The very best of discussions are those where both sides have valid points, and this is one of those discussions. Both the yeasayers and the naysayers arguments have some merit. To start with the Fozzie naysayers, their point about Sov structures being too easy to troll is partially a valid one. Fitting an entosis link to a small ship is really easy. A single interceptor with no real intention of fighting if an opposition would actually appear, can create defensive work for the alliance holding the sov structure in question. Without going into the whole process, it takes xx minutes to reinforce the structure depending on the Activity Defense Multiplier (ADM) of the target system.Check out this calculator for the exact amount of time. Command Nodes will spawn around 48 hours later. To complete the event, one side needs to successfully capture 10 command nodes. The defender will always spend 10 minutes(if uninterrupted) pr node while the attacker spends time according to the above mentioned ADM index of the system. For all of those familiar with the system, apologies for repeating stuff you already know. But I wanted to highlight that trolls creating command node capture events in reality only creates 10 instances of 10 minutes work for the defender. If no-one show up to contest the command nodes the defender need 10 people running entosis links for 10 minutes each. So the same interceptor fit that was used to troll the system can be used by the same 10 people who has to defend it. One trolling attempt created maybe 20 minutes of activity for the sov holder. Is that too much for them to handle? Spending 10-20 minutes, including form-up, to counter a troll attempt really isn’t a whole lot of work. For the attackers it will be much longer, especially if the system is used and ADM is high. The table below show the numbers I am talking about.
Yeasayers have a tendency to focus on the argument that Fozzie Sov allows smaller alliances entrance into sov holding. And this is true. Its equally true that a larger alliance can take that away from them quite easily. The latter part is used as a counter argument by naysayers, who point to this fact as a proof of Fozzie Sov being bad. Nowhere is it mentioned in the devblogs that any small alliance who wanted a couple of systems of their own would be guaranteed to hold them easily under a new sovereignty system. So yeasayers and naysayers are too narrow minded in their approach to this argument. A smaller alliance would have to secure some friends in order to hold sov or they have to grow into a larger alliance really really fast. But since Fozzie Sov encourages and rewards players to live in their space, a small alliance can approach a larger one and offer to hold a couple of systems in exchange for running nodes and take away some of the maintenance work for the larger alliance. So a combination of diplomatic and military activity can secure a new nullsec home for an alliance with relatively new EVE players.
I must admit that to a certain degree I have stopped reading all the long threads on reddit and elsewhere filled with whining about how bad/good Fozzie Sov is. Both sides are so entrenched in their own arguments they fail to lift their heads and look at how to solve this new puzzle presented to us by CCP. This new system requires some new strategies and tactics. The defending and attacking FC’s have to plan for how to hold the constellation. That means looking at the geography of the area and plan accordingly. Expanding the use of local geography in EVE is a great addition to the game. It's always been a side of conflict that has more or less been missing from the game. What's the entrance points to the area? Which system within the constellation offers the best chance to pin and hold down the opposing force? If multiple systems located far away from each other are reinforced, which systems are most important to defend and concentrate own forces in? Those are questions a FC or team of FC’s have to ask themselves. In addition to the old questions of opposition numbers, ship strengths, whatever meta is active in the game, etc.
I always thought of EVE FC’s being akin to Generals and commanders from the period before World War I. They would command the forces tactically on the battlefield and orchestrate all their forces.The FC calls primary and all the forces would focus in on that ship, before moving on the next and so forth and so on. The quality of the commander was a huge factor in deciding the outcome of a battle. So it has been in EVE. But spread a contested system across a constellation and the fleet requires more commanders who can respond to the situation on that specific part of the overall battlefield. If the FC is in system X and combat starts in system Y, one side will probably lose or sustain heavy losses if they have to wait until the FC can make his or her way over. A FC can ofc use alts to be everywhere, but can most likely only handle 1 combat situation. Not going to go too deeply into real world analogies, but WW II was different to previous large conflicts in that junior officers were given a strategic objective. Then they had to make tactical decisions based on their judgements while engaged in combat. With Fozzie sov I see more of this coming to EVE, and it should make the game even more interesting.
Spending the required time to win a command node cannot be considered too long and it’s shorter and better than the structure grind/repair of Dominion Sov. The monotony level is approximately the same. Before it was truly a N+1 game where you could throw huge amounts of capitals/supers at a structure and finish it in no-time. Thats IF you had those capitals and the ability to defend them against a possible counter-drop. New mechanics given by CCP requires new ways of handling conflict, with different strategies and tactics. Once we get past this transition period I honestly believe that the game will have been enrichened by the change and provide more opportunity for fun than Dominion.