nodes needs to be captured. If they win every time, they spent 4 hours of their lives at the keyboard with a handful of trivial killmails.

Again: 4 hours of focused gameplay and practically no result. At least you could watch TV between reloads with the Drake.

The attacker should commit something worth killing, so the defenders - if did their job well - go home with a nice killboard.

The Entosis trolling will be insane if put into effect right now. Speed tanking will be the best defense with them, especially since any cap ships trying to use them will just get piled on since it takes so long for them. The Entosis needs an effect like siege and triage mods that force the ship to remain stationary, or at least a huge movement penalty.

Also, in many ways this makes Dreads only useful for POS grinding and anti-carrier ops. Carriers can at least triage and support with fighters, but Dreads, and in some ways Titans, are almost obsolete. I always saw dreads as the ultimate structure grinder, but if that doesn't happen anymore, what's the use of them?

People want fights, not boring chases of hard to catch, low value ships. Think of how annoying warp stabbed farmers are in FW.

Why is the Entosis thing not a deployable structure? Rather than fitting it on a ship, why not make it like one of the new deployables? Cost it around 50/100m, and have the attackers defend it until it has produced a timer on the TCU/Ihub/Station. Once it has, it can be scooped and re-used, but it could give the defenders something concrete to attack.

Avoidance is already way too dominant a strategy in this game, don't make it even more powerful. Right now all the costs are put on the defender. Make the attacker ante up, and actually have to commit rather than just abusing fast things.

But this again makes avoidance the dominant, boring strategy. People in this system undock and use an Entosis to counter mine? Okay I move along, switch structures, or go log off in a safe and then come back and start again. Avoidance and annoyance seem far too effective with no cost.

There is a slight opportunity cost of danger, but there needs to be a non zero cost for just trying to flip every thing that can be.

a malediction with 2 sensor boosters (range script), two T2 ionic rigs, being RSBed by another malediction (range script) can lock out to 200km

the pair go 4.5km/s mwding while cap stable and are <2s align (3x istab, overdrive)

this is before implants or gang bonuses

You don't have to.

Eventually they will just not appear, so you take the sov without a fight, just a bunch of interceptors and a can-do attitude.

(Numbers helps with both of these)

- Attackers and Defenders in New System should be able do to something in the Defenders space during the RF cycle to influence the outcome of the final fight. Having the indexes fix at the time of RF isn't a good idea, it encourages everyone to dock up and do nothing until the timer. Active mechanics > passive ones.

On the entire interceptor thing: If it really does become a big issue, a simple change would be:

"Activating an Entosis Link also causes ships to become extremely vulnerable for the duration of the moduleGÇÖs cycle: the equipped ship cannot warp, MICROWARP, MICROJUMP, dock, jump or receive remote assistance until the cycle completes."

New idea added in caps. Its not as limiting as being stuck in place, but my guess is it's enough.

And the escalation begins. In a few iterations of counter vs counter, Titans will be on the field.

i guess if they are standing still, sure

if you rig for misl distance you are getting about 125km range on a cerb with a flight time of 12s

an interceptor orbiting at 120km covers 48 km in this time

120 + 48 > 125

So I have gang of 20 ceptors, fit for extreme speed (20km/s for example and 150km locking range) and t2 Entosis Link. Who/What can stop my gang from reinforcing the whole region? The module needs to either disable any prop mods or make the ship stationary like siege does. That will give you the fights you are trying to force.

Also whats up with this prime time? Should we only have USTZ alliance, EUTZ alliance etc in huge blocks focused on very specific 4hour window in time?

So far this seems like the only reasonable counter to the trollceptors I've seen. It keeps the risks of defense roughly equal to that of the attackers. (Not the insanely expensive interceptors mentioned above, just the basic interceptors that would be common. Interceptor fleets vs ewar fleets.)

These phantom interceptors threats are nothing short of a nonsense if you live in your space.

I have no connection to Goons whatsoever. I live in a single constellation that my alliance owns. I'm worried about these interceptors trolling and keeping me from being able to go have real fights by either swatting at them or endlessly counter-camping.

Hat, thy name is tinfoil.

The goal of defense isn't to bait attackers to fight, it's the other way around. Sitting at zero with anything for defense is basically iceberging. The goal isn't to create more camping, but actual fights. Interceptors are one way to show that this does not actually create dynamic fights.

If the changes goes through like they are now, I'm unironically going to take a 200 man interceptor fleet to Provi and reinforce the entire region in 4 hours.

You're missing the point. We decide what and where to fight when we're in interceptors. Sure, we might not get all the reinforcement timers but we're going to deny you content other than using Entosis Links.

won't take us four hours to RF the entire region, just 30 minutes

Not sure I'd call 200 interceptors avoiding me in my space content tbh.

No, that's the point. We're not going to provide any content to whatever alliance holds the space. We're going to take their sov with an interceptor fleet because we dictate the battles and they will be unable to catch all of us. Which is essentially almost like Dominion sov where n+1 always wins.

What are you talking about? If we reinforce the entire region we just move 7 jumps to another constallation and voil+í and bunch of new timers. By the time the 5 minute Entosis cycle is done the hostile fleet might have arrived if they're flying frigates - Which, with 200 people will end quickly. If they're flying anything larger than that they'll never catch up to us before we finish our reinforcement cycles.

They could take a jump bridge, but then next time we move they'll have jump fatigue and won't be able to do it again for +5 minutes.

If even a few of those timers are successful, it can disrupt a region and require hours of 'grinding' the command nodes back to the original state.

The small alliances who get swamped by fleets of 200 interceptors and get their iHubs blown up constantly, that's who loses. This does not hurt goons, they don't care if their unused space is burned. It's easy for people to jump in and take sov, but it's also too easy to completely disrupt an active community in a constellation.

Why would 200 inteceptors bother with small alliances? Because why not! Let's make that 20 man alliance lose their systems because we can. You don't realize the extend of this. If an ihub blows up it requires a FREIGHTER to get a new one. Now, imagine these systems are 15 jumps into null sec. Not every alliance has the ISK for a Titan to shortcut those freighters.

We rapecaged an entire system for a week to deadzone it. 40 min is nothing to us.

You really have no feel for just how masochistic we are, have you? :)

I must admit to being moderately amused by the folks who think that activating a defensive entosis link somehow prevents the interceptor from causing further harm.

Sure, the interceptor at that particular node gets blocked, but he is free to turn around, burn off grid, then travel to a system 10 jumps away in the time it takes you to disengage your link.

It's not about the individual sov structure or command node; it's about the ability for the interceptor to, when flown by a moderately competent pilot, to choose to disengage at will should the situation become untenable, and to begin poking another sov structure outside of the reach of any ship but another interceptor.

They feel no pity, no remorse, and no pain, and cannot be stopped. Even the Terminator wasn't so lucky.

Most individual regions consist of systems covering more than ten jumps.

Confirmed -- for example, Goonswarm Federation does not control the whole of Deklein.

My point yet remains.

The fact that you think alliances at that scale of sov havership are the only valid ones is immaterial to the greater discussion.

e: fixing quotes

This is a very strange conclusion to draw from the current discussion. The current discussion is about the interceptor's inability to be countered in a meaningful fashion, not the size of an empire. The size of an empire is immaterial to this as well; the interceptor simply cannot be caught in any but the most contrived scenarios.

Until he comes back in 5m.

Now picture a garden after you knocked over a beehive.

Might I respectfully suggest that CCP consider one small change.
That rather than reinforcing with an Entosis module incrementally, an attacker must have his Entosis module on the sovereignty unit being attacked for the full timer.
Thus, any form of LOL reinforcing may be reverse trolled by simply waiting until the timer has nearly expired before decloaking a Falcon, jamming the aggressor and resetting the entire process.
Thus, an attacker must be committed to the conquest, or run the risk of being trolled himself.

The better moons are worth about as much as a highsec ice miner. The worse ones less than that.

For the upkeep and book-keeping they require, they are just fine. There is absolutely nothing "obscene" about it.

Grr, Moons.

You first.

It does not mention the circumstance I am discussing. It says "in fights over an owned structure", indicating a fleet fight in progress. It then goes on to say that the ally force will not be able to add their own Entosis to the mix to try and help their ally by stopping the attacker's progress.

It does not say what happens if some solo trollceptor tries, gets blapped before he finishes, and I just leave.

And what I'm saying is that is should immediately reset or begin ticking down once any attackers using Entosis mods are dead.

*shrugs*

I fail to see why anyone would think that the burden of effort is intended to be completely removed from the attacker.

If this doesn't end up with a timer or reset, I'll be very surprised.

To alleviate multi tz concerns: Enable alliances to set a different prime time per constellation?

I do not see this changing how sov war is actually conducted. Shooting sov structures only occurs after the war is already won. swapping shooting a sov structure with missiles to shooting the sov structure/cap point with an entosis module doesnt change how the wars are actually fought.

look as the last war between Goonswarm Federation and Test Alliance Please ignore as a reference

Quite the opposite, actually. It encourages any prospective attacker to spread out as much as possible, and fight as little as possible, since the cycle time on these things is so incredibly low

Hey, that's a great idea that nobody ever though of before! Oh, wait, except that it's impossible to do given the current income system. I'd be able to support about ten players with 3 systems.

Great plan, bro.

That's what a bunch of my posts in this thread have been about, by the way. This MUST be accompanied with a full rework of individual level income in nullsec space.

But, by the time an alliance is entering the phase where they are spreading out along the constellation to capture points the war is already in the clean up stages. If not, then that alliance is doing it wrong. The war has already been fought, and won, before capture speed and all of the other clean up operations proposed begin to be engaged.

I am really trying to see this working out, but I think the game designers need to place more emphasis onto how a war is actually won... not how to clean up the existing structures. These are two fundamentally different concepts.

I see changes to forcing a fight, and cleaning up structures. I do not see changes to how sov wars are actually fought today.

ANY and all mechanics that scale on number of members can be circuvented by spliting alliance in Joe's alliance 1 and Joe's alliance 2

I agree that there is far less grinding. I also agree that less grinding is good. But, this isnt being brought to us as a system to reduce grinding. This is being brought to us as a system which will change how sov war is conducted.

Sadly, this system does not change how sov war is conducted. It only changes the final stage, cleaning up our mess.

This actually looks by far one of the better solutions.Might want to also add a different cycletime according to shiptype going from a shorter period for bs to a longer period for frig size but if you do the difference should not be too far from each other.

So make it one type of module but different versions of it wich can only fit to X type of shipclass.Basically the same way a shield booster is now.

it does not require the whole of goonswarm federation to contest someone else's sov

we send EUTZ to go wreck nerds and leave USTZ home to defend

easy peasy

Make it adaptable per region/constellation/systems. That way you can adjust to whatever your prime really is. Large alliance can cover most timezone so they could have a different spot vulnerable at different time to enable "content" to everybody. Smaller group might be lacking in some timezone so they concentrate everything on their effective prime.

no problem, we just break into multiple holding alliances and shift pilots around as they are needed to defend

Do you have any idea how phenomenally bad this idea is? 'Hey, null players! You only have reason to be logged in during this 4 hour window! Let's make null more empty!'

unfortunately, sov bonuses just don't work like that

sov bonuses spawn anoms, grav sites, hacking mini-games, wormholes (lol), and DED complexes

none of these things can be restricted to one alliance or can even really be restricted to the alliance's prime time

the only thing on the list that can be is cyno beacons, which, surprise surprise, already work like this

also entosis link ships can be farmed out to alts

It seems that the majority of the problems related to the entosis link I'm reading here could be alleviated by making three changes to it.

A) structures being captured will have an 'uncapture' timer associated while an enemy entosis link is not active on it. In other words if an enemy captures a structure to say 50% but then is forced to leave. the structure will slowly undo what the attackers have done until it is back to full strength. (say 30min as just an example) this could then be sped up by the defender using an entosis link but it at least gives reason for the attacker to need to return if they do not want to lose the ground they gained and simply swapping around structures in a system would not have nearly the benefit it does in the current proposed idea.

B) make the entosis link unavailable to interceptors. frigates are still fine because warp bubbles will completely disrupt an attackers ability to literally troll an defender into submission. It is the warp bubble immunity and speed associated with them that is the main problem with the entosis link.

c) reduce the range of the t2 down to 100km. This would still give more than enough orbit range to keep ship (defense fleet) speed up while allowing defenders to actually be able to shoot them. 250km is just ridiculous as that pushes the total bubble of influence to 500 km in diameter! I'm all for bringing back a reason to have fast ships but that's a little absurd.

Just a thought to reduce the small-gang and individual griefing aspect this form of sov mechanic will induce:

Attacks on TCU's are able to be countered by anchoring them near a POS. Enough guns will ward off the single or small gang. It should also be worth considering allowing Ihubs to be anchored near a POS as well.

