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) |
Yang Aurilen
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
800
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 05:07:30 -
[901] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: What large afk empire? My alliance holds 28 systems, we use them, I know, I rat in them lol.
It's not that you don't understand what I'm talking about, it's that you don't want to. Frankly, I don't understand the idea of someone not wanting to know the truth of a situation. People who can't see past their own narrow (and in your case, outsider) perspective probably sholdn't join in on discussions like this, as most of the discussion will fly over your head.
Answer my question, how would you like the null-secification of your wormhole space? I mean, it would be ok right, seeing as you're fully happy with CCPs lowseccing of null?
And the entosis ship speed changes? Why are you stuck on the troll ceptor thing, trollceptors are nothing, gnats easily swatted. The issue is the focus of the Sov system being "small force wackamole" ala FW that gets REALLY tired after about 15 seconds even when you win the contest (and we have) rather than being one that encourages fleet fights (hopefully without the excesses of Dominion Sov) like CCP has been advertising to us for 12 years
I can deal with tidi, I can't stomach games of whackamole much. Thankfully since very little SOV challenging is going on for about 200 light years around me, I don't have to worry about being called to a snore fleet very often. But it's a shame, CCP missed an opportunity to strengthen the sandbox (with a no-sov option) rather than dampen it with this over-engineered monstrosity called Aegis.
Every alliance I've been in with any character, 80% of systems are empty at any given moment. Including CFC and Test. If you aren't big enough to have at least 2-3 pilots in every system on a daily basis, you're too big for the space you have. That's the point here. So why aren't the "small guys" taking said systems from the "big bad evil sov holders"? I mean from your experience and perception the "big bad null guys" are too big for the amount of system they hold.
Fozzie Sov pretty much got rid of structure grinds so the "small guys" no longer have any excuse of MUH SUPERS.
Post with your NPC alt main and not your main main alt!
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 05:12:02 -
[902] - Quote
Tell moa about these empty systems of ours, I think they were invading us
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat Working Stiffs
5281
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 05:12:40 -
[903] - Quote
It keeps going and going and ...
FYI, this thread ended back at 741, and arguably earlier than that. |
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2342
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 06:42:20 -
[904] - Quote
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Every alliance I've been in with any character, 80% of systems are empty at any given moment. Including CFC and Test. If you aren't big enough to have at least 2-3 pilots in every system on a daily basis, you're too big for the space you have.
That's the point here.
AU timezone opinion doesn't count :P |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16934
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 06:52:33 -
[905] - Quote
My experiences with fozzie sov can be loosely summarised thus: https://zkillboard.com/character/301445721/
It IS possible for sov alliances to deploy: we've done so
It IS possible to have great fights through sov: we've done so
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 07:09:46 -
[906] - Quote
I see that Northern Coalition. has made some bad choices in recent history.
Every change leaves the badguys just about to fall.
We just need more coalitions to exist to destroy them, more legions to be paid off, more lasersov, more something!!
|
Falken Falcon
32163
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 07:13:57 -
[907] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:My experiences with fozzie sov can be loosely summarised thus: https://zkillboard.com/character/301445721/ It IS possible for sov alliances to deploy: we've done so It IS possible to have great fights through sov: we've done so Can confirm.
CCP just gotta phase out the "sov trolling" tactics and fozzysov is golden.
Aye, Sea Turtles
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16936
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 07:29:20 -
[908] - Quote
Falken Falcon wrote:Malcanis wrote:My experiences with fozzie sov can be loosely summarised thus: https://zkillboard.com/character/301445721/ It IS possible for sov alliances to deploy: we've done so It IS possible to have great fights through sov: we've done so Can confirm. CCP just gotta phase out the "sov trolling" tactics and fozzysov is golden.
"Sov trolling" - a term used by people who think that undocking an interceptor in their prime time to defend a system is far too much to expect, but simultaneously think that it's far too little for an attacker to ante up.
If you're not going to muster sufficient defence to ward off a single ship, why would anyone bother to send more?
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Salvos Rhoska
1263
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:37:24 -
[909] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:No one is expecting perfection, but CCP saying to us that one of the lynchpin activities (fleet battles) that drew some of us in just aren't on the menu is a hefty kick in the teeth.
My reading between the lines of the dev blog numbered goals suggests this pretty strongly too.
They are moving away from large fleet battles and attempting to disperse conflict over more systems simultaneously.
Like that direction or not, or the means they are implementing to achieve that, but that much seems to be the underlying theme to the new goals.
Im not sure why, but I expect its reasonable to assume this is at lesst partly to avoid TiDi, save on server costs?, take some of the edge off sheer overpower of some existing bloc vs smaller aggressors, diversify and disperse fronts in an attempt to make sov ownership more dynamic.
Its arguable though, I think, whether sov mechanics, in any of its forms, have ever really been a deciding factor in large fleet battles happening in the first place.
Fights should be, I think, ultimately, what decide sov. PvP and explosions. Trick is finding a way to connect sov capture and ownership mechanics to PvP in a way that promotes fights, sooner or later.
------------
|
Falken Falcon
32163
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 08:56:58 -
[910] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Falken Falcon wrote:Malcanis wrote:My experiences with fozzie sov can be loosely summarised thus: https://zkillboard.com/character/301445721/ It IS possible for sov alliances to deploy: we've done so It IS possible to have great fights through sov: we've done so Can confirm. CCP just gotta phase out the "sov trolling" tactics and fozzysov is golden. "Sov trolling" - a term used by people who think that undocking an interceptor in their prime time to defend a system is far too much to expect, but simultaneously think that it's far too little for an attacker to ante up. If you're not going to muster sufficient defence to ward off a single ship, why would anyone bother to send more? I get what you are saying. It is usually a huge disapointment when you muster the 40 man cerb fleet expecting a fight, but then just when the fleet undocks, the scout(s) reports that it was 3 people in dessies and they are already bugging out when the saw the ceptor. vOv
Aye, Sea Turtles
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16936
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:09:10 -
[911] - Quote
You don't need 40 Cerberus
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6586
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 10:34:02 -
[912] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:My experiences with fozzie sov can be loosely summarised thus: https://zkillboard.com/character/301445721/ It IS possible for sov alliances to deploy: we've done so It IS possible to have great fights through sov: we've done so It's also possible to survive 4 miles of freefall into a train station roof without a parachute, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to rely on that as your method of leaving a plane. Sov mechanics, like FW mechanics can be used to generate conflict if both sides actively seek it, but don't drive conflict.
Malcanis wrote:"Sov trolling" - a term used by people who think that undocking an interceptor in their prime time to defend a system is far too much to expect, but simultaneously think that it's far too little for an attacker to ante up.
If you're not going to muster sufficient defence to ward off a single ship, why would anyone bother to send more? That's not the point though, is it. It's boring to chase a ship you know is deigned specifically to evade and is disposable in the odd time it's caught. The whole idea of sov is to create conflict. With sov trolling existing, even groups who used to create conflict now opt to run away.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:26:20 -
[913] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:My experiences with fozzie sov can be loosely summarised thus: https://zkillboard.com/character/301445721/ It IS possible for sov alliances to deploy: we've done so It IS possible to have great fights through sov: we've done so It's also possible to survive 4 miles of freefall into a train station roof without a parachute, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to rely on that as your method of leaving a plane. Sov mechanics, like FW mechanics can be used to generate conflict if both sides actively seek it, but don't drive conflict. Malcanis wrote:"Sov trolling" - a term used by people who think that undocking an interceptor in their prime time to defend a system is far too much to expect, but simultaneously think that it's far too little for an attacker to ante up.
If you're not going to muster sufficient defence to ward off a single ship, why would anyone bother to send more? That's not the point though, is it. It's boring to chase a ship you know is deigned specifically to evade and is disposable in the odd time it's caught. The whole idea of sov is to create conflict. With sov trolling existing, even groups who used to create conflict now opt to run away.
Its creating conflict, lots of conflict, just look at the forums. Oh yeah, just not conflict on your terms.
Gotta hate those guys who won't fight on your terms...
Like Sun Zu
Quote: If your enemy is secure at all points, be prepared for him. If he is in superior strength, evade him. If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him. Pretend to be weak, that he may grow arrogant. If he is taking his ease, give him no rest. If his forces are united, separate them. If sovereign and subject are in accord, put division between them. Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected.
Key points: -If he is in superior strength, evade him -If your opponent is temperamental, seek to irritate him -If he is taking his ease, give him no rest -Attack him where he is unprepared, appear where you are not expected
Sun Zu says that attack where your enemy is weakest, not where they are strongest.
You demand battles on your terms that are fun but that isn't the point. You are simply being attacked by the very principles of Sun Zu and you cannot or will not adapt. And those who are doing it are having fun, at your expense.
It is so amazing that he new form of Sov actually allows us as players to implement tactics and strategy in Sov warfare from the Art of War at such a fundamental level.
And it is so interesting to see some of those with the best gear in the game being unable to adapt.
|
Jenn aSide
Ascendent. Test Alliance Please Ignore
12156
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 12:42:30 -
[914] - Quote
Yang Aurilen wrote:Sonya Corvinus wrote:Jenn aSide wrote: What large afk empire? My alliance holds 28 systems, we use them, I know, I rat in them lol.
It's not that you don't understand what I'm talking about, it's that you don't want to. Frankly, I don't understand the idea of someone not wanting to know the truth of a situation. People who can't see past their own narrow (and in your case, outsider) perspective probably sholdn't join in on discussions like this, as most of the discussion will fly over your head.
Answer my question, how would you like the null-secification of your wormhole space? I mean, it would be ok right, seeing as you're fully happy with CCPs lowseccing of null?
And the entosis ship speed changes? Why are you stuck on the troll ceptor thing, trollceptors are nothing, gnats easily swatted. The issue is the focus of the Sov system being "small force wackamole" ala FW that gets REALLY tired after about 15 seconds even when you win the contest (and we have) rather than being one that encourages fleet fights (hopefully without the excesses of Dominion Sov) like CCP has been advertising to us for 12 years
I can deal with tidi, I can't stomach games of whackamole much. Thankfully since very little SOV challenging is going on for about 200 light years around me, I don't have to worry about being called to a snore fleet very often. But it's a shame, CCP missed an opportunity to strengthen the sandbox (with a no-sov option) rather than dampen it with this over-engineered monstrosity called Aegis.
Every alliance I've been in with any character, 80% of systems are empty at any given moment. Including CFC and Test. If you aren't big enough to have at least 2-3 pilots in every system on a daily basis, you're too big for the space you have. That's the point here. So why aren't the "small guys" taking said systems from the "big bad evil sov holders"? I mean from your experience and perception the "big bad null guys" are too big for the amount of system they hold. Fozzie Sov pretty much got rid of structure grinds so the "small guys" no longer have any excuse of MUH SUPERS.
Demonstrating that the problem was never "all those damn supers", it was "all that damn weakness and lack of drive" of the small guys. Lots of people (in game and in life) hide behind the idea that they can't win because of some per-existing condition, which is how they convince themselves to not even try in the 1st place (thus protecting them from the potential sting of defeat).
|
Sonya Corvinus
Chickenhawk.
96
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 14:27:11 -
[915] - Quote
Yang Aurilen wrote: So why aren't the "small guys" taking said systems from the "big bad evil sov holders"? I mean from your experience and perception the "big bad null guys" are too big for the amount of system they hold.
Fozzie Sov pretty much got rid of structure grinds so the "small guys" no longer have any excuse of MUH SUPERS.
because holding sov isn't a priority for the small guys. content generation is.
Jenn aSide wrote: Demonstrating that the problem was never "all those damn supers", it was "all that damn weakness and lack of drive" of the small guys. Lots of people (in game and in life) hide behind the idea that they can't win because of some per-existing condition, which is how they convince themselves to not even try in the 1st place (thus protecting them from the potential sting of defeat).
supers were never the problem. alliances with thousands and thousands of members refusing to take the risk of shrinking and setting neighbors to red has been the problem for years.
which is why major alliances are petitioning against the recent changes |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1139
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:23:11 -
[916] - Quote
Look, you can ride the "stop blueing everyone" train to the end of the line, but what you are hoping for isn't going to happen. Those who disliked the scope of our coalition are mostly already gone. What you have left, is largely a bunch of friends (in leadership anyway) who will ride Eve to it's grave before resetting each other, just because some lowsec jackasses think we should. This has been shown time and again. No interceptors, cancer nodes, or amount of "it's your own fault" is going to change that. We are humans. We have formed a cohesive spacetribe. It's been this way for years. CCP can either plan around that, or watch things continue to go to hell. I am honestly at the point where I don't even care anymore. I'll leave the game before I see coalitionmates resetting each other just because CCP saw fit to shoot themselves in the foot with a gun that was loaded for human nature. I have a feeling that I am not the only one. |
Sonya Corvinus
Chickenhawk.
96
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:26:47 -
[917] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:Look, you can ride the "stop blueing everyone" train to the end of the line, but what you are hoping for isn't going to happen. Those who disliked the scope of our coalition are mostly already gone. What you have left, is largely a bunch of friends (in leadership anyway) who will ride Eve to it's grave, before resetting each other just because some lowsec jackasses think we should. This has been shown time and again. No interceptors, cancer nodes, or amount of "it's your own fault" is going to change that. We are humans. We have formed a cohesive spacetribe. It's been this way for years. CCP can either plan around that, or watch things continue to go to hell. I am honestly at the point where I don't even care anymore. I'll leave the game before I see coalitionmates resetting each other just because CCP saw fit to shoot themselves in the foot with a gun that was loaded for human nature. I have a feeling that I am not the only one.
I don't disagree with any of this.
It does confirm that the major alliances are bears though. |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1139
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:31:15 -
[918] - Quote
That's pretty irrelevant to the point. Feel free to invade Deklein, and we'd be happy to show you. Oh, right, ~elitepvp~ won't help you here. It's pretty amazing how happy these bears are, to drop 30 to 40 of their bearing ships on anyone stupid enough to bring anything worth killing. We have our home. Feel free to kick in the door at any time. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2288
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:32:50 -
[919] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:You don't need 40 Cerberus
Heh, people bring overwhelming numbers and can't figure out why people don't stick around to fight. Mind boggling.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2288
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:35:56 -
[920] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:That's pretty irrelevant to the point. Feel free to invade Deklein, and we'd be happy to show you. Oh, right, ~elitepvp~ won't help you here. It's pretty amazing how happy these bears are, to drop 30 to 40 of their bearing ships on anyone stupid enough to bring anything worth killing. We have our home. Feel free to kick in the door at any time.
I'm convinced any invading force would be recruited and quickly added to your blue ball of boring. Unless it's 2 or 3 people, then they are trolling because you actually have to log in to deal with it and many tears must be shed so CCP can cave again.
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
|
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1139
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:37:55 -
[921] - Quote
If you call 40 Cerbs overwhelming numbers, I can't help but wonder why no one wants to fly with you. With the number of nerds we have around at any time, we'll usually have more than 40 in a fleet before a ping even goes out. I do like how people can say "make some friends" out of one side of their mouth to new players, while basically telling others "you have too many friends, and need to leave most of them at home" out of the other. |
Sonya Corvinus
Chickenhawk.
96
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:40:25 -
[922] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:That's pretty irrelevant to the point. Feel free to invade Deklein, and we'd be happy to show you. Oh, right, ~elitepvp~ won't help you here. It's pretty amazing how happy these bears are, to drop 30 to 40 of their bearing ships on anyone stupid enough to bring anything worth killing. We have our home. Feel free to kick in the door at any time.
/sigh. bears will be bears I guess |
Gallowmere Rorschach
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
1139
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 15:51:06 -
[923] - Quote
You can call us by whatever name you wish. It doesn't change the fact that we'll just be over here, playing other games with this same group of friends, until CCP decides to unfuck their game. My point is, we've been here for years. We're not going anywhere. You would think people would have accepted this by now, and realized that any attempt to break us apart is going to result in unsubs, not a broken coalition and more space fights for everyone. That being said, if you want to see conflict, give us a reason to wake the sleeping giant and lumber this big ass behemoth across the universe. "Gudfites" is not a reason. However, something like mobile and depleting high value resources might be. Initiative have always been a special (and kinda weird) case. I am positive that no matter how badly CCP ***** the bed on sov mechanics, they'll find a way to pick up conflict out of it. The rest of us just can't be arsed to put in that kind of effort without a tangible reason to do so. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6590
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:29:08 -
[924] - Quote
From this alone everything you ever say has now become entirely irrelevant. I mean for starters, we're not 12 anymore. Secondly, it's Sun Tzu.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2288
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 16:41:16 -
[925] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:If you call 40 Cerbs overwhelming numbers, I can't help but wonder why no one wants to fly with you. With the number of nerds we have around at any time, we'll usually have more than 40 in a fleet before a ping even goes out. I do like how people can say "make some friends" out of one side of their mouth to new players, while basically telling others "you have too many friends, and need to leave most of them at home" out of the other.
Yeah when you bring 40 to fight 3 it's overwhelming numbers. Did you fail math or just skip school completely?
~ Professional Forum Alt -á~
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16938
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:26:43 -
[926] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:I see that Northern Coalition. has made some bad choices in recent history.
That is also true.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Salvos Rhoska
1264
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:26:50 -
[927] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:we'll usually have more than 40 in a fleet before a ping even goes out.
Impressive, but also inversly part of the problem.
The "F1 monkey" phenomenon is real. You know that as much as I do.
As has been your strategy of assimilation and incorporation, you were wise to recruit them. But nonetheless, these are players who just want to be on the winning side, and be ordered around. They side with a "winner", cos it makes them feel like a "winner". Again, you know this as much as I do.
Basically WoW mentality players, with nothing else to offer, and whom produce nothing unless directed to do so. Passive, useless meat riding on your coat-tail, and all the more demanding for you/someone to lead them.
I sympathise and commiserate with how hard it must be to placate them. Im sure most of you would rather push them out of an airlock and be done with it.
------------
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
16938
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:27:58 -
[928] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote: Initiative have always been a special (and kinda weird) case...
orly? I thought we were a super old school kind of alliance.
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
|
Cancel Align NOW
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
557
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 17:43:38 -
[929] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Malcanis wrote:"Sov trolling" - a term used by people who think that undocking an interceptor in their prime time to defend a system is far too much to expect, but simultaneously think that it's far too little for an attacker to ante up.
If you're not going to muster sufficient defence to ward off a single ship, why would anyone bother to send more? That's not the point though, is it. It's boring to chase a ship you know is deigned specifically to evade and is disposable in the odd time it's caught. The whole idea of sov is to create conflict. With sov trolling existing, even groups who used to create conflict now opt to run away.
Perhaps SMA should invade Initiative. It would provide some clarity in this discussion. |
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
2121
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 18:10:04 -
[930] - Quote
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote: That being said, if you want to see conflict, give us a reason to wake the sleeping giant and lumber this big ass behemoth across the universe. "Gudfites" is not a reason. However, something like mobile and depleting high value resources might be.
Why throw billions worth of fleet at an objective without being sure there is that much value left in the system you are trying to capture? The issue with the moving ressources is that it's value is much lower because you never really know how much of it is left before you take it. How often would you siege a moon if sometime, there was 3 tick of goo left in it before it depleeted? Might as well just wait for it to spawn back on your turf... |
|
|
|
|
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 |