|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
53
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 08:35:00 -
[1] - Quote
The Mittani wrote:The forums ate my reply. I'm very much against the fact that the new forums devour posts and 'get ganked' all the time. What a pile of crap. My personal take on the "get ganked" bullshit is that we're looking at 2 or 3 nodes (or more) in a loadbalanced cluster, and one of them is down. The fact I'm redirected to another URL so I can't just refresh is also annoying as all ****, and I've lost count of how many posts have been eaten because I didn't copy them before doing post or preview, and apparently took more time than some arbitrary session timeout or something.
It would be awesome if someone on the forum team (with their awesome track record so far) could get a hard kick up the behind, for it is, as you say, atrocious. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
64
|
Posted - 2011.11.06 23:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
One of my pet peeves the last 2 years has been the atrocity that is today's SOV system. I keep hoping for someone in CCP to say that they're going to revamp the system to make it more attractive to attack multiple systems at the same time with smaller fleets, rather than what we're looking at today where we're just getting as many as we can into a system and whoever wins the one fight, wins that round.
I'm not sure how this could be done in actuality, but I keep thinking that maybe either have the SOV system be descriptive rather than prescriptive, or borrow the tug-of-war element from POS warfare (although of course with modifications to avoid the grinding aspect), so that the strategy for winning a war is deeper than "grind this system, now grind this system".
(I've no idea if this could even be done, or if people would still just go with the grind one system aspect, though. Or even if it's just a bad idea from start to finish.) |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
64
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 07:49:00 -
[3] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:You made (what I assume was) a complimentary response to my hi-sec manifesto. Obviously CSM6 has it's hands full with getting CCP to deal with the 0.0 issues we're all so familiar with, but is there a chance you'd press CCP to give some thought as to how hi-sec should work if you're re-elected? I assume you've had a chat with Vile Rat? |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
64
|
Posted - 2011.11.07 10:46:00 -
[4] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Lord Zim wrote:Malcanis wrote:You made (what I assume was) a complimentary response to my hi-sec manifesto. Obviously CSM6 has it's hands full with getting CCP to deal with the 0.0 issues we're all so familiar with, but is there a chance you'd press CCP to give some thought as to how hi-sec should work if you're re-elected? I assume you've had a chat with Vile Rat? Actually I haven't. Should I? I think so: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=22653&find=unread |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
84
|
Posted - 2011.11.08 21:28:00 -
[5] - Quote
Temba Ronin wrote:Mr. Chairman I think many players like myself would like the opportunity to infiltrate Null Sec as saboteurs, agents of chaos, and just plain irritants to the big Alliances that have frozen us out. Would you support a hacking module buff that could be implemented by a cloaked ship that would allow it to use ANY jump bridge? Some of the imbalance high sec suffers from is that a lot of the gankers get to flee home to GÇ£Too Safe Walled Garden Alliances Far Away In Null SpaceGÇ¥ if we could visit some of that gank PVP in their home systems I think everyone would be happier. Mr. Chairman will you support some changes to the hacking modules that will allow a cloaked small gang or large fleet to infiltrate Null space jump bridge networks? Maybe we will find some tears other then our own when the shoe is on the other foot. It could give us the chance to meet ship to ship in your local space at a time of my choosing which would be worth not getting out of your system with ship or pod. Are you up for a little non-consensual PVP on your turf?  Do me a favour, tell me why a JB should be hackable so it's usable by someone without the proper standings? What sort of benefits should this give them that isn't already there through wormholes and normal gates? What sort of drawbacks should they have to live with while they do it?
All I've seen from your idea so far has been something about nullsec alliances freezing you out, hisec suffering gankers fleeing to nullsec and you being unable to follow them there. This makes no sense to me, it's not like you're prohibited from going out into our space and touching somebody.
As of yet, I haven't seen anything that really screams "This would be awesome and enable me to do things I can't do otherwise. Let's do this." In short, this is your idea, sell it to us.
Temba Ronin wrote:Correct me if i am wrong but isn't that exactly how the first Titan was tackled .... by a single ship with a warp scrambling module and ONE bold pilot? Last I checked, the titan was decloaked because one guy saw where the titan cloaked and burned towards him. The actual tackling wasn't done by a warp scrambling module, since iirc the titans and motherships were immune to that module. You needed, then just as now, a hic or a dic for that. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
135
|
Posted - 2011.11.13 04:31:00 -
[6] - Quote
Hrm. 3 things.
1) Why do you keep adding the word "tearful" all the time? Do you even understand what the word means? 2) There are quite a few roaming gangs going through Deklein each day, actually. Have you tried going all the way up through the region, or are you just assuming it's "oh so deadly" if you're in a fast ship? A newbie ship, frigate or shuttle should do it just nicely. Please, do give us a detailed report of the findings you make on this trip. 3) Why don't you ask CCP if they can remove the asteroid belts from goonspace in a petition? Actually, please do so, and tell us if CCP responds with anything other than "AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHA no".
Seriously, your ideas are getting weirder and weirder by the minute. If they weren't as hilarious as they are right now, I'd ask you to stop, but given how hilarious they actually are, please continue. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
137
|
Posted - 2011.11.15 07:16:00 -
[7] - Quote
Death to all supercaps. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
159
|
Posted - 2011.11.17 22:42:00 -
[8] - Quote
The Original Alt wrote:You seem hell bent on destroying the experience of high security space to make null security space more appealing. Why? What part of "high security space" is being destroyed, again? |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
166
|
Posted - 2011.11.19 22:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
God damn, how many times haven't I said exactly that about having them as proper motherships for easier reshipping on the site which mustn't be named.
I'd unironically fap myself raw if that actually came to pass, especially if it was used as a forward staging area for deep incursions into enemy space or something. Anything, as long as it was used to make the tactical/strategic depth of EVE deeper.
Of course, someone's going to use it for nothing but shipping ships out from lowsec, and CCP'll get all nerfbatty. :frankfrank: |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
172
|
Posted - 2011.11.20 09:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
Personally I wouldn't be surprised if CCP are too invested in the current SOV system to do the changes that might be necessary, but I think the thing that has to be done is add some tug of war, or pendulum effect as CCP calls it, to not just enable, but encourage the use of smaller fleets to attack/defend in a strategic way. This could mean that feint attacks could decide the outcome of a day, and it could make spies more important beyond just providing fleet numbers and POS passwords, and I'd hope it could mean more use of 100v100 fights than 1000v1000 with literally trillions of isk on either side being on the field. |
|

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
239
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 12:48:00 -
[11] - Quote
Ravcharas wrote:I must admit I don't really like the idea of arenas. It seems kind of... WoWy. But on the other hand there's the neglected barely-living carcass of Factional Warfare that would be perfect for getting frankensteined into something that could provide some kind of decent on-demand pvp concept. There's absolutely no problem of having arenas where people can match skills against others in controlled circumstances. Hell, CCP could allow people to even place bets on who would win, once they finish off WiS. Imagine having a hall of people watching a large viewscreen showing the 1v1, 2v2, 4v4 arena action. All this would do is make EVE as a universe deeper, and I see absolutely no problem with that.
The only thing which should absolutely not happen is "arenas" for taking/losing SOV, taking moons, etc.
Unless, of course, you could bet the sovereignty of a system on a fight in the arenas. vOv |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
243
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 17:42:00 -
[12] - Quote
I think you'll find that the reason the game is being pushed ever further towards bigger and bigger blobs is because the SOV system basically requires it. You either overpower the enemy once every 2nd day or so, or all your progress is reset.
If the SOV system had been much more dynamic and allowed multiple systems to be under attack, smaller fleets could be incentivized into being used, instead of today's situation where one fuckoff fleet smashes into another fuckoff fleet until either all the timers are smashed through, or you're repelled. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
243
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 17:44:00 -
[13] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote:Lord Zim wrote:There's absolutely no problem of having arenas where people can match skills against others in controlled circumstances. Hell, CCP could allow people to even place bets on who would win, once they finish off WiS. Imagine having a hall of people watching a large viewscreen showing the 1v1, 2v2, 4v4 arena action. All this would do is make EVE as a universe deeper, and I see absolutely no problem with that. There is one such arena already, it's called Sisi. You're not getting the point. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
243
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 18:05:00 -
[14] - Quote
Key words: descriptive sovereignty. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
244
|
Posted - 2011.12.07 19:44:00 -
[15] - Quote
Tallian Saotome wrote:Whats stopping this now? CFC has enough people that we could easily keep 4-5 systems reinforced at any given time(and maybe even the intel resources to arrange for them all to come out at the same time to force a choice) and we don't, for a reason.
If we do this and our enemy doesn't, then they just crush the fleets one at a time, titan bridging to the next system we are attacking as soon as the first is crashed and taking on the rest. Without an I-Win button, the only counter for numbers is more numbers.
There is no mechanic preventing or causing either situation, other than the pure mechanics of warfare. When both sides have equal equipment, the side with more people wins, and in eve there is no such thing as a technological advantage, and at the bloc level if your fleet members aren't able to field strong ships, your already failing. Simple. If we split our forces over 2 or 3 systems, then worst case, the other guy will just defend one system a day, resetting all progress we've made as they save each system. There's nothing stopping this behavior, so the only thing an attacker really can do is devote all resources to one system at a time until it has been taken over, or attack more than i think 5 or 6 systems at a time. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
245
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 00:13:00 -
[16] - Quote
Yes, that's what I've been saying, and that's one of the main things I think should be implemented/enabled when/if CCP actually does improve nullsec SOV fighting. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
247
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 10:24:00 -
[17] - Quote
Tbh I'm not convinced that's really the way to go. If any ship should do the whole jump to cyno to deliver fleet maneuvers, it would be the mothership, and for that to happen pilots would have to dock with it prior to jumping.
Actually, I just had an idea. Why not make it so you need two titans to initiate bridging? Source and destination titan. It can be argued that everything else which is bridging other ships than themselves needs a source and destination structure, why not titans. Bridging equipment is huge and requires a lot of fuel and power etc and all that jazz. That way you make it more dangerous to hotdrop something, and you avoid the problem where CCP would invariably just suck up everything in a radius of 5000m, including POS structures or the POS itself, and move it to the cyno system, along with AFK people. Otherwise you'd have a hell of a time taking a titan into POSes or station undocks and bridge AFK people into hostile space and leave them there just because you can.
Tbh I think the whole movement possibilities of fleets is less a problem the whole SOV system is, and I'd much rather CCP put effort into making that better, more dynamic and actually strategic with the possibility of feints and surprise attacks etc. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
249
|
Posted - 2011.12.08 14:47:00 -
[18] - Quote
SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV SOV.
Enjoy. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
279
|
Posted - 2011.12.12 10:24:00 -
[19] - Quote
Derkata wrote:Fleet movement is an issue because of the SOV. Fix the SOV system and that movement wont be an issue. Huh? Elucidate.
Derkata wrote:If they cant fix the system though, limiting movement would be a nice bandage for the gunshot that is the SOV system. Again, huh? |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
283
|
Posted - 2011.12.13 09:17:00 -
[20] - Quote
How would shorter titan bridges bandaid in any way, shape or form over the shittastic SOV mechanics? |
|

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
309
|
Posted - 2011.12.18 00:15:00 -
[21] - Quote
He said encourages, not forces. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
316
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 13:51:00 -
[22] - Quote
Hey, here's an idea. Tell the guys in your NPC corp that you want them to go take over some system in nullsec.
Come back to us if you get any response other than "but I could lose my multibillion faction-fit navy raven! aaaaaaaaaaaaaaa" |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
316
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 14:16:00 -
[23] - Quote
Temba Ronin wrote:Hey here's a better idea ask the brave goons to only fight when they outnumber their opponent 10 to 1 instead of your normal heroic 20 to 50 to one and come back if you get any response other than "but i might lose a chance to get a kill board mention as a .001 percent damage dealer! nooooooooooooo!"
Bat Country is a glass house don't start to throw stones Zim. Hey, you're the one that's talking about NPC corps going into nullsec and taking over systems as a part of some sort of factional warfare. I'm just telling you to ask the people in NPC corps if they'd like to do this. I'd love to see hisec actually try to **** with nullsec, but I'm pretty certain that those in hisec aren't going to do what you want, no matter whether there's some mission or not, because they could lose their ships. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
316
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 14:35:00 -
[24] - Quote
So, have you asked them yet? |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
316
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:06:00 -
[25] - Quote
No. It's my way of asking you if you've asked how enthusiastic your NPC brethren were of invading any nullsec.
I've flown in wormhole systems, nullsec, lowsec and hisec for well over 3 years, I've never gotten ganked in hisec. I have, however, gotten ganked more than once in nullsec and lowsec.
Also heh, "NPC threats". Right. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
316
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:19:00 -
[26] - Quote
Temba Ronin wrote:Never been ganked in highsec Zim? Let me know when you will visit again in a cargo hauler and i'll see if some of my PVE friends in highsec can give you the experience you've missed thus far. I spend my time skulking around null looking for the rarest target in all of EVE ..... a goon flying alone. I fly cargo haulers around in hisec all the time, it's one of the few things my hisec alt does. Haul ****, manufacture ****, sell ****. No missions, I got bored of them.
But please, do tell us about these ~NPC threats~. |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
316
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 16:11:00 -
[27] - Quote
Temba Ronin wrote:So sensitive my goodness! Lets apply his standard to his own posts ..... he started off by calling me a "little carebear" which means i had a victory ..... by his standards ..... as soon as he responded! Wonder if his double standard troubles him? Oh yeah 1 vs 1 is not his strong suit, duh how silly of me to forget. So hey, asked your NPC brethren about a sov invasion yet? |

Lord Zim
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
316
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 17:21:00 -
[28] - Quote
Temba Ronin wrote:Is it really such a horrible idea to have more people shooting at each other for higher stakes? I think trying to conquer a system held by vet players would be far more challenging then any other mission being offered to PVE players now. Sure i know i can get my friends and do it now blah blah blah, but what prevents us from trying something more attractive like bounties and claiming sov for a NPC Empire faction to get the mission runners who get shot at everyday from looking at nullsec as an opportunity instead of an obstacle? So, have you asked your NPC brethren about this idea? What did they say? |
|
|
|