EVE Search - Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE Information Portal

Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 278	Posted - 2015.03.03 18:55:14 - [1] - Quote RE: Command Nodes Require the Defender to place the Command node(s) in each system of a constellation (or it be automatic w/ Sov costs) where the nodes decloak during Preferred Time/ Main Event but which ones can be interfaced with are random? Just a twist on the same idea but placing more onus on defender/ Sov owner -- cause right now without a proper explanation they just seem ... well random and disconnected from publicly known lore --- but mainly, defender should not only be more responsible for their Sov, but also be able to have some ability to help set the terms of engagement as well (ie location of Command Node in a system/constellation - near a gate or in the middle of no where) ~ just a thought to be a participant in the conversation. CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 278	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:07:52 - [2] - Quote Also regarding Command Node(s) and capture: Re: Adding the need to scan down Command nodes: Which equals diversity in game play. If we're removing grinding then something has to be hard... right now it's attacker advantage the way populated Sov is currently used... i.e. BLOB warps in suddenly to system and griefs station by reinforcing everything services wise Defender is at disadvantage because it's suprise attack, and the time to organize a defense --- When it comes to actual Sov capture there isn't a decisive advantage for defender over attacker, which is fine, but once the command nodes start popping it's just a race to see who can come across the anomoly first It would be nicer if some sill was involved of actually having to scan the things down instead of attacker just pre posiition in "spotters" in every constellation system and then via comms deploy the fleet CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 278	Posted - 2015.03.03 19:55:09 - [3] - Quote So in tweetfleet #slack Aaeriele brought up the question of how will this 4 hour window affect Alliances with multiple time zone pilots: One answer proposed: "Hmmm.... here's a thought - why not just attach the prefered time not to the Executor Corp window - but to each individual structure - TCU's come out in 1 4hr window, iHubs in another, and Stations in yet another --- this will give every multi-TZ member of an alliance a role to help protect sov structures etc." While not perfect - it does do the following: Dilutes player concentration /per Sov Structure Spreads content across multiple time zones, rather than the 'assumed' single dominant time zone (many alliances have balanced or dual dominate time zones) And other pro's that I"m to lazy to think of :P Cause I think the concern is legitimate - right now content is spread because not all timers are in the same window -- with the timer set via the executor corp instead of the structure (or structure type), it prevents participation in content for everyone outside that window of time. CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 278	Posted - 2015.03.03 20:05:53 - [4] - Quote Re: Problem: Command Node - and a Successful Defense It seems inherently unfair that if a Defender successfully defends their sov and captures the requisite command nodes - that they get ZERO break, and that the vulnerability is not delayed for the defender. Their litterally forced to be under CTA conditions at all times every day - particularly every day a Main Event might get triggered - let alone the main event itself.... I thought the idea was to spread out Sov warfare... Perhaps, if a defender is successfull in their defense they can be rewarded for the defense by getting an invlunerability bonus for a fixed period of time --- same of course for a successful attack. That any counter attack is delayed - and a potential attacker/invader will have to reconsider their startegy or go after another constellation. Why? Because Sov Trolls will totally become a thing, and a small group faking a sov take over every day day after day is beyond annoying... CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 280	Posted - 2015.03.03 20:35:39 - [5] - Quote REALLY IMPORTANT: Entosis Link should trigger alert IMMEDIATELY - not after a 10 Minute delay when the damage is already done!!!! *(Please like this post so Dev's will clearly see this) CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 282	Posted - 2015.03.03 20:53:33 - [6] - Quote Agent Known wrote: Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote: REALLY IMPORTANT: Entosis Link should trigger alert IMMEDIATELY - not after a 10 Minute delay when the damage is already done!!!! (Please like this post so Dev's will clearly see this) If you're actively using the system they're contesting then intel channels would tell you well before they got to the structures anyway. Intel channels don't tell you someone's fit or cargo. No where in all of EVE's mechanics does an attacker of a POS or POCO or ANY player owned structure get a free 10 minute head start in contesting anything in this game.... @#$@ THAT! That's *** game design right there --- I'm all for what's proposed EXCEPT that! CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 282	Posted - 2015.03.03 21:22:25 - [7] - Quote Nb4 Record Breaking posts - RIP Phoebe Thread Oh and - just say no to giving Entosis Link (attackers) free headstarts! CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 282	Posted - 2015.03.03 21:32:43 - [8] - Quote CCP Re: 96 Hour Timer So when this is launched and no one has a Preferred Timer window set - will it still take 96 Hours to set before anything can start happening? Or will everyone get a default Preferred Time at launch, until it is changed manually and then +96hrs? CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Kassasis Dakkstromri Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation 288	Posted - 2015.03.05 03:34:50 - [9] - Quote What's CCP's position on dealing with "Trollettos"? http://www.themittani.com/features/proposed-sov-changes-rise-trollceptor?page=0%2C1 CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.