I'm not really worried about this proposed sov mechanic with regard to organized groups who have a real intent to lay siege and take sov. But this mechanic, as proposed, will likely result in a massive uptick in annoyance as defenders respond to phantoms just running around and ringing doorbells. Maybe some fights or ganks or whatever you want to call PVP will result, but without a doubt it will also lead to abuses of the mechanic simply to cause the annoyance of forcing a defender to respond to false alarms. We already experience that with POS's. There is no need to expand it to sovereignty-related structures.

What may sound good on paper as a means of conducting legitimate sovwar will result in far more instances of players who just want to be dicks. Therefore, allow POS's to be used as a means to counter these kinds of fake attacks.

Well if the goal is to allow any single pilot to ring the doorbell or even reinforce a structure in 40 minutes, then I guess there is no way around the fact that it will get abused on a grand scale. Sovereignty warfare is not, nor should it be, the domain of any individual pilot to accomplish. If you can't get past a POS then you probably shouldn't be trying to get into the sovwar game. That's just my opinion of course, and I will await to see the abuse that results from thinking that it should be. Because if any single pilot has the capability of doing so, then thousands will organize just to show just how broken that mechanic truly is.

As long as you think a group of 1k people against 40k can do anything you'll be obliterated as the talis. You're not more than a terrorist group against the big motherf USA of New Eden. Keep on deliring while you stick to npc null, or try to get sov and get obliterated on your way.

Because a) if they're trying to or taking sov, aren't they at that point competitors? and b) "because screw you" isnt a valid eve reason for anything?

The joy for griefers, in a game of alts, is griefing and/or annoyance of others. It doesn't require anything past that point to give them joy.

And griefers don't have to care about taking it to the second stage of playing the capture the flag mini-game. Ringing that doorbell and then getting out of harms ways in 2-5 minutes is more than enough. Anyone willing to take it to the next level after reinforcing a structure is just fine by me. Maybe that would show they were serious about it. But opening it up to the one will open it up to the other. I guess we need to decide if that is ultimately good game play.

And you can use "grr goons, they must be scurred," all you like. I'm sure they may not like it for :reasons: that nobody should care about. But that shouldn't be used as an excuse for why the details of this proposal that will be gamed shouldn't be considered. Goons aren't wrong just because they are goons. They just happen to know how they would game it if given the opportunity.

No one can base locally. That's the part everyone seems to be forgetting.

You're also severely underestimating just how much trouble one dedicated camper can cause.

The Tl;DR of a bunch of the earlier replies to me:

"But Kaarous, the defender has forty minutes under perfectly ideal conditions to un reinforce it!"

Yeah, I know. How many systems in the game actually merit maxed out indices? How many don't? The last number is a damn sight bigger than the first number. (nevermind that this is a huge underestimation of just how much trouble one guy with half a dozen cloaked alts will be able to cause)

Unless this is accompanied by a full, and I mean full restructuring of personal level income in nullsec, it will be problematic. Without said full restructuring, it is unreasonable to expect people, plural, to live in and defend a single system when that system has worse income than slowboating highsec missions. (let alone the disgusting income of Incursions)

I believe it was, a few pages ago.

And how many times are you going to retake it after they trololol through your sov again and again? Who gets tired first? I would be willing to bet its not the larger entity.
And I do agree it should be a longer vulnerability window for bigger alliances, based on either amount of sov owned or size of alliance, but again, that would be able to be manipulated. They need to give people a reason to risk getting trolled by the big blocs before changing how you get trolled by them. Give null a carrot before the stick, or at least at the same time

And someone responded with "slightly" newer numbers shortly thereafter.

Chasing around ceptor fleets all the time appears to be something that will be more tedious than fun. I think the goal the community was looking for were good fleet battles and an end to a stagnant null sec. I have spoken with several people who are pumped for the changes, but they enjoy going and causing havoc elsewhere.

A compromise, suggested many times over, is to only allow the ship to fit on battle cruiser and above hull. Perhaps usable by a new T3 type of ship. Whatever changes happen they dont appear to be something that will help in the long run. I really like the idea of occupancy based sov rules, but that is not happening. The trollceptor idea seems to be fairly reasonable.

Or...

Instead of reading all the posts happening now and gauging public opinion first as to how to spin what you did in the past, let people know now what your advice to CCP already WAS and to what level the CSM was consulted on this PRIOR to the dev blog announcement?

I think that's where people are disappointed with the CSM right now. We expected you guys to have immediate releases ready to go once the dev blog hit to say "we talked to CCP about this and we said 'X"', BEFORE seeing which way the wind is blowing...

Now you are just going to spin based on what public reaction is now, rather than divulge what your thought leadership with CCP was.

A pox on all of you.

I am Mike Azariah, Hisec resident...Carebear...Casual player...Northern Troll...Anarchist

a) nobody puts a small tower on a r64 moon
b) siphons
c) every line members gets in touch with it, it's called SRP - ever seen the SRP bills of alliances?
d) if it's so much isk, why do alliances rent out space?

It's not like there are 4 trillion of ISKs flowing into the pockets of 1 guy. It's divided up between lowsec/nullsec entities, fought over, needs to be transported, manufactured, etc.

Yes, it's a lot of isks but considering how many hands it's running through and the monthy upkeep + strategic/logistic work done... not that great. If you feel like it, go take a hit at a lowsec r64 and check for yourself how much fun it is to have one!

please tell us how alliance finances are run

no

if you actually knew how POS worked, you'd know that you can set permissions such that only people with roles can empty the silos

then you don't hand out those roles except to the logisticians

Yeah, because deathstars set to shoot absolutely everyone on sight are really friendly to logistics fleets there to rep them up.

And if you mean 'everyone who isn't blue', well, all our towers do that.

There are indeed: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=399720&find=unread

1. Inty Entosis

2. Prime Time

3. We have now gotten two sticks, where's the carrot (otherwise known as incentive to even live in null)

Small ships can play a role, the one they are designed for. Ceptors role is tackle and scouting, I have no problem with that but if you can fit one of these Entosis modules to a ceptor you are actually removing active game play.
They are immune to everything but "pilot stupid", so OP when it comes to being able to use a sov changing module.

How? Does the Entosis module act like siege and you are unable to move for 2 mins? Or is the ceptor just going to warp off when he spots something on dscan?

If they make it so once you activate Entosis you are locked in position and can't move for 2 mins, by all means bring as many ceptors as you like.

Would be interesting to know though if the cycle is still concidered cycling even though your our of range.

- Let's say, i activate a 5minutes long cycle Entosis.
- I see ennemies burning to me.
- I Pull range, get out of target range.
- I lose target.

Can I still warp off ?
Would've been good to know.

Ok my bad, I somehow missed that.
It gives ceptors a drawback to using an Entosis so therefore I remove my objection.

I would still personally like to see Entosis tied to battle cruisers, a ceptor can freely roam until he finds the ideal spot for 2 mins of uninterrupted "kill sov" whereas a battle cruiser is going to need some sort of a support fleet to even get the the location. Seems it would create more content than a few ceptors roaming around taking sov.

Question here is, will this change the meta? Is this something that will break the power of coalitions like the CFC? I doubt it. I really do. CFC for example is using marauding squadrons themselves to put certain regions under pressure to aid "friendlies" or the enemy of the enemy. PL, N3 and CFC do have the resources and the isks to get enough mercs going around and rf'ing regions, then put in a major force to secure an area.

Don't allow it.

It would be impossible to realistically code in a varying time system that actually works.

because it's easy for him as wh guy to be happy about it and these changes - he won't have to live with it.

If you have to implement different rules for different people then you have lost the argument.

The very nature of interceptors in general do not generate conflict. A roaming gang of interceptors is not looking to fight anything that shoots back. They are designed to pick off people not paying attention or being utilized as fast tackle. Enabling such a ship to be able to flip sov is just asking for entire regions to be burned down without fights.

There is no place that you can force an interceptor to fight because they are immune to bubbles. They are already largely fit to be unlockable due to server tick times. Therefore, the only way to actually fight interceptors is if they want to fight you- which happens basically never.

I am all for more destruction of everything in Eve. However, allowing interceptors (and even nullified t3s) to be able to flip sov like this is just asking for us to burn down most of sov space.

Don't take this incorrectly either- if it stayed as-is, we would utilize interceptors to their maximum potential to burn everything down. Deklein has some of the highest density of any space in the game- aside from random roaming gangs coming through our space (mostly in interceptors or stealth bombers), there wouldn't be a way for someone to successfully disrupt our space, aside from starting the initial timers.

Also something to remember- if interceptors are starting these timers, then we'd have 27.5 minutes to react to them. There is no way an interceptor gang would stay on grid for 27 minutes to defend the initial countdown to even get to the siege timer.

I did answer, you just dont like what I said.

Your plan is ******** and does nothing good for the game. We want more conflict and trollcepters will provide no conflict at all. We are trying to stop CCP from giving us bad tools we can abuse yet here you are, trying to keep these tools that we have already stated we would abuse heavily.

They deal with it for as long as everyone else.

Having different rules for different people is just ******** and a great way to kill any sort of revival of null. Face it, interceptors fitting this sov laser is a terrible idea and needs to be purged.

This would **** over the likes of brave who don't have our level or organisation. This is before we get to the simple fact that nobody would like your idea. We are at least trying to make CCPs idea work while you are trying to break Null even more than it is now.

Us giving up space is a given. Brave infact have more pilots than we do so they need more space than we do so, they are ****** under your system. Infact, just about everyone in null would suffer more under your system than we would.

The blue doughnut doesn't exist.

Tell me, where does PL factor into your plan? What would you do if we move into NPC null? What is stopping RVB from doing exactly what we are warning you about with trollcepters?

Your idea not only makes the game worse for everyone in null but also ignores the problems we are pointing out.

The whole point of the trollcepter is to avoid fights.

Goons have the biggest propeganda machine in this game.

Yes. My cerberus alt is ready for this.
In fact I'm just worrying that visual effect that shows which ship is applying Entosis Link is hard to notice in swarm of such bastards before it is to late.

Hey Mr. Wormhole, funny to see you typing in capital letters now you've understood that 2 minute cycle time thingy. Congrats!

You're happy talking in here while having no clue about the actual day-to-day life in a 0.0 alliance. Just because a system doesn't get used that much doesn't mean it's unoccupied, some systems in constellations are just totally rubbish. Additionally people so tend to have private lives, alliances have activity fluctuations over their TZs and to swarm out everytime a group appears and picks at systems isn't viable or it'll burn you out. 42 minutes is for a totally maxed out system (you can count these on one hand in most alliances) - all other systems will be around 15-30 minutes.

Now you just take a group of 30-50 people in the right ships and lay waste to an alliance that's not in their proper TZ, this will be enough to reinforce enough or even camp their stations because these players will be scattered over systems in PVE ships with no FC around. And I did talk about the probable reaction of most 0.0 entities in the long run and what is the most convenient way to tackle this new system - and if you look at most 0.0 residents, they usually choose the most convenient way.

So I don't see the huge benefits of the new system because it doesn't really tackle the biggest issues of 0.0 atm. It'll lead to more dead space and the death of supercaps and dreads. Congratz.

True, I thought that you can reinforce anytime and then it comes out during designated prime time - but I highly doubt that CCP seriously is going to enforce a 4h timeframe which is probably going to lock up most sov fights. The other points are still viable. Btw. harrassing people to read up after having trouble do so yourself, GG

What you are proposing is stagnation even worse than we have now: if I, as a small alliance, take a roaming gang through a WH during prime time to Catch looking for "good fights" or ratter ganks, nothing stops someone else from setting a bunch of horrible timers that anyone can third party.

Okay chaps, listen up, this is the plan:

I want 75 of you in each of three systems for a total of 25 per SOV structure.
Now as to the other 100 of you, I want you to go and lock onto all the other SOV structures in interceptors, if you see three of your pals in one of their systems move on to the next one.
Wait for my "Go signal" for maximum chaos.

Tigger everything at the same time, every time.

Oh dear ignorant Eli Apol,
Let's say that one of the major alliances/coalitions loses a handful of systems on the edge of their territory because they cannot respond quick enough.
What happens next? The answer? Nothing.
Most of the major alliances/coalitions have consolidated their space after the Phoebe expansion, what you will have now are wasteland systems.
Systems that are a bit too far to respond to quickly and defend, but close enough that no small alliance can move in without getting wiped out rather quickly.
So I guess congratulations are in order ! You just created wasteland systems ! Such content ! Much wow !

Instead of using your own entosis link to pause his capture, just sensor damp him so he loses lock, and the whole thing should reset back to zero, right?

I know there is wasteland already, this will create even more wasteland.
You, like Eli Apol, seem to somehow miss the obvious. What drives conflict are incentives. Changing how sov is taken does NOT incentivize taking space. The only thing that can do that is to make null sec worth something, and currently, it's not worth much.

I can't be bothered to keep responding to such ignorant comments, so this will probably be the last.
The stations are only Freeport for a 48 hour period. Unless you expect the new owners to set it as a Freeport and also assume that the established alliances will let it remain as such.

No, Daniel, he's suggesting that the equilibrium resting state of those stations will be ownerless, because whenever someone comes in and claims it, we'll just burn it down again.

You know how we keep burning your POS's to the ground whenever we get the urge?
Yeah, well this will be the same, and probably even more frequent.
But keep telling me how you plan on *using* the space...

Playing whack-a-mole with a station... Let's see how long that will last. It certainly won't get boring quickly right?
I am curious as to how close you think these small alliances will get to these big alliances without swift retaliation.

Is there anything else we need to know ?
For example any plan for a new deployable, let's say a turret near a tcu or a entosis inhibitor ?

May be, but isn't it a piece of information useful to make up our mind ?

Lot's of wh ? Ok let's explore the chain hunting
Pretty highsec ? Ok let's doing some logistic travel.
Lot's of anomalies ? Ok let's farm
Close connexion with a friend corp ? Let's group with them.

Don't let us do this.

Trolling people with this won't require interceptors. T3s are enough - and we'll use them.

It will just be two huge coalitions with gate camps all around

This is manifestly untrue. There are plenty of people in this thread who are concerned about these changes who do live in our space. People who have actually built a home in 0.0. People whose alliances are less than 500 people.

You're comparing optimal Highsec to least-optimal nullsec. That's apples to oranges. Compare a -1.0 system to Osmon L4s and you'd have a fair comparison.

You are aware that that every guy in Nullsec can't do an anomoly in a -1.0 right? Whats the upper limit on people who can recieve missions in Osmon? (answer = there isn't one)

Also, I assume you realise that the more people doing anomolies the more dangerous it becomes for each one (since the rats-per-hour glow on the map is intensifying and drawing carrion-birds, and as numbers reach a certain point, clever (Z-named) enemies can creep in system without being noticed)? Whereas each extra ratter in Osmon creates greater protection as there is more targets for the finite number of gankers?

I really dislike 'a friend of mine' or 'a friend of a friend' type of hearsay posting, therefore, I felt compelled to chime in as an authority on the points mentioned in your post.

I'm a member of the Goonswarm Federation SRP team and I do have plenty of experience with what you are describing as "afktar ratting" in your post. As a matter of fact, I routinely push out advisory ratting fits for mass adoption, taking into account considerations such as cost, longevity, survivability in PvP encounters and ease of training.

With those said, when it comes to afktar ratting, an individual in a system with desirable truesec (those are rare) is looking at 17m ISK per tick with maximum skills after alliance taxes. Before taxes, the figure is close to 20m ISK depending on the specific corporation (and their specific tax rate). Rat drops per anomaly are worth 2-3 m ISK on normal conditions and salvage is practically isn't worth anything. (Picking up drops and salvaging will take up your time, affecting your income)

So, could you tell me how 51M ISK per hour on an account through bounties is an extravagant amount of income?

That pro synergy guy thinks he's clever by posting a dated screenshot of SRP figures, but all he's doing is making players in scrubby orgs jealous.

PS, post with your main

Uh, no Mike, I'd have to say that risk vs reward is still relevant.

I think the person who said 7 trillion a month was quoting the gross value of all R64s.

the maximum amount a GSF member can draw from SRP program for regular brawling and roaming related losses per month are limited to a certain amount. This amount is capped at low single digit billions.

Can you compress tears? I am running out of room!

I bet if they eliminated the white noise from highsec scrubs this thread would drop to 50 pages

Welcome to Wormholes.

Actually, I lived in w-space for a few years. It's fun, but it's not what I'm after. I like the big fights. I've found the happiest I've been in this game is winding the logi of a fleet through the middle of a massive slugfest involving 4 enemy fleets and a broken grid in 10% tidi. I like it when there's a challenge, and I have to be on top of my game (because in tidi, every delay in changing my mind or evaluating things is magnified. It feels like you have all the time in the world, but that's all a lie).

You don't get that kind of thing in w-space. Not really. Sure, the big toys come out, but it's never the same. But I'd hardly call it 'ego-pumping' or myself one of 'the dictators'. I'm a fleet guy, that's pretty much it. I want to do things where skill, and judgment, and the ability to keep calm under pressure can make a difference. Small gang stuff never feels like that to me - it always feels like the initial encounter determines everything. Someone screws up, everyone's toast. In a big fleet action, if the FC screws up, yeah, we're gonna take a pounding - but if I'm on my game, I can minimize how bad that's going to be. S'just my thing, I guess. I'm weird. I love the tidi.

Absolutely - but you take my point - it is something I DONT need to buy, so it is income of a sort.

100m isk is literally an hour of ratting on an afk alt, i sneeze and more isk comes out my nose than that. Also, unless you have a dictor with perfect coordination and a good warpin at the instant you alpha the trollceptor, you're not catching that snaked pod.

Yeah let's just spam every gate with bubbles.
That's definitely the nullsec I want to see.

Biggest problems with this proposal (which has already been posted to death) is; Simply tying sov to moons still only allows no-one but the biggest alliances to hold sov and moons of any consequence.

How is it harder to defend?
A smart large alliance is going to spread members out to protect their most valued assets.
They, in most cases have armies of allies close enough, they don't need to rely solely on their own membership to defend things.

Isolated pockets of sov are not going to be any harder for the bloks to defend than protecting those same moons is now. In fact it will be easier for them because all they need is more Entosis modules active and the war is over before it starts.

So yes by all means tie moons to sov, then sit back for the next 4 or 5 years and see how badly it fails to create content and change of moon ownership.

I dislike the bloks but would never (as some seem to be doing) underestimate their will to survive and grow.

It is going to take a lot more than "capture the flag" (entosis module) and "how much gold can Mario collect" (capture the most nodes) to break the determined and well organised bloks.


Some of the suggestions put forward by players may help to achieve a more level playing field in sov but CCP has tuned out, they have made their decision and for better or worse we are stuck with it.

And that is bad beacause?

I kinda thought that is the target to achieve with the changes. If CFC, N3 or RUSbloc cant defend their entire regioncoverage from this, they sure as hell deserve to loose some of it.
If any of the above entities are unable to project a defending force large/skilled enough to intercept a RF attempt within their own space, they simply do not deserve to have that space.

If anything, I find the above kind of situation as the best case scenario. The big blocs still can defend with ease some quite significant amounts of space, but propably not everything. They need to focus on what areas they want to focus their homeline defends on and that they should be able to defend easily. The blocs also have a huge advantage in numbers of FC's. They are more likely to be able to field 10+ semi-independent fleets to intercept attemps here and there. And all the smaller entities who tries to RF sove propably does it mainly to get content, not to troll. I atleast dont see my alliance in any need of sovtrolling, just simple and pure content creation.

CFC will remain CFC, N3 will remain N3 and rusbloc will remain rusbloc. If (and hopefully when) they are not able to defend all of their tens of regions worth of space, good! Then we get more independent triers out there. Who by the way generate content to all the sov blockers aswell. The numbers still does matter, as they always should. This just even's the odds a bit, if the smaller entities like mine are able to outperform the bigger fleet's movements.

When this hits TQ, sure there will be few first weeks quite a lot of action on the sovmap. But I imagine it will easen up after the few first weeks of players testing the new system out. I have honestly hard time believeing that the trollceptor would ever become a real issue. Beacause first, it is just as boring to the attacker, as it is to the defender. Secondly beacause getting your system reinforced has no penalty whatsoever. Also the bigger empires (richer) are propably going to even more start to stack ships around their empires, so that they can fast move their warfleet there in ceppies, reship to pvp ships and go intercept.

With the modern jump ranges, jump fatigue, ceptor travelspeed and the proposed sov mechanics, I think what we going to see is a very well organized CFC and N3 with very difficult, if not impossible castles to take. However the era of bufferregions will end. A focused multifrontal attack will be impossible to defend (note: FOCUSED), until the target have only few regions left.

I think that the above kind of scenarios are exactly what this game needs and exactly what CCP is after with the proposed changes. As I said before, the general idea is awesome, just few things I think needs tweaking. Primetime being the one I mean. I would revert back to SBU's, but penalitize the system of having anchored or online SBU's by loosing all upgrades. Then put a 10x to the mineral amounts needed to build a SBU, so that they get so expensive, that noone drops them for trolling only purposes.

Numbers do matter and need to keep mattering. However the changes CCP have made lately and keep making makes the moving of the numbers more difficult, as it IMO should be. As it also RL is. Easy to move a 10 man squad fast and agile from place to place, but try to get a 1000 men to move as fast and as agile.

Completion-ists can click the link, Chribba does the heavy lifting