Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
9886
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 08:07:00 -
[121] - Quote
Michael Escoto wrote:Honest Blob wrote:Before all you tards in CFC start qqing about jump in lag or spending hours in a cyno tunnel, maby your coalitions should have been smarter, you know like staging the dreads in system in the STATION YOU CAN DOCK IN before the fight and used those 1000 domis to establish station control to assist on the undock. But hurdur that would require thinking. Cant have that now can we, Oops its ccp's fault. But you can't refute that there IS a problem with getting in, right? Just drop politics/agendas for a moment..
Most of PL/N3 and rusrus/CFC agree with each other. Sov null is very broken and fights like this just downright suck for everyone. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4749
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 08:18:00 -
[122] - Quote
You can start by removing structure notification mails.
If an alliance is actually using the space the structures are in, they will know if it is attacked and take action. However, if they are not using the space then those structures will be removed over time and people who do actually utilize the space, will setup shop there instead.
If alliances want to continue to control the space they have, they will have to spread out a bit, thus, thinning the blob some. If they still choose to all dock up into one staging system, then their territory will shrink accordingly. Either way, it will be far better than controlling vast amounts of regions from just a couple stations far away. . |
Pok Nibin
Filial Pariahs
195
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 08:25:00 -
[123] - Quote
Can't say I'm personally involved, but the chatter on HED-GP piqued my interest so I GOOGLED IT! (mua haaaaaa...oops.)
After reading the below linked page, it came as no surprise to me "why there" instead of "lots of other systems." If you read this (should you not already know) you may see why, TOO.
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/HED-GP_(System)
AFTER reading it, you might reach the same conclusion I did...seems pretty cool as a transit choke-point just asking for trouble. It's like the many warring tribes using the same watering hole. You either call a truce when at the watering hole (or transiting HED-GP) or the fight moves to the watering hole (rather on some more ... wholesome ... battleground.)
If it's seen as an endemic or chronic problem, then a CCP fix would be to open a few more routes into that region of space. That would have the effect of spreading out the warfare. But, then, there may be those who disagree. There may be those who LIKE that there's a choke-point. Then, of course, the matter becomes one of LAG. Interesting what a map can do, eh? Don't fight it.-á Rejoin your Amarrian patriarchs.-á You know you want to. |
Beautiful Frelcia
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
37
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 09:03:00 -
[124] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Beautiful Frelcia wrote:CCP to keep you motivated I have un-subbed my 2 accounts and will comeback ONLY when OP issues are resolved.
2 less goons in the game? PERFECT
you dont get It. Its not about politics', meta gaming etc. Its about service we are paying for every month. I do understand issues with eve code. But for how long low we have lag/cluster/you name it issues.
and yet cccp is coming with some useless ideas pretending everything else is ok. |
Mah Boobz
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 09:07:00 -
[125] - Quote
Impose the same cap as in Jita, in every system. Problem solved.
P.S. Yeah I know it means first to blob wins, but at least it'll be over quickly. |
MonkeyMagic Thiesant
Shockwave Innovations Surely You're Joking
19
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 09:25:00 -
[126] - Quote
Mah Boobz wrote:Impose the same cap as in Jita, in every system. Problem solved.
That's a pretty terrible solution. On the other hand, you could make a pretty convincing argument it's less terrible than the current mess :-)
Surely there has to be something better.......... |
Mah Boobz
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
22
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 09:32:00 -
[127] - Quote
MonkeyMagic Thiesant wrote:Mah Boobz wrote:Impose the same cap as in Jita, in every system. Problem solved.
it's less terrible than the current mess :-)
Exactly |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8649
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 10:25:00 -
[128] - Quote
Raylucy wrote:from the looks of it, the other side enjoyed the turkey shoot and the amount of tears that will flood this thread and probably many others. Nobody's angry about losing dreads. Nobody's angry about tidi. They're angry about the game not working despite the tidi. My EVE Videos |
Skia Aumer
Atlas Research Group
71
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 10:26:00 -
[129] - Quote
WarFireV wrote:Fix Sov
This is terrible, this is not epic, this is not grand, this is not amazing. This is just putting a gun to the head of a blind an deaf man and yet this is also EvEs largest capital battle ever. "Ha-ha! Go cry me a river, loser!" That's what you were saying when RUSRUS complained about drone lags. Now I see people come to realize that it's not about winning and loosing battles, but rather about having emotions in those battles other than disappointment.
I for one support this petition and urge CCP to enforce more efforts in actually making large scale battles playable. If you advertise this feature - deliver it. If you dont deliver it - stop advertising and fooling your customers. |
March rabbit
Federal Defense Union
1188
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 10:36:00 -
[130] - Quote
Beautiful Frelcia wrote:March rabbit wrote:Beautiful Frelcia wrote:CCP to keep you motivated I have un-subbed my 2 accounts and will comeback ONLY when OP issues are resolved.
2 less goons in the game? PERFECT you dont get It. Its not about politics', meta gaming etc it is actually.
99% of Eve players don't have such problems. Why? Because they don't make blobs and overload nodes.
It's YOU have chosen this playstyle. No one forced you to go there. YOU did it.
We all know that blobs make TiDi and lags. And we KNOW that it is impossible for CCP to fix it any time soon. Whining on forums does nothing for it. It is just politics and meta gaming you mentioned. The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
|
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8649
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 10:39:00 -
[131] - Quote
Honest Blob wrote:Before all you tards in CFC start qqing about jump in lag or spending hours in a cyno tunnel, maby your coalitions should have been smarter, you know like staging the dreads in system in the STATION YOU CAN DOCK IN before the fight and used those 1000 domis to establish station control to assist on the undock. But hurdur that would require thinking. Cant have that now can we, Oops its ccp's fault. The cyno is needed for positioning, you cannot rely on simply warping since it's far too easy to disrupt that. They could have been brought in before the subcaps except for the fact that Rubicon recently introduced a (rather excellent) module that allows you to disrupt that as well. The subcaps were needed in order to clear the way, so to speak. My EVE Videos |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
8649
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 10:41:00 -
[132] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Beautiful Frelcia wrote:March rabbit wrote:Beautiful Frelcia wrote:CCP to keep you motivated I have un-subbed my 2 accounts and will comeback ONLY when OP issues are resolved.
2 less goons in the game? PERFECT you dont get It. Its not about politics', meta gaming etc it is actually. 99% of Eve players don't have such problems. Why? Because they don't make blobs and overload nodes. It's YOU have chosen this playstyle. No one forced you to go there. YOU did it. We all know that blobs make TiDi and lags. And we KNOW that it is impossible for CCP to fix it any time soon. Whining on forums does nothing for it. It is just politics and meta gaming you mentioned. Blobbing is a consequence of the mechanics involved. It's no more a choice to blob than it is to capture pieces in chess. You have to do it if you have any intention of winning against a decently competent opponent. My EVE Videos |
Smoking Blunts
ZC Industries Dark Stripes
719
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 10:53:00 -
[133] - Quote
yesterday was worse than the old 1k fights way back in 2008 before TiDi. but at least back then my drones worked on my dread when everything else was stuck cycling. plus back then it didn't take almost 2h to load a system
first round went to you ccp. you clearly won this battle. OMG when can i get a pic here
|
Leon Moss
brotherhood of desman Darkness of Despair
4
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:43:00 -
[134] - Quote
March rabbit wrote: It's YOU have chosen this playstyle. No one forced you to go there. YOU did it.
You kind of fail with your reasoning. It's true that this play-style generates the most stress on the system. It's also the play-style that CCP relies heavily on for their marketing and advertising. You don't get ads about 5vs5 frigsize fights in Heyd, now do you? You read and watch them clips about thousands of players having a go at each other in massive null-sec fights. But all that is besides the point, since this is a valid play style as any other. And as such, it should be supported to a full extent. If it can't be supported to a full extent, I'd expect the owners to come out and say: "Hey guys, we can't support that much stress on our system, let's see what we can do to avoid a bad experience?". But that doesn't happen ever, does it. Instead of admitting to a problem, CCP keeps encouraging it to happen, resulting in bad experiences for many players. I honestly can't see any solution to that, except admitting that CCP won. |
ElQuirko
Black Dragon Fighting Society The Devil's Tattoo
3197
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 11:52:00 -
[135] - Quote
dantes inferno wrote: fix tidi...
Obviously you never saw pre-tidi fights. Lag is a fact of life, tidi mitigates it. Dodixie > Hek |
Kogi Kaishakunin
Enso Corp
0
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:07:00 -
[136] - Quote
I left null sec because after about 2yrs i cant stand anymore sov / blob / tidi. If CCP thinks these fights are a great advert for the game, then their marketing department should be forced to log in and endure these type of events for their full duration (and then make them pay RL money for it).
Fully endorse the OP's statement - fix SOV.
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1139
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:11:00 -
[137] - Quote
TigerXtrm wrote:Why you people engage in activities like this that are not fun for anyone involved is completely beyond me. And not just once, but regularly.
I made a point of staying the hell out of Null until sov was properly fixed. That was 3 years ago.
Just as when someoen wake up in the morning and go to work? "If brute force does not solve your problem..... -áthen you are -ásurely not using enough!" |
RAIN Arthie
The Ascended Fleet Intrepid Crossing
197
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:15:00 -
[138] - Quote
Mah Boobz wrote:I wonder, if CCP hadn't spent all that money on Dust and WOD, and instead, put it into the Eve servers (were the money was made) if we could actually have the fights CCP brag about?
I agree. Dust was a failure. |
Diivil
Magellanic Itg Goonswarm Federation
239
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:20:00 -
[139] - Quote
Also as long as TIDI exists, separate sov objectives in different systems is incredibly hard to pull off in a way that it stays fair. Let's say I'm defending my sov and I need to defend in three different systems. It is in my favour to wait for hostiles to choose where to deploy their strongest force, deploy my strongest force against their weakest while trying to cause TIDI in any other system that is not where my strongest force is. I will try to kill the weakest fleets fast while their strongest fleet is slowed down by TIDII.
And don't even try to argue that causing TIDI is an exploit. I can put a system in to TIDI by having my 50 man fleet change ships or jump gates. Maybe I'm just indecisive what doctrine to bring or where to engage, definitely not causing TIDI there at all. Or would you make it an exploit to travel gates or change ships while a hostile fleet is your system?
Of course you could force TIDI to be the same in each system that are part of the sov system but I don't think CCP is willing to degrade server performance on purpose. |
RAIN Arthie
The Ascended Fleet Intrepid Crossing
197
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:20:00 -
[140] - Quote
Watched the fight from a tv set in my retreiver yesterday. Was slightly depressed by the amount of slowness and flashy flash there was. Didn't understand what was going on most of the time. The idiots on twitch kept making stupid comments distracting what was really happening. Also whoever shot the video should have closed local or something, that god awful spam in loal was terrible. Next time lets mix it up a bit and have the fight in an asteroid belt. |
|
Raylucy
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:47:00 -
[141] - Quote
James Amril-Kesh wrote:Raylucy wrote:from the looks of it, the other side enjoyed the turkey shoot and the amount of tears that will flood this thread and probably many others. Nobody's angry about losing dreads. Nobody's angry about tidi. They're angry about the game not working despite the tidi. not from what I saw, the whole "lets get ccp to apologise to us for their screw up and get them to reimburse our lost ships like usual when we welp hard" comments posted over and over in one of the streams for last nights fight and a few other places, which was most likely ordered by dbrb as the upcoming reimbursement phase. lets face it, when he orders something you guys jump, you don't need to ask "how high?" because you guys are pretty much used to it.
The game has been around for 10yrs+ now and you'd think goons would of learned from experience not to do something like this with the amount of numbers in the system and tidi. There has been countless times I can think of personally where a fleet welped due to desync jump in issues and I'm pretty sure that any goon who could at least think for themselves would easily think of several too and know yesterday was a bad idea but the welping still happened and it should be accepted |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
13573
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 12:58:00 -
[142] - Quote
The solution to this is something that not many of you are going to like the sound of.
First off, it's important to understand that's there's no magic "shut up and take my money" hardware bullet. Even if CCP went out and bought literally the best hardware on the planet, they'd get at most about a one-time 15-20% improvement. Real scope for improvement lies in the software. And developing a software fix is proving pretty damb difficult. Work is being done, but there aren't any big wins on the immediate horizon.
The other possibilty is game design. Either disincentivize or make too expenive (meaning as in time & effort because as we all know expensive as in ISK doesn't mean ****) ultrablob tactics.
My esteemed fellow poster Mr Grath Telkin has proposed a space-honoure~~ agreement between alliance FCs not to bring more than a few hundred ships to a fight. In effect, to turn EVE warfare into a tournament. Whilst his proposal is as laughably unrealistic as it is blatantly self serving, it does highlight a basic truth that there is no denying: EVE simply can't support all-out alliance warfare on the current model.
The only possible effective solution is to effectively enforce that space-honoure agreement and radically reduce power projection so that if eg: the CFC are deploying a fleet in Catch, the same fleet is physically unable to defend a timer in Branch. Thus any far-flung power bloc which attempts to project power on this side of the map must necessarily reduce it's ability to do so on that side. That is the only way that bloc level powers will voluntarily limit the size of the fleets that they deploy: by making it in their own interest.
To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement. I'm talking about changes on the order of a 24 hour cooldown on capital jumps, requiring consumables for gate jumps, burning jump bridges to the ground, eliminating titan bridging and so on.
Are you, the inhabitants of 0.0 ready to accept such a radical change in your 0.0 lifestyle? Most of 0.0 lives in blocs, and this would be a titanic nerf to blocs.
If not, then fine, but don't complain about what happens when 4000 people have a capital battle in a single system.
If you are then tell me so loud and clear right now, and that's the message I'll take to Iceland on Tuesday.
1 Kings 12:11
|
Money Makin Mitch
Paid in Full
302
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:10:00 -
[143] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement. I'm talking about changes on the order of a 24 hour cooldown on capital jumps, requiring consumables for gate jumps, burning jump bridges to the ground, eliminating titan bridging and so on.
|
Xavier Quo
Ashfell Celestial Corporation POD-SQUAD
72
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:21:00 -
[144] - Quote
Can someone explain to me why the complete removal of SOV etc is not a viable option?
as in, if you can defend a system, it's yours. If you can't, it isn't.
To me that would alleviate both;
-The growing blue doughnut by making a large portion of non-npc null unclaimed (as actual active defence is harder than dropping TCU's in dead systems and doing little else), giving smaller entities much more chance at claiming system(s), in a permanent or nomadic fashion.
-The concentration of fleets into technically unmanagable sizes, making intersystem warfare much more interesting in terms of strategy and tactics, smaller groupings across nodes, quicker flash conflicts arising from no notice timers, etc. ofc large battles would still occur but they would not be the only decisive
perhaps the addition of some defense unit deployables on gates, belts etc, with some mechanic to discourage turtling would be needed as well. would also promote interesting intrasystem conflicts as well rather than stressing one single grid every time a system is contested.
It does predicate the need for even small null sec corps to have a fairly global userbase, but for much more interesting conflicts that doesn't seem like such a bad tradeoff compared to what we have now.
I am sure this would've been discussed before, any links appreciated. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
166
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:27:00 -
[145] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:The solution to this is something that not many of you are going to like the sound of.
First off, it's important to understand that's there's no magic "shut up and take my money" hardware bullet. Even if CCP went out and bought literally the best hardware on the planet, they'd get at most about a one-time 15-20% improvement. Real scope for improvement lies in the software. And developing a software fix is proving pretty damb difficult. Work is being done, but there aren't any big wins on the immediate horizon.
The other possibilty is game design. Either disincentivize or make too expenive (meaning as in time & effort because as we all know expensive as in ISK doesn't mean ****) ultrablob tactics.
My esteemed fellow poster Mr Grath Telkin has proposed a space-honoure~~ agreement between alliance FCs not to bring more than a few hundred ships to a fight. In effect, to turn EVE warfare into a tournament. Whilst his proposal is as laughably unrealistic as it is blatantly self serving, it does highlight a basic truth that there is no denying: EVE simply can't support all-out alliance warfare on the current model.
The only possible effective solution is to effectively enforce that space-honoure agreement and radically reduce power projection so that if eg: the CFC are deploying a fleet in Catch, the same fleet is physically unable to defend a timer in Branch. Thus any far-flung power bloc which attempts to project power on this side of the map must necessarily reduce it's ability to do so on that side. That is the only way that bloc level powers will voluntarily limit the size of the fleets that they deploy: by making it in their own interest.
To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement. I'm talking about changes on the order of a 24 hour cooldown on capital jumps, requiring consumables for gate jumps, burning jump bridges to the ground, eliminating titan bridging and so on.
Are you, the inhabitants of 0.0 ready to accept such a radical change in your 0.0 lifestyle? Most of 0.0 lives in blocs, and this would be a titanic nerf to blocs.
If not, then fine, but don't complain about what happens when 4000 people have a capital battle in a single system.
If you are then tell me so loud and clear right now, and that's the message I'll take to Iceland on Tuesday.
Do it.
|
Niding
Peg-legged Goats Nihilists Social Club
38
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:35:00 -
[146] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement. I'm talking about changes on the order of a 24 hour cooldown on capital jumps, requiring consumables for gate jumps, burning jump bridges to the ground, eliminating titan bridging and so on.
Are you, the inhabitants of 0.0 ready to accept such a radical change in your 0.0 lifestyle? Most of 0.0 lives in blocs, and this would be a titanic nerf to blocs.
If not, then fine, but don't complain about what happens when 4000 people have a capital battle in a single system.
If you are then tell me so loud and clear right now, and that's the message I'll take to Iceland on Tuesday.
Well, 24 hour cooldown on capitals sounds extreme, but the scale of the Tranqulity universe is laughable at the moment. Everywhere is "neighbourhood" these days.
Maybe you assign your character/account to a given system as HQ and the cooldown increases the futher away from the HQ you get? (in addition to decreased jumprange) Ofcourse, people with alts will just get around this by having characters spread around, but it would somewhat hamper supercapital movements, since relativily few people got more than 1 titan/supercarrier. And jumpclones should not affect the HQ assignment.
I got several supers and normal capitals, and wont really enjoy having limitations to them. But at the same time I do not really see the current mechanics work satisfactory.
Its a discussion you should atleast bring up Malcanis.
|
Admiral Snowbird
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
7
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:36:00 -
[147] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:The solution to this is something that not many of you are going to like the sound of.
First off, it's important to understand that's there's no magic "shut up and take my money" hardware bullet. Even if CCP went out and bought literally the best hardware on the planet, they'd get at most about a one-time 15-20% improvement. Real scope for improvement lies in the software. And developing a software fix is proving pretty damb difficult. Work is being done, but there aren't any big wins on the immediate horizon.
The other possibilty is game design. Either disincentivize or make too expenive (meaning as in time & effort because as we all know expensive as in ISK doesn't mean ****) ultrablob tactics.
My esteemed fellow poster Mr Grath Telkin has proposed a space-honoure~~ agreement between alliance FCs not to bring more than a few hundred ships to a fight. In effect, to turn EVE warfare into a tournament. Whilst his proposal is as laughably unrealistic as it is blatantly self serving, it does highlight a basic truth that there is no denying: EVE simply can't support all-out alliance warfare on the current model.
The only possible effective solution is to effectively enforce that space-honoure agreement and radically reduce power projection so that if eg: the CFC are deploying a fleet in Catch, the same fleet is physically unable to defend a timer in Branch. Thus any far-flung power bloc which attempts to project power on this side of the map must necessarily reduce it's ability to do so on that side. That is the only way that bloc level powers will voluntarily limit the size of the fleets that they deploy: by making it in their own interest.
To achieve this, CCP will have to truly radically reduce capital and supercapital movement. I'm talking about changes on the order of a 24 hour cooldown on capital jumps, requiring consumables for gate jumps, burning jump bridges to the ground, eliminating titan bridging and so on.
Are you, the inhabitants of 0.0 ready to accept such a radical change in your 0.0 lifestyle? Most of 0.0 lives in blocs, and this would be a titanic nerf to blocs.
If not, then fine, but don't complain about what happens when 4000 people have a capital battle in a single system.
If you are then tell me so loud and clear right now, and that's the message I'll take to Iceland on Tuesday.
rebalancing/rework SOV and caps since 2010 - changes comming soon! (2027 or smth)
|
Doc Severide
State War Academy Caldari State
17
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:37:00 -
[148] - Quote
A lot of complaints every time this happens. And it will happen again. You're not gonna change the behaviour of the players and CCP can't fix it.
The End... |
Rumtin
Imperium Technologies Get Off My Lawn
57
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:40:00 -
[149] - Quote
You're all going about this the wrong way. The problem isn't blobs that overload the nodes causing the server to crash. The problem isn't the sov mechanics and how it takes over 200+ people to grind them down. The problem isn't timers that ensure EVERYONE and their ******* mothers is online at one time to jump into a single system. The problem doesn't rest with CCP's slow response time to properly reinforce the node so the players play at 10% TiDi before they flat out disconnect.
The true problem lies in the lack of useless deployable objects, and the lack of nerfs null sec recieves. These talks about big fights will be fixed because there are new deployables that are in most cases, never going to be used as intended and are infact ALREADY being banned from use by several null sec alliances (ESS). The only way to fix lag is to make sure that you deploy the "Anti-Lag Mobile Depot" (available 2025).
Thanks to CCP's good friends over in EA, you can make sure all your troubles are washed away with all these new ideas of useless content that our development staff spent the past few months of time and money for your enjoyment!
Seriously CCP, time to pull your head out and stop wasting our money and your time. |
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
328
|
Posted - 2014.01.19 13:55:00 -
[150] - Quote
Andski wrote:Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:I anyone "enjoyed" that fight , then they more than likely "enjoy" being beaten and whipped in some BDSM club. some people still find it more fun than shooting red crosses over and over in some blinged legion, so
A little scary that you'd rather spend five hours watching your computer lag out than actually interact with your ship.
I bet even more people would rather shoot crosses than not play their blinged out dread for hours on end. Loooooooooow standards. I am not an alt of Chribba. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |