Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6514
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:21:05 -
[421] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:[quote=Snowmann]
Look, this discussion is moot. CCP and the CSM wanted feedback, they have the vast majority of players explaining to them all the reasons the mechanic is terrible. I can't imagine trollceptors will remain in existence much longer and if they do you'll only see us forming into even bigger coalitions. 'Vast majority of players'? 50% of this thread has just been you complaining about your own negative experience in support of a petition by a few rentier landlords out to protect their assets. The 'vast majority' probably doesn't really give a rats ass about the changes and from what I see for every doom monger like yourself there is a person like me quite enjoying the new system. This isn't the only thread. If you've read other thread, blogs, reddit, etc, you'd know that there's a considerable number of players with problems with this mechanic. Just because MOA got CTA'd to come to the forum and **** up all the threads doesn't mean that the mechanics have that much support.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6514
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:24:39 -
[422] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Yes, Sov has problems. Yes, this didnt fix them. But is the now a problem? Not really. As you and others have corroborated, this is no threat, merely an annoyance. The mechanic is boring. Boring gameplay is bad.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Ganking is emergent game play, WTF? Yep. Sorry, didn't realise you were a newbie.
Maldiro Selkurk wrote:Also, more on point, entossing isnt emergent game play either since it is a game mechanic hard coded into EVE. I know it's not, that's why I said it wasn't.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
alpha36
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:25:17 -
[423] - Quote
One of the cool things about EVE that has fallen by the wayside like many emergent things was the ability to 'blockade' and lockdown an area or station. Colloquially known as the hellcamp.
I feel like npc 0.0 is too safe and theres little to no risk involved these days. It used to be that if someone was in your space and up in your grill basing out of npc you could go in there with a freighter full of bubbles and camp that **** for 30 days until they die and give up, leave.
The interdiction nullified tech 3's kinda eased that strain because they could still undock a fleet and run around doing things. They still werent gonna do much sov stuff without dreads and supers so it was sort of ok.
The interdiction nullified interceptor is one of the worst changes in recent years given there vast utility and even now the ability to capture, reinforce and influence sov events. Coupled with npc 0.0 the trollceptor is just awful and unbalanced gameplay.
There needs to be a better way to sit on somebody who bases out of npc 0.0 and interceptors need to lose their nullification, or keep them nullified but they need to lose all combat and entosis viability. Thanks. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2087
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:26:49 -
[424] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Frostys Virpio wrote:
There is no point to preventing warp out on an inty if he can still burn away at 4k/s since even if you warped on him with probes, by the time you land and re-accelerate, he is already too far away.
You don't need to chase him. Just grab a T1 jamming frig and cut his entosis off. Job done.
You think SOV game play should be a rather large game of ding dong ditch? Because that's what SOV trolling is right now. |
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
35
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:28:25 -
[425] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:
]LOL, mate, you know how it is because you're being told to do it. You show up in an interceptor, then run away when someone show up. You just over a system and repeat. With a whole bunch of people doing just that, the mechanic is boring as sin. You know this and you support this, because your feelings of "grr goons" are more important to you than whether or not CCP put in crappy mechanics and wreck part of the game.
As for free ride, we already have a free ride. The mechanic is boring, but it's cheap to fight back. Far cheaper than it used to be.
Nobody tells us to do anything. There are no CTA's in my alliance.
As for me or my fellow alliance members 'showing up in an interceptor' we almost always have a cruiser as our entosis ship with frig and dessy support.
We entosis stuff in the hope you will bring a fleet to fight us. Goons never disappoint on that front but because your whole tactic is blob warfare you bring 2-3 fleets (harpys, ferox and cerb fleets normally with numbers of 120-160 usually) to take us on. Obviously we can't take that on with a 20-25 man gang so we usually blueball and try and pick off stragglers when you leave - typical asymetrical tactics.
Now if Goons really wanted a fight they would bring a roughly equal force to fight (you always have the big guns to call in later if things aren't going according to plan) but you NEVER do, so obviously your not really looking for a 'fight' just a massacre and complain when we won't play willing victims. |
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
21
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:30:16 -
[426] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Snowmann wrote:I would suggest that Trollcepting is emergent game play as well.
Spin it how you want, both involve being forced into gameplay that you don't want, and each have their "said" purposes.
The merits of those will be continuously debated. LOL. Emergent gameplay directly created by CCPs new mechanics which they are still tweaking? Quite honestly I think you would suggest anything just to disagree. It seems you are butthurt of being ganked and want to support a boring mechanics as some form of payback, even though most sove holders had nothing to do with whatever ship you lost in highsec. Look, this discussion is moot. CCP and the CSM wanted feedback, they have the vast majority of players explaining to them all the reasons the mechanic is terrible. I can't imagine trollceptors will remain in existence much longer and if they do you'll only see us forming into even bigger coalitions.
Emergent is any gameplay that comes by unexpectedly. Jet Can mining was one of the first.
I don't believe Trollcepting as a form of gameplay was originally envisioned by the developers, but I could be wrong. In any case, it does seem effective, in what it is currently intended to do.
And no, I'm not upset with ganking, I have done it many times with my various characters.
I just don't like the double standard, where some are free to troll others, but when they start getting trolled in a way they have to respond to, they gets all kinds of upset.
That isn't directed at you, just some organizations that force many into forms of gamplay outside of their preferred area of operations, but complain about it when it starts happening to them.
And it is so interesting to see the lengths they will go to try and dispel that.
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2087
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:31:27 -
[427] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:
]LOL, mate, you know how it is because you're being told to do it. You show up in an interceptor, then run away when someone show up. You just over a system and repeat. With a whole bunch of people doing just that, the mechanic is boring as sin. You know this and you support this, because your feelings of "grr goons" are more important to you than whether or not CCP put in crappy mechanics and wreck part of the game.
As for free ride, we already have a free ride. The mechanic is boring, but it's cheap to fight back. Far cheaper than it used to be.
Nobody tells us to do anything. There are no CTA's in my alliance. As for me or my fellow alliance members 'showing up in an interceptor' we almost always have a cruiser as our entosis ship with frig and dessy support. We entosis stuff in the hope you will bring a fleet to fight us. Goons never disappoint on that front but because your whole tactic is blob warfare you bring 2-3 fleets (harpys, ferox and cerb fleets normally with numbers of 120-160 usually) to take us on. Obviously we can't take that on with a 20-25 man gang so we usually blueball and try and pick off stragglers when you leave - typical asymetrical tactics. Now if Goons really wanted a fight they would bring a roughly equal force to fight (you always have the big guns to call in later if things aren't going according to plan) but you NEVER do, so obviously your not really looking for a 'fight' just a massacre and complain when we won't play willing victims.
If you really wanted a fight, you would attack someone who can't flash form 3 fleet at the drop of a hat... Your whole "they form too big so we blueball them" argument falls flat on it's head when you only ring the bell on the imperium. Go poke some smaller entity and you will get a form up to defend around your own size.
The real issue is that you are not looking for fights. You have a completely different agenda but try to mask it with excuses. |
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
37
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:35:51 -
[428] - Quote
alpha36 wrote:
I feel like npc 0.0 is too safe and theres little to no risk involved these days. It used to be that if someone was in your space and up in your grill basing out of npc you could go in there with a freighter full of bubbles and camp that **** for 30 days until they die and give up, leave.
So people are willing to HELLCAMP NPC STATIONS FOR A WHOLE MONTH with no pvp content to destroy an enemy yet the same people won't chase around a lone interceptor?
I think you just blew Lucas Kell's arguement about entosis wars being boring out of the water. |
Salvos Rhoska
1221
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:37:16 -
[429] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Yes, Sov has problems. Yes, this didnt fix them. But is the now a problem? Not really. As you and others have corroborated, this is no threat, merely an annoyance. The mechanic is boring. Boring gameplay is bad.
Whats boring about the tears of thousands of alts in coalition about a single frigate stepping on their lawn?
I think you may have, in your complacency, lost the picture here of what EVE is about. As you can see, plenty of people see thisnfor what it really is.
The change may not have fixed Sov entirely, but its a step in the right direction. If your bosses were to hire me instead of you as spindoctor (im open for negotiation) thats the tact I would take. You wont win this one. Best you can do is mitigate future impending changes that will make one interceptor on your lawn seem like a fond memory.
If you cant HTFU and adapt with changes, perhaps that is exactly the reason for someone else who can, to step up. Historically all empires fall invariably due to complacency, luxury, self-entitlement and decadence, even if no external force is strong enough to engage them directly.
Also: "If you've read other thread, blogs, reddit, etc,-á" Please, you cant be serious...
------------
|
alpha36
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
51
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:38:44 -
[430] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:I think you just blew Lucas Kell's arguement about entosis wars being boring out of the water. Entosis wars are boring. ALL sov holders hate it, nobody wants to mount a new sov campaign in the current system. The only people who like it dont have sov. The map will never change, stagnation increases, EVE dies. The end. |
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6516
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:39:32 -
[431] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Nobody tells us to do anything. There are no CTA's in my alliance. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Yes there are. You get toldd what to do all the time, we see it in your comms. You got told to come to this thread. Even your leader gets steered by Gevlon.
Akballah Kassan wrote:We entosis stuff in the hope you will bring a fleet to fight us. lol, and yet whenever a single player shows up you scatter. Again we know that you're being instructed to troll, you can eve buy packs of fitted troll ships from your alliance contracts.
You guys really are terrible at this.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6516
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:43:07 -
[432] - Quote
Snowmann wrote:Emergent is any gameplay that comes by unexpectedly. Jet Can mining was one of the first.
I don't believe Trollcepting as a form of gameplay was originally envisioned by the developers, but I could be wrong. Except of course that trollceptors were already a concept before fozziesov was implemented.
Snowmann wrote:In any case, it does seem effective, in what it is currently intended to do. If the intention was to make a boring gameplay mechanic, then sure, it's effective. The stated goal was to generate conflict and spice up nullsec hough and that has failed.
Snowmann wrote:And no, I'm not upset with ganking, I have done it many times with my various characters. I can smell the lies on you.
Snowmann wrote:I just don't like the double standard, where some are free to troll others, but when they start getting trolled in a way they have to respond to, they gets all kinds of upset. It's not a double standard though, especially considering a mass of sov holders with issues with fozziesov don't gank. I'm not saying ganking doesn't need a balance, but using it as an excuse to leave in badly designed mechanics is a bad idea.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Akballah Kassan
Mosquito Squadron Mordus Angels
37
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:43:35 -
[433] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:Nobody tells us to do anything. There are no CTA's in my alliance. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Yes there are. You get toldd what to do all the time, we see it in your comms. You got told to come to this thread. Even your leader gets steered by Gevlon.
I get the impression you are the 'kings hand' to your overlord Mittens. Proof that I get told to post on this thread or we'll just assume you are full of ****.
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6516
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:48:31 -
[434] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Akballah Kassan wrote:Nobody tells us to do anything. There are no CTA's in my alliance. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Yes there are. You get toldd what to do all the time, we see it in your comms. You got told to come to this thread. Even your leader gets steered by Gevlon. I get the impression you are the 'kings hand' to your overlord Mittens. Proof that I get told to post on this thread or we'll just assume you are full of ****. It's easy. Check your alliance mails. We can't post them here but I'm sure they'll be on eve skunk too. I'd forward them from my alt but that would just be silly.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2316
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:49:46 -
[435] - Quote
Occasionally, they tell us to upvote threads and all but I never do it because I just keep pressing F1 and it doesn't do anything. |
Salvos Rhoska
1221
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:51:30 -
[436] - Quote
Threats to report for censure, all caps laughing and then claims of confidential emails that will not be revealed.
Hmmm.
------------
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2089
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:54:28 -
[437] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Threats to report for censure, all caps laughing and then claims of confidential emails that will not be revealed.
Hmmm.
We are not allowed to post the mails that are available on eve skunk that mention entosis troll ship being on contract or a call to the alliance to come post positive stuff about the sov change to be sure CCP don't see to large of a majority in support of changing some of it.
For all I know, I'm about to be forum banned now...
Welp... |
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2316
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 19:55:44 -
[438] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Threats to report for censure, all caps laughing and then claims of confidential emails that will not be revealed.
Hmmm.
You should see the local chat when some of us end up in the same system. Some of it is pretty facepalmy, from both sides.
Also, isn't there CAOD for this inter-alliance shitposting? Can you continue doing it there?
We want to talk more about how Fozziesov is really boring and hasn't really changed 0.0 much at all and how CCP doesn't listen to the CSM, unless they want to fire someone. |
Salvos Rhoska
1221
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:07:06 -
[439] - Quote
Frostys Virpio wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Threats to report for censure, all caps laughing and then claims of confidential emails that will not be revealed.
Hmmm. We are not allowed to post the mails that are available on eve skunk that mention entosis troll ship being on contract or a call to the alliance to come post positive stuff about the sov change to be sure CCP don't see to large of a majority in support of changing some of it. For all I know, I'm about to be forum banned now... Welp...
Well, I for one hope you are not and think you walked the line just fine on candour.
But, subversion and deception are part and parcel of this game, and this forum is an extension.
A forum CTA for alliance members is perfectly valid, whether it did or did not happen.
Lets not be naive here, you and I. We both know that all interested parties (for whichever reason) are arguing en-force and deliberately to pursue their own agenda. Lets all not try to take this all too seriously, its a game that we all share afterall, and remember also that CCP has to read through all the politics for the core points of feedback.
I for one, and still hoping for someone to post itemized and numbered list of suggestions, especially as supported by experience with sov change. Ive seen them in other threads and some were quite good. I miss them here. Gives structure to the discussion.
------------
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1038
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:10:03 -
[440] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote: I've an idea for you, why not put up a small, regular 'anti-entosis' fleet that gets paid isk for patroling your outlying/renter regions? As a player who hates grinding for isk hunting and killing 'trollceptors' for payment would beat running anoms or mining any time of the day.
You have no idea how much you'd have to pay me to do that stupid **** on an even halfway regular basis. Ratting is terrible; chasing interceptors is somehow far worse.
I get the feeling that I'm not the only one who feels that way. |
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2317
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:11:02 -
[441] - Quote
The core point of feedback is pretty visible through all the politics and shiptoasting.
It's boring
People who like it only like it because it's boring the people they don't like =p |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6516
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:17:08 -
[442] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:I for one, and still hoping for someone to post itemized and numbered list of suggestions, especially as supported by experience with sov change. There's some easy starts for this: 1. Entosis links should only be able to be fitted by cruisers+ 2. Full defense index should require multiple simultaneous links to get started (2 or 3) 3. Moving outside of the range of the entosis link while it is running should burn it out (like overheating) with a repair cost of roughly half the cost of the link.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2091
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:19:40 -
[443] - Quote
Let's put discussion forward now and throw in a stupid idea.
What if we made T1 link only work on abandoned SOV but require the T2 link for other systems. Taking defenseless SOV is still just as easy but anything occupied require a minimum commitement.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6746
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:24:55 -
[444] - Quote
I could retort, but blue lists...
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Salvos Rhoska
1221
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:30:53 -
[445] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:I for one, and still hoping for someone to post itemized and numbered list of suggestions, especially as supported by experience with sov change. There's some easy starts for this: 1. Entosis links should only be able to be fitted by cruisers+ 2. Full defense index should require multiple simultaneous links to get started (2 or 3) 3. Moving outside of the range of the entosis link while it is running should burn it out (like overheating) with a repair cost of roughly half the cost of the link.
Alrighty. Well done!
Now could you elaborate on each point as to specifically why you suggest it? Include amusing experience anecdotes if possible, as per OP.
------------
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6518
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:36:32 -
[446] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:I for one, and still hoping for someone to post itemized and numbered list of suggestions, especially as supported by experience with sov change. There's some easy starts for this: 1. Entosis links should only be able to be fitted by cruisers+ 2. Full defense index should require multiple simultaneous links to get started (2 or 3) 3. Moving outside of the range of the entosis link while it is running should burn it out (like overheating) with a repair cost of roughly half the cost of the link. Alrighty. Well done! Now could you elaborate on each point as to specifically why you suggest it? Include amusing experience anecdotes if possible, as per OP. 1. Trollceptros stop existing. While people can easily contest so they risk losing their ship far more than they currently do. This encourages people to want to take sov when they choose to attack it. 2. This give an improved benefit to people's heavily used systems and it further increase the bar for entry. A single player arriving doesn't require immediate response but can be used to begin staging. 3. This reduces the amount of troll pilots with the whack-a-mole tactics we currently see, where they want to get defenders out but run away. This means that it not only costs but requires you to go and repair before repeating the process without waiting out the timer.
That's about the best you're getting because they're pretty self explanatory and to be quite honest irrelevant since CCP will do what CCP wants to do.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Panthe3 Black
The Branded Few Test Alliance Please Ignore
3
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:37:03 -
[447] - Quote
It's FW without LP |
Kit Bradovich
Dicistro Viridae
0
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:48:50 -
[448] - Quote
Akballah Kassan wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:
]LOL, mate, you know how it is because you're being told to do it. You show up in an interceptor, then run away when someone show up. You just over a system and repeat. With a whole bunch of people doing just that, the mechanic is boring as sin. You know this and you support this, because your feelings of "grr goons" are more important to you than whether or not CCP put in crappy mechanics and wreck part of the game.
As for free ride, we already have a free ride. The mechanic is boring, but it's cheap to fight back. Far cheaper than it used to be.
Nobody tells us to do anything. There are no CTA's in my alliance. As for me or my fellow alliance members 'showing up in an interceptor' we almost always have a cruiser as our entosis ship with frig and dessy support. We entosis stuff in the hope you will bring a fleet to fight us. Goons never disappoint on that front but because your whole tactic is blob warfare you bring 2-3 fleets (harpys, ferox and cerb fleets normally with numbers of 120-160 usually) to take us on. Obviously we can't take that on with a 20-25 man gang so we usually blueball and try and pick off stragglers when you leave - typical asymetrical tactics. Now if Goons really wanted a fight they would bring a roughly equal force to fight (you always have the big guns to call in later if things aren't going according to plan) but you NEVER do, so obviously your not really looking for a 'fight' just a massacre and complain when we won't play willing victims.
Well goonswarm fits their mascot (Bee) Lol because bees by themselves are only an annoyance until you squash it :-) but when bees swarm they are dangerous. Point being they know they are only dangerous in large overwhelming fleets ! By themselves they are another -hit against the Kb (squashed) bug :-) |
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
23
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:59:42 -
[449] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:I for one, and still hoping for someone to post itemized and numbered list of suggestions, especially as supported by experience with sov change. There's some easy starts for this: 1. Entosis links should only be able to be fitted by cruisers+ 2. Full defense index should require multiple simultaneous links to get started (2 or 3) 3. Moving outside of the range of the entosis link while it is running should burn it out (like overheating) with a repair cost of roughly half the cost of the link. Alrighty. Well done! Now could you elaborate on each point as to specifically why you suggest it? Include amusing experience anecdotes if possible, as per OP. 1. Trollceptros stop existing. While people can easily contest so they risk losing their ship far more than they currently do. This encourages people to want to take sov when they choose to attack it. 2. This give an improved benefit to people's heavily used systems and it further increase the bar for entry. A single player arriving doesn't require immediate response but can be used to begin staging. 3. This reduces the amount of troll pilots with the whack-a-mole tactics we currently see, where they want to get defenders out but run away. This means that it not only costs but requires you to go and repair before repeating the process without waiting out the timer. That's about the best you're getting because they're pretty self explanatory and to be quite honest irrelevant since CCP will do what CCP wants to do.
I don't agree with the premise that someone should desire to take Sov in order to be able to disrupt someone else's Sov.
The multiple simultaneous entosis links is interesting, if it is tied to defense index. Maybe high active systems require multiple, but lowest defense index systems only require one entosis links.
I don't agree with the burning out of the links when someone decides to dis-engage. Smells too much like entry barrier to me.
If your alliance is active in a given system, it shouldn't be too hard to shoo away the pesky annoyances. Requiring more active links in a higher defensive index is intriguing.
But anyone should be able to easily challenge Sov in a low activity system, even if their goal is only to disrupt it.
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2319
|
Posted - 2015.08.06 20:59:50 -
[450] - Quote
Salvos Rhoska wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Salvos Rhoska wrote:I for one, and still hoping for someone to post itemized and numbered list of suggestions, especially as supported by experience with sov change. There's some easy starts for this: 1. Entosis links should only be able to be fitted by cruisers+ 2. Full defense index should require multiple simultaneous links to get started (2 or 3) 3. Moving outside of the range of the entosis link while it is running should burn it out (like overheating) with a repair cost of roughly half the cost of the link. Alrighty. Well done! Now could you elaborate on each point as to specifically why you suggest it? Include amusing experience anecdotes if possible, as per OP.
I'll give it a try.
1) Trollceptors are bad. There are a bunch of reasons why but perhaps the most 'visible' reason is that they can avoid any actual confrontation, anytime, anywhere and still be as effective at the sov game as any other ship, which I guess is alright because CCP said they didn't want limitations but the boring truth is that we (the players) need limitations, otherwise we'll be bored shitless by the 'most effective' methods that us silly human beings always revert to using. We need you to dictate us a meta, not let us come up with one =p
Anecdotal evidence? I was in a trollceptor fleet to go and sovlaser a bunch of buildings 3 regions away purely to **** off the people there. We ran a trollceptor fleet to defend out stuff, purley to **** off the other guys. What am I getting at here? We're flying a ship that's good at pissing people off because pissing people off is a good way to win a war. It's an efficient way. It's what humans do! See? We need you to tell us how to do it. We need you to figure out how to have fun for us because we wont do it on our own.
Solution? Limitations, yes, I know, bad word, but if you want to force us to have fun, you need to do it.
2) Defense indexes are a bit meh at the moment. They are numbers that increase the amount of time it takes for an attacker to capture stuff. Good enough, I guess. It certainly provides an advantage but contrary to the amount of mind numbingly boring activities you have to submit yourself to in order to get any of this... You get the idea. Defense indexes are high in places that get a lot of traffic, that was the intention and that is working and maybe we are at fault for trying to hold on to our colours on the map.
Anecdotal evidence? I went ratting for a while. It was terrible. I was going to mine as well but luckily, someone blew up my ship before I got there.
Solution? Dare I say, bonuses to ship's parameters? More speed, better resists, that kind of thing =x It would do something for the next point on my list as well but it also has a chance to be abused and be very overpowered.
3) A reason to actually have sov.
Right now, the only people who supposedly have fun with fozziesov (Sorry, Aegis Sov) are those who do not really want any sov for themselves. If sov were a thing that meant anything beyond colours on Verite's influence map, maybe it would give more of an incentive to go for sov, try to hold sov and actually put some effort behind attacking it, defending it and you get the idea.
Alternatively... screw it all! Yes, make quality of space dynamic. Make asteroid belts disappear, make rats move away if a system/constellation/region is farmed to Narnja and back. That would force people to move around if they want to keep doing what they're doing. This is probably too much like a new sov system altogether and would require a lot of tweaks and changes to the rest of Eve to prevent everyone from just going to space that does not change. Also, this may be too much of a wormholer approach to the empire building that sov seems to be supposed to be.
Quote:Has your small alliance been able to capture space for the first time ever? I have seen a little bit of it but on a large scale, there does not seem to be much of a difference. Maybe, once all current 0.0 players get bored enough to log in for sovgames in their current state, new and fresh alliances can come in! Maybe that is the change you need.. maybe you just need to ban everyone who is in an alliance with more than 500 people and then wait and see what happens.
Quote:Are you playing World of Warships while AFK capping 800 command nodes? Essentially. I really hated the Myogi when I got it but then I started liking it a lot before I got the Kongo and now I am absolutely in love with it!
There are too many quotes in this post, so I am going to continue without a quote.
Has your corporation or alliance's playstyle been radically altered by fozziesov?
As opposed to before Aegis Sov or 6 months ago? Compared to before the update, no, not really. Compared to 6 months ago, yes. We're not flying ships across half of 0.0 anymore to have big wars. You know, the unbearable 10% TiDi slideshow kind of situations that are hailed as the biggest online battles by all kinds of media that might not even have anything to do with video games.
Phew, done. I think this was the longest post I ever typed up, except for that one time where I tried to make a suggestion about a working bounty system with purchaseable killrights and hitmen and space assassinations and whaaa! I hope it wasn't too much bullshit :3 |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 33 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |