Yes, that are the numbers right now ... but as the blog says, everything is still in an early stage and we love to hear your feedback and reasons.

Can we just bring back the POS grind? I miss the POS grind. Lets just go with POS grind and call it even.

Also, it's absolutely ironic to see what spills over now and from where. Advocate stakeholders hurray.

why are sov bears not shooting everything in jita yet?

If anyone wants a more balanced and thought out view as opposed to all of the mindless whining I highly suggest the thread on the EVE sub-Reddit.

Grrr goons. People there enjoy the changes not because of goons, but because they believe these changes are good.

correct. this system changes how you think about null. If you have a strategically important system that you want to keep, act like it and have a standing fleet to protect your damn space.

Having the luxury of a local channel tell you who is in system is very risky indeed. Its so hard to live in nullsec.

We have all sorts of risks in wspace. We deal with those risks and still get our rewards. You want more safety in nullsec? Maybe CCP should just extend your local channel to constellation wide so you can see reds farther out.

I'm asking because I don't know. Why do alliances hold the space that they do today? The changes don't specifically change the motivations for holding the space, so why would you ask this question now?

The sovereignty system Fozzie described in the dev blog he wrote is extremely poorly thought and half baked. CCP should just take it back to the drawing board and rethink. Meanwhile, perhaps they would also do well to review their assumptions about EVE players and how they behave and plan their actions in game. I'm going to write more about what I think are the peripheral causes as to why Fozzie and others are constantly failing later. For now, I'd like to elaborate on what I think is the central cause behind the dev team's shortsightedness.

It might be just that the faulty line of thought on the dev team's part is assuming that these poorly designed changes will result in people fighting more. I think they are expecting that they can really change bloc (and individual player) behavior solely through changing rules and mechanics and avoiding touching risk-reward balance.

They are wrong.

For instance, as Arrendis mentioned before, Encounter Surveillance Systems weren't adopted en masse by null residents. They were supposed to create fights. Because they did not see any serious adoption, not many fights were created through them.

Has any developer ever thought about why they weren't adopted by null residents?

More importantly, why is Fozzie's dev blog containing statistics makes him sound like an apologist, or worse, a distressed middle-level executive trying to defend his design through cooking up his numbers, when his plan obviously failed to achieve the intended objectives? If you look at the number carefully, Fozzie is only able to say 'hurray, my plan is doing okay and null sec pvp-related player deaths increased', because Pandemic Legion got bored and decided to farm HERO coalition. I especially laughed out loud and ended up spilling the Turkish coffee I've been sipping when I saw that Deklein region, the place I live in and the revered Goon homeland, has seen PvP related losses decrease by 20% since Phoebe and Jump Fatigue hit. Fozzie isn't just doing a terrible job at re-imagining sovereignty, he is also doing a terrible job at covering his own back so that he and his plan can look good to his immediate superiors who no doubt track his so called progress.

I have said this before when Greyscale announced plans for Phoebe before and I'll say it again;

No amount of change and skewing of sandbox mechanics towards a theme park setting will result in players fighting and causing destruction just for the sake of doing so. People also will not fight and create destruction just so that Fozzie and CCP are appeased and are able to recite statistics without good analysis.

Holding space in null is currently is not worth much for all the effort and resources it takes. Even with these changes, it will still not be worth it.

EVE players will always collaborate, cooperate to minimize risks, and the instances of fights that they do not want to take.

The structures that make up the large entities cannot and will not be dismantled through the change of game play mechanics. You cannot change human behavior and tendency to socialize, cooperate and collude to further mutual goals through introducing ~bright ideas~ like this.

We need developers that are ruthlessly pragmatic and in possesion of first-hand knowledge and experience of life in nullsec to fix nullsec, not developers moonlighting as bright idea fairies that don't know the game and the mechanics they are working on. It's the second type of developers who always end up with introducing Hail Mary plans that are destined to fail like this one.

CCP I spoke to some ex-players about this change, most of who left due to sov being meh, and so far everyone who I spoke to were positive and were thinking about re-subbing so they can carve out their own space even if its precarious. Stick to your guns on this, its being well received by people who left because doing sov was impossible with supers on line.

I thought you knew that the average person that lives in highsec and lowsec has an IQ lower than tumblers.

Nope, it's totally fine, and can be completely countered by AFK alts in Drakes. There's no problem at all here to solve, the solution's already there.

Quit whining about Interceptors, HTFU, and prepare to actually have to defend your sov.

I am defending FW 2.0 because it will shake things up

Another question: Would anyone shed any tears if you dropped sov tomorrow? Not one.

The problem isn't whether you want to keep sov or not. There is no 30,000-foot reason to give you any motivation to keep sov. The rest of us don't care, and CCP could care even less. The question is why would someone expend the effort to come take it from you? The motivation to take it would be the so-called activity that CCP is trying to tease out.

The problem is, this motivation isn't there. Why would someone rob you of something with less value than WH or a Saturday afternoon in hisec?

as currently proposed he is right, there is far to much babysitting required because the vulnerability mechanics of systems are absolutely terrible. Yes his specific example is pretty meh, but the general gist of the proposal as written suggests that for 4 hours each day as a sov holder you really have to focus all your attention on defense, that is nto a good system because while many in nullsec like to focus on pvp, they do also want and need to make money, the risk versus reward equation is way out of whack and you wouldn't have goons and n3 agreeing with each other on this aspect unless it was quite bad which it is.

The argument I have seen the most of so far is that the 4 hour vulnrability is the "occupancy" factor of the system. Its really not, if alliance could survive on only owning 1 or 2 constellations of sov trust me we would, but the cold hard fact is that 90% of systems are 100% useless in most regions. In order for a system to be worth using in a PVE capacity it needs to be off pipe/or far away from your borders, have -5 or better truesec, and preferably be a deadend of some sort. This is the requisite amount of safety required to be on par with other isk making methods see highsec, missions in general, incursions ect. If you make space worth owning that alone will create a large amount of PVP content. I.E. see just about every moon rebalance and how fast it has ignited wars. Tech led to the fall of the NC, then the fall of raiden. WN and the tribute war. The r64 rebalance created the fountain and delve wars.

Nothing in this game creates conflict better than money making incentives. Wars have been over moons and renters more than any other reason in the game. Money talks, this system does not speak to that equation so you are missing the inherent conflict driver. The only driver that exists as written is the pain in the butt factor.

Whats even more hilarious is if all the people in this thread who are not part of incumbent nullsec and keep saying ya the empires and coalitions will finally fall had banded together under the old system of sov dominion or pos warfare they would likely own a region or more of space ALREADY. The key to nullsec is in fact not fleet numbers, supercapital count or even the amount of money in your warchest. It is and always has been organization. The other 3 factors help and yes there is at least some fleet numbers required but by in large it is organization that controls sov ownership. Under the new sov system this doesn't change, organized powers will always beat unorganized powers and control more or better space. The only thing the new system controls is how many people will want to bother with sov at all.

What many of you may fail to realize just because you were not involved or not at a level to know is that most sov wars are lost by the organization, not disparities in fleet numbers or capitals. Fountain war is a key example, as is the halloween war. Test didn't lose because of numbers it lost because its leadership fell to pieces under the organization stress of fighting the war. The halloween war very very similar, the russian leadership of the coalition fell to internal strife. Its likely that the war could have gone 6 months or more in immensea under russian ownership had this leadership strife not occured. The likely reason you are nto seeing a war between the coalitions now is because we know there are sov changes coming, we have known since july and as such no one wanted to commit to stress of sov war until we knew whether or not we even had a reason to fight. No sense in starting a war over space if you dont even know if the new system will allow you to keep what you took.

If CCP was smart, then instead of just rolling this out onto Tranquility, they should let it run (at least) three to six months on the test server to see how null sec ebbs and flows.

Make the Entosis Link a bastion/siege module. Immobile, but with defensive bonuses. Fitting requirements for battlecruiser and above.

Welcome hordes of triple plated triple repped abaddons... battleship combat ensues.

Glorious days, this thread is a tsunami of nullbear tears.

You sound mad. Good, when CCP does their job right, people like you always get mad, it's a good sign for the future health of the game.

But there's more to come, can't wait for the capital ship nerfs, bombers nerfs, T3 nerfs, jump freighter nerfs, plus the new delayed local system.

I got bad news for you, most null sec high skill point players have a reserve fund (mine currently 7.5 billion isk) and major block alliances have mind blowing reserves. They kill null sec 6 months of burn jita at every major trade hub and mission hub(low sec faction warfare, too. They have yet to deal with 1,000 person fleets that don't care about a fight, until we get tired of ganking. We make isk every burn Jita. Our leadership knows what happens when we get bored, its not good. This looks like a very boring patch after the first week. When this hits: time to go down to a single account, put the cap alt, hauler, cynos, miners to rest until its fixed.

In the words of our dear leader:

"We not here to ruin the game, we here to ruin your game."

Enjoy your null sec nerf; we will.

Does this plan address the goals properly?

To be fair, it was your alliance and others doing most of the crying. Thread after thread of EVE is dying/ quitting EVE/ unsubbing forever rants.

And now they're doing it again with this.

Seriously guys! You know you are not going anywhere. You'll adapt and keep on keepin' on. Like we all have at one time or another over the course of the many changes over the years.

Far be it from me, though, to suggest you stop and think things through before pounding keys. Not just null blocks, of course. Anyone who feels the game is ruined for whatever reason is current that week.

Half the reason I'm still subbed after eight years is the sheer entertainment I get from reading the rage from quitters that never actually quit.

Mr Epeen

You think the new sov mechanics look fun?
I fear for the future of Eve.

- - - - - - - - -
Mini games have NO place in sov wars.

"SOV WARS" is what it is called not bloody "reinforce the node", which sounds like it belongs in a kiddies game for 8 to 12 year olds.

How many nodes can you win in 4 hours - How many gold coins can Mario collect.
Anything seem familiar here?

Who in their right mind wants to spend 4 hours a day collecting gold coins, especially when collecting those gold coins 1 day only means you have to go collect the same ones again the next - An all new concept for Eve no-one ever expected, boredom and repetition with the odd killmail thrown in for good measure.

What do you think the old POS sov mechanics were?

And dotlan show that there is more risk in JITA than in nullsec. Metrics.

I dunno, I'm tentatively looking forward to seeing if these changes'll turn into more small fleets engaging other small fleets, rather than the 1kv1k or bigger fleet fights which have become de jure sov fights as of the last 4 years.

See my other posts.

My alliance BUYING me a fitted capital....yeah, that's a few billion I'm NOT spending (well, covering half). Thus I view it as income, a benefit in kind - as the taxman would see it.

Kinda seems like the CFC plan by trying to remove interceptors from the equation...

I mean nullified ships are basically the most effective way to AVOID that situation are they not?

Nice to have you onboard.