Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Quesa
Burning Napalm Northern Coalition.
82
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:39:07 -
[91] - Quote
Maybe I'm too tired to say this but I seem to have spotted a typo:
Quote:All Entosis capture progress for owned structures, command nodes for owned structures and online station services will regenerate towards full owner control if nobody has an active link running. This regeneration only applies when the structure is partially contested, not while reinforced.
The pace of this automatic regeneration will be slower than active linking from defenders, but it provides another option for defenders to choose between after they have driven off their attackers.
Also, you're using two different types of scales (seconds and minutes) for your http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/67557/1/tableforsov.png chart showing regen times. (this is just me nit-picking though, sorry!) |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1977
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:44:48 -
[92] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote: You realize if you come across a gate bubbled like that.. all you do is wave the magic ticket wand at a GM.. and those players who dropped all those Bubbles will feel very sorry. while you can Bubble a gate.. only X amount of bubbles may be used. Any amount of Cans/bubbles around gates that start to effect the loading of someones computers is considered bannable and an exploit. CCP has swung that magic hammer many times on players, suspending them and banning them for multiple offences.
It is a fair whack before it can be claimed to be lag inducing, as I'm sure you well know.
My point remains, relying on an edge case of lag inducing bubbles and GM hand waving doesn't strengthen your argument.
What should have happened is as I said, minimum align time, lower speed. Debatable sundries would be higher fuel costs and high cycle times (to allow running them down in time).
This swings the pendulum too far back the other way. |
Baron Holbach
The Northerners Northern Coalition.
32
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:48:20 -
[93] - Quote
this 5 day max fatigue is joke ... most of capital pilots (if they are playing) are active player who would usually want to play more than once a week in weekend.... while i agree its nice that you can't ***** youself 2hard when over jumping - in large picture its quite useless change - i never managed to get much over day of fatiqu for playing smart... i once once managed to jump my fatiqu over week and that was last jumps to move my titan and i just made those jumps knowing i never have change to use it and while logged off and inactive it has all the time in world to wait until fatigue goes away
PLEASE INCRASE BLACK OPS FATIQU BONUS - THIS 50% IS TOTAL JOKE... 90% LIKE JF WOULD ACTUALLY GET THAT SHIP BACK TO GAME AS SOMETHING FUN TO USE AGAIN :P with current 50% bonus ja bit more max range it still means you can do 3-4 jumps a day unless you want to wait hour between jumps ... what usually means 1 change for hotdroop :S |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
219
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:49:09 -
[94] - Quote
Reppyk wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Have you considered Actually finishing something you started or is your group just not competent enough to hold it? Have you considered that many people are interested in the fight and not in the sov/ihubs/whatever ? Have you considered that, since the nodes will regen, a lot less fights can be expected ? Have you considered that, since the anom buff, you can park 600 pilots in the same constellation and they all have something to grind, making our current universe way too big for the low population in 00 ? Have you considered that the game does not need a better, juicer carrot, but on the contrary a lower density of the riches, that would create conflicts after ~4 years of relative peace ?
The problem is SOV for the average member doesn't offer As much riches as many claim. Hell its why I personally rather rent. I pay less in the long run and short run then I would on Infrastructure and Defense of assets. If I seen a reason to take Sov that outweighed what I made on my FW or Incursion alts.. my corp would not be renting.. but brawling again. As it stands now tho. I can putz around in null and make more Isk per hour in hi-sec or low-sec warfare zones. It's why the majority of pilots across all alliances in all sov areas have Incursion alts. No way am I saying change Faction Warfare or Incursions, I like my isk. But as for Reasons to fight in other regions and take Sov elsewhere. I have no reason to risk my toys for Sov, when I can get the better benefits elsewhere.
The big empires have no reason to kick over each others sandcastles when nothing of Value is sitting in the neighbors yard. Sure you can look at Lowering the density of what is around each Sov area. But it has to be done in a way that would effect the Leadership chains of the large and small alliances - Sov holding or not. Moons at one point drove conflict then they spread the value everywhere. Many suggestions have gone into these forums on how to change wealth redistribution of Sov. Having moons run out, making moons change what you can mine in certain cycles, etc. None of it is anything that would drive anyone to kick a castle over that isn't already well stocked up. Null Sov needs something new built into it to make empires want to go and fight elsewhere. Having something change that is long stocked up would only effect them if those assets were getting destroyed. They still need a reason to Exhaust the stocks. Not sit on them and chuckle buying what they need out of market hubs.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1876
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:53:20 -
[95] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Quote limit. Querns wrote: Cynos can be nullified -- you can put a covert cyno on a covert, nullified strategic cruiser and sneak any number of people behind the dread bubble wall, then refit to a more combat-oriented configuration using mobile depots once you've arrived.
You can also shoot the bubbles. A large bubble costs 10m (20m for T2), so if you consistently blow them up, you can probably encourage the bubble havers to stop throwing money away. Anchored bubbles just aren't that big of a deal. Their defense of sovereignty is hardly meaningful at all -- at best, they slow down people hunting ratters. A sovereignty conquering force should have little issue destroying them.
It is still a hilarious design goal fail. Tell me, if a minimum align time of 4s and a speed limit of 3k was enforced...what would the problem be? You should not be able to hide behind anchorables so easily, it is every bit as big a flaw as the current model - except now it is in sov holders favour, so I guess that is ok.....? I guess I am not understanding the outrage. How does having to slowboat through some bubbles meaningfully affect sov warfare?
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
3386
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:55:38 -
[96] - Quote
i would never have thought that nullsec will receive timer rollbacks before FW. Kinda funny :)
how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:56:36 -
[97] - Quote
Reppyk wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Have you considered Actually finishing something you started or is your group just not competent enough to hold it? Have you considered that many people are interested in the fight and not in the sov/ihubs/whatever ? Have you considered that, since the nodes will regen, a lot less fights can be expected ? Have you considered that, since the anom buff, you can park 600 pilots in the same constellation and they all have something to grind, making our current universe way too big for the low population in 00 ? Have you considered that the game does not need a better, juicer carrot, but on the contrary a lower density of the riches, that would create conflicts after ~4 years of relative peace ? So, you're only interested in generating fights, and not in actually conquering sov. Why should the system cater to you? Sovereignty warfare should be about contesting sovereignty, not creating meaningless fights with nothing on the line. Sure, the system can't deduce the intent of either the attacker or the defender, but the spirit of the mechanic should keep this in mind wherever possible.
The Imperium has a zero-tolerance policy towards attempts on our sovereignty, no matter the intentions of the attacker. I see no reason why any other sov holder should act differently. Plan accordingly.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
144
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 22:58:55 -
[98] - Quote
Massive respect, CCP!
I absolutely hated the first iteration of Aegis Sov and was pretty vocal about the shortcomings. Very happy to see these steps that are in the right direction.
o7
If I may, 5 days may be too soon of a cooldown timer, as we don't want to make weekend hoping a thing. Perhaps 10 days?
Also, perhaps a 50-minute regen timer is too short of a window for the attacker. I think it's fair for the shortest regen window to straddle the shortest vulnerability window possible at highest ADM (so 4 hrs?) so that the attacker has a good chunk of the next vulnerability window to show up in and contest. In other words, make the regen multiple ~0.04x instead of 0.2x for stations, ihubs and TCUs, for example.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1978
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:04:26 -
[99] - Quote
Querns wrote:afkalt wrote:Quote limit. Querns wrote: Cynos can be nullified -- you can put a covert cyno on a covert, nullified strategic cruiser and sneak any number of people behind the dread bubble wall, then refit to a more combat-oriented configuration using mobile depots once you've arrived.
You can also shoot the bubbles. A large bubble costs 10m (20m for T2), so if you consistently blow them up, you can probably encourage the bubble havers to stop throwing money away. Anchored bubbles just aren't that big of a deal. Their defense of sovereignty is hardly meaningful at all -- at best, they slow down people hunting ratters. A sovereignty conquering force should have little issue destroying them.
It is still a hilarious design goal fail. Tell me, if a minimum align time of 4s and a speed limit of 3k was enforced...what would the problem be? You should not be able to hide behind anchorables so easily, it is every bit as big a flaw as the current model - except now it is in sov holders favour, so I guess that is ok.....? I guess I am not understanding the outrage. How does having to slowboat through some bubbles meaningfully affect sov warfare?
It dimishes the commitment to living in space, you have a greatly reduced need for real pilots in space when a fleet can be formed based on intel alts x jumps out knowing full well you can block and hide behind anchorables- - the enemy can't move quickly.
Don't mistake me, I may be an alt, but I live in WH are we are facing far greater problems than null will with these mechanics come citadels:
You currently need needed an entosis alt/system, we will need an alt/structure and "living" out of our space is impossible by comparison as anomalies do not work the same way.
So that said, I have sympathy with the complaints - which is why I suggest align lower bounds and a lower max speed. It allows people living in places to have a (pretty trivial) odds of catching people by active piloting/living but keeps a low bar with regard to "passive" defences. I was vehemently against removing the mass penalty, for example, I wanted it pushed even higher.
I want to see active fleets rewarded, I don't want passive defences to be the one stop shop for defence. They will be, once again.
A lot of people hate nullification but it's the only decent counter to anchorable spam. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
144
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:08:23 -
[100] - Quote
Unnecessarily so :) Both figures show the information in the units that is important. I wouldn't want to have to convert to second for the first, or minutes in the second.
Reppyk wrote:Have you considered that many people are interested in the fight and not in the sov/ihubs/whatever ? Have you considered that, since the nodes will regen, a lot less fights can be expected ? Have you considered that, since the anom buff, you can park 600 pilots in the same constellation and they all have something to grind, making our current universe way too big for the low population in 00 ? Have you considered that the game does not need a better, juicer carrot, but on the contrary a lower density of the riches, that would create conflicts after ~4 years of relative peace ? Have you considered that everything you are whining about has nothing to do with sov?
Baron Holbach wrote:this 5 day max fatigue is joke ... most of capital pilots (if they are playing) are active player who would usually want to play more than once a week in weekend.... while i agree its nice that you can't ***** youself 2hard when over jumping - in large picture its quite useless change - i never managed to get much over day of fatiqu for playing smart... i once once managed to jump my fatiqu over week and that was last jumps to move my titan and i just made those jumps knowing i never have change to use it and while logged off and inactive it has all the time in world to wait until fatigue goes away
PLEASE INCRASE BLACK OPS FATIQU BONUS - THIS 50% IS TOTAL JOKE... 90% LIKE JF WOULD ACTUALLY GET THAT SHIP BACK TO GAME AS SOMETHING FUN TO USE AGAIN :P with current 50% bonus ja bit more max range it still means you can do 3-4 jumps a day unless you want to wait hour between jumps ... what usually means 1 change for hotdroop :S Both the items you suggest would roll back power projection limitations, which have been painful but beneficial in my mind. Any thoughts on how you could prevent the rampant power projection issues from before Phoebe, if what you suggest comes to pass?
afkalt wrote: It is still a hilarious design goal fail.
Tell me, if a minimum align time of 4s and a speed limit of 3k was enforced...what would the problem be?
You should not be able to hide behind anchorables so easily, it is every bit as big a flaw as the current model - except now it is in sov holders favour, so I guess that is ok.....?
So lemme get his straight - you want the sov, but you find it too difficult to coast the 20 seconds it would take you to clear the bubbles? |
|
Dreiden Kisada
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
33
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:08:45 -
[101] - Quote
Reppyk wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Have you considered Actually finishing something you started or is your group just not competent enough to hold it? Have you considered that many people are interested in the fight and not in the sov/ihubs/whatever ? Have you considered that, since the nodes will regen, a lot less fights can be expected ? Have you considered that, since the anom buff, you can park 600 pilots in the same constellation and they all have something to grind, making our current universe way too big for the low population in 00 ? Have you considered that the game does not need a better, juicer carrot, but on the contrary a lower density of the riches, that would create conflicts after ~4 years of relative peace ?
But they aren't. They want to troll the sov holders in a "made you respond" kind of way. Or catch some dewey eyed newbie who's all "I got dis notification thingy wats that guys i'm on fire :v" and pod him so their killboard goes up one more notch. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:09:55 -
[102] - Quote
afkalt wrote:It dimishes the commitment to living in space, you have a greatly reduced need for real pilots in space when a fleet can be formed based on intel alts x jumps out knowing full well you can block and hide behind anchorables- - the enemy can't move quickly.
Don't mistake me, I may be an alt, but I live in WH are we are facing far greater problems than null will with these mechanics come citadels:
You currently need needed an entosis alt/system, we will need an alt/structure and "living" out of our space is impossible by comparison as anomalies do not work the same way.
So that said, I have sympathy with the complaints - which is why I suggest align lower bounds and a lower max speed. It allows people living in places to have a (pretty trivial) odds of catching people by active piloting/living but keeps a low bar with regard to "passive" defences. I was vehemently against removing the mass penalty, for example, I wanted it pushed even higher.
I want to see active fleets rewarded, I don't want passive defences to be the one stop shop for defence. They will be, once again.
A lot of people hate nullification but it's the only decent counter to anchorable spam. The amount of time that a bubble wall delays an attacker is a scant minute or two, at most. This matters for catching ratters, but not for contesting sovereignty. Use scouts to find bubble walls. Use cynos to avoid bubble walls. Use an alternate route. Use nullified strategic cruisers. Send in a team to blow up the bubble walls before the campaign starts and/or the vulnerability timer; anchorable bubble fields take a long time to erect due to their requirement of an industrial ship to haul the largest ones. Stealth bombers are very good at catching and murdering industrials.
This is a molehill, not a mountain.
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
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:11:29 -
[103] - Quote
Also, as an aside, if you dislike bubble walls, you are going to HATE the new structures CCP is adding. CCP is talking about adding a variety of structures that can be used to detect hostiles and augment travel in sovereign space. I believe that players should be able to invest in their systems and see some benefit from it.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Moac Tor
Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation
134
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:12:39 -
[104] - Quote
Just make it so that entosis links can't be fitted on frigates imo.
Also I would suggest caution with rolling back fatigue, there has a great many positive changes coming out of the pheobe expansion and I hope that you won't go any further than as proposed here.
The days when PL drop 100 archons from the other side of the galaxy are thankfully gone; and as a result I am finally seeing some medium sized gang fights involving capitals without them being third partied. |
Kenneth Feld
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
298
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:12:55 -
[105] - Quote
Querns wrote:peaSTAR wrote:so with the jump timer changes 5 days of fatigue max. this means the uni has shrunk even more now.
does this mean fatigue timers will be adjusted ? (reduced) being as a quick response fleet will only be able to jump 3 times before hitting 1 days 7 hours 17 mins of fatigue,after that time it will be 7 days 19 hours 38 mins, unless your allowed to go over the 5 day max period this is not going to be of any use.
thanks for the stupidity ccp.sandbox game,becoming more like a matchbox game Considering that you can jump an unlimited number of times by waiting out 50 of the 60 minutes of fatigue a 5LY jump grants you, I fail to see the concern. A 5d fatigue, 5LY jump grants 1h12m of cooldown.
Based on this equation: Cooldown (minutes) = Max ( fatigue / 10, 1 + ( distance in lightyears * ( 1 - bonus ) ) )
Max Fatigue is 5 days (5*24*60) = 7200
7200/10 = 720 minutes
so, 12 hours reactivation, when you jump with max Fatigue
My math may be messed up, but if you were relying on a popular online calc, I think it has gone wonky on you
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:14:29 -
[106] - Quote
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:So lemme get his straight - you want the sov, but you find it too difficult to coast the 20 seconds it would take you to clear the bubbles?
Most likely, he is trying to contort his personal vendetta towards anchored bubbles with respect to their efficacy at protecting ratters by implying that they are a relevant defense for sovereignty.
To that, anyone incensed at the existence of anchored bubbles would do well to train into a Proteus; they can be fit for warp disruptor range and to ignore bubbles, all while having superlative EHP. Use one to get initial tackle and light a cyno, or simply wait for the rest of your gang.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1978
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:15:40 -
[107] - Quote
Querns wrote:Also, as an aside, if you dislike bubble walls, you are going to HATE the new structures CCP is adding. CCP is talking about adding a variety of structures that can be used to detect hostiles and augment travel in sovereign space. I believe that players should be able to invest in their systems and see some benefit from it.
I have enough problems with planning on dealing with the hell of vulnerable structures which will not shoot wihtout an alt in there, in systems with no local and inconsistent routes home, even from a mere 2 jumps out.
At least you guys can sit a few jumps out and the gates wont collapse behind you, can monitor local. We're going to have to park a toon on every structure just in case.
Believe me, your problems are nothing next to mine |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:15:54 -
[108] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:Querns wrote:peaSTAR wrote:so with the jump timer changes 5 days of fatigue max. this means the uni has shrunk even more now.
does this mean fatigue timers will be adjusted ? (reduced) being as a quick response fleet will only be able to jump 3 times before hitting 1 days 7 hours 17 mins of fatigue,after that time it will be 7 days 19 hours 38 mins, unless your allowed to go over the 5 day max period this is not going to be of any use.
thanks for the stupidity ccp.sandbox game,becoming more like a matchbox game Considering that you can jump an unlimited number of times by waiting out 50 of the 60 minutes of fatigue a 5LY jump grants you, I fail to see the concern. A 5d fatigue, 5LY jump grants 1h12m of cooldown. Based on this equation: Cooldown (minutes) = Max ( fatigue / 10, 1 + ( distance in lightyears * ( 1 - bonus ) ) ) Max Fatigue is 5 days (5*24*60) = 7200 7200/10 = 720 minutes so, 12 hours reactivation, when you jump with max Fatigue My math may be messed up, but if you were relying on a popular online calc, I think it has gone wonky on you Yeah, I was using an online calculator, and working quickly because I was at work and didn't want to commit too much time to it. That being said, the reality being worse than I thought only strengthens my initial point.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
220
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:18:56 -
[109] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Querns wrote:Also, as an aside, if you dislike bubble walls, you are going to HATE the new structures CCP is adding. CCP is talking about adding a variety of structures that can be used to detect hostiles and augment travel in sovereign space. I believe that players should be able to invest in their systems and see some benefit from it. I have enough problems with planning on dealing with the hell of vulnerable structures which will not shoot wihtout an alt in there, in systems with no local and inconsistent routes home, even from a mere 2 jumps out. At least you guys can sit a few jumps out and the gates wont collapse behind you, can monitor local. We're going to have to park a toon on every structure just in case. Believe me, your problems are nothing next to mine
Don't worry Once more of the Citadel info comes out and the WHers complain about the POS's turning into Citadels and not firing back... you will have the rest of EVE yelling at you next that you should always have someone online and use your space more :P While they themselves never rolled WH's to make isk and Micromanaging WH mass so your fleet can return to your own hole :P |
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder
352
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:19:41 -
[110] - Quote
Querns wrote: I don't follow -- how does anything you talked about limit skirmish warfare?
...I'm not sure how it does, either. I'm a little bit addled today. |
|
Casandra Elise McIntire
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:20:14 -
[111] - Quote
Ravcharas wrote:159Pinky wrote:So, now that all gates will be bubbled to **** to prevent entosis. When will you start add a limited timer for bubbles to be in space? SO ppl at least have to put an effort in to keeping their entrances bubbled interdiction nullifier subsystems m8
That would mean flying a T3, which some groups are unwilling to risk. Some groups, feel that trolling in interceptors are the only option they have to ensure positive KB stats and receive funding for said trolling. |
afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1979
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:20:36 -
[112] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Don't worry Once more of the Citadel info comes out and the WHers complain about the POS's turning into Citadels and not firing back... you will have the rest of EVE yelling at you next that you should always have someone online and use your space more :P While they themselves never rolled WH's to make isk and Micromanaging WH mass so your fleet can return to your own hole :P
Actually, my isk is on YouWereNeverMeantToLiveThereAnywayGäó |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1880
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:21:05 -
[113] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Querns wrote:Also, as an aside, if you dislike bubble walls, you are going to HATE the new structures CCP is adding. CCP is talking about adding a variety of structures that can be used to detect hostiles and augment travel in sovereign space. I believe that players should be able to invest in their systems and see some benefit from it. I have enough problems with planning on dealing with the hell of vulnerable structures which will not shoot wihtout an alt in there, in systems with no local and inconsistent routes home, even from a mere 2 jumps out. At least you guys can sit a few jumps out and the gates wont collapse behind you, can monitor local. We're going to have to park a toon on every structure just in case. Believe me, your problems are nothing next to mine I didn't say I had problems. I said that the stuff CCP is planning is going to be significantly more effective at "passive defense" than the 45 seconds someone loses slowboating through a bubble wall.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
939
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:24:25 -
[114] - Quote
If you don't announce a significantly more comprehensive capital rebalance by the end of next week then you can say goodbye to my patronage. |
Sarah Saoirse
Yet Another Meaningless Alt Corp
0
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:29:57 -
[115] - Quote
Now that jump fatigue is being capped, the 365 day cooldown on pod jumping seems a bit excessive. Could we have another look at that please, and possibly scale it back to 30 or even 90 days. 365 days is rather punishing, and a shorter timer would at least make it a viable option again for established players wanting to move out to 0.0. |
Sakido Cain
Duragon Pioneer Group Goonswarm Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:30:22 -
[116] - Quote
drunklies wrote:The fatigue limit should be set at 24 hours, though the cumulative effect on the jump reactivation timer should continue to scale. This allows for people to play each day, but would prevent the dog piling and such that fatigue wishes to prevent.
This is honestly the best statement I have seen in regards to fatigue. There should not be any reason to limit this to more than 24hrs. This cap would still allow for groups to wage war, but would prevent the dog piles when 2 factions decide to duke it out somewhere. It would also give groups the option to call in for assistance a day or two before they plan on having a major fight. Allowing for strategic warfare, but preventing unwanted 3rd parties crossing the galaxy to hit a fight they found out about after it started.
The current system is similar to cutting off your leg, because you have an ingrown toenail. The proposed changes are better, but you are still cutting off the toe rather than just the nail. |
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
144
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:40:35 -
[117] - Quote
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Don't worry Once more of the Citadel info comes out and the WHers complain about the POS's turning into Citadels and not firing back... you will have the rest of EVE yelling at you next that you should always have someone online and use your space more :P While they themselves never rolled WH's to make isk and Micromanaging WH mass so your fleet can return to your own hole :P A more constructive thing to do would be to keep bringing up the issues and get CCP to address them. Perhaps I'm on a high after seeing these changes, but they do seem receptive to feedback. Perhaps citadels should have different rules in WHs?
Incidentally, WHs were never intended to be inhabited and chained akin to sov, so ..
159Pinky wrote:So, now that all gates will be bubbled to **** to prevent entosis. When will you start add a limited timer for bubbles to be in space? SO ppl at least have to put an effort in to keeping their entrances bubbled Don't be silly - people live in those systems, and the bubbles will be a massive annoyance to them more than it will ever be to entosis gangs. The only place you'll see bubble masses are at dead ends where traffic is low and ratting is high - same places they are right now.
Primary This Rifter wrote:If you don't announce a significantly more comprehensive capital rebalance by the end of next week then you can say goodbye to my patronage. I don't think that is what CCP meant by a 'cooldown' window of max 5 days...
Sarah Saoirse wrote:Now that jump fatigue is being capped, the 365 day cooldown on pod jumping seems a bit excessive. Could we have another look at that please, and possibly scale it back to 30 or even 90 days. 365 days is rather punishing, and a shorter timer would at least make it a viable option again for established players wanting to move out to 0.0. You know you can travel to the station you want to set a clone in, and set it there as many times as you like, right?
|
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
144
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:41:23 -
[118] - Quote
uggh.. sometime delete this dbl post =/ |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
220
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:42:09 -
[119] - Quote
afkalt wrote:Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:Don't worry Once more of the Citadel info comes out and the WHers complain about the POS's turning into Citadels and not firing back... you will have the rest of EVE yelling at you next that you should always have someone online and use your space more :P While they themselves never rolled WH's to make isk and Micromanaging WH mass so your fleet can return to your own hole :P Actually, my isk is on YouWereNeverMeantToLiveThereAnywayGäó
LOL I remember that when they first came out .. First day we had a Large Caldari dropped in a c3 :P |
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers Goonswarm Federation
221
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:47:25 -
[120] - Quote
Sarah Saoirse wrote:Now that jump fatigue is being capped, the 365 day cooldown on pod jumping seems a bit excessive. Could we have another look at that please, and possibly scale it back to 30 or even 90 days. 365 days is rather punishing, and a shorter timer would at least make it a viable option again for established players wanting to move out to 0.0.
I made it out to null without an issue.. used a Ares. Established players have no problems shifting around gates. We know how to move around them. Hell. Before the lands of No SP loss for Pods, you either ate the cost of 100m+ to update your clone from PodX.. Or you Ceptored the 50+ jumps to the next staging system. Bought what you needed there and got ready to rock and roll. It's the players who don't want to settle in a region and constantly roam around that have issues. Not those Established. Those Established just JC where needed or Ceptor. 10x Clones means alot of space you can drop your fun, especially with Restrictions lifted on standings for clones. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |