| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Doctor Shady
   |
Posted - 2005.11.06 11:04:00 -
[1]
empires rise and fall, only with eve its faster.
what funny about it, its always the same players that are corp and alliance hoping all the time.
wars could be dclared withing 24 or 48 hours, so that makes it even easier.
what iam trying to say, is that we need a little bit more balance to keep the sovreignty map the way it is for longer, without having to change it every 1 hour to keep it accurate.
most of you PvPers will not agree with me, and thats why im using this slimshady wannabe alt.
but what im trying to say is that we need delays, bit more delays than 24 hours or until next dt.
thats to have bit more time to prepare, as some people dont log on for 2-3 dayus and they come in, wtfsomeoneelseownsthisstation.
 Quote:
i don't want lots of naps in eve dont get it twisted, i just would likre to see more team works from alliances, more teaming up againt others, and i dont mean it in a sense, were there is one war in eve north vs south, or east vs west. Quote:
|
Marcus Aurelius
|
Posted - 2005.11.06 11:10:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Marcus Aurelius on 06/11/2005 11:10:16
Why ?
As things are now, stations change hands only rarely.
And station ownership is only one of several factors that make up the power map of Eve.
Conquest in Eve is prety slow paced anyway, I think the way things are is petty ok, except for the poswar thinghy.
|
Sarmaul
|
Posted - 2005.11.06 14:30:00 -
[3]
I agree that the war timer should be longer (48 hours would be nice), as usually the aggressor builds up their resources for a good few weeks before declaring war, while the target has 24 hours to try and do the same.
Maybe 24 hours for a war on an alliance and 48 hours for a war on a corp?
Originally by: Chowdown
We camp a lot
|
Mystiel Raleigh
|
Posted - 2005.11.06 16:08:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Mystiel Raleigh on 06/11/2005 16:08:44
I can tell that you didn't get your doctorate studying English 
In before someone calls me insensitive because not everyone speaks English
What delays do you suggest?
|
Ralus
|
Posted - 2005.11.07 00:10:00 -
[5]
Hopefully with the new soverenty grandplan that the devs have been talking about, the 0.0 empires will be finally able to turn there bit of space into an actual empire.
Once this happens wars and fights between teritory holding alliences will become much more interesting as both parties will start massing on the borderlines in preperation for a full scale war.
|
Franky B
|
Posted - 2005.11.07 00:25:00 -
[6]
I think the big inhibitor to these truly epic "territorial" wars is not the sovereignty system, but rather, eve's inability to handle fleet battles in excess of 50 people comfortably.
It's simply a fact that alliance warfare is BIG, people gravitate to big fleet battles and as such, the effect is cumulative; both sides fielding larger and larger fleets. however LAG seems to always be the victor in such battles. when LAG gets nerfed is when alliances can really put their backs into defending/invading soveriegn space.
|
Vishnej
|
Posted - 2005.11.07 04:31:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Vishnej on 07/11/2005 04:32:44
From the suggestions thread in my sig: Quote:
Increase POS anchor+online times to 15/30/45 minutes instead of 7.5/15/30.
Offline POS = 0 shields.
Small POS = 1 point of sovereignty, Med = 2, large = 4
Do you think that would fix things? It would make towers very vulnerable in their first stages of construction, make construction take longer (you have half an hour to kill a small tower, 90 minutes to kill a large, and only a few million armor to chew through), and make it much more valuable to have an entrenched battle POS instead of a bunch of smalls zerged against every moon in a system.
T2 Destroyers: a proposal
Requested Changes: An alphabet's worth |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |