Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 46 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 23:06:17 -
[811] - Quote
Arrendis wrote: What's next, mocking CONDI for not dominating Faction Warfare? At least we are blue to Fweddit and they do?
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!!
|
Sgt Ocker
Military Bustards FUBAR.
701
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 23:07:37 -
[812] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:We're saying there will be no big fights as there's no REASON to start them Which is of exactly no relevance whatsoever to sov mechanics, whatever they may be. I think your wrong. Devs made it quite clear they intended sov to be a driver for conflicts and fighting.
Quote:Goal #1: As much as possible, ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved Goal #6: Spread the largest Sovereignty battles over multiple star systems to take advantage of New EdenGÇÖs varied geography and to better manage server load. To date with new sov; Hundreds of systems entosed, 1 (big) fight, which took place in one system.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode -
Vice Admiral, Forum Dictator, Arrogant Nobody
|
Vic Jefferson
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
547
|
Posted - 2015.08.20 23:46:06 -
[813] - Quote
Sgt Ocker wrote: To date with new sov; Hundreds of systems entosed, 1 (big) fight, which took place in one system.
A keen perception obfuscated by the heaps of grr in this thread.
It's a very good point. Any and all opinions on either side are worth nothing compared to hard numbers and real evidence. The success of the system should be measured by the proportions of reinforces that lead to a change in sov, particularly a new entity claiming it. Now you could make such a metric more involved, but it would be much harder to quantify and qualify what counts as a successful defence, especially when many successful defences are just displays of force, and don't actually escalate into fight after both sides are mutually scouted. Therefore, while crude, a good metric is simply the ratio of reinforces that result in a structure/system/etc being changed hands. If an overwhelming majority of reinforces do not result in a change of some kind, then the mechanic is a terrible failure, because one would absolutely not RF something unless one had both the intention and the resources to actually follow through on it, unless it is just simple trolling, which I'd guess the majority is currently. Sov mechanics are supposed to let powers attack each other, not enable a single interceptor to troll a region.
Of course then you could get fancy with those metrics, once you got going. I.E size of the attacker and defender, weighted chances of a successful attack...you could go nuts with it, and it would be absolutely a blast for people who like numbers. At the end of the day though, the take home message is that RFs that do not commonly result in a successful invasion:
A)Should not be costless, they currently are. -Cost to use an entosis link should be ISK paid to CONCORD -Cost to fail to actually invade should cost the alliance ISK, status, or incur penalties. -Limit the amount of entosis an alliance can do based on size: an alliance of 2 corps with 10 people each has no business reinforcing more than a few things at time. -Unsuccessful Entosis should cause the capsuleer to lose SP, the same way losing a T3 cruiser does.
B)Should not be numerically the overwhelming majority of RFs. RFs are designed to let sovereign entities invade each other, and if this is simply not happening with enough of them, then the mechanic is a failure and needs to be revisited. -When most RFs are trolling, its a failure. -When most RFs are actual people actually interested in taking actual space, the mechanic is a raving success!
Graphs won't do. We all remember, hey look, more capitals are exploding post Phoebe graphs - but they aren't very convincing at all when you consider how popular insurance frauding capitals in-lieu of moving them is. A tiny little filter on the data could remove all those, then you'd have a greater chance of convincing people of what you are trying to prove. Or the hilarious amounts of capitals dying in Aridia - yes the average goes up, but they aren't provoking or generating actual fights. It's like watching ship kills in Uedama - PvP yes, fights no.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:30:34 -
[814] - Quote
Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote: torp bombers your coalition used to grind sov during fountain and halloween wars that could cloak as soon as someone enters local, and that can move via covert cynos.
It astounds me that people are still bitter about siegefleet. it astounds me that you see bitterness there.
i'm just pointing out the obvious. it was the same concept for risk free sov capture as inties are now, and goons jumped on it now that the tables have turned - goons are crying nerf to inties.
well done to CCP for ignoring people who asked to nerf bombers (not that i think there were any), keep up the good job ignoring the goon tears now |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:33:46 -
[815] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote: You are missing what we are saying here, we like the new fozzie sov system. It just needs tweaks and details ironed out i.e. an interceptor being able to solo a whole constellation, regardless if anyone is defending or not.
the only thing that needs ironing out is elimination of pure trolls. if no one comes to spin the nodes when structures come out of RF they should despawn after couple of days and the structure should go back to defender.
now if someone is serious about taking sov, there is no reason inty shouldn't be able to do it when defender doesn't show up.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:35:25 -
[816] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote: torp bombers your coalition used to grind sov during fountain and halloween wars that could cloak as soon as someone enters local, and that can move via covert cynos.
It astounds me that people are still bitter about siegefleet. it astounds me that you see bitterness there. i'm just pointing out the obvious. it was the same concept for risk free sov capture as inties are now, and goons jumped on it now that the tables have turned - goons are crying nerf to inties. well done to CCP for ignoring people who asked to nerf bombers (not that i think there were any), keep up the good job ignoring the goon tears now The fact that you considered it "risk free" is where the bitterness originates. Or, to be more specific, that it was used in proxy for the dreadnoughts typically considered for the role, denying anyone in drop range a bunch of free dread kills.
Siegefleet was a marvelous way to reduce risk -- it was not, by any means, risk free. If siegefleet was risk free, then all tactics involving dropping bombers would also carry forth this connotation, and few people bemoan the bomber drop as a risk-free ganking experience.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:53:03 -
[817] - Quote
Querns wrote: The fact that you considered it "risk free" is where the bitterness originates. Or, to be more specific, that it was used in proxy for the dreadnoughts typically considered for the role, denying anyone in drop range a bunch of free dread kills.
Siegefleet was a marvelous way to reduce risk -- it was not, by any means, risk free. If siegefleet was risk free, then all tactics involving dropping bombers would also carry forth this connotation, and few people bemoan the bomber drop as a risk-free ganking experience.
you are confusing two things here, pvp and contesting undefended systems.
there is a difference between dropping stack of bombers on someone who can shoot back, and dropping them on the structure with no hostile in local. of course it wasn't entirely risk free, i remember us decimating a few of those fleets, when your people got so bored that they probably went afk and stopped watching local.
same thing applies to inties in current sov mechanics. if someone tried to use them to capture sov against a proper fleet, they'd be dead. they only turn into risk free thing when the system they are used in aren't defended.
in your second sentence you outlines the exact reason why you want inties to not be able to entosis - you just want free kills for anyone in the drop range.
as i outlined before, if you are worried about people trolling your sov, changes need to be done to the mechanics so that the structures return to normal state if no one captured the beacons for a certain period of time.
|
Plaid Rabbit
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 00:55:47 -
[818] - Quote
It also required a fair amount of effort. Those fleets were 40+ people, instead of 1 guy in a trollceptor. Instead of 5 guys in dreads, it was a swarm of guys in something cheaper, grinding the sov more slowly. |
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
49
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:04:06 -
[819] - Quote
Plaid Rabbit wrote:It also required a fair amount of effort. Those fleets were 40+ people, instead of 1 guy in a trollceptor. Instead of 5 guys in dreads, it was a swarm of guys in something cheaper, grinding the sov more slowly.
It's about the effort of the attacker. The goons put forth effort (20man/hours per structure or so) to take out a structure. why should taking something that no one needs enough to bother defending it require much effort? |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:11:32 -
[820] - Quote
Warmeister wrote: you are confusing two things here, pvp and contesting undefended systems.
there is a difference between dropping stack of bombers on someone who can shoot back, and dropping them on the structure with no hostile in local. of course it wasn't entirely risk free, i remember us decimating a few of those fleets, when your people got so bored that they probably went afk and stopped watching local.
same thing applies to inties in current sov mechanics. if someone tried to use them to capture sov against a proper fleet, they'd be dead. they only turn into risk free thing when the system they are used in aren't defended.
in your second sentence you outlines the exact reason why you want inties to not be able to entosis - you just want free kills for anyone in the drop range.
as i outlined before, if you are worried about people trolling your sov, changes need to be done to the mechanics so that the structures return to normal state if no one captured the beacons for a certain period of time.
Generally, a few recons take care of the "shooting back" problem.
While I enjoy dropping on nerds as much as the next fat guy, unfortunately fatigue makes this an unwieldy proposition against troll threats. I would struggle to find it even in the same vein as dropping supercapitals on anything in the galaxy at moderate to severe distances. (Not calling out any player group here; we abused the **** out of it as much as anyone else.)
And you are mischaracterizing the goals of the Imperium at large if you think kills are our primary motivating factor. Our primary motivating factor is protecting the empire. To that extent, we would like it so that there is a reasonable chance for malefactors towards our holdings, which we've worked for five years to create, to be caught and punished. Kills intersect nicely here on the account of nearly everyone else in Eve valuing ship kills over sov; this creates the necessary negative reinforcement.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:14:27 -
[821] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Plaid Rabbit wrote:It also required a fair amount of effort. Those fleets were 40+ people, instead of 1 guy in a trollceptor. Instead of 5 guys in dreads, it was a swarm of guys in something cheaper, grinding the sov more slowly.
It's about the effort of the attacker. The goons put forth effort (20man/hours per structure or so) to take out a structure. why should taking something that no one needs enough to bother defending it require much effort?
The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
Thank you, sov team, for adding the publicly visible ADMs and timers; they allow for succinct silencing of these sorts of accusations.
e: Also of note is the fact that we ceded a total of five regions leading up to both Phoebe and Aegis. The vaunted Empire Contraction has taken place! We can only tighten the belt so much (goons are fat.)
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:21:37 -
[822] - Quote
Querns wrote: The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
if it's "well utilised" then i'm not sure why we are having this discussion, troll ceptors won't be able to do a thing |
Plaid Rabbit
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:28:17 -
[823] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Plaid Rabbit wrote:It also required a fair amount of effort. Those fleets were 40+ people, instead of 1 guy in a trollceptor. Instead of 5 guys in dreads, it was a swarm of guys in something cheaper, grinding the sov more slowly.
It's about the effort of the attacker. The goons put forth effort (20man/hours per structure or so) to take out a structure. why should taking something that no one needs enough to bother defending it require much effort?
Agreed. We should have a man/hr number somewhere in the middle. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:31:49 -
[824] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
if it's "well utilised" then i'm not sure why we are having this discussion, troll ceptors won't be able to do a thing We actually don't have much problem with them at all -- the only group that actually tries to RF our stuff uses 500mn omens instead.
We're allowed to be proactive with this sort of thing. This is usually the first step in helping the game, and failing the acceptance of our eternal beatitude, abusing the mechanic so hard that change is forced.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:35:13 -
[825] - Quote
Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
if it's "well utilised" then i'm not sure why we are having this discussion, troll ceptors won't be able to do a thing We actually don't have much problem with them at all -- the only group that actually tries to RF our stuff uses 500mn omens instead. We're allowed to be proactive with this sort of thing. This is usually the first step in helping the game, and failing the acceptance of our eternal beatitude, abusing the mechanic so hard that change is forced. to me it sounds like working as intended - utilised space is hard to capture, unused space can be capured by any passer by with entosis link |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1834
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 01:39:14 -
[826] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: The implication here that we don't need nor could utilize our current holdings is laughable. Check the ADMs across Imperium space; besides the areas currently undergoing sov transfer in "western" (dotlan projection) Pure Blind, everything is well-utilized.
if it's "well utilised" then i'm not sure why we are having this discussion, troll ceptors won't be able to do a thing We actually don't have much problem with them at all -- the only group that actually tries to RF our stuff uses 500mn omens instead. We're allowed to be proactive with this sort of thing. This is usually the first step in helping the game, and failing the acceptance of our eternal beatitude, abusing the mechanic so hard that change is forced. to me it sounds like working as intended - utilised space is hard to capture, unused space can be capured by any passer by with entosis link It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence.
Imperium regions are not typical of Eve at large. Our largest defensive structure is our reputation.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:03:44 -
[827] - Quote
Querns wrote: It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence. .
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that. attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1835
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:13:34 -
[828] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence. .
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that. attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted. Wanting to affect negative reinforcement in your aggressors is in no way "taking ownership for granted."
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:23:19 -
[829] - Quote
Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence. .
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that. attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted. Wanting to affect negative reinforcement in your aggressors is in no way "taking ownership for granted." you have a perfect avenue for negative reinforcement. use all your titans and supers to hell camp every station they are based in so the only thing they can fly out is an inty. purchase all the inties in those stations and relist for 10 times the price. be inventive, use the vast resources you control. if they move, keep moving after them until they roll over |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1835
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:27:55 -
[830] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence. .
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that. attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted. Wanting to affect negative reinforcement in your aggressors is in no way "taking ownership for granted." you have a perfect avenue for negative reinforcement. use all your titans and supers to hell camp every station they are based in so the only thing they can fly out is an inty. purchase all the inties in those stations and relist for 10 times the price. be inventive, use the vast resources you control. if they move, keep moving after them until they roll over You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:28:08 -
[831] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: It's more that the current system lacks a way to adequately punish an attacker for their insolence. .
i feel that the punishment of sov owner for failing to defend outweighs that. attacker owns nothing, defender owns a chunk of space. he shouldn't take his ownership for granted. Wanting to affect negative reinforcement in your aggressors is in no way "taking ownership for granted." you have a perfect avenue for negative reinforcement. use all your titans and supers to hell camp every station they are based in so the only thing they can fly out is an inty. purchase all the inties in those stations and relist for 10 times the price. be inventive, use the vast resources you control. if they move, keep moving after them until they roll over good news for all those new small sov owners!
where did they go, i thought they all appeared when magic wands did
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!!
|
Warmeister
Van Diemen's Demise Pandemic Legion
50
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:31:48 -
[832] - Quote
Querns wrote: You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
because you are pretty much the only ones complaining in this thread |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1835
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 02:34:10 -
[833] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
because you are pretty much the only ones complaining in this thread We're goons -- we live to post. Posting is what we do.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 03:35:13 -
[834] - Quote
Hi, I like to post while watching lasers cycle (magic or mining).
This is really relevant to lasersov, as you can see.
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!!
|
Harry Saq
Blueprint Haus Blades of Grass
113
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 03:44:28 -
[835] - Quote
bigbillthaboss3 wrote:Im'a toughy and my friends...er...me and my friends gun hurt you and tell mommy it was yer fawlt ...noted, I will be sure to have my lunch money on hand too...that wasted troll aside, this will prove the point of FozzieSov. You can enjoy your journey across the universe to poop and pee all over other's space, then leave and thump your chest and watch everybody move right back in. Unless you plan on actually moving into those systems, your pomp and circumstance will just be noise. We all know they aren't done iterating on sov and making null livable/defense worthy. Until that happens this is just an exercise in anti-boredom narrative building.
Like I have said in other posts Team 5-0, keep your eye on the ball and keep the concept of making space big, where local literally means the system and constellation you are in, and where it is worth fighting your actual neighbors not for content farming but actual compelling infrastructure and logistics need. The mega coalition concept and meta is obsolete, and only petulantly being held onto by intransigent arcane (and based on the "meta" narrative, hypocritical) thinking by a very unhappy vocal few. Of whom, some I do not even fault because old tales of over-romanticized 4k mega-brawls where ever so minor details like node dropping and soul crushing lag tidi misery marathons are glazed over or just plain left out.
I am no believer in CCPs ability to do things well, timely or remotely correctly, but they atleast nailed the concept and vision part, no matter how it plays out, a successful (or even moderately failed) execution of mechanics and improvements toward that vision would (and should) render organizations larger than alliances completely unnecessary. Some of these loud voices are the very ones stating that coalitions are simply a necessary evil to thwart bad design, yet now still cling and argue for hooks and compromises that draw us back into that stagnant design mentality.
Entosis modules should absolutely be able to be on anything; ceptors fitted with them can just as well capture an uncontested command node event for an attacker OR defender, and absolutely should be used in this way. Decay back to ownership is retrograde thinking, and goes counter to the point of alliances owning and renewing claim to their space as a basic responsibility. Forcing entosis modules on large slow ships is the argument of a disingenuous empire builder wanting to make it harder to hit empty space.
Finally, those crying for killmails on entoasted structures due to some presupposed purity of Eve are also being disingenuous. They want the killmails so they can flaunt what they destroyed for general griefing/aka "narrative" building and anti-boredom nose rubbing incentive. Killmails are a sov trolling incentive vs an actual necessary output for basic sov takeover. So all those scream crying about troll-ceptors and begging for killmails are arguing both sides of the "sov trolling" concept only to a comfortable n+1 end. This is made clear when you put those arguments (Entosis on BC and above + killmails for toasting) together, and reveal the real desire to maintain the n+1 design that they theoretically loath, and only reluctantly do to teach CCP a lesson. It's quite silly, obvious and transparent.
Maybe it isn't disingenuous, sinister or driven by motive....maybe they just don't know any better...whatever the reason, the outcome is the same, and we have been living that outcome for years...however, I believe the tough guy threat against me above, also helps make clear where the priority in mentality lies. That is, I want to gang up on people smaller and feel powerful while flaunting phat killmails vs actually acknowledging compelling game design that allows for more individualized skill and meaningful group (large and small) gameplay...but what the hell do I know, I am just in one of those small alliances that has been actively participating in the new mechanics on a day to day basis... |
Snowmann
Arrow Industries
38
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 03:44:59 -
[836] - Quote
Querns wrote:Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
because you are pretty much the only ones complaining in this thread We're goons -- we live to post. Posting is what we do.
We all know its much more than that. Been there, seen it, heard it, passed on the tee-shirt and lifetime membership.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6813
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 03:59:33 -
[837] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote:but what the hell do I know, I am just in one of those small alliances that has been actively participating in the new mechanics on a day to day basis... So you're a sovtroll?
I can see why you might want to maintain that.
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!!
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1107
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:05:29 -
[838] - Quote
Warmeister wrote:Querns wrote: You're still approaching this conversation with an Imperium-focused bent. Why?
because you are pretty much the only ones complaining in this thread
Other than the members of NCdot, BL, people in PL who aren't you, and others who've actually dealt with sov.
None of your arguments address the fact that 'orbit button in space' is boring as heck, non-engaging gameplay that makes up the other half of the complaints. |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1107
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:09:25 -
[839] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Harry Saq wrote:but what the hell do I know, I am just in one of those small alliances that has been actively participating in the new mechanics on a day to day basis... So you're a sovtroll? I can see why you might want to maintain that.
No, he's ex-LAWN, and he's apparently bitter that Blue-P didn't want to leave Fountain. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1836
|
Posted - 2015.08.21 04:14:32 -
[840] - Quote
Harry Saq wrote: ...noted, I will be sure to have my lunch money on hand too...that wasted troll aside, this will prove the point of FozzieSov. You can enjoy your journey across the universe to poop and pee all over other's space, then leave and thump your chest and watch everybody move right back in. Unless you plan on actually moving into those systems, your pomp and circumstance will just be noise. We all know they aren't done iterating on sov and making null livable/defense worthy. Until that happens this is just an exercise in anti-boredom narrative building.
I guess ihubs don't have value or utility where you live.
Quote: The mega coalition concept and meta is obsolete
This is false.
Quote: I am no believer in CCPs ability to do things well, timely or remotely correctly, but they atleast nailed the concept and vision part, no matter how it plays out, a successful (or even moderately failed) execution of mechanics and improvements toward that vision would (and should) render organizations larger than alliances completely unnecessary.
Why are large organizations unnecessary? Hell, your corp used to be in the Imperium four months ago.
Quote: Entosis modules should absolutely be able to be on anything; ceptors fitted with them can just as well capture an uncontested command node event for an attacker OR defender, and absolutely should be used in this way. Decay back to ownership is retrograde thinking, and goes counter to the point of alliances owning and renewing claim to their space as a basic responsibility. Forcing entosis modules on large slow ships is the argument of a disingenuous empire builder wanting to make it harder to hit empty space.
Finally, those crying for killmails on entoasted structures due to some presupposed purity of Eve are also being disingenuous. They want the killmails so they can flaunt what they destroyed for general griefing/aka "narrative" building and anti-boredom nose rubbing incentive. Killmails are a sov trolling incentive vs an actual necessary output for basic sov takeover. So all those scream crying about troll-ceptors and begging for killmails are arguing both sides of the "sov trolling" concept only to a comfortable n+1 end. This is made clear when you put those arguments (Entosis on BC and above + killmails for toasting) together, and reveal the real desire to maintain the n+1 design that they theoretically loath, and only reluctantly do to teach CCP a lesson. It's quite silly, obvious and transparent.
Maybe it isn't disingenuous, sinister or driven by motive....maybe they just don't know any better...whatever the reason, the outcome is the same, and we have been living that outcome for years...however, I believe the tough guy threat against me above, also helps make clear where the priority in mentality lies. That is, I want to gang up on people smaller and feel powerful while flaunting phat killmails vs actually acknowledging compelling game design that allows for more individualized skill and meaningful group (large and small) gameplay...but what the hell do I know, I am just in one of those small alliances that has been actively participating in the new mechanics on a day to day basis...
It's pretty clear that your opinions are driven by whatever the Imperium's aren't. I should probably be careful how I use the words "bleach" and "drink" henceforth.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 .. 46 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |