It’s sorely tempting to dress this post’s intro up with a lot of flowery language and because of that temptation, I’m not going to. I’m going to lay it out straight. It’s about sov. But as I sometimes do, I am going to trot out an old-fashioned “theme” statement:
The worst mistake CCP could make when they eventually iterate on sovereignty again would be to implement a “bottoms up” income system without a corresponding “bottoms up” sovereignty system at the same time.
What do I mean by that? Before I get into that, I’d like to take us all back three years for a moment, to the Dominion expansion. This expansion was trumpeted by CCP as the most major change in the way sov would work pretty much since the game was launched ten years ago. Every single mechanic in the way sov was captured and managed was changed; nothing was left as it was. Remember: Every. Single. Little. Thing was changed. And the changes were so revolutionary, so ground-breaking, that a month or so before Dominion was released, the sov map looked like this:
And a month after Dominion was released — the most revolutionary change to the sov system in the history of EVE Online — the sov map looked like this:
I swear those are real pictures and I swear I am not making this up. It’s OK. No need to feel bad: you can laugh. Go ahead. I’ll wait.
Why did Dominion effect so little change on the EVE landscape? Mostly, it comes down to inertia. A lot of people belonging to a lot of sov alliances were already living in and around the systems that they held prior to the Dominion drop. These people were therefore already in the best position in terms of logistics to drop the hundreds of Territory Claim Units that would be needed to claim sov under the new system. These people already had ships in stations and already had the processes in place to stand guard as this was done. But just as important, these alliances already had both enormous financial backing to make all of the needed purchases and the motivation needed to make sure that as little as possible changed after Dominion dropped.
And that leads to the third reason why there was so little change after Dominion: the system prior to Dominion, that of logistics and POSes and a structured, organized top-down approach lent itself well to Dominion’s structured, organized, top-down approach. The cost of sov wasn’t based on how many members an alliance had but how much ISK they had and those ISK sources were very much fed from the top down, primarily moons of course, but also supplemented by a lot of very rich EVE players. How those EVE players stayed and remained rich, particularly in the east, I leave as an exercise for the student.
But the net result was clear: since income was top down, sovereignty continued to be top down and as a result, almost nothing on the map changed when Dominion dropped. I’ve been playing this game long enough that I remember how revolutionary and ground-breaking and game-changing CCP promised Dominion would be. The reality? Not so much.
The Truman Show is a movie about a man who is born, raised, and is living in an artificial town-sized bubble as the unknowing star of a reality TV show. The town is a massive TV set. All the people around him are actors. He is not allowed to leave the bubble. So when as a child he proclaims he wants to be an explorer, his (actress) social studies teacher is quick to point out that he’s too late, it’s all been explored and mapped out already. The subtext: there’s obviously no reason to leave the bubble.
That late 2009 snapshot of sov was only that: a snapshot. Soon after, a lot of changes began impacting the sovereignty map that happened despite Dominion rather than because of it. A lot of people were pushed out of sov in 2010. I was only one of them, pushed out of Scalding Pass by the Red Alliance invasion of the region. Those of us in that situation were joined by thousands of new EVE players with the Incursion expansion, also released in 2010. By mid-2011, a lot of us were looking outward at sov again but by that time were essentially being told that it had all been explored and claimed by others. So a lot of people decided that there was no reason to leave the bubble.
Now CCP has just started to hint that they’d like to look at this again, and a lot of players are giving their opinions of it, myself among them. The problem is that where the discussion seems to be going is in the direction of bottoms up income without linking this to bottoms up sovereignty. In short, a lot of the various proposals and discussions revolve around removing moon-goo and forcing alliances to make their ISK through the active ship-flying activities of their members. And I’m all for this. And the big sov coalitions are as well. And I’m sure CCP likes it because it would be easy to implement. Whatever system they put in place for players generating alliance income through taxes or whatever, few or no fundamental changes to the game’s mechanics will be needed.
But the net result is going to be that nothing is going to change in null-sec sovereignty. A couple of months after such changes were implemented, the sov map would change not at all. The sov coalitions would enjoy massive incomes coming out of their thousands of members, renters, and pets, and would use this to pay their TCU-based sov bills and that would really be that. No wonder the big sov coalitions like it: hell, it makes their jobs easier!
In my opinion, bottoms up income is a nice start. But it’s only a start. It has to be linked to bottoms up sovereignty as well. I’ve written about this before, as sov by occupation. To hold sov, the sov owner should have to be active in the systems that they hold, by living in the station there, by mining, by running sites, or through some other mechanic. At the end of the day, I don’t much care what that mechanic is (though I’ve suggested one possibility). And bottoms up sov is not going to be easy for anyone: not for people holding sov, and not for CCP. But if change is going to come to sovereignty, in my opinion, this is going to be the only way to do it: get your players to solve the problem for you.
But this post has gone on long enough, so I’ll write about that in a day or two.
Send us Intel/Corrections via dropbox or shoot us an e-mail
If you would like to read more we invite you to visit his blog here.
Bottoms up!
Have you thought it through, if we have the new POS system people can setup in those systems that are not worth much to big alliances, most of which now have a TCU and IHUB in, because they can. So having an IHUB benefits the squatters, so what happens is that the holding alliance turns off the IHUB making the system more vulnerable. They have a choice, keep feeding the squatters or make their system easier to take. To further push this choice all CCP has to do is set up a new sov module called a Squatters IHUB interface which allows them to upgrade the Sov IHUB by hacking, perhaps have one that acts like an IHUB but only to a limited degree, perhaps up to level 3 military and mining, this will change the way that major Sov owners hold sov.
Or just remove the squatters… maybe?
That means that they actually look after their space with boots on the ground…
This entire article is meaningless. The only difference Ripard proposes is that the sov system distinguish between sovholder activity and renter/pet activity. Ergo, the only result will be forcing renter/pets to be in the same alliance as the sovholders, even though they will still known to be lesser citizens. A purely semantic dishonesty. Possibly facing this dishonesty will result in a few renters/pets being actually in the alliance and not thought of as strict renters/pets, but they'll still be regarded as lesser class citizens of the alliance–truth is truth. As the CSM was originally formed to combat dishonesty in nullsec between CCP and the players, it's disturbing to see a CSM candidate advocating instituitionalized dishonesty in the form of this proposal. We deserve real changes, to balance out the military and economic realities of nullsec, not mere semantic disguises.
you may have missed the point, huge tracks of sov held 0.0 are completely empty, except for maybe pos moon mining, sov being held by player activity sounds like a reasonable idea
Want a steak to your whine?! Another mimimi article that does no impact except of the shit storm that follows. Aren't you guys tired from writing shit?
Why should they remove moon goo? Aren't we playing a game about space and spaceships? Moons are a good source to become certain ressources, not only in EVE. It's the same thing in reality too. They should add the possibility of depleting ressources on moons. This would have a impact sooner or later.
Go and play WoW if EVE's nothing for you.
The current Sov system would work OK if we had meaningful, small gang objectives. Can we take SOV through concerted, small gang effort? Possibilities include breaking the I-hub and other SDOV infrastructure into many smaller, destroyable units.
The pre-dominion sov system had that in some sense with POS's.
Terrible article. Ripard makes no reference to quality of space. Why would a ratter use a -0.3 system, when one constellation over there is a -0.7 system? He probably roams into the -0.3 system and states "null sec is empty" and writes this article. How about there being no ice miners in a system with no ice belts etc? System with no outpost/station? I wouldn't be surprised if Ripard is roamed FA space, found it empty atm, assumed that therefore they don't use it. Doesn't matter that they are on deployment.
Null sec is pretty empty. I am sure from your comments you travel through it on a regular basis.
Spoken like some one who never lives in null sec. There are empty systems that suck and no on goes there unless they tend to a POS. Then there are good systems, systems with stations or good true sec or good belts or gas clouds and so on, people go to those systems. Lumping them all together as Ripard has and saying that because no one lives in or uses the bad systems, therefore null sec is broken etc is just ignorant.
No, he's absolutely right in saying so because it's totally aweful that there's so much space out there never used but in hand of big alliances not allowing smaller entities to grow fat. Politically i fully understand why alliances work like this. But on the other hand it's an issue that causes absolutely empty space. Empty space shouldn't be defended this easy like it's today possible.
But i guess you're both correct. At the moment it's not only an issue because it's easy to pay and defend systems, but also the sec status works in a contraproductive way. There are way better systems out there in every region to handle a few dozens carebaers at the same time. Why then ratting in systems that are to crap for good income?!
The idea with the farms and fields is a nice idea to solve a lot of current problems. It integrates the issue with sec status as a feature to get systems free for everyone which are worthless for the current sov holder.
Um because the major alliances would grab true sec more….This would make T2 Alli`s be able to grab less sec if they worked it, in exchange larger Alli`s would let them live…Almsot like rent.
There should not be SOV bills as Null Sec would never be regulated by CONCORD
I'm going to ignore mining because I know nothing about it. Anyway, as far as ratting goes system is viable so long as it's upgradable to the point where it spawns 2 or more forsaken hubs. I'm not sure what the exact number is but I think it only needs to be -0.3 to do this.
Those would be some interesting orders coming down from directors: "We need people to go sit in system blah now!" Lot's of AFK cloakers in a system to mark it as active maybe?
Should make it require sites to be run, ore mined, rats killed, that kind of thing.
USE the space, not just OCCUPY it, then Sov would be effective.
Totally agree.
"Why should they remove moon goo?"
Because it is reinforcing a stagnent, stale blue doughnut.
Mittani the biggest TECH holder has all but admitted that he's not going to war now due to fear of losing TECH moon holdings so what does TEST do? Create a NOTECK cartel which will further put the blue doughnut into reinforce!
CCP's pushing the ring mining back further & further is worsening the situation IMHO
Change the sov system so whoever uses the space (ie. rats and mines in it) holds sovereignty. Problem solved.
The map would change because alliances like Goonswarm don't have the active members to USE the space they own. TEST's space is occupied mainly by renters, same for SOLAR, same for most of the alliance in the game.
An alliance only needs a constellation or two to maintain itself, a region tops if your a large, active alliance. The rest of hte space is rented out to carebears. If sov shifted to whoever USED the space, renting would end, and the sov map would change, because the alliances that own 5 regions often don't have the active numbers to USE 5 regions.
Also, requiring people to USE their space would spur on small gang PVP, targets would be in space, ripe for killing, people would HAVE to undock and fight off the gang, because otherwise they would risk losing their system.
that would be pretty dumb to make people who use the Space own the Space, think about alliances like CVA, and it would be a hellofa mess.
Isn’t that what you effectively do if you bottom-it-up though?
I realize that you guys are barking about tying the actualy nametag-sov into use as well. However, a bottom-up economy tie the true usage of space into use.
This whole “it will give small gang targets” is not just semantics or targets on paper. Provided that ship-ship economy is fixed as well (so everyone don’t fly ships they can replace by merely looking agressively at a rat for two seconds), then those targets in space are not only theoretical targets – they are also practical targets. They will enable you to hurt someone by killing their ships again.
This is also why i have been shifting more and more to comment on the ship-ship economy lately. It’s always been important to me, but lately i’ve come to realize that ship-ship economy is A, bottom-up economy is B and whatever mechanical changes come to the act of placing your name on sov is C.
That’s also where i guess i agree with the sentiment of this article. A bottom-up income (creation) approach is pointless as long as design direction head in a direction of top-down expenses (destruction).
All i’m saying is that you shouldn’t underestimate the impact of A+B provided it is implemented with at least an ounce of balance inbetween them.
Think about what the often jested “KB ratio” actually is. The term may not solely be used to describe it’s roots, but: at it’s root it’s your ability to maximize destruction while minimizing necessity creation. If destroying ships and not losing ships become important again, then so will whatever “elite PvP KB ratio” you maintain as well.
If you can impact someone by killing their ships where destruction is then twofold, both destruction and lost opportunity that also translate into lost control and you will see larger entities crumble if they are unable to control their own space through active use of space (bottom-up creation and destruction).
Makes sense?
Killing a pilot’s PvP ship will put him one step closer to a piloting a PvE ship. Killing a pilot’s PvE ship will disable his ability to recouperate into a PvP ship and naturally force pilots on the defensive. This of course is only true if losing a PvP ship mean you have to PvE for some time to recouperate similarly to losing a PvE ship. The problem today is that we have bolstered so many ships with little to no pricetag that at least the dedicated PvP ships are usually replacable with little to no PvE effort. Part of that issue is Moons, but even more part of it is rampant bolstering of smaller tech I hulls and insurance.
That’s why it’s odd to see so many “small gang PvPers” hail and cheer on the changes that keep marginalizing them. Yay Cruiser-buff! BC changes! Without realizing that per “Noisrevbus law” those very changes is what make you unable to compete with a larger sovholding entity.
I forgot to add the most important bit, my conclusion of sorts.
A+B is not pointless without C, which is what seem to be Ripard's contention.
We disagree there, even if we agree that B is pointless on it's own. He's just not identifying A as an issue.
The issue that is most important to me: that ship destruction is far more imbalanced than creation atm.
The powerbase of all current coalitions is not in moons, prexisting individual wealth or skillpoints: it's in numbers and the ability to resupply those numbers with little effort.
That's the vicious circle as meaningless destruction feed numbers, which feed meaningless destruction, that feed numbers… you get the picture.
It has nothing to do with "new players" it has to do with complacent and conceited players. The spoonfed generation that exist at all scales and in all levels of EVE. The ideal is present in many coalition powerbases but it's also present among many small-gang roaming groups throughout the game today as well.
In case that last bit didn't sink in:
That means that anyone who barks at the coalitions while flying ships like Cruisers, BC3, BC2 and Frigates based on the favourable economic situation of those classes are also part of the problem. Hence they have no right to complain about coalitions, because they don't play bottom-up they play bottomed-out – same as the coalitions.
PI is only slightly broken. But it's our own fault for letting Cfc sit on all the tech moons all this time. The truth is the north where almost all the tech moons are, should be an active war zone over the resources. But Cfc has been able to prevent this.
i think everyone agrees moons have done nothing but fuck this game up. Never should income be passive in any mmo, and moons are pretty much passive income that also has large market control as well. True sov should be represented by the motto eve is real. Therefore everything in space should hold value……… ring mining would be a step in the right direction…..
Also make station destructible. If you want to go there you have to deseve it
This would be amazing….Imagine how much suffering we could inflict on enemies.
OMG I want it badly.
easiest way to fix sov nerf moon goo into the ground double the universe size make sov bill conditional on the system quality more for better systems etc etc. this means that coalitions will have less money and higher sov bills so they hold less space. it also mean that there is more space to hold for smaller alliances looking to get into null sec i also agree i think that an alliances isk income should come from it's player base's willingness to make the coalition isk not from moons which means that the coalition will have to treat it's player base better and more numbers mean more isk this also makes it easier for noobs to get into null because of isk strapped alliances looking for isk
Question remains, why an unstable Element like Technetium, which is mostly a radioactive waste by-product and can only be found in rare/trace amounts in nature, is so important in Eve. Its radioactive nature makes its good catalyst properties expendable.
If u want to change things' make better fights and have funthis is what u do. You make the tec moons deplete and respawn in another system far away every say 3 months. this would let the little guys get some isk to, The big alliances would panic! that would be fun for sure
make sov bills get cheaper when systems are used more.
here is how it could work.
if sov for system A costs 10 bil isk per month base rate.
ratters kill 1000 npc per day = 1% reduction in sov costs for system A – sov bill is now 9.9 bil isk for the month
ratters kill 2000 npc per day = 2% reduction in sov costs for system A – sov bil is now 9.8 bil isk for the month
ratters kill 10000 npc per day = 10% reduction in sov costs for system A – sov bill is now 9 bil isk for the month
also to add further reductions in sov costs miners can do their bit
miners mine 1,000,000m2 ore per day = 2% reduction in sov costs – sov bil for the month is 9.8 bil isk
miners mine 2,000,000m2 ore per day = 4% reduction in sov costs – sov bil for the month is 9.6 bil isk
miners mine 10,000,000m2 ore per day = 20% reduction in sov costs – sov bil for the month is 8 bil isk
now combine both activites to gain even more sov cost reductions
ratters kill 10,000 npc each day and miners mine 10,000,000m3 ore per day = sov cost reduction of 30% – sov bil for the month is 7 bil isk
Make systems have to be used, remove jump bridges.
This is incompatable with NRDS.
Before you go shouting *NRDS is lame*: Its a playstyle and the people that practise the playstyle would like for it to stay intact tyvm.