You can't dictate a battle when you're all in ships that do <100 dps. Sure you can cyno some caps in to one or two systems at a time, maybe even try moving them through gates to assist in multiple command point fights but when you're dedicating your numbers into essentially useless combat hulls you won't be able to hold a grid to complete your RFs or captures without bringing in reinforcements in far more killable ships.

People that are worried about the T2 Entosis link range of 250km been op.

it sounds like its a targeted module, so whatever ship fits it can only burn around in a bubble of its own target range, not the full 250k bubble

The primetime idea definitely needs a different idea behind it

Where are you people getting these numbers from? Your arguments are based on a while assumption someone made on the first page that you could fit this module to a ceptor, of which i can find absolutely none, nada, zip, nothing offical as to what the fitting requirments would be.

After a 100page threadnaught im sure the Devs get it. Fitting these on ceptors will be a bad idea and totally OP. Give Fozzie and Rise and the rest of the Dev team dealing with Sov and ship balancing a little credit.

Stop with the mittani trollceptor.

A single ship with a link is enough to counter your ridiculous wing of trollceptor.

Exactly, why not, just for lols...then you realise that it's not very much lols orbitting something with a laser for 40 minutes and running away as soon as a defensive fleet shows up and stop doing it. Thanks for confirming.

And you were talking about doing this across the whole of the south, that's 40 minutes for every structure in the south of the map...

And being a small alliance with a small area of operations, they're all still perfectly within range to come and deter him again...

Picture a wasp in a tiny one bedroom flat.

Now picture it in the Louvre.


That's the difference.

I think you'll get bored to alarmclocking to grief euro timers every 2 days.. emm, in 1-2 weeks. :)

Then why I see a half of galaxy not owned by CFC? :) Easy to hit, hard to hold.

What a point of grief then? You came, take station.. you leave, you lose station. :)

Sure they'll troll... but considering that their 'trolling' consists of orbitting a structure for 40 minutes then returning 2 days later and having to do it another 10 times - with or without hostiles in system with them.

...and then two days later you flip it straight back because they don't live locally and have no intention of holding it and so didn't grind up the indices or have anyone show up to your velator.

How many days are they gonna keep up this epic trollolololol for whilst also defending their own space during primetime (which I've already suggested should be a much longer period for large alliances).

Oh I'm fully aware of this, I just needed a rough figure to bounce around when people are saying that nullsec is so poor at the moment. I mean the 4T across the whole of New Eden is a definite lowball estimate if you check the coverage percentages on dotlan as well. I'm not saying it's all going into Mittens pockets directly buuuut I'm also quite sure he doesn't do much afktar-ing either when he needs a new ship to whelp.

As I say, it's top down income - would be far more interesting to have industry guys actively mining that stuff and have a bottom up process.

A carrot for the stick? What's the carrot currently?

Some make it sound like null is just a vast land of lower-than-hisec income with logistical nightmares on top. If so, then why are people out there now? And in such vast numbers in the coalitions?

Shouldn't the carrot just simply be the very same carrot that exists currently? There's gotta be one right, to have the alliance/coalition numbers null enjoys over other player entities?

I don't want to be rude because I haven't been in null for a few years but if you are out hitting all of the south then who is watching your back yard? Invading the south for a few days would let any frig hole that opens in your area dump potentially hundreds of the same kind of E-link frigs to do the same thing to your SOV.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that we're moving to the extremes of the arguments to expose loop holes in mechanics but if you are busy harassing others in a different area doesn't that allow others to do the same thing to you? I agree that E-linked interceptors may be too easily used as a trolling ship but at the same time a larger ship fitted to deal with ceptors with a Entosis mod could be use to defend. At least a well tanked ship with its own Entosis link would stop the interceptor till a more robust fleet arrived or the aggressor simply gave up or was destroyed.

The goal of these new mechanics are to encourage fights, keep pilots active and quell stagnation. When pilots are out trolling systems causing people to undock and defend their assets then that, to me, means that the mechanic is working as intended. If the defender doesn't defend then they should move to an area that doesn't use the SOV mechanic or to a system with a higher sec status. If pilots do undock and defend then the mechanic has worked.

Again, I understand the underlying premise of the argument but at the same time I don't think going to extremes is always the best way to drive the conversation in a productive direction. I like how the new mechanics look on paper but I do think they need some adjustments, they are conflict drivers and they seem to combat apex forces, structure grinds, n+1 gameplay and stagnation by giving small groups the ability to fight/harass larger groups using hit and run tactics and guerrilla warfare. Defiantly not perfect but moving in the right direction.

Cancer?

I get that and I believe that you can and do but the next question is how long can you pilots keep it up?

Then this mechanic shouldn't be much of a change for your people with the exception that you may get more fights that aren't dependent on an apex force. Again, it sounds like the new mechanic would be working because either you win because they don't undock or they fight and GFs are had.

The point is to inject activity and these changes would seem to do that allowing the occupants of systems to determine the outcome by being active or inactive. Taking and holding sov by occupancy instead of HP.

What would be your fix for the trollcepter?

In regards to null sov. Would it be enough of an incentive if the best level 4 mission agent or high sec incursion farming was still not as good as the worst null system for income?

I'm just trying to get the basic vibe on the issue from everyone.

Nah I just think that saying 'Cuz we can **** around with it because we have enough members to easily cover a 4hr period once a day and still be dicks'

is just an encouragement to say: OK then, deal with 8, 16, 24hrs of it if you can cope with a meagre 4 so easily.

If you can't cope, then break down into smaller components where you can manage smaller spaces with fewer members.

Rather than caving into the dickishness...

I think not answering questions is also a sign of struggling for answers that don't make you look worried.

More sov = longer primetimes. Simple rule which just needs a few minor tweaks to prevent you gaming around it. Larger alliances can and should be vulnerable over longer periods than 100 people that all come from the same country wanting to stake a claim in a couple of systems.

If a large group can field enough players to RF all of null each weekend and not reducing the home defense then maybe it should be longer.

Trollceptors - when used as you intend - force no conflict.

Anyone else chucking a link on a CFC structure in any of your systems (during your nice long, bloated primetime period) who actually wants a fight WILL force a response. Just because you're so risk averse doesn't mean the rest of the players are.

Great, you're not risk averse and you don't mind defending for 24hrs a day, it'll be easy for you with multi-TZ coverage.

I guess the next thing is deciding how short a period small alliances need to deal with this for, maybe just 1hr a day for the single system guys?

No, we were hypothesising about large groups having to defend for l-o-n-g-e-r periods because they have such great TZ coverage that it'll be easy for them to deal with every single drunken interceptor pilot flying through their space 24hrs a day and challenging them to hold their sov.

You sounded so keen before, what's up?

Brave don't hold anywhere near as much Sov as you, they'd probably be down around 8hrs a day or something and I'm sure they'd love undocking to fight people contesting them - they already do that without needing supercaps on grid for them to n+1.

The reason YOU don't like the idea is because you realise that you'd have to consolidate down to a smaller area because in spite of your bravado you couldn't hold as much space as you currently do 24/7...which is the point of the idea in the first place.

And yes, there would have to be suitable rewards for your diligence.

You would probably be one of the few organisations that has a 12 hour prime time.

Good, I'm not pointing a finger at Goons, it's the whole donut that needs to be chipped away at.

Also I'll point out that 24hrs was just to prove a point that it is completely unfeasible to hold the whole map and go around dicking about in trollceptors with no repercussions the whole time. Something like 1-16 hrs scaling by number of systems held could be reasonable though?

I do not agree with removing the sov laser from inties.

Give better rewards for sov to balance it out.

If RvB want to come roam in intys and force fights it sounds great. It sounds a whole bunch better than them having to fight a static blockade on an entry system where they'll just get out blobbed because you don't require any depth to your defences unless you're vulnerable to ceptors penetrating them.

What's your idea to counter a walled defence around undefended systems?

So why the hell are a highsec pvp group gonna come into nullsec to avoid fights

Why the hell would you ruin someone else's game at the expense of your own game?
Well, goons would do it to prove a point. Which is like proving that meat grinders are dangerous and should require operation license by shoving your hand into one. But why would RvB take part in this idiocy if they don't get their fun from it?

I wouldn't have expected for a moment that you did - HOWEVER it cannot be ignored as it is a massive source of NULL income, even if the only way people see it is in SRP.

Ignoring moon goo is like ignoring LPs in high sec.

Also, null PI isn't too shabby.


Point being - I've no problem with a null income rebalance - but it might not go quite the way we expect (or hope).