open All Channels
seplocked Warfare & Tactics
blankseplocked Why Sov Mechanics?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Derrick Lang
Posted - 2011.04.21 18:36:00 - [1]
 

Why oh why do we need sov mechanics? Is it not enough for an alliance to hold a system by the might of its' fleets? Imagine no more timers! Those strong enough to hold the system declare to the galaxy that this system is ours not by right of some timer, but by the might of our lasers.

If you are strong enough to take my system then you push me out and send me to the warm embrace of a clone vat. Deny me access to the belts that I once mined and ratted. Destroy my pos where I once processed moon goo. Take from me the outpost I labored to build. What use is an owners name on a system? The true masters are the ones who live there who reap the systems resources. When I am no longer strong enough to keep my enemies at bay then this will no longer be my system.

Instead of endlessly tinkering with sov mechanics give us more infrastructure to build with. Allow me to put guns on the stargates and outposts of my systems. Instead of an ihub where i simply buy upgrades, make the upgrades into actual deployable units that can be destroyed by my enemies.

TL:DR
Sov mechanics gunk up the game. Instead of worrying about pushing the enemy out of the systems I want, I instead must worry about when xyz timer is up to go shoot it some more. War should be about hunting my enemy not blowing up his ihub. Once the enemy is pushed out I can capture his infrastructure and put it to my use.

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.21 18:42:00 - [2]
 

So basically, you want to go back to pre-Dominion.

Derrick Lang
Posted - 2011.04.21 18:46:00 - [3]
 

I started with Dominion....

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.21 18:48:00 - [4]
 

Me too, but I've read about it. You got sov by spamming more large towers in system than the other guy. wars involved shooting towers 23/7. I appreciate the sentiment, but finding the solution to sov mechanics that suits everyone is difficult.

Derrick Lang
Posted - 2011.04.21 18:54:00 - [5]
 

I don't want there to be any sov mechanic. The system would have no ownership. Whomever manages to live there and keep others out controls the system. If someone else pushes them out then they control it. No need for a system to have a is owned by 'Alliance X' field.

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.04.21 19:01:00 - [6]
 

Okay, yet you want the resources controlled by a group, you've said so.. take a station systenm, where the controlling party determines docking rights and such. You say if I can push you out, I win.. how does one determine when you have "pushed someone out?" When you have more people is system? There has to be some mechanic to decide that.

Derrick Lang
Posted - 2011.04.21 19:16:00 - [7]
 

Stations are controlled by corporations. So the question really becomes "How do we determine who controls a station?" There is already a station capture mechanic, but it is tied to the sov mechanic. I think stations should transfer ownership in two ways. Peacefully and forcefully. You should be able to peacefully surrender a station to whatever corporation you choose. Or a corp can take it from you with lasers. Stations should work similarly to pos'es, in that they require fuel to run. They would also have a reinforcement cycle then. So taking a station by force would work by A) letting it run out of fuel and deactivate where it can then be captured. or B) reinforce it, then shoot it down to some base level where it can be captured.

Only a corp director can capture a station or surrender it. Whichever corp captures it owns it.

Sellador
Posted - 2011.04.22 05:09:00 - [8]
 

Look, before you started playing, sov was completely different. Then CCP Games, the company which made EvE you know, decided to dedicate a full expansion and a team of hundred developers to plan and make a new, better sov system. Results? Major alliances and a lot of players who actually do fight over sov - welcomed the changes with their both hands.

Sorry, but I don't see you alone playing EvE since Dominion be serious about suggesting major game changes to the most important part, when a company full of game designers and developers focused on that not so long ago and based on their 5+ year experience had great results and feedback.

Sorry, not this time. end of discussion

Derrick Lang
Posted - 2011.04.22 13:23:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Sellador
Look, before you started playing, sov was completely different. Then CCP Games, the company which made EvE you know, decided to dedicate a full expansion and a team of hundred developers to plan and make a new, better sov system. Results? Major alliances and a lot of players who actually do fight over sov - welcomed the changes with their both hands.

Sorry, but I don't see you alone playing EvE since Dominion be serious about suggesting major game changes to the most important part, when a company full of game designers and developers focused on that not so long ago and based on their 5+ year experience had great results and feedback.

Sorry, not this time. end of discussion


Im sorry you feel that way. You're right, I don't know how EVE used to be. I know how it is now. My PVP chars live in nullsec exclusively and have fought in several large scale deployments in including Atlas's taking of RA's space, IT's taking of Fountain and Delve, and the SC's incursion into NC territory. We werent out hunting the enemy. we were too busy shooting ihubs. The current Sov Mechanics make the game clunky.

Cyniac
Gallente
Twilight Star Rangers
Posted - 2011.04.22 13:43:00 - [10]
 

Head over to Syndicate space (or any other NPC held nullsec for that matter) you might find it to be more to your liking.

Target Painter
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.04.22 13:45:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: Derrick Lang
The current Sov Mechanics make the game clunky.


It would be awesome if there was some stretch of space where there was no sov warfare.

Kriegman
Ixion Defence Systems
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.04.22 14:59:00 - [12]
 

Sounds like you need to move to 0.0 NPC space. Endless docking games and gate camps.

I like living in sov controlled space with a nice JB network and corp owned stations. I work for it by helping my alliance to run day to day chores and defend it. This makes me feel like part of something greater than just random pew pew.


Rika Jones
Amarr
Warp Storm Industries
Posted - 2011.04.22 15:05:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Derrick Lang
Stations are controlled by corporations. So the question really becomes "How do we determine who controls a station?" There is already a station capture mechanic, but it is tied to the sov mechanic. I think stations should transfer ownership in two ways. Peacefully and forcefully. You should be able to peacefully surrender a station to whatever corporation you choose. Or a corp can take it from you with lasers. Stations should work similarly to pos'es, in that they require fuel to run. They would also have a reinforcement cycle then. So taking a station by force would work by A) letting it run out of fuel and deactivate where it can then be captured. or B) reinforce it, then shoot it down to some base level where it can be captured.

Only a corp director can capture a station or surrender it. Whichever corp captures it owns it.


You do realize that if someone wants to transfer sov to someone else, they can just offline the TCU, right? Sovereignty structures don't require fuels, but they do require ISK for upkeep costs. Fail to pay these costs and you'll lose all sovereignty at the next downtime. (see: GoonSwarm)




Izuru Hishido
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2011.04.25 20:45:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Derrick Lang

TL:DR
Sov mechanics gunk up the game. Instead of worrying about pushing the enemy out of the systems I want, I instead must worry about when xyz timer is up to go shoot it some more. War should be about hunting my enemy not blowing up his ihub. Once the enemy is pushed out I can capture his infrastructure and put it to my use.


ITT: Whining about getting ganked by a larger alliance.

/thread

Merdaneth
Amarr
Defensores Fidei
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2011.04.26 00:05:00 - [15]
 

Sov mechanics are dumb, have been for a long time. CCP, while understand the fundamental problem, hasn't found a solution yet, or doesn't have the guts to totally change the current sov landscape with a solution (since that would be required).

Sov wars are largely an exercise in trying to grief the other players out of the game/war by boring them to tears. I haven't met anyone who actually likes shooting at stationary and non-responsive structures with millions of hp. They like seeing them blow up, but shooting them, nah, not so much.

I simply couldn't believe that CCP replaced millions of EHP POSses with millions of EHP worth of other structures. And then put a completely artificial system that totally reeks of uber-meta gaming: structures to grant or 'jam' sov, invulnerable structures with timers that make them vulnerable at specific times, I don't know what SF shows or stories CCP has been watching, but the sov war mechanism is absolutely uninspiring for a game that tries to be the 'the greatest and most complete SF simulator'.

zxsteel
Gallente
Darkness Of Absolution
Posted - 2011.04.26 00:34:00 - [16]
 

Your right want 0.0 to be changed? then move npc 0.0 all of nulla. take time to look at it.

gonesideways
Posted - 2011.04.26 03:50:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Merdaneth
Sov mechanics are dumb, have been for a long time. CCP, while understand the fundamental problem, hasn't found a solution yet, or doesn't have the guts to totally change the current sov landscape with a solution (since that would be required).

Sov wars are largely an exercise in trying to grief the other players out of the game/war by boring them to tears. I haven't met anyone who actually likes shooting at stationary and non-responsive structures with millions of hp. They like seeing them blow up, but shooting them, nah, not so much.

I simply couldn't believe that CCP replaced millions of EHP POSses with millions of EHP worth of other structures. And then put a completely artificial system that totally reeks of uber-meta gaming: structures to grant or 'jam' sov, invulnerable structures with timers that make them vulnerable at specific times, I don't know what SF shows or stories CCP has been watching, but the sov war mechanism is absolutely uninspiring for a game that tries to be the 'the greatest and most complete SF simulator'.


Pretty much

Not only are they kinda dumb, but sov mechanics are bugged- and officially bugged at that. I am fairly certain there are lurkers and posters alike that recall not too long ago when a system dropped sov when it wasn't suppoed to, etc...

Dont say it too loud...but those that enjoy sov wars...are carebears for the most part...

The fix? Wish I knew, but I'm all for anyone that is up for ending the 'shoot-rep-shoot-rep' sov cycle- speaking only for me it is more boring than I ever considered space to possibly be.


Target Painter
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.04.26 06:31:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: zxsteel
Your right want 0.0 to be changed? then move npc 0.0 all of nulla. take time to look at it.


Large tracts of NPC 0.0 are completely abandoned.

Vincent Athena
Posted - 2011.04.26 22:35:00 - [19]
 

I thought sov was needed to build supercaps. With no Sov mechanic... how is it decided if you have rights to build a SC? Also is not sov needed for system upgrades?

Ive been thinking about the incursion "system influence" thing, and wondering if a version of that could be used to determine sov.

mistack
Caldari
Legio Prima Victrix
Imperius Legio Victrix
Posted - 2011.04.27 11:11:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Target Painter
Originally by: Derrick Lang
The current Sov Mechanics make the game clunky.


It would be awesome if there was some stretch of space where there was no sov warfare.


Yes, wouldn't it be awesome if you could live in WH-space and not care about sov; I wish CCP would work on that...

Concubinia Scarlett
Posted - 2011.04.27 14:29:00 - [21]
 

Originally by: Derrick Lang
TL:DR
Sov mechanics gunk up the game. Instead of worrying about pushing the enemy out of the systems I want, I instead must worry about when xyz timer is up to go shoot it some more. War should be about hunting my enemy not blowing up his ihub. Once the enemy is pushed out I can capture his infrastructure and put it to my use.


So are you propositioning that all timers should go?

Should it be the case, for instance, that the EU timezone alliance can muster a huge fleet and go blow up all of an US alliances multi billion assets in any given system while most of them are still at work with no way to defend it?

Wouldn't it just be the case that a 1000+ strong NC fleet would steamroller through multiple systems for a few hours every day, destroying all the towers, scooping all the mods and killing all the infrastructure? With no timers to wait out it would be very easy to clear a large amount of systems every day.

If you are proposing have to clear players from a system what about people sat cloaked or docked?

I think timers are a necessary, if irritating game mechanic, as much as people (myself included) dislike them in practise.

Battleship Bob
Posted - 2011.04.27 18:10:00 - [22]
 

I say we drop the idea of Sov all together. Why does Sov even need to exist? It's 0.0 space, let ppl build whatever they want wherever they want. If someone else blows it up, then thats just how the cookie crumbles. And you wouldn't get rid of timers, just the sov mechanic. So no more TCU's or Ihubs. Make a module than can be deployed similar to a tower that takes fuel and other mats, that does the same things as the upgrades. So if you drop a wormhole generator and it gets blowed up, then too bad.

Why does it need to be
YZ-LQL
0.0
Goonswarm Federation
?

Why cant it just be
YZ-LQL
0.0
?

Miss Rabblt
Posted - 2011.04.28 08:51:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Battleship Bob
I say we drop the idea of Sov all together. Why does Sov even need to exist? It's 0.0 space, let ppl build whatever they want wherever they want.

why do you need name of your account? And even picture? Let's all players just play with standard name "Player123" and without icon! What? You say names and icons adds some niceness to the game? Well. Sovereignty gives some strategic part to the game. And i really don't understand why people want "Walking in Station" and removing learning skills and sov from the game. You want to improve game of simplify, make it more interesting or easier?

Judicator Saturnius
Amarr
Viziam
Posted - 2011.04.28 16:28:00 - [24]
 

Edited by: Judicator Saturnius on 28/04/2011 16:38:03
I'd go back to pre-dominion. Cool

Ed: If I could also have all the free time I had back then too. ugh

Milla Jovobitch
Posted - 2011.04.28 19:16:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Derrick Lang
Those strong enough to hold the system declare to the galaxy that this system is ours not by right of some timer, but by the might of our lasers.


Minmatar, Gallente, and Caldari, those poor suckers, would lose such battle right away, for their ships have no bonuses for lazors.

Your rules suck bass.

Mfume Apocal
Minmatar
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2011.04.29 19:09:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: Derrick Lang
Why oh why do we need sov mechanics? Is it not enough for an alliance to hold a system by the might of its' fleets? Imagine no more timers! Those strong enough to hold the system declare to the galaxy that this system is ours not by right of some timer, but by the might of our lasers.


lol

It wouldn't play out like that. It'd be "those with enough NAPs in place to have complete TZ coverage hold 90% of sov in EVE."

Quote:
When I am no longer strong enough to keep my enemies at bay then this will no longer be my system.


More like when you go to sleep. ****ing timezones, how do they work?!


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only