EVE Search - New Dev Blog, LeMousse on Revelations 2 Sovereignity

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

New Dev Blog, LeMousse on Revelations 2 Sovereignity

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)

CCP kieron	Posted - 2007.06.13 15:58:00 - [1] With the deployment of Revelations 2 looming on the horizon, the changes to the Sovereignty system have been locked in place and fine adjustments are being made. The big questions, what, how and why are answered in the new blog by Le Mousse, Building up your realm, one sovereignty at a time. Enjoy! kieron Community Manager, EVE Online, CCP Games Email/Netfang Look Ma, I'm in a Dev thread! Oh wait...

Grimpak Gallente Trinity Nova KIA Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.13 16:12:00 - [2] now the great question comes: can the servers hold it? oh and first on a kieron thread??!11oneone ------- Originally by: Tiuwaz for caldari perception weapons that hit up to 100km are short range weapons
Tareen Kashaar Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.06.13 16:16:00 - [3] Nice read, I like the pictures :D --- WTS: Forum Signatures, price negotiable. Evemail me!
Maze La'Zie Caldari Independent Navy Reserve	Posted - 2007.06.13 16:29:00 - [4] Green should win!!!!!
Chainsaw Plankton	Posted - 2007.06.13 16:31:00 - [5] well if you can lock down a constellation you should deserve to have some protection. although if you can lock down a constellation i would assume you are good enough that you can protect the most important parts. then again i suppose one cyno recon is currently enough to mess things up. makes me want to go 0.0 more and more everyday
gfldex Evolution Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.13 16:48:00 - [6] What are Scanner Array? -- There are countless games in the world. There are at least as many ppl that dont like one or more rules of said games. That never stopped smart game designers from creating good games.
Deren Thaldrel Minmatar Black Watch Legionnaires	Posted - 2007.06.13 16:49:00 - [7] A quick question, since its not clear in the devblog. Is it one capital per ALLIANCE Or can there be a capital in every constellation that meets the conditions? Thanks, Deren
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2007.06.13 16:55:00 - [8] Originally by: gfldex What are Scanner Array? It uses a scanning system (like probes) to detect ships in the system...not sure how good/bad it will be though. Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton then again i suppose one cyno recon is currently enough to mess things up. Certain levels of sovereignty will allow the defending alliance to place something called a cyno-jammer to prevent cyno fields from being deployed. It will be interesting to see how BoB and MC use this to their advantage/have it used against them. <sig> IBTL! IBDS! IBTC! 1st in a BoB Post! And other such forum tom-foolery. Join my Corporation! Can I lock sigs for tom-follery? - Ductoris
Marrano Cardosa	Posted - 2007.06.13 16:57:00 - [9] Originally by: Maze La'Zie Green should win!!!!! Yes, but mostly because it looks to me like pink chose the wrong systems to claim. They should have done 1, 2, 6, 7. That way they would have to worry about unclaimed or hostile claimed systems breaking their lines. Of course, this is true only if all the systems are otherwise equal.
Bartholomeus Crane	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:00:00 - [10] Sounds interesting, but isn't this going to increase the amount of or the importance of POS spamming? Or am I thinking about this the wrong way round? -- Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Winterblink Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:02:00 - [11] Very informative blog, and the diagrams were nifty :) Blog rating: 9/10 warp drive active \| nature vraie
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:04:00 - [12] Originally by: Bartholomeus Crane Sounds interesting, but isn't this going to increase the amount of or the importance of POS spamming? Or am I thinking about this the wrong way round? If I remember correctly, they're significantly changing the way claiming sovereignty via POSs is done to reduce the degree of POS spam in 0.0 wars. As for what that actually is, though... <sig> IBTL! IBDS! IBTC! 1st in a BoB Post! And other such forum tom-foolery. Join my Corporation! Can I lock sigs for tom-follery? - Ductoris
Gnulpie Minmatar Miner Tech	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:09:00 - [13] Interesting ideas .. but sadly it won't work as expected. Why? Well, you cannot invade, that's why. It sounds all nifty and good: conquer the systems and constest sov. But how do you do that if you cannot move in your capital ships due to the cyno jammer and the enemy has them available readily in the system? If he has no capitals there and if the cyno jammer is active all the time, then he still can get capital ships just by building them at pos/outpost. So there is a HUGE imbalance and I think that this will lead to a very static game, at least territorial-wise. But the ideas behind it, they sound nice
B Glorious Imperial Academy	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:14:00 - [14] So, question for you: If the capital system is invulnerable while constellational sovereignty is active, doesn't this highlight the importance of balancing supercapitals sufficiently? If it becomes even harder to destroy them before they are completed, that removes yet another contingency for repelling titans and motherships. Not really a question for LeMousse's department, I suppose, but it is vitally important nonetheless.
Miranda Duvall Gallente OPM Holdings	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:26:00 - [15] Originally by: B Glorious So, question for you: If the capital system is invulnerable while constellational sovereignty is active, doesn't this highlight the importance of balancing supercapitals sufficiently? If it becomes even harder to destroy them before they are completed, that removes yet another contingency for repelling titans and motherships. Not really a question for LeMousse's department, I suppose, but it is vitally important nonetheless. I believe only the Capital OUTPOST is invulnerable. not "everything in the system" But i could be wrong... My Skills -Invention HowTo
Kweel Nakashyn Minmatar Aeden Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:28:00 - [16] Ok, LeMousse here's one rant for you. I'm coming back from work, wanted to slow my heat, acting a little like a no brainer (well, it's somehow cool sometimes you know) Now I read you I have no headache but I guess, well, I guess I shouldn't have read this :) ...must...drink...beer...and...say...gah... ...must...drink...beer...and...say...gah... ...must...drink...beer...and...say...gah... pscht ----- History is made by whinners Originally by: DB Preacher (...) Ignore what the coalition muppets are saying on their forums (...)
Kvarium Ki legion of qui Freelancer Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:36:00 - [17] It seems like invading a constellation is going to be a massive isk investment. Not something for the little guys. KK.
Hoshi Blackguard Brigade Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:38:00 - [18] Edited by: Hoshi on 13/06/2007 17:36:57 Originally by: Miranda Duvall Originally by: B Glorious So, question for you: If the capital system is invulnerable while constellational sovereignty is active, doesn't this highlight the importance of balancing supercapitals sufficiently? If it becomes even harder to destroy them before they are completed, that removes yet another contingency for repelling titans and motherships. Not really a question for LeMousse's department, I suppose, but it is vitally important nonetheless. I believe only the Capital OUTPOST is invulnerable. not "everything in the system" But i could be wrong... Sovereignty 4: * Starbase control towers, conquerable stations and outposts belonging to the sovereign alliance may not be attacked ---------------------------------------- A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations
Just Smith Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:49:00 - [19] The idea is you send wave on wave of smaller ships to kill the cyno jamer to allow dreads to jump in after them (they only have like 30k of hp) this gives the smaller ships a role e.g to mass die to allow the larger ships to jump in to the defenders have time to turn on the 2nd cyno jamer The next problem is your need enough dreads to kill 9-10 large guns before they can break the tank on a single dread (as all the guns will shot the same ship now and dreads in seige can't be remote armor or shield fixed) if you don't have enough dreads to gank every gun at once. then pos combat is going to be highly annoying for you cus 1 large pos is cheaper than 1 dread( so if you spam enough and the other side does not have the firepower you win as you only need 1-5 alts which can control all the guns to be online all the time) Then even after you put the pos in to reinfored mode this does not mean it will not come out at a daft time like 4 am or some other time (which screws small alliances even more cus they can't cover all time zones) and the defender can jump captails in to the system by using the pos cyno maker (would be my guess so the cyno jamer would not effect him much)
ForceM Gallente POS Builder Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:50:00 - [20] The one that make those flash animations should get a free beer :) .. even I can understand it :) ill send some beer to iceland. BTW .. if the foam is gona when it gets there use a sodastream I aint playing eve that much .. i just spend very little time on anything else :)
Pang Grohl Gallente	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:50:00 - [21] Originally by: Hoshi Edited by: Hoshi on 13/06/2007 17:36:57 Originally by: Miranda Duvall Originally by: B Glorious So, question for you: If the capital system is invulnerable while constellational sovereignty is active, doesn't this highlight the importance of balancing supercapitals sufficiently? If it becomes even harder to destroy them before they are completed, that removes yet another contingency for repelling titans and motherships. Not really a question for LeMousse's department, I suppose, but it is vitally important nonetheless. I believe only the Capital OUTPOST is invulnerable. not "everything in the system" But i could be wrong... Sovereignty 4: * Starbase control towers, conquerable stations and outposts belonging to the sovereign alliance may not be attacked Basically the Constellation capital is where all your delicate/sensitive structures go. This wasn't clear to me in the blog; is it possible for an invading alliance to contest sovereignty in the capital system by deploying starbases in the capital system? Si non adjuvas, noces (If you're not helping, you're hurting)
Miranda Duvall Gallente OPM Holdings	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:52:00 - [22] Edited by: Miranda Duvall on 13/06/2007 17:51:44 Originally by: Hoshi Edited by: Hoshi on 13/06/2007 17:36:57 Originally by: Miranda Duvall Originally by: B Glorious So, question for you: If the capital system is invulnerable while constellational sovereignty is active, doesn't this highlight the importance of balancing supercapitals sufficiently? If it becomes even harder to destroy them before they are completed, that removes yet another contingency for repelling titans and motherships. Not really a question for LeMousse's department, I suppose, but it is vitally important nonetheless. I believe only the Capital OUTPOST is invulnerable. not "everything in the system" But i could be wrong... Sovereignty 4: * Starbase control towers, conquerable stations and outposts belonging to the sovereign alliance may not be attacked I stand corrected. I guess then the only way is to remove sov or conquer outposts in systems other than the capital, to drop sov in the capital system back to lvl3, making the outpost vulnerable again... My Skills -Invention HowTo
Miranda Duvall Gallente OPM Holdings	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:54:00 - [23] Originally by: Hoshi Edited by: Hoshi on 13/06/2007 17:36:57 Originally by: Miranda Duvall Originally by: B Glorious So, question for you: If the capital system is invulnerable while constellational sovereignty is active, doesn't this highlight the importance of balancing supercapitals sufficiently? If it becomes even harder to destroy them before they are completed, that removes yet another contingency for repelling titans and motherships. Not really a question for LeMousse's department, I suppose, but it is vitally important nonetheless. I believe only the Capital OUTPOST is invulnerable. not "everything in the system" But i could be wrong... Sovereignty 4: * Starbase control towers, conquerable stations and outposts belonging to the sovereign alliance may not be attacked I stand corrected. I guess then the only way is to remove sov or conquer outposts in systems other than the capital, to drop sov in the capital system back to lvl3, making the outpost vulnerable again... (post above was borked, couldnt edit, thread didnt exist appearantly) My Skills -Invention HowTo
Miranda Duvall Gallente OPM Holdings	Posted - 2007.06.13 17:55:00 - [24] Frelling forum software, the EDIT of my previous post DID come through, so now it looks like I double posted.... Carry on folks.. My Skills -Invention HowTo
Azerrad InExile	Posted - 2007.06.13 18:03:00 - [25] So instead of pos spamming a single system, people get to pos spam entire constellations? Brilliant! -- t20: "So Let us play and enjoy the game you and I both love on the same level."
Seleene Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.13 18:17:00 - [26] I just wanna have a bigger gas tank on the towers!!! Very cool stuff. Ace job on the graphs. Even my four year old understood them. Well... sorta. He does seem to think that green should win tho! - Vid - 'P-2 Defense'
Tar Ecthelion Kryomek Industries The Volition Cult	Posted - 2007.06.13 18:18:00 - [27] My head hurts after reading that, but the animations were nice. Be nice to see how this all unfolds, but I expect alliances to become more static, harder to break down, and claim less space, all bunch up in one or two constellations to get sovereignty. ..... "When you kill a man it costs nothing to be polite" Winston Churchill
Haizum Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.13 18:24:00 - [28] Originally by: Gnulpie Why? Well, you cannot invade, that's why. It sounds all nifty and good: conquer the systems and constest sov. But how do you do that if you cannot move in your capital ships due to the cyno jammer and the enemy has them available readily in the system? If he has no capitals there and if the cyno jammer is active all the time, then he still can get capital ships just by building them at pos/outpost. As I understand it with moving various things outside a starbase's shield, as will the cyno generator be outside a shield, allowing a smaller, specialised strike force (bombs anyone? ) to get in, down the generator, and get out. Also mentioned was this will let the defenders turn the next one on, perhaps only allowing one cyno jammer anchored per system? Either that or one active, and a long enough onlining delay to allow jump-ins (but perhaps not jump-outs? ) About Dreads succumbing to focused fire, maybe a good alteration would be to allow only logistics ships to repair Dreads in siege mode? They would be targeted straight away by the POS gun users, but maybe the locking time/smaller sig radius would allow one or two cycles before warping out? I'm not a capital pilot so I don't know how viable that would be in terms of damage dealt vs repair, would along with the logistics boost give them an important part to play. Either way it belongs in another thread, as for Sov I look forward to later blogs and the introduction of the new system. Overall I think this may result in the importance in POS-spamming even more, however in terms of how people go about defending and attacking it will lead to a more tactical edge, allow for more specialised roles, and generally a lot more structured and realistic to what sovereignty should mean. --------------- If you are ferocious in battle, remember to be magnanimous in victory. - Lt. Col. Tim Collins
Frabala Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2007.06.13 18:26:00 - [29] So you looked at the sovereignty system and you saw all are well and decided to make i more complicate? At least will we get some sort of in-game tools for finding out when levels change etc?
ForceM Gallente POS Builder Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.13 18:32:00 - [30] I wonder tho, This apparently means that you can save on fuel cost for the starbases in the capital system right? .. as you do not need any guns there. And as soon as your constellation gets contested you have more then enough time to online a few guns. I can imagine this being a good option to build all your capital ships in the Capital .. This being said means that if you find out there is an Alliance building a Titan (or any other good Mothership) it takes WAY more then a mere OMGWTFBBQPWN fleet to whipe out the Capital Shipyard building it. I aint playing eve that much .. i just spend very little time on anything else :)
Laendra	Posted - 2007.06.13 18:43:00 - [31] Excellent first blog. Here's hoping that we can get a workable solution to POS spam that doesn't involve arbitrary placement limits. Oh, and btw, since you have Constellation Sov in the entire constellation, does the Alliance get Alliance mails to the effect of someone placing a POS somewhere in the constellation, even if that system has no POSes in it from the alliance that claimed Constellation Sov? ------------------- Brainstorm ideas to make EVE better:->http://eve.stormingbrains.org/index.php
Notleh RABBLE-RABBLE	Posted - 2007.06.13 19:02:00 - [32] Edited by: Notleh on 13/06/2007 19:07:41 game on! My main concern is that the only way to take down a Capital is to go in with a HUGE fleet of non cap ships, old school style. However, with the defenders being able to deploy Dreads/MS/Carriers (in Triage Mode) the attacking fleet will have to have an vast numerical advantage and the lag is going to be insane on these sieges. I predict a capital siege = instant node poppage.
Mashie Saldana Hooligans Of War	Posted - 2007.06.13 20:03:00 - [33] Excellent blog, sounds like fun times ahead for the 0.0 alliances. It will be very interesting to see the tactics spawned by this. We're sorry, something happened.
Zrevak Ashek Beagle Corp	Posted - 2007.06.13 20:06:00 - [34] Originally by: ForceM I can imagine this being a good option to build all your capital ships in the Capital .. This being said means that if you find out there is an Alliance building a Titan (or any other good Mothership) it takes WAY more then a mere OMGWTFBBQPWN fleet to whipe out the Capital Shipyard building it. A very good point. I'd guess alliances from now on will wait until they have capsov and then build all their capyards in the cap system, and only fortify the surrounding systems. This will make an attack like the coalition performed against LV and BOB impossible in the future. Surrounding systems have to be sieged for some time before any attempt on cap system is to be made. In other words? NO SURPRISE ATTACKS. An invasion will need to be planned properly before going throuh with it. Personally, I love the idea, and props for an amazing blog. Me guess the designer have played Twilight Imperium somewhat
SauronTheMage Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.13 20:09:00 - [35] Rev 2 is really sounding great. One concern I have though is the small bonus you get for fuel usage once you finally attain sov 4. Instead of raising it only 5% from 25% to 30%, wouldn't it be better to boost it to 40%-50% since it does take alot of work to get from Sov lvl 1 to sov lvl 4. This way the alliance can focus less on having to keep gathering fuel for their poses and focus more on pvp / production.
Cailais Amarr VITOC	Posted - 2007.06.13 20:43:00 - [36] Looks very good indeed. C. - sig designer - eve mail
Fon Revedhort Aeria Gloris Inc United Legion	Posted - 2007.06.13 21:01:00 - [37] I like those pics ---
Pepperami Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.06.13 21:03:00 - [38] First off, thanks for this, been waiting for this info great figures, they explain it really well. But I do have a couple of questions; 1) What happens if green tried to put pos up in pink's capital while it was invulnerable? Is that impossible? (ie, might it be good to set capital systems as the one with most moons?) 2) Also, what would happen if a corp who controls most/all pos in pink alliances capital system(only), but not the station itself, left and joined green alliance? Depending on the answer to 1 would the pos be destroyed or immediately unanchored, or would pink lose the system?
stoats The Aftermath	Posted - 2007.06.13 21:14:00 - [39] So we're going to see capital systems (sov 4) with 10 capital assembly arrays a piece that are completely invulnerable pumping out supercaps. Fantastic.
Vincent S	Posted - 2007.06.13 21:26:00 - [40] Jesus christ just remove supercaps before the game is destroyed entirely, this will only make the supercap problem infinitely worse by making it possible to produce them essentially risk-free!
Kazuo Ishiguro	Posted - 2007.06.13 21:36:00 - [41] Originally by: Vincent S Jesus christ just remove supercaps before the game is destroyed entirely, this will only make the supercap problem infinitely worse by making it possible to produce them essentially risk-free! Although this will make it easier to produce supercapitals, those same monsters will be able to bolster major offensives to take down constellation capitals. In that respect it's somewhat self-balancing. ------ Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant tanking
John McCreedy Caldari Eve Defence Force	Posted - 2007.06.13 22:01:00 - [42] Great changes and an excellently written blog but it still does not address the most fundemental reason for all the evils of the current soverignty system. POS Spammage. You still need 51% of the moons covered and this means exorbitant costs in terms of both outlay for the infrastructure and fuel costs. Please don't misunderstand me here because I do like these changes but until POS spammage becomes a thing of the past, Soverignty wars will not change. Roll in with a large BS fleet and a Freighter or two, POS spam a system and bingo, you're back to square one and no amount of cyno inhibitors will stop an enemy Cap Fleet jumping in and then we're back to POS ping pong. At the very least, remove a Freighters ability to launch a POS, forcing people to use Haulers to drop them. But I realy think you need to re-examine the entire way soverignty is worked. Prehaps a Soverignty tower? Like I say, good first step but it needs to go further. Make a Difference
NovaPod	Posted - 2007.06.13 22:14:00 - [43] lol now its already a isk and timeintensive thing to even get one system when your enemy is dedicated with posspamming and what not..and now we are supposed to pos spam/attack several systems at once to break constellation while they have their goodies in a capital during all the time..then 7 grace days? I nstead of taking a look into a more fluid situation in 0.0 we get to play team fortress or something in every constellation without any results..the current powerhouses get some tools to put themself into the situation to be able to hold with a quite low number of people (titan jumpbridges posgates) their space against better/more enemies. 0.0 should be king of the hill and its right now with titan usage a coldwar for certain alliances and nerfs to titan (which are now possible cause the big war is over with the right victor right?) we get WordWar I type of action with this comingchanges with the right alliance waiting in the trenches.
Holy Cheater	Posted - 2007.06.13 22:27:00 - [44] Looks like EVE will fall into POS wars
Bruno Bonner Gallente Lutin Group	Posted - 2007.06.13 22:43:00 - [45] Originally by: Seleene I just wanna have a bigger gas tank on the towers!!! /signed This will be the only problem with the new sovereignity system....fuel bays on the towers are not big enough to the new timeframes you are required to achieve in order for each sov-upgrade to become effective. Either double the fuel bay size, or effectively cut all the fuel requirements by half (which would be much more welcomed given the fact fueling POS is one of the most boring activities in EvE). regards Bruno ------ aka BinderAJ
Tipz NexAstrum Celestial Horizon Corp. Valainaloce	Posted - 2007.06.13 23:05:00 - [46] Edited by: Tipz NexAstrum on 13/06/2007 23:10:28 Originally by: ForceM This apparently means that you can save on fuel cost for the starbases in the capital system right? .. as you do not need any guns there. And as soon as your constellation gets contested you have more then enough time to online a few guns. Excellent point. Two things I'm wondering about are 1) It's a good amount of stuff to keep track of, is there anything planned to let an alliance check it's claims and current sovereignty level? Like a new tab in the alliance that lists constellations you hold sovereignty in and a breakdown from there listing the individual systems and their sovereignty levels? It'd be nice to have a count down timer in there to help keep track of when the next sovereignty level hits considering this could play out over the course of months. 2) When this is implemented, will the timers start at zero or take into account the existing days of sovereignty? (edit) Originally by: Bruno Bonner Originally by: Seleene I just wanna have a bigger gas tank on the towers!!! Either double the fuel bay size, or effectively cut all the fuel requirements by half Isn't that what those faction towers are for? Granted you need to be rolling in isk for it to be an option... -------------------------------------------
SauronTheMage Dragonfire Intergalactic Crusaders of Krom Dark Matter Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.13 23:36:00 - [47] From what I've been told, although it could change.... every system that has sov in it will get sov lvl 1 when rev 2 hits. There is a possibility that the systems could start as high as sov lvl 2, saving 3 weeks of upgrade time.
Exco Executor Occam's Razor Combine R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.14 00:08:00 - [48] Quote: we are looking into putting limits to the claiming mechanics, which have been touched upon by TomB, but this would be the subject of another blog Now this is something what could change everything, and I hope CCP uses their imagination well on this. Why not to have distance limits on sove as well number limits? www.occam-razor.com
Exco Executor Occam's Razor Combine R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.14 00:20:00 - [49] Originally by: ForceM I can imagine this being a good option to build all your capital ships in the Capital Systems with Gallente outposts will most likely be new Capital ship construction locations, as you can get upgrade to Gallente version what speeds up your Capital component production up to 60%... www.occam-razor.com
insolace GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.06.14 00:37:00 - [50] Does CCP intend to continue it's policy of only documenting these features in informal dev-blogs and patch notes? It would be nice to actually have a reference for players to go to rather than having to dig through blogs and hope you haven't missed a more recent revision of how the game mechanics work. One of the most frustrating things about this game is not knowing what the game mechanics are, not having them available to us, and then having them used against you by someone who has figured it out years before you started playing. Remember back when creating a cyno field made you invulnerable until one day this "bug" was "fixed"? Where would I go now to learn the mechanics of dropping a cyno field? Shouldn't there be a cross index in the item database that explains how things work?
Tyrrax Thorrk Amarr Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.06.14 00:37:00 - [51] Edited by: Tyrrax Thorrk on 14/06/2007 00:36:39 Quote: Starbase control towers, conquerable stations and outposts belonging to the sovereign alliance may not be attacked Does this include modules that are outside the shields, f.i. cyno jammers or can guns/ecm/cyno jammers still be destroyed in capital systems ? Quote: Sovereignty in the Capital system cannot be lost (or contested) while Sovereignty 4 is in effect Nice so you can use an 80 moon system as your capital and only have 1 POS claiming sov http://eve.klaki.net/
Max Teranous Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.06.14 00:57:00 - [52] Originally by: Tyrrax Thorrk Nice so you can use an 80 moon system as your capital and only have 1 POS claiming sov And really, really hope that someone doesn't forget to fuel it ! Max --------------------
Omber Zombie Gallente Frontier Technologies	Posted - 2007.06.14 01:02:00 - [53] great blog ---------------------- sig out of order, returning soon FTEK \| Production ~ Research ~ Sales ~ Election Fixing
Cringeley GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.06.14 02:43:00 - [54] I know you're not used to hearing nice things from goons, but I think you have some really, really nice, interesting new features here, that will hopefully bring fascinating new subtlety to an aspect of the game that had become a bit of a capital sledgehammering contest. Well done.
Erotic Irony RONA Deepspace	Posted - 2007.06.14 03:47:00 - [55] Originally by: insolace Does CCP intend to continue it's policy of only documenting these features in informal dev-blogs and patch notes? It would be nice to actually have a reference for players to go to rather than having to dig through blogs and hope you haven't missed a more recent revision of how the game mechanics work. Nothing consequential will ever change on the documentation front. It's a nonpolicy really and the number one reason why Eve remains a niche game. On the topic of the devblog, we need some more information on any other changes to the POS mechanics; is reinforced mode being tweaked or tower bonuses being enhanced? ___ Junkie Beverage: i use your tears to cyno in my laughter
Solbright altaltalt	Posted - 2007.06.14 04:40:00 - [56] Originally by: Erotic Irony Nothing consequential will ever change on the documentation front. It's a nonpolicy really and the number one reason why Eve remains a niche game. The lack of docs are so not a problem. Sure it would make life easier but is no where near a game breaker. Being able to play at all is the real killer. Btw: This blog was very clear in it's details. Top notch documenting. LeMousse is a keeper! :)
gordon cain Minmatar x13 Anarchy Empire	Posted - 2007.06.14 05:10:00 - [57] How on earth will this prevent POS spamming and server from overloading. I am not much into this POS thing, but the way I see it, Tower will be going up everywhere. Gordon Cain "Allways remember. Never argue with idiots, they will just drag you down to their level, and beat you with experience"
Ralitge boyter Minmatar Mordus Angels	Posted - 2007.06.14 07:44:00 - [58] I have the feeling this will only make it easier for the main alliances to claim and hold systems. If one can have multiple capitol systems (one in every constilation) We will soon enough see 0.0 claimed by one or two alliances. The reason for this is that the need to defend systems is only getting smaller and smaller, with twined jump systems one will see tactical highways between regions and critical systems. I predict that within a month or 4 all of the 0.0 systems will be officialy owned by an alliance. In about a year and a half 0.0 will be owned by one or two alliances. Though I like the ideas I fear that CCP is just providing more options to the current power houses and making it harder for starting corps and alliances to take hold of their corner of the universe. ------------------------------------------- Should you disagree with me, well I guess that is because I disagree with you. If you have a problem with that please feel free not to tell me.
Artean Minmatar North Star Networks Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2007.06.14 07:53:00 - [59] Oh, this makes me wanna play EVE again. ........ There's a thin line between professional gate camping and just standing by a gate looking like an idiot...
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.06.14 08:57:00 - [60] Originally by: Ralitge boyter I have the feeling this will only make it easier for the main alliances to claim and hold systems. If one can have multiple capitol systems (one in every constilation) We will soon enough see 0.0 claimed by one or two alliances. The reason for this is that the need to defend systems is only getting smaller and smaller, with twined jump systems one will see tactical highways between regions and critical systems. I predict that within a month or 4 all of the 0.0 systems will be officialy owned by an alliance. In about a year and a half 0.0 will be owned by one or two alliances. Though I like the ideas I fear that CCP is just providing more options to the current power houses and making it harder for starting corps and alliances to take hold of their corner of the universe. Well, it depends on a few things. 1. How many systems can have level 4 sovereignty for 1 alliance? If its just 1, the capital, then its less of a problem. 2. Another downside will be that you need a LOT of POSses, and keep them all fueled. Even the best corps/alliances out there in terms of logistics will screw up every once and again. I remember even a BoB system in Delve I think losing sov a few weeks back I think. There is a limit to where you can push POS-managers, and if you increase the number to reduce the workload, you greatly increase the possibility of spies. 3. I agree with Seleene, please increase the fueltanks on POSses, or reduce the amount of fuel it uses. 4. And I would still advocate moving all sovereignty claiming POSses to planets instead of moons. That way you help the determined defender (easier to cover all sov positions with towers to protect themselves) and the determined attacker (defender can no longer spam 50 moons and force attacker to sit in dreads for a week solid to clear them all). ------------------------------------------------ Murphy's Golden Rule: Whoever has the gold, makes the rules.
Kerfira	Posted - 2007.06.14 09:35:00 - [61] Nice attempt, but not addressing the main problem.... The main problem with POS warfare today is not that sov is too simplified, or that there are too few different POS structures, or outposts are not upgradable.... The main problem has two parts: 1. Shooting POS after POS is intensely boring. 2. POS spamming is stupidly easy. You're not solving either!!! The 'solution' mentioned in other posts from CCP employees (i.e. limit on number of POS deployed per day), doesn't solve anything either... How about solving the PROBLEMS with POS warfare instead of inventing fluff???? Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
Sister Aika	Posted - 2007.06.14 09:55:00 - [62] So, lots of new stuff for "big" alliances, noting really to look forward to for the individual player ?
PC5 ClanKillers Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2007.06.14 10:08:00 - [63] Edited by: PC5 on 14/06/2007 10:07:47 More boring POS wars, POS spam - thats what EVE needs. Aparently someone in CCP likes them or they are just blind ppl who had idea what to do next in game without any perspecive how it will look in practice. Blog is good but rest is crap. Insted of 'prepare your weapons!' well be saying 'prepare your towers and dreads!'.
Tzrailasa Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.14 10:17:00 - [64] I wonder when CCP will find out that fun in alliance warfare comes from people shooting people, NOT people shooting structures..... All this is just enhancing the boredom of territorial warfare, not making it more fun. It's been said before. There is one small change that'll make POS warfare more fun, and that is making pos spamming invalid as a tactic (plenty of suggestions has been made as to how)... ...but of.c. that's not being adressed at all..... 'Lets add some pos structures instead and hope that shuts people up for a while...' 'Maybe if we make pos warfare even more boring, people will stop whining....' My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance.
Cergorach Amarr The Helix Foundation	Posted - 2007.06.14 10:31:00 - [65] Please correct me if i'm wrong, but every starbase module is being moved out of the protective field of the control tower, the blog mentions that (only) the starbase tower is invunerable in a captial system. So you can still attack the individual modules, that would mean capital ship arrays are vunerable. So not having POS guns online in the capital system is not smart, as it makes all the other modules vunerable to attack. The POS guns are also outside the protective field of the starbase tower and thus also vunerable to attacks by a non capital fleet. You don't have to destroy them, you just want them offline, that only requires going through the shield and the armor and doing a little damage to the hull. Then you bring in the dreads... Sure the POS guns can concentrate fire, but you'll need actual people online to do that, and while it can be done with alts, these cost money to maintain. Due to the changes to the POS, they are 'easier' to disable. Take out the guns, take out the Cynosural Field Jammer, jump in the capitals and destroy the tower (or the capital ship array). You could send a strike force that quickly disable all the guns before any of the alts are active. A lot of POSes not only means a lot of isk to build and maintain them, but also requires a lot of actual players to operate them in case of attack. While it won't cost you Sovereignity right away, it can cost you a capital ship array. A relatively small gang can now go raiding POSes, offlining important POS systems, making the enemy all jumpy, because they are now vunerable in location x and they might be invaded there. The trick is to take they enemy by suprise (no one available in the first couple of minutes to take over the POS guns), and have enough fire power available to offline modules relatively quickly. Hving a lot of these small groups is way more effective then having one huge blob of 200 ships engaging a POS. That also means that there need to be a lot of smaller response fleets that need to be able to Warp in quickly when the POS gets attacked. Now it also becomes a tactical move if you want your Capital in a system with a large number of moons (difficult to defend them all at once, but a lot of resources) or a small number of moons (easier to defend, but less resources to take advantage of). I think that CCP has made an excellent move with all the changes that are comming in Rev2 regarding warfare. It makes 0.0 a lot more interesting for the beginning player, because a small group of them can make a huge difference. ps. I'm a highsec player, but with these developments i'm just itching to move to 0.0 space and make my claim ;-)
Mashie Saldana Hooligans Of War	Posted - 2007.06.14 10:50:00 - [66] Originally by: Cergorach Please correct me if i'm wrong, but every starbase module is being moved out of the protective field of the control tower, the blog mentions that (only) the starbase tower is invunerable in a captial system. It will mainly be offensive modules outside the force field so no popping of capital assembly arrays until the tower is dead I'm afraid. We're sorry, something happened.
zykerx Pegasus Mining and Securities R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.06.14 10:52:00 - [67] Originally by: Cergorach Please correct me if i'm wrong, but every starbase module is being moved out of the protective field of the control tower, the blog mentions that (only) the starbase tower is invunerable in a captial system. So you can still attack the individual modules, that would mean capital ship arrays are vunerable. So not having POS guns online in the capital system is not smart, as it makes all the other modules vunerable to attack. The POS guns are also outside the protective field of the starbase tower and thus also vunerable to attacks by a non capital fleet. You don't have to destroy them, you just want them offline, that only requires going through the shield and the armor and doing a little damage to the hull. Then you bring in the dreads... Sure the POS guns can concentrate fire, but you'll need actual people online to do that, and while it can be done with alts, these cost money to maintain. Due to the changes to the POS, they are 'easier' to disable. Take out the guns, take out the Cynosural Field Jammer, jump in the capitals and destroy the tower (or the capital ship array). You could send a strike force that quickly disable all the guns before any of the alts are active. A lot of POSes not only means a lot of isk to build and maintain them, but also requires a lot of actual players to operate them in case of attack. While it won't cost you Sovereignity right away, it can cost you a capital ship array. A relatively small gang can now go raiding POSes, offlining important POS systems, making the enemy all jumpy, because they are now vunerable in location x and they might be invaded there. The trick is to take they enemy by suprise (no one available in the first couple of minutes to take over the POS guns), and have enough fire power available to offline modules relatively quickly. Hving a lot of these small groups is way more effective then having one huge blob of 200 ships engaging a POS. That also means that there need to be a lot of smaller response fleets that need to be able to Warp in quickly when the POS gets attacked. Now it also becomes a tactical move if you want your Capital in a system with a large number of moons (difficult to defend them all at once, but a lot of resources) or a small number of moons (easier to defend, but less resources to take advantage of). I think that CCP has made an excellent move with all the changes that are comming in Rev2 regarding warfare. It makes 0.0 a lot more interesting for the beginning player, because a small group of them can make a huge difference. ps. I'm a highsec player, but with these developments i'm just itching to move to 0.0 space and make my claim ;-) only warfare modules wil be outside shield, like guns, scramblers etc, not the buildarrays or corphangers etc darn ccp, more freaking boring posjunk, man thats yust rly lame smal ships attacking the posguns does mean alot dead smalships aswel . "MY COMMENTS IN NO WAY REFLECT MY CORP OR ALLIANCE"
Gyro DuAquin1 Tri Optimum Ev0ke	Posted - 2007.06.14 11:26:00 - [68] Edited by: Gyro DuAquin1 on 14/06/2007 11:25:08 Good thing moving pos guns outside, that way bs fleets can operate at a pos and help their caps. Intresting but not addressing the real problem of the sov thing, as someone said before, Alliance warfare should be based on ppl shootin ppl not ppl shootin towers.
Tzrailasa Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.14 11:26:00 - [69] Originally by: zykerx darn ccp, more freaking boring posjunk, man thats yust rly lame smal ships attacking the posguns does mean alot dead smalships aswel Yeah..... pretty much sums it up..... Cut down on fun, add boring stuff... Where is the fun in shooting pos structures (more required)? Where is the fun in pos spamming (not solved)? Where is the fun in loosing ships to structures (PvE)? Where is the fun in maintaining even more pos (const sov)? NOTHING is added in this that encourages PvP in territorial warfare. All new additions added are essentially PvE..... Seems like player-vs-structure is CCP's new ideal for 0.0 warfare.... I feel a bit silly for thinking PvP was what 0.0 was about... PS: FFS just solve pos spam. All this other **** is not needed... My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance.
Janeway	Posted - 2007.06.14 11:42:00 - [70] If you have been following the big BOB debate lately you would have already known much of this info already. BOB have known about these changes for ages and are already making plans there comments on these forums make that much plainly obvious. I for one wont be paying any attention to these changes since it has been designed plainly with a specific allience in mind.
Verone Gallente Veto Corp	Posted - 2007.06.14 11:53:00 - [71] I just saw colors... and circles... and... stuff, not that I was paying a lot of attention. Glad to be nomadic... god I'd hate to have to deal with that crap >>> THE BEAUTY OF NEW EDEN <<<
Qual Gallente Cornexant Research	Posted - 2007.06.14 11:55:00 - [72] Originally by: Janeway If you have been following the big BOB debate lately you would have already known much of this info already. BOB have known about these changes for ages and are already making plans there comments on these forums make that much plainly obvious. I for one wont be paying any attention to these changes since it has been designed plainly with a specific allience in mind. You miss one very importatnt thing. This will open UP 0.0. Holding const sov in more than a few contalations will take quite a lot of efford. The simple fact that people can do hit and run attacks on the posses will force alliances to focus their defence forces more. Invading the whole universe will become LOT harder a few months after Rev 2, let alone holding the whole universe. I see this rsulting in alliances holding smaller areas, but defending them more, while keeping economic warfare on enimies going by keeping thier constalation(s) under pressure. You will see on Sisi that earning isk in 0.0 has become a lot easier on avarege, while the big earners, (6+ plexes) have been nerfed by the simple fact that they are now hidden and pretty hard to find. This will mean that its not important for alliances to hold large areas of space anymore, for thier memebrs to have good places to earn ISK. Does this mean that large alliance wont still TRY to hold onto large areas? Certainly not. THere is prestige in that. But its getting a lot harder, and it doesn't really add any bonus to you income to do so. SO in short: Go back to your cave troll. "The short version: Qual is right." -Papa Smurf
Dr Aryandi Hematite Rose Bionic Dawn	Posted - 2007.06.14 13:59:00 - [73] The sov ideas look nice. The dev blog is well written and the animations were a good touch. Sorting POS spam and seige is becoming more urgent all the time though. I saw a really nice suggestion someone made on POS spamming a while ago... Basically it said that rather than adding up the number of towers in the system you do the following: Add up the number of towers on each planet. Each planet then gets claimed. The person with the most planets gets sovereignty. Why does this help? Lets say you have a system with 60 moons over 5 planets. Planet 1: 3 Moons Planet 2: 12 Moons Planet 3: 1 Moon Planet 4: 34 Moons Planet 5: 10 Moons Old system you needed 31 moons claimed. New system...put 2 pos on planet 1, 1 on planet 3, 6 on planet 5. 9 POS now means you control the system by strategically placing them in the right place. Now not all moons are equal. As I said at the start this is not my idea, sorry I can't remember who originally suggested it, but I think it is an excellent one. Blueprint Research Service Available See thread for details.
Sakura Nihil Tabula Rasa Systems The Star Fraction	Posted - 2007.06.14 13:59:00 - [74] I like the thought that you'll have to try and work through outlying systems to attack the capital, however, I think its a very, very poor idea to make the capital system's POSes invulnerable. Give them a defensive bonus, that's fine, but invulnerable? It takes away the option of blitzkrieg - that being said, I really think this will encourage further blobbing. Might be lessened with bombs, but the motivation will be there and stronger than ever. Looking for a relaxed ingame RP channel to join? La Maison De Tous Les Plaisirs
Almiel Gallente Xenodus Syndicate	Posted - 2007.06.14 14:27:00 - [75] o/
Virtuozzo IVC Consortium INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.06.14 14:27:00 - [76] Any chance we could um get our hands on the .fla source files for those .swf files? :-) For adaptation to actual constellations in game ... they're lovely. Virtuozzo Last words of a Caldari general: "Pull the Ravens back! Full retreat! they've got frigates!" snip Inappropriate. -Elmo Pug
Garr Anders Minmatar Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2007.06.14 15:00:00 - [77] Edited by: Garr Anders on 14/06/2007 15:00:12 Planets: The New Sovereignty Mechanic Originally by: Dr Aryandi ... As I said at the start this is not my idea, sorry I can't remember who originally suggested it, but I think it is an excellent one. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=530688 by Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys Garr Anders - Minmatar
Garr Anders Minmatar Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2007.06.14 15:01:00 - [78] Edited by: Garr Anders on 14/06/2007 14:59:48 double post Garr Anders - Minmatar
Vasiliyan The Flying Swan	Posted - 2007.06.14 15:07:00 - [79] Originally by: Kerfira The main problem has two parts: 1. Shooting POS after POS is intensely boring. 2. POS spamming is stupidly easy. You're not solving either!!! QFT. Also, maintaining constellation sov is going to require fuelling of HUNDREDS of towers - a majority of large towers in every system in the constellation! While at the same time it's no longer as easy to haul in sufficient quantities of fuel in by carrier. I'd like to see estimates for the number of daily freighter/carrier runs required to do this, along with the number of barge-hours required to keep that up and cost of NPC fuels.
Joerd Toastius Octavian Vanguard	Posted - 2007.06.14 15:08:00 - [80] Originally by: Garr Anders Edited by: Garr Anders on 14/06/2007 15:00:12 Planets: The New Sovereignty Mechanic Originally by: Dr Aryandi ... As I said at the start this is not my idea, sorry I can't remember who originally suggested it, but I think it is an excellent one. http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=530688 by Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial We Are Nice Guys Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Noluck Ned Goum, this time you managed to have a good idea. Actualy, it was Zarimax Mishka. I just typed it up in a more presentable manner(with premission). He posted it here a while ago, but it never really got seen. I hadnt given sovereignty holding mechanics much thought before he proposed it. PS Hi Goum :P
Tzrailasa Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.14 15:34:00 - [81] Originally by: Qual This will open UP 0.0. Holding const sov in more than a few contalations will take quite a lot of efford. True, but you can still hold de-facto sov over a constellation in the old way, by just holding sov in the station systems. In reality, I don't think much will change.... Originally by: Qual The simple fact that people can do hit and run attacks on the posses will force alliances to focus their defence forces more. Will it really? Attackers will need to form up a fleet, go into hostile territory, attack their pos (presumably taking losses). The defender can then come back during low-activity hours and repair the structures with a single carrier (or put up new ones). It's exactly the same disproportion as exist with pos spamming today. The non-spammer need to form up a capital fleet, and shoot the pos. The spammer can then come back during low-activity hours and put up another one with a single carrier..... See the similarity? The party actually willing to expose his fleet will have to organise stuff, and will usually be bored stiff. The other party can recover with minimal effort (just a few ISK and a carrier pilot). The party not willing to fight is given the easy way out! Originally by: Qual Invading the whole universe will become LOT harder a few months after Rev 2, let alone holding the whole universe. I see this resulting in alliances holding smaller areas, but defending them more, while keeping economic warfare on enimies going by keeping their constellation(s) under pressure. TBH, I don't see any big changes in 0.0 warfare from this. There'll of.c. be small changes in exactly how you do things, but apart from pos warfare being even more boring, I'm afraid not much will change.... The main reason for this is that pos (and structures) are generally not worth defending! They're relatively cheap (compared to risking ships to defend them), easy to replace if shot, so it's much simpler to just spam new ones than defend the old. Attacking a pos spammer: You either outspam, or spend endless boring hours. Defending from a pos spammer: You either outspam, or spend endless boring hours. This'll not change, just get worse...... EVE, the game where not fighting is the winning strategy!!! My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance.
hydraSlav Synergy Evolved Sparta Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.14 15:45:00 - [82] Diagrams FTW Nice blog == Above comments are my personal views Oveur >Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat
Haniblecter Teg F.R.E.E. Explorer EVE Animal Control	Posted - 2007.06.14 17:03:00 - [83] I agree with a previous poster: while it will be harder to take territory from a dug in alliance in a constellation, that alliance is going to focus everything in one or two constellations. Having to have three stations in a constellation (max, 8 systems lets say) is fairly costly, esp. since most alliances spread their outposts out throughout a region. I say most reasonable alliances are going to hold only a handful of constellations. But, there's ALOT of stations already built. With enough time, I think most alliances are going to want to eventually hold every constellation that has a station in it. Will BoB or whoever owns old ASCN space just abandone a 00 station? ---------------------------------------- Friends Forever
Adam C 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.06.14 19:08:00 - [84] Edited by: Adam C on 14/06/2007 19:12:31 Well... Oh my god! You can tell by the amount of pages (3) that their is little support with sovereignty warfare(!) and the additions dont seem much more appealing. (cringe worthy in my opinion) I understand this added demension to 0.0 warfare is interesting from a developer standpoint to get this new feature out. However it seems mostly inclined with power players! This will turn days long battles of sovereignty into weeks. It will shift the current balance of pos>dread. (ie defense vs offense) Oh and too mention this is just a new thing for BOB to win at. (hehe had to put that in) You need to address the void in fun this will create and let players put warp disrupt bubbles in 0.4 and below. You need to address game mechanics this will further encourage capital blobfare and blobbiness in general something well and against CCP need for speed initative! Think very carefully PLEASE!
Reptile Minmatar The Raven Warriors	Posted - 2007.06.14 20:20:00 - [85] Godness, more POS spaming, Super Capitals en masse in a few weeks, I don't get the people who are cheering this change, I think its idiotic and only beneficial to a few power players and the alliances they run. The 'end game' is getting more and more idiotic with every release (since the introduction of capital ships)
Annapolis	Posted - 2007.06.14 20:23:00 - [86] I think with the new sytem, in addition there should be ways to prevent people from logging off within the areas you have SOV of. To prevent log in traps and other scenarios similar to this.
Serenity Steele Rearden Steele	Posted - 2007.06.14 21:01:00 - [87] Nice 2D map layout, think I've seen that somewhere before .. Eve Strategic Maps - Outpost Alert - Sovereign Systems - Alliance Rank
Adam Weishaupt Minmatar Pyrrhus Sicarii Aftermath Alliance	Posted - 2007.06.14 21:08:00 - [88] It's a nice system, but it doesn't remove the need for tons of towers, tons of ice, tons of manhours, and tons of dread siege cycles and that favors the huge, hulking alliances quite disproportionately. There's nothing wrong with being rewarded for having good logistics, but come on...there are tons of good suggestions in this thread for making POS warfare less annoying. Moving the offensive modules outside the shield is fine, but it's only a partial solution. Why not move them to planets? Or only POS at planets can claim sovereignty? It's not a problem since only one outpost can be anchored in a system...and the moons can still be used for moon mining/whatever, but they won't HAVE to be used...keep the 7 day timer, since that, much like a 'best of 7' playoff series, tends to favor the stronger team overall (which is fair - just because you outnumber the resident alliance one or two nights doesn't mean you deserve to wreck months of work)...but lose the spammage, unless you're going to hit the server with a magic wand and remove POS lag completely.
MissileRus	Posted - 2007.06.14 21:15:00 - [89] any alliance recruiting forum alts? it all looks great and sounds well planned to me --------------------------- 4. i like pizza
Abbadon Wrath Coreli Corporation Corelum Syndicate	Posted - 2007.06.14 22:22:00 - [90] Is it just me, or does it look like the new system encourages POS spamming?
Adam C 0utbreak	Posted - 2007.06.14 23:17:00 - [91] Edited by: Adam C on 14/06/2007 23:17:24 Originally by: Abbadon Wrath Is it just me, or does it look like the new system encourages POS spamming? in encourages spamming in general beit ships or things. more pos's more small ships to take out pos guns more cap ships (more reasons to fight? at pos's?) - YAY i guess It aint neccercerily a bad thing though just current game mechanics and rev 2.0 simply still cant handle Super EPIC Capital Fights. (though it will change Titan / Mummyship warfare) I hope to be proven wrong and at the end of it all the future of this game is still bright. Looking foward o/
Abramovich OEG	Posted - 2007.06.15 04:34:00 - [92] more poses, more POSes.. MORE MORE POSes. more pain with logistics. All this features are good, but why you just change claiming from moon POSes to planet POSes. Left moons for mining, and planets for fight.
Hugh Ruka Caldari Free Traders	Posted - 2007.06.15 09:00:00 - [93] Nice and well written blog. However I don't think the end result envisioned by the creators will tak place. Any limit on cynojammers in system ? If they affect BOTH parties (defender and attacker), then it's ok. However if they do not affect jump portal towers, the defender has a large advantage. It looks like constelations will be easy to lock down once you have constellation sov. Anchor a few large POSes with enough small guns to take out non-cap ships easily. Anchor cynojammers at these poses. Anchor one jump tower. You are ready to react to any attack almost instantly. As other people stated, more boring shooting of structures. Just now it has a progression. Instead of going straight for the tower, you can waste time with out of shield structures. Anchoring a cynojammer will make this a necesity. Originally by: JP Beauregard The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
Zeveron Generals Of Destruction Syndicate Terror In The System	Posted - 2007.06.15 10:23:00 - [94] I need some1 to clarify that outpost/starbase invulnerability feature pls. What happens if you have sov 1-3 on a station system? Can the station get attacked if you still have sov on that system? I quess its gona work as now, right? The only thing that changes is that if you have sov lvl 4 the POSes in the capital system cannot be targeted and destroyed, so the sov there cannot be changed and that means that sov and station cannot be lost in the capital system. Sorry for the questions, but CCP confused me with those descriptions a bit :-) ---------------------------------- A desperate voice brakes the silence on the GODS coms:
Eumenis Generals Of Destruction Syndicate Terror In The System	Posted - 2007.06.15 13:21:00 - [95] Wow, big changes. I like those and it looks that we are going to see many more alliances claiming constellations now, unless big ones stop CCP's plan from working. It will also be a big change in politics. I doubt whether most alliances (including the bigger ones) can keep constellation sovereignty (that is the winning apple) over more than 3-4 constellations, unless the smaller ones don't take a role. Hence I see two roads in the plan: BoB, RA, GS and maybe a couple of others, continue their work and they don't allow anyone to claim capital sovereignty. The same old story will remain. The most probable road is though towards capital claiming in systems, by groups of alliances and "micro" wars between those alliances on neibhouring constellations. This last will be a very beautiful perspective. Who will divide the pie now?
Recluse Viramor Reikoku Band of Brothers	Posted - 2007.06.15 13:38:00 - [96] Tzrailasa hits the nail on the head. Rev 2 really addresses none of the issues of pos warfare that have been a plague since its inception, only builds upon them. Albeit there are some good changes that will make pos warfare easier and harder at the same time.

CCP LeMousse	Posted - 2007.06.15 17:35:00 - [97] Edited by: CCP LeMousse on 15/06/2007 17:35:49 Thank you for the feedback; keep it coming. I've compiled a list of questions from this thread and a few other sources, and will try addressing them below; Is it possible to have more than one constellation capital per alliance? Yes. As the name indicates, its a constellation capital, so an alliance may have as many capitals as it has constellations (with Constellation Sovereignty). Can station services be attacked in a constellation capital with Sovereignty 4? Yes. While the outpost is invulnerable, its services are not, so you may target, attack and disable them. What happens to Constellation Sovereignty if the corporation holding sovereignty and the outposts leaves its alliance to create a new one, or switches sides? Sovereignty is on a per-alliance basis, so if a corporation that holds all of the sovereignty in a constellation leaves the alliance in whose name it is claiming, constellation sovereignty will go into contested mode. Are alliance mails generated for starbases anchored in a constellation over which you have Constellation Sovereignty but not in a system in which you have a starbase? No. Only systems in which the alliance has starbases will generate an anchoring alert. So it is possible to only have one starbase up and running to claim a capital with Sovereignty 4? Yes. It is, however, a risky tactic. Can you anchor starbases in a capital with Sovereignty 4 if you're not the holding/claiming alliance? Yes. Anyone may travel through or anchor starbases in a system with Sovereignty 4. However, only the starbases belonging to the alliance with the sovereignty will be invulnerable and claim sovereignty while Sovereignty 4 is in effect. When this is implemented, will the timers start at zero or take into account the existing days of sovereignty? All current sovereignty claims will be switched to Sovereignty 1. The timers from Sovereignty 1 and upwards will start at zero however. Is there anything planned to let an alliance check it's claims and current sovereignty level? Individual sovereignty is displayed in each system, and the map tracks Constellation Sovereignty claims. What would happen if a corp who controls all starbases in the Pink Alliance's capital system (only), but not the station itself, left the alliance, or if the towers were offlined? We'll assume the capital system has Sovereignty 4. A system with Sovereignty 4 cannot lose its sovereignty. So until Constellation Sovereignty is lost, Sovereignty 4 will remain in that system, and it will not be possible to target or attack the station. Isn't the faster-claim advantage given to the defender too short? We'll be closely monitoring the situation and modify it if needed. Hope this answers most of your questions/concerns.

Serenity Steele Rearden Steele	Posted - 2007.06.15 23:05:00 - [98] Edited by: Serenity Steele on 15/06/2007 23:06:17 Below is a link of alliances with the infrastructure in place to reach; - Constellation Sov. - Sovereignty Level 4. Sov 4 and Constellation Sov Readyness (On 15th June 2007) Eve Strategic Maps - Outpost Alert - Sovereign Systems - Alliance Rank
Pepperami Art of War Cult of War	Posted - 2007.06.16 00:09:00 - [99] Thanks for the replies Le Mousse.. Why is it not considered a good move to make the Station Services of the Capital system invulnerable also? Seems like it would follow naturally with the invulnerable system idea?
Gladia Horusthu Gallente Anything Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.16 07:24:00 - [100] Other would-be prognosticators have spoken up, so here is what I predict: 1) Alliances that choose to pursue constellation sovereignty will probably be very selective about where to expand to. Constellation sovereignty = supercap capability IF they are able to repel attackers long enough to finish building before they lose constellation sovereignty and become vulnerable again. With so many POS's required, FEWER constellations, not more, will be under sovereignty on territorial control maps. 2) More supercap production will be planned, as players see an opportunity for a safe build with Constellation Sovereignty. Most builders I have talked to speak wistfully of the opportunity, and more than likely this will be acceded to in many groups. 3) Because of the defensive requirements there will be room for greater numbers of smaller alliances to claim space in 0.0 as POS maintenance is a downer. 4) More alliances will ensure within each that multiple corporations run POS's, as absconding with corp-owned but sovereignty-insuring POSes will become more damaging to long-term goals. But that is all just an educated guess.
Francesca Dell'Agio	Posted - 2007.06.16 14:43:00 - [101] In the current climate of a mad polarised EVE in 0.0 however, the cost factors pretty much squeeze out the small to medium sized alliances, as opposed to those who do not rely on income from the belts and such things. I wouldn't be surprised that around two weeks after the patch a few folks go on a killing spree as their own homes are nicely on track for stability through the new game features .. while their targets are still in the process of adapting as the required costs are comparably (relative to them) much much higher.
Tyrrax Thorrk Amarr Umbra Congregatio Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.06.16 20:20:00 - [102] Edited by: Tyrrax Thorrk on 16/06/2007 20:20:36 Quote: Starbase control towers, conquerable stations and outposts belonging to the sovereign alliance may not be attacked Does this include modules that are outside the shields, f.i. cyno jammers or can guns/ecm/cyno jammers still be destroyed in capital systems ? ANSWER PLS ;i Quote: What would happen if a corp who controls all starbases in the Pink Alliance's capital system (only), but not the station itself, left the alliance, or if the towers were offlined? We'll assume the capital system has Sovereignty 4. A system with Sovereignty 4 cannot lose its sovereignty. So until Constellation Sovereignty is lost, Sovereignty 4 will remain in that system, and it will not be possible to target or attack the station. So capital system sov can be held without any poses at all once const sov is established ??? http://eve.klaki.net/
MehTheTrader University of Caille	Posted - 2007.06.17 18:51:00 - [103] Sounds king of cheesy.. doing step one to get to step 2 extra. Seems a bit unrealistic, but whatever, hehe,
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. INVICTUS.	Posted - 2007.06.18 10:19:00 - [104] Will be interesting to watch what happens. Every system with a cynojammer in it and high percentage of moons covered could end up being a graveyard for an attacking force. Imagine this: You attack a system with 10 moons, all have deathstar POS. There is a cynojammer active on one of them. there is 5 carriers repairing the cynojammer and each other while the attacking 50 BS try to blow up the cynojammer before getting ripped to shreds by the manned POS guns. I am not sure how CCP envisions attackers getting a foothold in a system with a cynojammer active and a fleet defending the Cynojamming POS (and remote repping the cynojammer). Now even worse, imagine that the defender has a titan. Titan on grid with the cynojammer. What fleet would ever survive long enough to take out the cynojammer before getting ripped to shreds? ------------------------------------------------ Murphy's Golden Rule: Whoever has the gold, makes the rules.
Arushia Nova Labs Empire Research	Posted - 2007.06.21 09:14:00 - [105] Originally by: Adam Weishaupt Why not move them to planets? Or only POS at planets can claim sovereignty? You don't need to move them if you simmply allow only 1 POS per planet to claim sov. IE: "You cannot claim soveriegnty with this control tower (Charmerout 7 moon 5) becaue a control tower at Charmerout 7 moon 3 already claims sovereignty." Tired of Waiting? Use Empire Research

CCP LeMousse	Posted - 2007.06.25 18:10:00 - [106] Originally by: Tyrrax Thorrk Edited by: Tyrrax Thorrk on 16/06/2007 20:20:36 Quote: Starbase control towers, conquerable stations and outposts belonging to the sovereign alliance may not be attacked Does this include modules that are outside the shields, f.i. cyno jammers or can guns/ecm/cyno jammers still be destroyed in capital systems ? ANSWER PLS ;i Quote: What would happen if a corp who controls all starbases in the Pink Alliance's capital system (only), but not the station itself, left the alliance, or if the towers were offlined? We'll assume the capital system has Sovereignty 4. A system with Sovereignty 4 cannot lose its sovereignty. So until Constellation Sovereignty is lost, Sovereignty 4 will remain in that system, and it will not be possible to target or attack the station. So capital system sov can be held without any poses at all once const sov is established ??? Structures outside of the starbase forcefield may be targetted and shot in a Sovereignty 4 system. And yes, a system with Sovereignty 4 will hold sovereignty without any starbases deployed in the system, as the condition for it is Constellation Sovereignty. You do need starbases to claim Sovereignty 1-3 though, which are required to get to Sovereignty 4. It is, however, a very risky tactic for a very small advantage.

Chruker	Posted - 2007.06.27 15:45:00 - [107] Originally by: CCP LeMousse Is there anything planned to let an alliance check it's claims and current sovereignty level? Individual sovereignty is displayed in each system, and the map tracks Constellation Sovereignty claims. The individual sovereignty levels are also available through the EVE API. Somebody just have to write a tool to display them. ----- http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online ----- Top wishes: - No daily downtime - Faster training on sisi - Updated data export - Speedup IGB table rendering
Casket Base	Posted - 2007.06.27 15:52:00 - [108] Edited by: Casket Base on 27/06/2007 15:51:11 Edit; Nm
Serenity Steele Rearden Steele	Posted - 2007.06.29 07:18:00 - [109] Originally by: Chruker Originally by: CCP LeMousse Is there anything planned to let an alliance check it's claims and current sovereignty level? Individual sovereignty is displayed in each system, and the map tracks Constellation Sovereignty claims. The individual sovereignty levels are also available through the EVE API. Somebody just have to write a tool to display them. The alliance pages on eve-maps.com already display sov level per system. :) Just click an alliance name to see the list by sov level. Eve Strategic Maps - Outpost Alert - Sovereign Systems - Alliance Rank
Nubiam Caldari Eternity INC. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2007.07.09 20:47:00 - [110] Are there plans to allow member of the alliance to use the weapons on a pos to better allow versatility in POS defence instead of just the members of that corporation? N-

CCP Abathur	Posted - 2007.07.17 09:29:00 - [111] Originally by: Nubiam Are there plans to allow member of the alliance to use the weapons on a pos to better allow versatility in POS defence instead of just the members of that corporation? N- Yes, this is being looked into. We are also looking at finally allowing Ship Maintenance Arrays and other structures to be set for use at the Alliance level as well. "Tux did it!"

pewpew master	Posted - 2007.08.19 13:15:00 - [112] A quick but important question, if when the 30 day timer is started all the conditions are not met e.g not 3 outposts in one constellation. Will the alliance get constellational sov if the conditions are met on the 30th day?
Cain Calzon Caldari Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.25 19:27:00 - [113] according to the Devblog that when u get Constellation Sovereignty ur supposed to get 30% reduction in fuel usage on all towers in the constellation. now that our alliance has cons. sov. why doesnt the fuel reduction step in?
Jurt	Posted - 2007.08.30 22:55:00 - [114] Could you clarify what will hapend in next case: We have Sovereignty Level 2, and deploy Cap shipyad and Crystal field generator. After that we lost Sovereignty in case of other aly deploy more POS. Question: 1) Crystal field generator put off-line automatic or continue work? 2) What will be with building mather ship in Cap shipyad if in building time we lost Sovereignty?

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

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