EVE Search - Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Pooptasticize Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:32:49 - [541] - Quote The timezone thing sucks. Instead of invulnerable outside that window, you should give a big defense bonus. 10x or something. So with a max-sov rating and that you get a 40x timer out of primetime or a 4x during. This makes it possible, but very hard, to take sov outside that window.
Hilti Enaka State War Academy Caldari State 10	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:33:19 - [542] - Quote TCU MARKET CRASH Quote: Future iterations on this system will add more structures that alliances can use to obtain new kinds of bonuses and effects in their space. - hmmm thinking about a static Worm hole module with a exit into high sec.
Volmyr Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS. 10	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:34:30 - [543] - Quote Man, I wish I could sit around all day in Iceland huffing paint and trolling the people who pay my bills. Seriously CCP, I can't even words right now to disgust my measure.
Elenahina Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 167	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:35:28 - [544] - Quote Olya Tsarev wrote: Aryndel Vyst wrote: Sounds like you should report this to security and provide proof instead of being a big baby *****. Well actually here's the thing, I don't need to provide proof whatsoever. I can make these claims all I want. #FreedomOfSpeechYo You can indeed make all the claims you want. However, freedom of speech has nothing to do with it. I wish people would actually read the damned bill of rights if they're going to misapply it. Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
Scud Maximillion Senex Legio The Old Contemptibles 113	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:35:54 - [545] - Quote I see this one brought out all the crazies. Firstly, good job CCP. Most people here don't realise that you are actually looking for feedback. They are way too busy defending the past. I think here you have some excellent mechanics. The multiple command spawn, and actually having to have people from the defending alliance at the battle, are two examples of great ideas. Here are a few suggestions. 1. I get you on the primetime intent but I think you need a bit more. Consider linking primetime variation with occupancy sov levels (not strategic tho). So, if occupancy levels (ie. mining and ratting only) are nonexistent, it can be hit at any time and the resulting timer can occur at any time. As occupancy levels increase, the window for both narrows. At full levels you get the four hour window. This means capitals matter and alliances can focus themselves on important systems. It deals with 99% of the concerns people have with this mechanic. Occupancy is now important. 2. I this no you really need to seriously buff the defensive bonus from occupancy. Strategic levels should be irrelevant, or largely so. You want people to see a benefit for their hard work. I think the current bonuses are far too low. Doing this will likely again eleimnate most of the concerns about frigs messing with people, and make alliances focus where it matters. 3. I think you need to introduce some incentives to alliances making the system work. This is what people are calling buff nullsec. Give them some bigger mining/ratting/whatever bonuses to systems which they are prepared to put in the effort to raise the index. You have given them the stick, now provided the cardot. Again, good job. I hope my comments help work out issues with the planned mechanics.
Caius Sivaris Dark Nexxus S I L E N T. 107	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:36:12 - [546] - Quote Sarel Hendar wrote: Is there any sane reason to have Infomorph Psychology as controlling skill for the entosis module? We have a perfectly good and logical skill that could be applied here: Hacking. Actually a good point Sarel Hendar wrote: I'd recommend restrictions on entosis module so that it can't be fitted into frigate- or destroyer-class hulls. Otherwise we'll have troll-fitted T3 Destroyers or Interceptors that'll be MWD-orbitting at 200 kilometers and nearly impossible to stop or hit. People that can't catch a fast ship have no business holding sov, and it requires a lock anyway so damps/ECM work.
Unsuccessful At Everything The Troll Bridge 20154	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:36:52 - [547] - Quote Well, It's.. different. *Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?* Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
DaReaper Net 7 1817	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:38:18 - [548] - Quote Now i just want to see what changes you guys will be doing to the null sec economics to make it more viabale and benifical to own fewer systems. Unless thats phase 3? then i'd say that should be phase 2. OMG Comet Mining idea!!! Comet Mining!
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 887	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:38:34 - [549] - Quote Eli Apol wrote: KIller Wabbit wrote: "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! Just put a defensive link on it, fight the fleet battle then find the needle once the haystack is removed :) I'd like to not burn my haystacks down, thank you very much. lol CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
Dradis Aulmais RW Vindicator Connection Phoebe Freeport Republic 705	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:39:23 - [550] - Quote HarlyQ wrote: Dradis Aulmais wrote: Doesn't change a thing for us. clap clap clap Love it Holy crap you guys are still around. After this culutral win looks like we will be around a lot longer CSM 10: Mike Azariah, Sugar Kyle, Chance Ravinne, Jenshae chrioptera Do No Vote For: Tora Bushido, Bobmon
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 887	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:41:17 - [551] - Quote Scud Maximillion wrote: 1. I get you on the primetime intent but I think you need a bit more. Consider linking primetime variation with occupancy sov levels (not strategic tho). So, if occupancy levels (ie. mining and ratting only) are nonexistent, it can be hit at any time and the resulting timer can occur at any time. As occupancy levels increase, the window for both narrows. At full levels you get the four hour window. This means capitals matter and alliances can focus themselves on important systems. It deals with 99% of the concerns people have with this mechanic. Occupancy is now important. I like this. CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
EvilweaselFinance BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation 482	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:42:32 - [552] - Quote Caius Sivaris wrote: People that can't catch a fast ship have no business holding sov, and it requires a lock anyway so damps/ECM work. people who won't commit to a fight in any way have no business contesting sov
yogizh Northstar Cabal Tactical Narcotics Team 19	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:42:42 - [553] - Quote This was exactly what I have expected. Bad change that will be presented along the applause from empire masses that won't ever go into sov anyway, while leaving us "nullbears" with mouths wide opened and jaws dropped. Sometimes it would be nice to get some vision along with the presented changes. Is this a plan to create some weird FW area with no extra advantages at all ? What is the point of this ? So far the only advantage of having sov is: a) tower fuel alliance bonus b) ability to build supers So far we saw: making jumpdrives close to useless, making JBs useless, no announced changes to very limited resources that a nullsec sov solar system offers (pathetic mining, very limited anomalies), messing up the refineries, rendering salvage useless (time x effort is hilarious with fully skilled noctis with t2 salvagers) and so on. I don't expect people from empire to understand this, regardless their mindless flapping and cheering (you showed us this time ). Personally I see this progress (?) towards greater chaos that will generate random battles of unorganized small groups for some time before we all realize that lowsec should be the place for this kind of thing, small entities have nothing to gain by holding sov compared to staging in NPC null or lowsec, where they can use agents and have all their members comfortably packed in one station making them sweet sweet LPs. I realize there will be tweaks to this (June is months away now), but this concept won't make nullsec system ownership more desirable. The effort fending off various trolls attacking systems, capturing those anoms, upgrading systems (good luck with freighter convoys small alliances). Instead of giving the players something to look forward to, your are opening Pandoras box full of big nasty surprises. Remember the last one ? With the jumpdrives ? Coalitions still work, renting is still a thing, no new entities entered nullsec sov. Only fools and people who don't know much about sov can be happy about this.
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 887	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:42:43 - [554] - Quote Dradis Aulmais wrote: HarlyQ wrote: Dradis Aulmais wrote: Doesn't change a thing for us. clap clap clap Love it Holy crap you guys are still around. After this culutral win looks like we will be around a lot longer I wanna know if CCP paid you for "Freeport" or if you guys knew something long before the rest of us. CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
Swiftstrike1 Swiftstrike Incorporated 870	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:43:44 - [555] - Quote I like everything about this blog apart from the random spawning of capture nodes. I think the randomness detracts from the sense of strategic planning on the part of defending alliances. I suggest the following alternative: Alliances setting up sov structures must set up control nodes when setting up the sov structure. Each sov structure must have a minimum of 3 control nodes linked with it before it has any effect. Those control nodes will be inert and invulnerable until the capture event for that sov structure takes place. Attackers must capture AND HOLD the majority of these nodes in order to capture the sov structure they are linked with. Defenders may choose to place many nodes to make the attackers job more difficult... Or they may choose to only place 3 to make them easier to defend The nodes self-destruct if the attackers capture the relevant sov structure or become invulnerable again if defenders win Targeting, Sensors and ECM Overhaul
TheSmokingHertog TALIBAN EXPRESS 293	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:47:34 - [556] - Quote EvilweaselFinance wrote: we have to create a strategic mining division to protect important systems are you ******* kidding me nullsec mining has been broken for ages, go look at the price of mega and zyd and then think about why on earth mining should play a role here So, because some people choose to work within a broken system to get an advantage over you, you are mad?
Hugh Coloure School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:48:54 - [557] - Quote Eli Apol wrote: Total Newbie wrote: 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. Anecdotal evidence versus actual statistical evidence...nice Also read the damn devblog, it explains why some areas of null have been quieter whilst there's been an overall increase across the whole game outside of your anecdotal situation. 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.
Callic Veratar 664	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:49:05 - [558] - Quote Papa Django wrote: Callic Veratar wrote: I'm really confused. So, if the defensive window is not during your availability you have nothing to do and if it is during your availability you can't do anything else. So... living in nullsec means you spend all your time defending sov and that's it? Unbelievable Your place seems to be the highsec dude ... Oh totally, pointing out that some pilots have been arguing that the only thing to do is defend when in the timezone and there's nothing to do if they're not in the timezone must clearly define my activities, alts, and understanding of the game. If you're going to make an argument don't just spew garbage that is literally untrue. There's tons of stuff to do in all space and it's not always available in all time zones. I don't like the fixed time zone thing, which is why I suggested a more flexible option but sure, I can be dismissed out of hand too.
Kossaw Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion 121	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:49:54 - [559] - Quote Overall theres some really good ideas in here. Especially freeporting stations. Some things appear strange though ... It seems odd that the reinforcement window applies to the first attack on a structure as well as on the subsequent reinforcement timer. Surely it makes more sense that the first attack to put the structure into reinforced can happen at ANY time, but the structure only comes out of reinforced at a time decided by the defender ie. the same way it works now. Since capture the flag points appear constellation wide, it makes more sense for the reinforcement window to be set for a constellation rather than the entire alliance WTB : An image in my signature
Tatsuj Khan Cascading Failure Un.Bound 5	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:50:18 - [560] - Quote Lena Lazair wrote: Altrue wrote: The bad stuff: [list] Yay! Brave Collective will pick an US timezone and thanks to your new system, ensure that EU and AU get no chances to defend their space EVER. At least, with the current system we had the opportunity to actively prevent the first attack... Now all is left is the defense of station services, very exciting. Or maybe Brave could split into multiple alliances for differing timezones that are loosely affiliated in a coalition but are much more independent and locally operated. And then maybe once in awhile those alliances might get bored and actually fight each other instead of blue-ing up half the map, or draw conflict from smaller groups that want to take on, say, only AU Brave but not the entirety of US/EU/AU Brave. Which, I think, was kind of the point. It's supposed to encourage these massive blocs to break up into smaller, localized units with people that actually PLAY TOGETHER in similar timezones, in space, with each other. Not just in name only. This. One of the best reasons for the change I've seen so far. Diversification, and get more players involved at a higher level such as leading and building rather than following the big blue blob around.
Winter Archipelago Furtherance. 349	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:51:53 - [561] - Quote For those griping over the 250km range on the T2 mod, remember that you have to maintain a lock on the structure. You aren't going to get your 12km / sec Svipul or any Interceptor with that type of lock range. Those fast ships will have to be significantly closer, where that high speed of theirs is less useful (and they may not even be able to reach their max speed). A Rapier's webs easily hit 40km. 52km overheated. Overheated Lachesis scrams reach 21km. The further you get from the structure, the larger (and slower) the ship you'll have to use. Sure, you can add range-improving mods to a smaller ship, but then you're sacrificing the ability to reach and maintain high speeds. Ransoms are accepted in Isk, Mods, Ships, and Dolls.
Kaliba Mort Patriotic Tendencies Executive Outcomes 8	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:52:06 - [562] - Quote KC Kamikaze wrote: If i held sov and someone brought in a carrier i'd be undocking dreads and hics.... forcing them to escalate further. Why? You can hold a carrier with a noob ship and a point. You can kill it with 20 interceptors. https://zkillboard.com/kills/capitals/ Maybe CCP should just scrap this and go back to POS warfare. At least those required effort to both attack and defend and there were strategies involved, like kitting RF timers. You know, it was actually fun.
Eli Apol Pro Synergy 96	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:55:04 - [563] - Quote Hugh Coloure wrote: 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. Your original statement was about the Jumpnerf changes announced in September 2014 causing decreased player counts... http://imgur.com/KuPaWqk Please go do a handstand, I might get more sense from your other end.
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 278	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:55:09 - [564] - Quote So in tweetfleet #slack Aaeriele brought up the question of how will this 4 hour window affect Alliances with multiple time zone pilots: One answer proposed: "Hmmm.... here's a thought - why not just attach the prefered time not to the Executor Corp window - but to each individual structure - TCU's come out in 1 4hr window, iHubs in another, and Stations in yet another --- this will give every multi-TZ member of an alliance a role to help protect sov structures etc." While not perfect - it does do the following: Dilutes player concentration /per Sov Structure Spreads content across multiple time zones, rather than the 'assumed' single dominant time zone (many alliances have balanced or dual dominate time zones) And other pro's that I"m to lazy to think of :P Cause I think the concern is legitimate - right now content is spread because not all timers are in the same window -- with the timer set via the executor corp instead of the structure (or structure type), it prevents participation in content for everyone outside that window of time. CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 10014	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:55:50 - [565] - Quote I haven't read any other responses. Phase two sounds pretty slick. The problem is that it doesn't address one of the underlying problems of null. WHY? What are we fighting for, what is the value of what we are fighting for. Why fight for it when as a grunt who relies on pve for income I can just do faction warfare missions or wormhole stuff or lvls and incursions in high sec. Nothing you (CCP) does will have an effect to you address the why that in the past was nerf and created the 'renter's desert' that null became. http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/those-anomaly-changes-in-full/ That didn't cause the desert (Dominion did) but it accelerated it. There needs to be a fundamental change in how null sec isk making/income/wealth generation works before anything else. While null generates a lot of isk and a good amount of wealth in the form of deadspace modules and implants, there are WAY better ways in EVE to make individual isk. Until that's addressed and while the average null system can't accommodate more than a handful of people at one time, no amount of "Entosis based gameplay's going to matter. Null will continue to be the "Game of ~~Thrones~~ who gets to be LANDLORD" rather than something people do just for the fun of it.
Kossaw Body Count Inc. Pandemic Legion 121	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:55:53 - [566] - Quote Tiberian Deci wrote: On a serious note, anyone care to speculate on how PL is going to get fights now? Pretty much the same way we do at the moment. By reinforcing stuff and forcing people to undock and defend it. WTB : An image in my signature
RainReaper RRN Assembly INC 8	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:56:08 - [567] - Quote ok dident read all the pages here so i dont know if this have been asked and answered so here i go. with these new changes and removal of the stargate blockade units. it looks like stargates ahve nothing to do with sov anymore. so my question is. can we capture wormholes with these changes?
Tau Cabalander Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs 4643	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:56:18 - [568] - Quote I'm not qualified to address the sov topic, but I'll throw my 0.02 ISK in anyways as everyone else is. I'll echo others in that I see no incentive to hold sov. Vulnerability selection time is a bad idea. Absentee sov should be easy to capture, but resident shouldn't. I personally don't consider 40 minutes much of an incentive. Which leads me to the indices. If you want to promote industry, the bonuses have to reflect that. Also mining in nullses is broken. One need look no further than the Rorqual: CCP Fozzie wrote: The Rorqual on the other hand... We are very aware of how dire need of help it is. We're at the moment in the Summer release gonna be taking... well its gonna keep its compression feature, but that's now gonna be shared with a starbase structure, so that's no more unique to it. Its always a ship that has kind of languished as its got the bonuses for tractor beams, but then you never put it in a belt, because that would be silly. Its got the gang link bonuses, but it kind of also needs to be inside a force field, which is why we gave the mining links the exception when we removed all gang links from force fields. So the goal here will be to make a ship that is the kind of thing you want to put into a belt, with extremely strong defensive bonuses, and the ability to not only protect itself but its friends, and the ability to provide also a strong benefit to your mining fleet. Get these things out where they're in a bit of some danger, but also where that danger is manageable, where it is actually sane to put them into that danger. So more details of what we're thinking of for that will be coming in the future. We're still kind of at an earlier stage with that. That's not gonna be coming out in the Summer [2014] release, but it's one of the things we are thinking very heavily about, and plan on getting to basically next. "... basically next" = how many days / months / years?
Nof Nof Incertae Sedis 2	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:57:15 - [569] - Quote Lots of gsf tears on this thread. Can certainly understand why high level players would be upset as they have put in a lot of work and meta gaming to get where they are. My personal views on this change: What's the incentive? The incentive is for players to actually think for themselves and increase content. I dunno perhaps maybe control an r64 of their own? Perhaps get actual fights instead of blobbing with a safety net of supers? I was a member of an alliance and you guys literally spent 8 weeks camping us so you could possibly get 1 super kill. Doesn't sound like there is much content for your membership under the blue doughnut regime. The current mechanics provides no incentive for anyone to move in to null sec.Do you call chasing timers and fighting for OTHER People's moons and isk content? Maybe for peons who want eve spoon fed to them sure. Not to mention the vast blue balling and arrogant nature of care bears who pay for a protection racket and sit in station and wait for their masters to come save them. Sure there is plenty of incentive for players to try null sec. The incentive for living in null sec (under the proposed changes) iis a better game experience plain and simple. The argument of: increasing system value to support more player. the whole point of these changes are to spread people out and make.your blobs less viable. You wanna control so much space? Kudos to you but now you gotta spread your members out to do it. I know you would love to create impenetrable systems to sit and grind in your supers all day with no risk... but ya CCP and the player base already saw that coming. for what it'd worth your leaders won the game, everyone recognizes it but in doing so it also destroyed the attraction and viability to garner new players and keep active players engaged. You will still be powerful and rich and who knows it may even make you better since your f1 monkeys will have to learn. I agree that simultaneously with the changes that their should be 1 incentive to move to null sec. That incentive would be to greatly reduce income potential in hi sec.
Winter Archipelago Furtherance. 349	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:59:47 - [570] - Quote Total Newbie wrote: If there were, in fact, more players in null, road trips wouldn't be a necessity. I think that's caused less by the number of players present, and more by the number of players you have blue. Having 15,000 blues in the regions surrounding Cloud Ring (a region at the far edges of nullsec) is what's forcing you to travel so far. Ransoms are accepted in Isk, Mods, Ships, and Dolls.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 1,14s, ref 20250916/0219
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

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.