Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
ImYourMom
Republic University Minmatar Republic
24
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 13:22:00 -
[121] - Quote
Hasikan Miallok wrote:SOV fights get free publicity of the "Biggest Space Battle in History" type and a rush of new subscribers.
This presumably is seen as a good thing.
Errr yeah and then they say how bad things are and they leave.
|
ImYourMom
Republic University Minmatar Republic
24
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 13:29:00 -
[122] - Quote
Beekeeper Bob wrote:ImYourMom wrote:http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Northern_Associates. http://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Greater_Western_Co-Prosperity_Spherehttp://evemaps.dotlan.net/alliance/Darkness._CitizensAll these are rental, nearly 17 regions and god knows how many systems abut 600+. and thats not all of them. So is it just me seeing something fundamentally wrong here? this is why we need multiple worlds jus tlike every other MMO or make some fundamental changes that stop this . Becuase alliances like this just control everything, and always will, and most of all this surely isnt what eve was supposed to be about was it? personally i would like all nullsec to be npc or sov costs need to go up massively. Don't like how it is? Can't be bothered to do anything about it yourself? I heard "Fix it for me, I don't want to actually work to have sov..." Oh and no comprende "sandbox"?
this isnt rreally helpful is it? Why do people keep coming back with this silly comment.
Most eve players in new coalitions and alliances are just the same people in old coaltiions. Also can you tell me where suddenly where someone can get 500 supers and 300 titans from please? Magic? I know ill just make it out of thin air shall we? You know it takes many years to do that right? You know that the best pvp alliances in eve just tried and lost right? PL/NC./N3? You know those guys that have elite players and hundreds of titans and supers. You know they just lost right? SO WHERE THE HELL DO YOU THINK CREATING SOMETHING NEW OR TRYING IT OURSELVES IS GOING TO BE BETTER?
|
Soltys
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 13:36:00 -
[123] - Quote
You're wasting your time on them , IZ.
Though I'd say that mails that you mentioned here are the least of a problem here.
Utter anti-sandbox ******** ideas like:
- many ways to almost instantly teleport anywhere - reinforce timers going into days long values (inc. dual phases for outposts and ihubs) - structures having stupid amount of defenses available (hp, shield, regen, and so on) - the whole sov mechanics being some drunken-insane dreamt out nonsense from a perspective of a sandbox game
Everything is de-facto indestructible and fought always at prescribed hour with defenders dictating rules at close to 0 effort. This is essentially [random mmo] battleground zerg vs zerg at hour X.
It's not that people wouldn't want to move and bite back. It's that it's utterely pointless - no matter how well prepared, secret and cunning some smaller group of players would be. Starting with "concept" of taking a pos which can go into 40ish hours of reinforce bullshit and ending on dual-mutliday-reinforce bullshit ihubs and outposts.
TBH, if EvE's development started a few years later, there's high chance that assinine idea like "reinforce timer" would be put on anything battleship and larger.
The worst thing is that this "concept" has been repeated for so many years it's taken for granted. People literally feel they are automagically entitled to be able to always defend something and preferable not be able to lose anything.
Instead of thinking about mechanics that would support proper sandbox - e.g. POS module that creates large pod-like mechanics taking valuables to destined station or bookmark during emergency (e.g. 50% structure left).
Sadly, CCP doesn't give a damn about making any part of nullsec lose-able for current holders. So any discussion or thread about it is essentially pointless. |
arabella blood
Revenant Tactical
194
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 13:49:00 -
[124] - Quote
The question is: what is so bad in renting? Without renting, those systems stay empty. With renting they are at least used. What do you care about the arrangments that allow the residents to survive? Why is it a big deal? Troll for hire. Cheap prices. |
Oxide Ammar
80
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 13:57:00 -
[125] - Quote
arabella blood wrote:The question is: what is so bad in renting? Without renting, those systems stay empty. With renting they are at least used. What do you care about the arrangments that allow the residents to survive? Why is it a big deal?
Passive income in 10 figures while you are sitting afk for next CTA is bad thing. |
Dave Stark
4548
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 13:58:00 -
[126] - Quote
Oxide Ammar wrote:arabella blood wrote:The question is: what is so bad in renting? Without renting, those systems stay empty. With renting they are at least used. What do you care about the arrangments that allow the residents to survive? Why is it a big deal? Passive income in 10 figures while you are sitting afk for next CTA is bad thing.
so don't join **** tier alliances that have CTAs, and don't be afk. not difficult. |
arabella blood
Revenant Tactical
194
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 14:23:00 -
[127] - Quote
Oxide Ammar wrote:arabella blood wrote:The question is: what is so bad in renting? Without renting, those systems stay empty. With renting they are at least used. What do you care about the arrangments that allow the residents to survive? Why is it a big deal? Passive income in 10 figures while you are sitting afk for next CTA is bad thing.
U mad because someone reacher than you? Kodus to them i say. I dont find anything bad in that. And it sure beats empty systems. You want them empty? Troll for hire. Cheap prices. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1906
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 14:39:00 -
[128] - Quote
Prince Kobol wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:Dave Stark wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:You're inability to consider the health of the game and your denial of the broken system which allows you to keep sov without effort is laughable. but the forest is full of trolls! Indeed. Bad Messenger wrote:it is just one phase on evolving sandbox.
What comes next? is the question. When there's only one way to take and keep sov, timers, turning up at x time... that's called themepark. Its the only ride in town. As opposed to infiltrating the the corp which owns those structures, taking control and leaving the alliance or maybe bribing somebody who is that corp to leave and switch sides? Yes there is only one way to take sov.. Once again you show how little you know of Sov Mechanics and how little imagination you have. LMAO. So its not sandbox because there's another aweful mechanic that lets a single director disband the work of thousands of players who may have spent hundreds of thousands of man hours working for that particular thing. One bought account or in real life money bribe away from a disband is a feature huh.
You really think this terrible unfixed mechanic is an alternative to the themepark sov war bs :)
That's hilarious. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Arthur Aihaken
Arsenite
3131
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 16:25:00 -
[129] - Quote
The solution is to just stop renting. It's not like these alliances can police all this space anyway... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
CERA Elitist
The Prometheus Society
15
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 17:34:00 -
[130] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Tauranon wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote: Stop calling it a sandbox when its obviously not given there is only one way to win and lose sov. One way. Not two, not three. ONE themepark way and that's to turn up at x time to face up to 37,000 player coaltions.
And that was as I already showed, created by an EvE PLAYER, turned dev, turn back to EvE player.
No, the way to win Sov is to ensure that 37,000 character alliances have pressing reasons to NOT turn up to contest your timers. ie guns. politics. spies. opportunism. etc. That's horsecrap. 37,000 people is more than the populations of the smallest 30 countries in the world. There is literally nothing you can do as a normal EVE player, corporation or alliance against that many people but to pay to rent, try join the coalition or go to npc space and give up on the major element of the game which is sov. There are more people in CFC than active servicemen in my countries defence force. That's the reason there is one huge blue blur in the map I posted above. Look at how rediculous this is - whats CCP's plan - nothing. Eh. Fallacious argument.
|
|
RRNL
Silver Snake Enterprise
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 17:44:00 -
[131] - Quote
The Technetium mistke lead to the power increase of just a hand full of allainces, now its broken due to that. |
Jenn aSide
STK Scientific Initiative Mercenaries
5127
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 17:50:00 -
[132] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote: LMAO. So its not sandbox because there's another aweful mechanic that lets a single director disband the work of thousands of players who may have spent hundreds of thousands of man hours working for that particular thing. One bought account or in real life money bribe away from a disband is a feature huh.
You really think this terrible unfixed mechanic is an alternative to the themepark sov war bs :)
That's hilarious.
What's really hilarious is you looking down on one guy being able to disband an alliance when you constantly talked about how one guy (YOU) should have been able to destroy sov structures if you wanted to (despite the thousands of man hour people had to put in to take sov so they could plant thos structures in the 1st place).
You problem as usual is that you can't see the big picture and don't understand that the world does not just exist for you. You are a solo player who plays in the least active timezone, SOV null (like high end wormhole space) is group space. People like you have high sec, low sec, low end wormholes and npc null (with it's npc stations and resources that cannot be permanently denied to any player, unlike sov null) to play around in, yet that's not enough, you must also have SOV null in your pocket too.
In other words, you aren't supposed to be able to affect the coaltions in a major way unless you recruit your own coaltion (or are a brilliant spy). You'd understand this is your perspective weren't so narrow and self serving. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1517
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:08:00 -
[133] - Quote
RRNL wrote:The Technetium mistke lead to the power increase of just a hand full of allainces, now its broken due to that.
The tech change wasn't meant to fix the root problems, it was designed to give the established powers something to do. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Onictus
Silver Snake Enterprise Fatal Ascension
873
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 18:27:00 -
[134] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:RRNL wrote:The Technetium mistke lead to the power increase of just a hand full of allainces, now its broken due to that. The tech change wasn't meant to fix the root problems, it was designed to give the established powers something to do.
The tech bungle started as a method of conflict driving.....except the players outsmarted CCP (like always) and basically locked everyone else out.
Renting isn't new, that was how the southern alliances (with little to no tech) got by for years and years. |
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
343
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 21:53:00 -
[135] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:What's really hilarious is you looking down on one guy being able to disband an alliance when you constantly talked about how one guy (YOU) should have been able to destroy sov structures if you wanted to (despite the thousands of man hour people had to put in to take sov so they could plant thos structures in the 1st place). You are being unfair. He doesn't want to destroy sov structures solo. That would be silly. He wants to be able to destroy thousands of man-hours of work with a small corp of say 20-30 guys. Geez! Total difference....
|
Red Teufel
Conflagrated Authority
357
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 23:12:00 -
[136] - Quote
The main problem with SoV is that there is no insentive for people who do not live there to go there to make isk. You can do exploration but everyone is in a cloaky ship. |
Medalyn Isis
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
79
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 00:23:00 -
[137] - Quote
I think the point which a lot of people are missing, is that it should be easier for a small upcoming alliance to be able to claim at least some small undefended part of sov nullsec.
Just like in real life, if you spread your forces too thinly, there is some strategic disadvantage to that. Current eve mechanics mean that there is no such disadvantage in spreading themselves over the whole of sov null sec, hence the blue doughnut. |
La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1725
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 00:29:00 -
[138] - Quote
Fix bottom up income, sov, and PVE to solve this problem.
E: And nerf highsec. This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Proof Highsec reward needs to be nerfed: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqC-BTui2uSGdDlxa2dWOG5ieHB0QXBVWW82bGN5TFE&usp=sharing |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
1519
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 01:18:00 -
[139] - Quote
La Nariz wrote:
E: And nerf highsec.
Broken record has spoken. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Baron Chauman
Gladiators of Rage Fidelas Constans
12
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 02:51:00 -
[140] - Quote
Red Teufel wrote:The main problem with SoV is that there is no insentive for people who do not live there to go there to make isk. You can do exploration but everyone is in a cloaky ship.
Tell that to the two guys who've been ratting in our sov for months. They seem happy with it, since they keep coming back even if we shoot them sometimes. |
|
La Nariz
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1728
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 03:25:00 -
[141] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:La Nariz wrote:
E: And nerf highsec.
Broken record has spoken.
Go back to whining in the refining thread :smug: This post was loving crafted by a member of the Official GoonWaffe recruitment team. Proof Highsec reward needs to be nerfed: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqC-BTui2uSGdDlxa2dWOG5ieHB0QXBVWW82bGN5TFE&usp=sharing |
Klymer
Hedion University Amarr Empire
510
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 04:42:00 -
[142] - Quote
Why do something yourself, when you can pay someone else to do it for you?
Oh wait, 99% of you are poor...
|
Oxide Ammar
80
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 05:30:00 -
[143] - Quote
If CCP overhauled the SOV, one of the reasons to rework it is to intentionally kill renting. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1909
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 06:36:00 -
[144] - Quote
Oxide Ammar wrote:If CCP overhauled the SOV, one of the reasons to rework it is to intentionally kill renting. CCP have gone from a decent development team with a decent game to an incompetent development team with a broken game they obviously have no real intention of trying to fix.
They seem content to do nothing, fix nothing, deploy aweful new 'structures' and just suck up money from the playerbase. There is no one listening to what the players want. Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
864
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 06:52:00 -
[145] - Quote
the mobile depot alone was better for the solo player intent on farming the whole universe than anything since wormholes, t3s and "new" probing system that came with them (ie eves best expansion).
reduction of the value of moongoo (per tower) has lead to a significant increase in the accessibility of nullsec for carebears as it is now more desirable to work buffer lands than it is to keep it as empty buffer.
highsec now has a valid reason for formation of larger highsec entities (control of pocos).
ship balancing has made many more hulls viable.
ie I'd say the devs are running out of tuning opportunities, ie this isn't a strategy that can sustain EVE forever, but it was a very necessary phase.
|
March rabbit
Federal Defense Union
1388
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 07:13:00 -
[146] - Quote
arabella blood wrote:The question is: what is so bad in renting? Without renting, those systems stay empty. With renting they are at least used. What do you care about the arrangments that allow the residents to survive? Why is it a big deal? it is not bad by itself However in Eve Online people are supposed to do it other way: by taking it from owners. You just go and take what you want. Or you don't.
Renting makes 0.0 carebears who are not much different from high-sec ones. I know: i have been there as renter. The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
1909
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 07:27:00 -
[147] - Quote
Tauranon wrote:the mobile depot alone was better for the solo player intent on farming the whole universe than anything since wormholes, t3s and "new" probing system that came with them (ie eves best expansion).
reduction of the value of moongoo (per tower) has lead to a significant increase in the accessibility of nullsec for carebears as it is now more desirable to work buffer lands than it is to keep it as empty buffer.
highsec now has a valid reason for formation of larger highsec entities (control of pocos).
ship balancing has made many more hulls viable.
ie I'd say the devs are running out of tuning opportunities, ie this isn't a strategy that can sustain EVE forever, but it was a very necessary phase.
Mobile depots are okay but they're really just a bandaid to a bigger problem - the complete lack of a realistic player run nullsec. Null sec is basically stuck in the primordial cave man era where anyone out of your tribe gets beaten to death with clubs. Null sec is missing many of the more sophisticated elements that make up an advanced technological society. One of those things is a outsider based economy. Its also the reason there is no market in null.
Highsec poco's were immediately taken over by CFC, a coalition of players with a membership base of close to 40k players. High sec players are casual players, the poco's are not valuable enough for people to fight that many people over. I know, you know and the devs know that high seccers will never form a coalition to take back the pocos so the point you make is fallacious.
Ship balancing has made small ships overpowered to the extent that large ships are obsolete for day to day PvP. That's not balancing that's called imbalancing.
The main and most important things remain untouched. Sovereignty is a mess, cyno's are an epidemic, ganking is out of control, the market is a mess, POS are a mess, drone interface is still untouched... the list is huge and the list has things on there that are pending to be looked at since 2004 , 2005... soon is not good enough.
A "we have a 5 year plan" without details or actually delivering is rubbish and just a load of stalling to suck more money out of the playerbase while doing nothing.
Want to make billions a week solo running combat sites in null sec? -á Read my Exploratation Guide here -> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=309467 |
Tauranon
Weeesearch Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere
864
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 08:06:00 -
[148] - Quote
Last I looked RVB owned about 250 pocos, and mynnna said goons owned 26 pocos. Remind me how many highsec planets there are.
If you wanted to specialize an organization on the ownership of pocos, there is plenty of room to do so, and if instead of the terrible retail army overspend that gevlon managed, you had 500 bears that wanted those pocos (even though those pocos are valuable but really only symbolic), you could take them. Even if in reality its a complete furphy because if you were actually recruiting 500 bears you could do so by sitting at the CFC pocos and propositioning the users.
I can do PI in my system, because my system is as a happy happenstance of history, next door to the JF terminal that was established after I moved in. If it was 8 jumps to the JF terminal, I'd probably not do it, unless the alliance had a jump bridge that covered the route. Hint hint, PI is convenience game once you get past the easy to move the heads remotely thing.
So if you actually cared about the average "highsec" indy player, and you wanted to stand against the CFC, you could form an organization that made highsec PI more efficient than merely using a goon poco because it happened to be near jita. If you were offering internal corp logistics, you were replicating p2s or p3s or other convenience products from Jita to the systems where you had factory planets, and you contract hauled to jita for customers or even gave out alliance orders to fill that you were skimming for alliance profits, (which people would take if it was easier than hauling to jita themselves), then you could easily sort through dotlan to find candidate systems that can 1-stop shop, and then you can go investigate them for setting up your alliance there.
Believe it or not there are people that love to spacetruck. There are people that love to group up with other indies and scheme to work the market in their favour. there are other people that will run with reasonable alliance contracts even if they know the alliance is skimming a margin on them. (in fact they'll do it forever if the alliance has open books and they know its not just lining director pockets).
CAS proves that by having people that organize PVP in an organization can even get a damn newbie INDY starter corp to take over a system in Syndicate and roam the hell out of the area, ie if the cultures says we fight, then even indy starters do it.
So basically, no I don't agree the CFC has won the war for pocos. The candidate organization that will eventually contest them properly for it may even already exist.
Honestly very tired of the "can't do".
|
arabella blood
Revenant Tactical
196
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 08:25:00 -
[149] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:arabella blood wrote:The question is: what is so bad in renting? Without renting, those systems stay empty. With renting they are at least used. What do you care about the arrangments that allow the residents to survive? Why is it a big deal? it is not bad by itself However in Eve Online people are supposed to do it other way: by taking it from owners. You just go and take what you want. Or you don't. Renting makes 0.0 carebears who are not much different from high-sec ones. I know: i have been there as renter.
So only your style of play exist? And i thought it a sandbox :/
Troll for hire. Cheap prices. |
Baron Chauman
Gladiators of Rage Fidelas Constans
12
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 09:43:00 -
[150] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:Mobile depots are okay but they're really just a bandaid to a bigger problem - the complete lack of a realistic player run nullsec.
Realistic? As in run by you?
I find the pseudo-fascist empires that rule null with their renter serfs oddly reflective of the real world.
Infinity Ziona wrote:Null sec is basically stuck in the primordial cave man era where anyone out of your tribe gets beaten to death with clubs.
How does this make it different than any other part of eve, to any significant degree? Null requires the forming of larger "tribes" and more sophisticated organisations which I would think is a further step away from cavemen than most of the galaxy.
Having two massive blocs fighting each other instead of 2000 independent tribes is a step forward in evolution, not backwards.
Infinity Ziona wrote:Null sec is missing many of the more sophisticated elements that make up an advanced technological society.
Besides the spaceships? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |