Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
230
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:26:03 -
[2491] - Quote
Super Stallion wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Super Stallion wrote:I do not see this changing how sov war is actually conducted. Shooting sov structures only occurs after the war is already won. swapping shooting a sov structure with missiles to shooting the sov structure/cap point with an entosis module doesnt change how the wars are actually fought.
look as the last war between Goonswarm Federation and Test Alliance Please ignore as a reference For the initial RF fight, you're correct. For the actual defence of an RF'd structure the war now needs to be fought across many different battlefields concurrently with the defender having upto a 4x advantage in capture speed. But, by the time an alliance is entering the phase where they are spreading out along the constellation to capture points the war is already in the clean up stages. If not, then that alliance is doing it wrong. The war has already been fought, and won, before capture speed and all of the other clean up operations proposed begin to be engaged. I am really trying to see this working out, but I think the game designers need to place more emphasis onto how a war is actually won... not how to clean up the existing structures. These are two fundamentally different concepts. I see changes to forcing a fight, and cleaning up structures. I do not see changes to how sov wars are actually fought today. Of course a larger, more organised alliance should win. But they have to devote time to: disrupting PvE to lower the indices, RFing the structures, fighting the actual battles
AND THEN holding the space afterwards: using the space to raise the indices, protecting it during their own primetime.
Otherwise you just flip it straight back 2 days later. |
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen
Origin. Black Legion.
2008
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:26:11 -
[2492] - Quote
What if only dreads or supers could fit the Entosis magic wand module?
- You mirror today's paradigm of SOV cap use without the structure grind, and capitals still get a role to play in SOV warfare. i.e. Why caps now? - A SOV fight would always involve at least one valuable asset from both sides. An aggressor needs to risk at least one valuable asset, a defender needs to at least field one also to counter-entosis. No cepter' frackery. Delicious IMHO.
What if ISK generation (the heart of EvE IMHO) was nerfed across the board, and net-buffed in null SOV held systems?
- People ask 'why SOV'? I say follow the money. Problem is it might not be compelling right now. Nerf ISK generation across New Eden including hisec, incursions, losec -- every single aspect of isk generation. Then have the SOV held system indices at 'normal' levels of occupancy use yield a net buff to ISK generation in null from current levels.
Would you like to know more?
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1998
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:26:15 -
[2493] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:afkalt wrote: I'd LOVE to see these "mighty trollceptors" deal with a simple maulus/caracal combination.
The issue is, as is obvious, not actually killing them. It's that, since it only takes two minutes to complete a reinforce (which then forces you into a four hour sitdown on the structure), that you functionally would need to have said Caracal and Maulus sitting 50km off of the structure literally all the time. Idk about you, but I missed the memo where EVE is supposed to be a job instead of a game.
If someone live in the system it will not take 2 minutes. if someone live in sytem then they can neutralize the still ongoign Estosification of the structure with their own module.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
823
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:26:16 -
[2494] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:afkalt wrote: I'd LOVE to see these "mighty trollceptors" deal with a simple maulus/caracal combination.
The issue is, as is obvious, not actually killing them. It's that, since it only takes two minutes to complete a reinforce (which then forces you into a four hour sitdown on the structure), that you functionally would need to have said Caracal and Maulus sitting 50km off of the structure literally all the time. Idk about you, but I missed the memo where EVE is supposed to be a job instead of a game.
It takes two minutes to START a reinforce.
>>Before occupancy defensive bonuses are applied, exerting uncontested control over Territorial Claim Units, Infrastructure Hubs and Outposts will take 10 minutes (plus the duration of the first cycle) and enabling/disabling station services will take 5 minutes (plus the duration of the first cycle). Like everything in this plan, these numbers are subject to change based on playtesting and discussion. |
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
699
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:26:17 -
[2495] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Super Stallion wrote:I do not see this changing how sov war is actually conducted. Shooting sov structures only occurs after the war is already won. swapping shooting a sov structure with missiles to shooting the sov structure/cap point with an entosis module doesnt change how the wars are actually fought. There will be WAY less structures to shoot. The structure grind at the end will be a mere formality. The new system takes the same amount of grinding time regardless of if you have fone person doing it or one thousand. That is huge, no longer are supercap blobs required to take space without putting your whole alliance on suicide watch.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Kah'Les
hirr Northern Coalition.
13
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:27:28 -
[2496] - Quote
Elenahina wrote: Or you could use 20 Rifters and save yourself a couple hundred million ISK.
Remember - they can't reinforce it, if you have it linked up too. You don't HAVE to kill the attacker. Just deny him sole control of the field.
That said, kill him anway, if you can, because you can.
Null is kind of supposed to be the end game, where dose people who have played this game for so long have to go to get away from the frigate game. SP should acually count for something, CCPs idea that newbro should be able to take sov is backwards. If you want to fly small gang pvp go do FW not null sec. |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
232
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:27:30 -
[2497] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:ANY and all mechanics that scale on number of members can be circuvented by spliting alliance in Joe's alliance 1 and Joe's alliance 2 So make it so the Sov bonuses only work in favour of the holding group, no passive ratting bonuses etc for anyone that happens to be in the same system, only benefit the group that actually holds the sov.
Great we just split a big alliance into two. Working as intended. |
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
699
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:28:45 -
[2498] - Quote
Alp Khan wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote: Current method at least offers some initiative to the attackers to actually start a meaningful fight as the defender has to come on grid and push them off or remain on grid with them whilst risking a 20m module on even their cheapest ship.
Quite the opposite, actually. It encourages any prospective attacker to spread out as much as possible, and fight as little as possible, since the cycle time on these things is so incredibly low. It actively discourages defensive fighting pre-reinforce. Which, in turn, basically puts a four hour per structure time tax on the defender. I elaborated this earlier. I can get a separate monitor, put up a few clients on it with an "afk" cloaked ship each, wait until I have two minutes, reinforce half a dozen structures(because let's not even pretend that is feasible or reasonable to tell people to defend a system 24/7. That's not a game, that's a job), and then they have to guard each and every one for four hours to make sure I don't show up and cap their **** like I'm sniping an Ebay auction. That is the optimal sov capture method. Barely more effort than afk cloaking, and I can capture sov from even determined defenders after a little while, since eventually they will get tired of it or their wives will kill them. And then you'd have the Republic of Kaarous, and I didn't fight anybody to get it. At least until someone wanted to take it from me, then we'd take turns trolling each other until somebody gives up. That's what made me laugh about the "weaponize boredom" line. And this is precisely why the whole proposal is incredibly, ridiculously weak when it comes to risk-reward and game balance. Even worse, I'm not seeing an easy to way to make this workable. It would probably take less time to modify the existing mechanics and increase the null-sec life benefits to make this non-sense workable. I'm betting that the majority of CSM already said no when this was revealed to them. Sometimes, I feel as if my words are falling short to describe the level of incompetency here. I thought before, when the pre-Phoebe blog hit, that this shortsighted and shallow approach was an issue specifically with Greyscale. However, now I fully realize that it is not something that is isolated to Greyscale.
Yea, the CSM overwhelmingly disagreeing with this is why we've seen so many CSM speak out against it--oh wait, they haven't.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1619
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:30:52 -
[2499] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:afkalt wrote: I'd LOVE to see these "mighty trollceptors" deal with a simple maulus/caracal combination.
The issue is, as is obvious, not actually killing them. It's that, since it only takes two minutes to complete a reinforce (which then forces you into a four hour sitdown on the structure), that you functionally would need to have said Caracal and Maulus sitting 50km off of the structure literally all the time. Idk about you, but I missed the memo where EVE is supposed to be a job instead of a game.
It takes up to 42 minutes to complete a reinforce, not 2 unless you were stupid enough to leave your structure with a pre-capped timer of only 1 second left.. You can use your own space and only be "defending" a particular structure when you get a warning about that one. If defender bonus get applied when you de-cap your own structure, then you will be able to reset the timer to a full 40 minute.
As much as I want to attacker to work to get SOV, the defender should work to keep his. Keep your index high and you would be allowed longer response window and faster de-cap timers. Not keeping your index up mean you are not using that space anyway so I don't see why you should keep it. |
Super Stallion
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:32:27 -
[2500] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Super Stallion wrote:I do not see this changing how sov war is actually conducted. Shooting sov structures only occurs after the war is already won. swapping shooting a sov structure with missiles to shooting the sov structure/cap point with an entosis module doesnt change how the wars are actually fought. There will be WAY less structures to shoot. The structure grind at the end will be a mere formality. The new system takes the same amount of grinding time regardless of if you have fone person doing it or one thousand. That is huge, no longer are supercap blobs required to take space without putting your whole alliance on suicide watch.
I agree that there is far less grinding. I also agree that less grinding is good. But, this isnt being brought to us as a system to reduce grinding. This is being brought to us as a system which will change how sov war is conducted.
Sadly, this system does not change how sov war is conducted. It only changes the final stage, cleaning up our mess.
edit: also changes how defender is notified that the system is in danger. but that is superfluous in that, your trading one eve male notification of a blockaid unit being erected for an eve mail notification of an entosis module being activated |
|
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
60
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:33:55 -
[2501] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote: ANY and all mechanics that scale on number of members can be circuvented by spliting alliance in Joe's alliance 1 and Joe's alliance 2
Again :
I see no issue with that.
People defending must be the real owners so ...
That mean ally member john doe from Joe Alliance 1 cannot defend a Joe Alliance 2 node wich is good to display people accross systems. If you want more flexibility you have to sustain a bigger vulnerability window.
The goal is to localize conflicts and break big renting block. |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
233
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:34:02 -
[2502] - Quote
Super Stallion wrote:I agree that there is far less grinding. I also agree that less grinding is good. But, this isnt being brought to us as a system to reduce grinding. This is being brought to us as a system which will change how sov war is conducted.
Sadly, this system does not change how sov war is conducted. It only changes the final stage, cleaning up our mess. It introduces the ability for small groups to harass and stretch out a larger group WITHOUT needing to drop (and whelp) a vulnerable supercap fleet to do so...
Did you miss the bit of the thread about trollceptors? |
Miner Hottie
Valar Morghulis. Goonswarm Federation
72
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:34:34 -
[2503] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote: Current method at least offers some initiative to the attackers to actually start a meaningful fight as the defender has to come on grid and push them off or remain on grid with them whilst risking a 20m module on even their cheapest ship.
Quite the opposite, actually. It encourages any prospective attacker to spread out as much as possible, and fight as little as possible, since the cycle time on these things is so incredibly low. It actively discourages defensive fighting pre-reinforce. Which, in turn, basically puts a four hour per structure time tax on the defender. I elaborated this earlier. I can get a separate monitor, put up a few clients on it with an "afk" cloaked ship each, wait until I have two minutes, reinforce half a dozen structures(because let's not even pretend that is feasible or reasonable to tell people to defend a system 24/7. That's not a game, that's a job), and then they have to guard each and every one for four hours to make sure I don't show up and cap their **** like I'm sniping an Ebay auction. That is the optimal sov capture method. Barely more effort than afk cloaking, and I can capture sov from even determined defenders after a little while, since eventually they will get tired of it or their wives will kill them. And then you'd have the Republic of Kaarous, and I didn't fight anybody to get it. At least until someone wanted to take it from me, then we'd take turns trolling each other until somebody gives up. That's what made me laugh about the "weaponize boredom" line. And this is precisely why the whole proposal is incredibly, ridiculously weak when it comes to risk-reward and game balance. Even worse, I'm not seeing an easy to way to make this workable. It would probably take less time to modify the existing mechanics and increase the null-sec life benefits to make this non-sense workable. I'm betting that the majority of CSM already said no when this was revealed to them. Sometimes, I feel as if my words are falling short to describe the level of incompetency here. I thought before, when the pre-Phoebe blog hit, that this shortsighted and shallow approach was an issue specifically with Greyscale. However, now I fully realize that it is not something that is isolated to Greyscale. Yea, the CSM overwhelmingly disagreeing with this is why we've seen so many CSM speak out against it--oh wait, they haven't.
I don't see much in the way of positive affirmation of these changes from the CSM either. Silence doesn't not imply they condone or endorse this change.
It's all about how hot my mining lasers get.
|
flakeys
Arkham Innovations
2712
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:38:16 -
[2504] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote: Current method at least offers some initiative to the attackers to actually start a meaningful fight as the defender has to come on grid and push them off or remain on grid with them whilst risking a 20m module on even their cheapest ship.
Quite the opposite, actually. It encourages any prospective attacker to spread out as much as possible, and fight as little as possible, since the cycle time on these things is so incredibly low. It actively discourages defensive fighting pre-reinforce. Which, in turn, basically puts a four hour per structure time tax on the defender. I elaborated this earlier. I can get a separate monitor, put up a few clients on it with an "afk" cloaked ship each, wait until I have two minutes, reinforce half a dozen structures(because let's not even pretend that is feasible or reasonable to tell people to defend a system 24/7. That's not a game, that's a job), and then they have to guard each and every one for four hours to make sure I don't show up and cap their **** like I'm sniping an Ebay auction. That is the optimal sov capture method. Barely more effort than afk cloaking, and I can capture sov from even determined defenders after a little while, since eventually they will get tired of it or their wives will kill them. And then you'd have the Republic of Kaarous, and I didn't fight anybody to get it. At least until someone wanted to take it from me, then we'd take turns trolling each other until somebody gives up. That's what made me laugh about the "weaponize boredom" line. And this is precisely why the whole proposal is incredibly, ridiculously weak when it comes to risk-reward and game balance. Even worse, I'm not seeing an easy to way to make this workable. It would probably take less time to modify the existing mechanics and increase the null-sec life benefits to make this non-sense workable. I'm betting that the majority of CSM already said no when this was revealed to them. Sometimes, I feel as if my words are falling short to describe the level of incompetency here. I thought before, when the pre-Phoebe blog hit, that this shortsighted and shallow approach was an issue specifically with Greyscale. However, now I fully realize that it is not something that is isolated to Greyscale. Yea, the CSM overwhelmingly disagreeing with this is why we've seen so many CSM speak out against it--oh wait, they haven't. I don't see much in the way of positive affirmation of these changes from the CSM either. Silence doesn't not imply they condone or endorse this change.
It implies they need to ask 'their leaders' aka reall CSM on what position 'they' should take or it implies they rather await till the storm of complaints from players has lowered so that they can pick the most popular concerns as 'their own concerns' .
That is what it implies . If that is the case is a second thing .
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
700
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:41:06 -
[2505] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:M1k3y Koontz wrote:Alp Khan wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Eli Apol wrote: Current method at least offers some initiative to the attackers to actually start a meaningful fight as the defender has to come on grid and push them off or remain on grid with them whilst risking a 20m module on even their cheapest ship.
Quite the opposite, actually. It encourages any prospective attacker to spread out as much as possible, and fight as little as possible, since the cycle time on these things is so incredibly low. It actively discourages defensive fighting pre-reinforce. Which, in turn, basically puts a four hour per structure time tax on the defender. I elaborated this earlier. I can get a separate monitor, put up a few clients on it with an "afk" cloaked ship each, wait until I have two minutes, reinforce half a dozen structures(because let's not even pretend that is feasible or reasonable to tell people to defend a system 24/7. That's not a game, that's a job), and then they have to guard each and every one for four hours to make sure I don't show up and cap their **** like I'm sniping an Ebay auction. That is the optimal sov capture method. Barely more effort than afk cloaking, and I can capture sov from even determined defenders after a little while, since eventually they will get tired of it or their wives will kill them. And then you'd have the Republic of Kaarous, and I didn't fight anybody to get it. At least until someone wanted to take it from me, then we'd take turns trolling each other until somebody gives up. That's what made me laugh about the "weaponize boredom" line. And this is precisely why the whole proposal is incredibly, ridiculously weak when it comes to risk-reward and game balance. Even worse, I'm not seeing an easy to way to make this workable. It would probably take less time to modify the existing mechanics and increase the null-sec life benefits to make this non-sense workable. I'm betting that the majority of CSM already said no when this was revealed to them. Sometimes, I feel as if my words are falling short to describe the level of incompetency here. I thought before, when the pre-Phoebe blog hit, that this shortsighted and shallow approach was an issue specifically with Greyscale. However, now I fully realize that it is not something that is isolated to Greyscale. Yea, the CSM overwhelmingly disagreeing with this is why we've seen so many CSM speak out against it--oh wait, they haven't. I don't see much in the way of positive affirmation of these changes from the CSM either. Silence doesn't not imply they condone or endorse this change.
It also doesnt mean that they hate it. Considering that the last time CCP went over the CSM's head they were quite vocal, it seems safe to assume the CSM were aware of the changes, and werent strongly opposed.
Edit: or as flakeys said, they are waiting to take a public stand because they are playing politics.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Super Stallion
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:43:19 -
[2506] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Super Stallion wrote:I agree that there is far less grinding. I also agree that less grinding is good. But, this isnt being brought to us as a system to reduce grinding. This is being brought to us as a system which will change how sov war is conducted.
Sadly, this system does not change how sov war is conducted. It only changes the final stage, cleaning up our mess. It introduces the ability for small groups to harass and stretch out a larger group WITHOUT needing to drop (and whelp) a vulnerable supercap fleet to do so... Did you miss the bit of the thread about trollceptors?
I am not seeing a difference between a troll ceptor and a troll-industrial erecting a blockaid unit. Both accomplish the same thing. Both annoy the defender to no end. Both need to be dealt with.
But I would not declare the swapping of one for the other as a fundamental change to how sov war is conducted. |
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3964
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:43:59 -
[2507] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Arik Alabel
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
6
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:51:24 -
[2508] - Quote
Super Stallion wrote: I do not see changes to how sov wars are actually fought today.
then perhaps you shouldn't be commenting.
|
Arik Alabel
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
6
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:54:00 -
[2509] - Quote
Super Stallion wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Super Stallion wrote:I agree that there is far less grinding. I also agree that less grinding is good. But, this isnt being brought to us as a system to reduce grinding. This is being brought to us as a system which will change how sov war is conducted.
Sadly, this system does not change how sov war is conducted. It only changes the final stage, cleaning up our mess. It introduces the ability for small groups to harass and stretch out a larger group WITHOUT needing to drop (and whelp) a vulnerable supercap fleet to do so... Did you miss the bit of the thread about trollceptors? I am not seeing a difference between a troll ceptor and a troll-industrial erecting a blockaid unit. Both accomplish the same thing. Both annoy the defender to no end. Both need to be dealt with. But I would not declare the swapping of one for the other as a fundamental change to how sov war is conducted.
You seem to be completely missing the point. A "troll-industrial" doesn't exist because the owner's defensive SBU would have to be killed first. And kill and replace 51% of the sbu's in that system. You don't do that in a no effort "troll-industrial". |
Killbac Orator
KB's Malevolent Monks
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:57:06 -
[2510] - Quote
My two isk worth...
Good initial concept for nul sov changes. Entosis module should fit and function according to ship class. All ship classes retain same activation timer.
1. Inability to warp off once activated, and for duration of cycle. 2. Cap consumption penalty based on ship class ( pulse that MWD ceptors!) 3. One module class that incorporates range penalty based upon fitted ship class ( ceptor = 50km, BC = 100km, BS = 250km) with 250km max for any fitted ship class greater than BS, ( no need for a T2 variant ). 4. No external repps, links, ect.
TZ needs some added consideration. Wouldn't want anyone excluded from game play.
Fight!!!
As far as the detractors and naysayers are concerned...
"Overall score for Sovereignty Conquests: WeGÇÖre successfully off life support, but we absolutely need to do better."
This has been a long time coming. The long debated "null is stagnant" refrain by the Eve community is largely a result of the big bloc alliances who have carved out their niche space and became complacent. Meanwhile CCP sat idly by and failed to act upon a negative trend. Now CCP is fixing it. Adapt or go elsewhere!
"Over the medium term, we see the potential for more substantial changes in the nullsec status quo as the various competing parties work to adjust their internal objectives to the new situation; it seems plausible that the general reduction in travel capabilities will lead to more localism, but we don't want to make any firm predictions in this area. We're confident that these changes improve the overall system of lowsec and nullsec gameplay and take them in better directions, but any set of changes that would allow us to accurately predict their consequences would by their nature be too simple to be interesting for very long."
Please note: "nullsec status quo" and "localism". I read that as a good thing. We all know that the real stagnation in null is not null itself, but the controlling alliance blocs that are resistant to anything that forces them to defend against anyone smaller than their crony enemy alliances. Change is coming, like it or not.
|
|
Styphon the Black
Forced Euthanasia Soviet-Union
12
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 15:59:16 -
[2511] - Quote
Well once these changes are made I see me and my corp mates coming out on top. It will be very fun continuously flipping systems with nothing more than a small gang. "You can't be everywhere all the time" |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations
2714
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 16:01:08 -
[2512] - Quote
Killbac Orator wrote: 3. One module class that incorporates range penalty based upon fitted ship class ( ceptor = 50km, BC = 100km, BS = 250km) with 250km max for any fitted ship class greater than BS, ( no need for a T2 variant ).
This actually looks by far one of the better solutions.Might want to also add a different cycletime according to shiptype going from a shorter period for bs to a longer period for frig size but if you do the difference should not be too far from each other.
So make it one type of module but different versions of it wich can only fit to X type of shipsize.
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2832
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 16:09:53 -
[2513] - Quote
Shorten range of module to 75 km so that a reasonably spec'd anti-interceptor Destroyer can engage. Interceptor immunity gone.
No T2 module in game increases performance by a factor of 10. This module shouldn't be the first. I have a feeling the devs put the 250km number out there as a red herring. They are setting expectations "high" so that when they come back with a number like 100km you will be happy rather than upset that most ships can't hit an interceptor at 100km.
JUSTK is recruiting.
|
Super Stallion
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
13
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 16:10:21 -
[2514] - Quote
Arik Alabel wrote:Super Stallion wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Super Stallion wrote:I agree that there is far less grinding. I also agree that less grinding is good. But, this isnt being brought to us as a system to reduce grinding. This is being brought to us as a system which will change how sov war is conducted.
Sadly, this system does not change how sov war is conducted. It only changes the final stage, cleaning up our mess. It introduces the ability for small groups to harass and stretch out a larger group WITHOUT needing to drop (and whelp) a vulnerable supercap fleet to do so... Did you miss the bit of the thread about trollceptors? I am not seeing a difference between a troll ceptor and a troll-industrial erecting a blockaid unit. Both accomplish the same thing. Both annoy the defender to no end. Both need to be dealt with. But I would not declare the swapping of one for the other as a fundamental change to how sov war is conducted. You seem to be completely missing the point. A "troll-industrial" doesn't exist because the owner's defensive SBU would have to be killed first. And kill and replace 51% of the sbu's in that system. You don't do that in a no effort "troll-industrial".
I guess we will just have to see how these changes actually play out. I would love to see a major change. I would love to see a change that truly impacts how wars are fought.
Sadly, just as i have gotten side tracked in the conversation, I think that this design for null sov got side tracked into producing a mini game to replace the very final stages of a war with some fun opportunities for trolling mixed in. |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
233
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 16:10:52 -
[2515] - Quote
flakeys wrote:Killbac Orator wrote: 3. One module class that incorporates range penalty based upon fitted ship class ( ceptor = 50km, BC = 100km, BS = 250km) with 250km max for any fitted ship class greater than BS, ( no need for a T2 variant ).
This actually looks by far one of the better solutions.Might want to also add a different cycletime according to shiptype going from a shorter period for bs to a longer period for frig size but if you do the difference should not be too far from each other. So make it one type of module but different versions of it wich can only fit to X type of shipclass.Basically the same way a shield booster is now. I don't think this is really necessary because there's already the hard limits of how many sebos and rigs you can fit to your ship to extend the locking range far enough anyways (and the associated gimping that does to the rest of your fit)...
Seems like the fear of the 80dps with no application beyond their own noses, no tackle, no tank trollceptors is getting to people too much
edit: Forgot to say 100m per ship, 80dps with no application beyond their own noses, no tackle, no tank trollceptors... |
FourDrink Minimum
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 16:11:15 -
[2516] - Quote
Killbac Orator wrote: 3. One module class that incorporates range penalty based upon fitted ship class ( ceptor = 50km, BC = 100km, BS = 250km) with 250km max for any fitted ship class greater than BS, ( no need for a T2 variant ).
To expand on this, divide entosis mods into separate classes like the 1MN/10MN/100MN propulsion mods and balance accordingly.
For example: The capital version takes 4x longer to cap. The battleship version has a huge range. The cruiser version caps the fastest, but has short range. The frigate version has the shortest range and scaling penalty to cap time based on sov index.
Then you can tune the sov capture process based on individual ship classes and you don't have to have a one-size-fits-all approach to the module. For obvious reasons, you'd have to lock the entosis mods to ship size, unlike with propulsion mods. |
Killbac Orator
KB's Malevolent Monks
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 16:12:37 -
[2517] - Quote
I'm game for anything that includes common sense, fun, and of course, Fights!!! :) |
flakeys
Arkham Innovations
2714
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 16:14:39 -
[2518] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote:Shorten range of module to 75 km so that a reasonably spec'd anti-interceptor Destroyer can engage. Interceptor immunity gone.
No T2 module in game increases performance by a factor of 10. This module shouldn't be the first. I have a feeling the devs put the 250km number out there as a red herring. They are setting expectations "high" so that when they come back with a number like 100km you will be happy rather than upset that most ships can't hit an interceptor at 100km.
A trick my wife does a lot .
You can guess in wich way .
We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.
|
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
569
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 16:21:41 -
[2519] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:For those who are claiming they will take over half the galaxy in 40 minutes with their swarms of interceptors; what are your plans for protecting your space while you are away? Do you honestly think no one will do the same thing to you?
it does not require the whole of goonswarm federation to contest someone else's sov
we send EUTZ to go wreck nerds and leave USTZ home to defend
easy peasy |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
233
|
Posted - 2015.03.05 16:23:11 -
[2520] - Quote
Promiscuous Female wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:For those who are claiming they will take over half the galaxy in 40 minutes with their swarms of interceptors; what are your plans for protecting your space while you are away? Do you honestly think no one will do the same thing to you?
it does not require the whole of goonswarm federation to contest someone else's sov we send EUTZ to go wreck nerds and leave USTZ home to defend easy peasy Yeah, they definitely need to scale primetimes with sov size...
24hrs primetime if you hold over 3 regions sounds fine to me |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |