Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
digger tigger
xHELLonEARTHx Swords of Damocles
4
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 14:28:42 -
[1] - Quote
Now an alliance can simply waltz into a system, set up a Fortizar, and don't even need to cloaky camp. They can just sit on their citadel and warp to the asteroid belts to make sure no mining is taking place. And if you don't have several supercap pilots in your alliance, you're screwed. Any large alliance can pretty much go into any constellation, set up a citadel, defend it in numbers until it's online, and kill any actual null sec activity. Null sec will be little more than big alliances having dueling fortizars.
Thanks, CCP! |
TigerXtrm
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
1866
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 14:38:56 -
[2] - Quote
To this day I really don't understand why Citadels aren't vulnerable during their anchoring period. As it stands right now you could driveby drop a Citadel in a system with 500 reds and only have to worry about the 15 minute window while it onlines. It makes absolutely no sense.
This same weird mechanic made it possible for PL to attack a Keepstar from 1000km away by anchoring a citadel on top of it that the defender couldn't counter in any way.
Seriously, dropping Citadels should be a serious commitment. Something that can/should only be done in places where you can actively defend it while it anchors. If you're not committed to defending your big ass space station for at least a couple of hours then you have no business putting one up IMO. Not saying it should be vulnerable for the full 24 hours, but 15 minutes is just laughable. Make it at least 3 hours, though I'd be more inclined to make it 6 or even 12. If Citadels are going to be used offensively the defenders should at least have a reasonable timeframe to blow it up while it anchors. The mechanics right now make offensive structure dropping WAY too powerful.
My YouTube Channel - EVE Tutorials & other game related things!
My Website - Blogs, Livestreams & Forums
|
Lulu Lunette
Savage Moon Society
1102
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 16:34:04 -
[3] - Quote
I blame the 'coalition culture' more than any other reason for stagnant nullsec complaints. Setting blues .. boo! You're either in or out!
@lunettelulu7
|
mkint
1376
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 17:07:32 -
[4] - Quote
Lulu Lunette wrote:I blame the 'coalition culture' more than any other reason for stagnant nullsec complaints. Setting blues .. boo! You're either in or out! First rule of economics is people respond to incentives.
CCP keeps going back and forth on stagnant nullsec. They say they want an active dynamic nullsec, but only make changes that further stagnate it.
My opinion, my belief in what will actually make the nullsec game interesting in a way it hasn't been in nearly a decade, is balance it around the assumption that a nullsec alliance should have a lifespan of about 6 months. Any longer and the inherent corruption of human nature would cause them to implode, creating a constant stream of opportunities for new groups that form out of the remains.
CCP will never do this. The nullsec blobs of tidi tediousness are the center of CCPs marketing campaign, and that lie is a big part of what will eventually kill off EVE. It requires a stagnant nullsec to happen, even though it goes entirely against the idea of the individual and the tribe being able to accomplish anything, it subsumes the individuals story by-and over writes it with-the story of the alliance in a way that makes it meaningless and impersonal.
CCP's lie that they want a non-stagnant nullsec will forever be a lie. Instead, the long term plan is to develop new things to make stagnant with the nullsec cancer.
Maxim 6. If violence wasnGÇÖt your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
|
Wallstreet J0urnal
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 18:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
Um what's changed? I mean numbers and more ships is null sec pvp. lol
If you can't beat the swarm - join it. |
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
2448
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 18:47:15 -
[6] - Quote
who said otherwise? That said people have been making the same complaint for the 10 years I've been playing Eve.
@ChainsawPlankto
|
Eternus8lux8lucis
Primus Inc. LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
1198
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 23:28:10 -
[7] - Quote
That which pays the subs and brings the subs in gets the attention and rewards. CCP doesnt stand for Crowd Control Productions for no reason. If you control the crowd you get the production.
Have you heard anything I've said?
You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?
That's right.
Had to end sometime.
|
Etain Darklightner Agittain
Aliastra Gallente Federation
16
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 01:15:07 -
[8] - Quote
Really? Come here and rant when someone or a group of someone's takes the logical next step when a power vacuum is created in null sec?
Take the time to do something new, create something new. Anytime an "apex" predator leaves an ecology through becoming extinct or otherwise moving to climbs that are better suited to their biology, a vacuum is created. That vacuum is then filled by the next in line predator.
What exactly makes you think the situation will not change? What makes you think other corporations won't fill the void and exploit the situation to their benefit like the previous corporation?
CCP created a nearly perfect sandbox where in power fluctuations between varying groups of people occur. Power changes hands. New corporations move in, temporarily or permanently depending on the corp.
It is refreshing to see one constant, the players with entitlement issues.
As much as I can't stand [CODE] they fulfill a much needed purpose in this game..... keeping the biomass recyclers running....
Sadly for every entitled alpha player you pop, another 5 take their place...... |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
15087
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 02:00:59 -
[9] - Quote
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:who said otherwise? That said people have been making the same complaint for the 10 years I've been playing Eve.
Exactly this. Null has NEVER been small group space, ever. Most of New Eden (npc null, low sec, high sec, WH space) IS small group or even solo space. The ONLY place for large organized groups is sov null, and some how players who like fleet battles and don't mind being in a big group are terrible F1 monkeys for liking it.
ALL of CCPs effort in null has been aimed at 'small groups. Dominion's stated goal was "breaking up the 'big coalitions' and making room for small groups". The whole idea behind fozziesov (aka faction warfare 2.0) is the exact same thing. It all failed because some of us LIKE big group play. Null isn't stagnant, Goons no longer own the north, my own Alliance (TEST) is in the middle of an invasions, etc etc.
Can we not have ONE chunk of space that's not pointed at the honorable space gladiators? BTW, the OP's complaint isn't about big groups, it's about safety, people complain because citidels disrupt their safe null sec islands.
Deal with it. |
Rogwar Toralen
The Graduates The Initiative.
42
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 05:28:37 -
[10] - Quote
Does not appear to be stagnant.
Eve Online territorial maps 2007-2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcS4n09SRfQ&t=12s
|
|
mkint
1380
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 06:07:43 -
[11] - Quote
Has anything CCP's done really changed the dynamic of nullsec? Or is it still "show up in a blob, dump all the supers into the fight, wait for the servers to catch up, see what $ value of the losses CCP uses in their marketing"? Because last I checked, that's the one and only tactic that actually has mattered in nullsec for years. Which faceless nobodies are hitting f1 is irrelevant. goons, bob, pl, test. Same boring story told over and over again. Sure, it's probably fun for the couple guys at the top, but for everyone else, they are just NPCs in those guys stories. If the most exciting things that have happened in nullsec in a decade is someone forgetting to pay their bills on time, maybe it's time to reevaluate things.
Maxim 6. If violence wasnGÇÖt your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.
|
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46611
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 06:35:59 -
[12] - Quote
mkint wrote:Has anything CCP's done really changed the dynamic of nullsec? Or is it still "show up in a blob, dump all the supers into the fight, wait for the servers to catch up, see what $ value of the losses CCP uses in their marketing"? Prior to Citadels this was all but gone (CCP aimed for capital fight escalations to be reduced and were pretty much spot on in what they saw as the anticipated consequences).
The combination of the jump fatigue introduction and Aegis sov mean that capitals were dying at their highest rates in a long time due to much more regionalised conflict and the greater willingness to use them because they couldn't be blobbed from across the map. Aegis sov itself broke the need for large fleets up.
It reached a point where veterans, rightly so, wondered what the game held for them anymore, because the development in the last couple of years had focused on small ship meta and small fleets.
CCP then abandoned the plan to extend the entosis link use with Citadels, to reintroduce the need to shoot something and the blob has come back again, but really only for structure bashing.
Sov war is still small ship/gang focused in general. |
Marcus Binchiette
Pyrotech Creations
72
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 06:47:43 -
[13] - Quote
Mighty nullsec alliance cries, "Boo hoo hoo. We can't beat the crap out of the little guy anymore". Take a cup of cement and harden the **** up dude. If you can't contest the system and stop these emergent tactics. Then you don't deserve to have the system. Simple as. |
Mephiztopheleze
Laphroaig Inc.
1196
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 07:00:34 -
[14] - Quote
Last time I checked, the only actual benefits of owning sov are as follows:
1: Supercapital Production. 2: Sov Fuel Bonus for POS Towers. 3: Mining/Ratting iHub upgrades. 4: Cyno Inhibs.
That's basically it as far as I can see.
Occasional Resident Newbie Correspondent for TMC: http://themittani.com/search/site/mephiztopheleze
This is my Forum Main. My Combat Alt is sambo Inkura
|
Scipio Artelius
Savage Moon Society
46611
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 07:02:26 -
[15] - Quote
Mephiztopheleze wrote:Last time I checked, the only actual benefits of owning sov are as follows:
1: Supercapital Production. 2: Sov Fuel Bonus for POS Towers. 3: Mining/Ratting iHub upgrades. 4: Cyno Inhibs.
That's basically it as far as I can see. 5. epeen
But moons are a big part of owning some space. Good moons == good income == rich leaders/expansion/srp/etc. |
Hir Miriel
Elves In Space
277
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 07:09:36 -
[16] - Quote
digger tigger wrote:Now an alliance can simply waltz into a system, set up a Fortizar, and don't even need to cloaky camp.
Thanks, CCP!
I imagine the Blue Danube playing as players waltz.
CCP conducting the orchestra as players mingle and dance between the stars.
*sighs admiringly*
There's not a lot we can do about large alliances and their effects. We can choose to be particles in a blob, or not, and then talk to CCP about it here.
It's the same for other multiplayer games, the biggest group wins, mostly.
Sorta like life. Bigger groups have more efficiencies, lower unit costs, more options, can share the load more evenly. And the list of advantages goes on.
All you can do is avoid parts of the game where the blobs roam.
I have a theory that this is why zombie movies are so popular, not because we see ourselves as heroes, but because we identify with the zombies.
~
~~
Thinking inside Schrodinger's sandbox.
~~
~
|
Infinity Ziona
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
2517
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 08:53:02 -
[17] - Quote
digger tigger wrote:Now an alliance can simply waltz into a system, set up a Fortizar, and don't even need to cloaky camp. They can just sit on their citadel and warp to the asteroid belts to make sure no mining is taking place. And if you don't have several supercap pilots in your alliance, you're screwed. Any large alliance can pretty much go into any constellation, set up a citadel, defend it in numbers until it's online, and kill any actual null sec activity. Null sec will be little more than big alliances having dueling fortizars.
Thanks, CCP! This is not a bad thing you simply need to reorient your expectations of EvE. The idea that you can take a bunch of system and use a silly sov flag to prevent others from moving in is so ingrained in EvE players that they seem to have problems understanding what the game is supposed to be about - conflict.
People are so used to being SAFE in null sec but they should never have been in the first place, its supposed to be lawless not safer than high sec.
A great change. If you don't like PvP then there are options you can take to remove yourself from PvP. You can join a mega alliance, many of which still have safe renter systems hidden behind 100 bubbles, you can log off, play an alt in high sec.
What you can't and should'nt expect anymore though is to be sitting in null sec and never having to worry about pvp.
CCP Fozzie GǣWe can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-tonGǪ in null sec anomalies. Gǣ*
Kaalrus pwned..... :)
|
digger tigger
xHELLonEARTHx Swords of Damocles
6
|
Posted - 2017.01.17 18:19:28 -
[18] - Quote
Infinity Ziona wrote:[quote=digger tigger] What you can't and should'nt expect anymore though is to be sitting in null sec and never having to worry about pvp.
There's a difference between not having to worry about PvP and being prevented from doing anything else. |
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
3094
|
Posted - 2017.01.17 18:29:35 -
[19] - Quote
digger tigger wrote:Infinity Ziona wrote:[quote=digger tigger] What you can't and should'nt expect anymore though is to be sitting in null sec and never having to worry about pvp. There's a difference between not having to worry about PvP and being prevented from doing anything else.
Uh, if someone can waltz into "your" system and drop a structure, and you can't outform them in 24 hours for the timer, I'd say it's "your" system in name only.
"Help, I'm bored with missions!"
http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
|
Atomic Virulent
Dark Matter Industrial
179
|
Posted - 2017.01.18 02:05:14 -
[20] - Quote
Don't be silly, we all know that all those 'new' players (not veterans creating new accounts, nuh uh, no way sir) don't all have Super Capitals on standby?
The ever increasing gap (unless you are a member of the Walton family of course) continues to widen???
Are you trying to tell me that CCP's only interest is the exact same core of d-bag alliances that have plagued the game for the better part of the last decade and have driven thousands of players out of the game because of the very tactics you describe???
CCP says welcome to Eve Online. |
|
Atomic Virulent
Dark Matter Industrial
179
|
Posted - 2017.01.18 02:08:09 -
[21] - Quote
Mephiztopheleze wrote:Last time I checked, the only actual benefits of owning sov are as follows:
1: Supercapital Production. 2: Sov Fuel Bonus for POS Towers. 3: Mining/Ratting iHub upgrades. 4: Cyno Inhibs.
That's basically it as far as I can see.
Yep, the 'only actual benefits' are top-tier, end-game uber-lucrative content. You win the 'Just Said It But Don't Understand It' award of the day.
Well done! |
NofriendNoLifeStilPostin
State War Academy Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2017.01.18 02:36:25 -
[22] - Quote
Wallstreet J0urnal wrote:Um what's changed? I mean numbers and more ships is null sec pvp. lol
If you can't beat the swarm - join it.
some "sandbox". Joke of a game. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |