| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2004
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:18:33 -
[3031] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: Cloackign is already not allowed since you CANNOT LOCK ANYTHING WHILE CLOACKED!!!
One wonders then if you can drop your target deliberately, and prematurely end the Entosis cycle and thereby it's debuff, enabling someone to disengage and warp off when they would otherwise be unable.
That is NOT how TARGETED modules work. When you lose the lock on a target that you were applying a targeted module the cycle of the module does nto END IMMEDIATELY! Check it with a salvager for example. The effect is just checked at the end. I am pretty sure the debuffs will end only when the CYCLE time ends.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2004
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:19:37 -
[3032] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:Papa Django wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:Mike Azariah wrote: 3) Goons will ruin everything. How is that different from any other point in the past few years. The do because they like to.
Actually on point 3 we couldn't ruin everything before, there were limits imposed by timers and EHP. Now we can conceivably make every sov-null system outside of the homeland burn in the space of a month. 12 000 / 3294 = ? Mmh seems you could not. Either you miss the point here or you are just trolling. Miner Hottie wrote: 10) All night shops are open 24 hours a day by rotating their staff. A large multi-timezone organization could do the same for the prime time to make things interesting for different parts of its membership.
11) If I were an Aussie alliance I would hire mercs to drag a late night prime time over to my slot so we could finish it off. Remember prime time is when the battle has to start, not end.
The primetime should be scaled with alliance size. The bigger you are the bigger should be your primetime. You are not very good at math it would seem, try 40,000/(3,294-665 (CFC space)). We can put 5 inties in every other system in null sec and still have 20,000 for home defense. As for primetime scaling with alliance size, that rubbish has been disposed of elsewhere.
LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|

Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
792
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:20:17 -
[3033] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Well, the whole trollceptor thing has been effectively demolished.... Only in the heads of those who don't want to hear about it. How about leaving it to the Devs to decide whether its a problem or not, rather than the rather biased views of posters?
|

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2004
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:20:57 -
[3034] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote: I would suggest more of a trade-off approach, rather than punish, punish, punish. Give players the choice of widening the window if they feel they can handle it, in return for benefits to doing so - say match the amount of Prime-time "stretch", with a commesurate stretching of capture time (For example, say a system would be a 10 minute capture against an Alliance with a 4-hour window, make it so having a 6 hour window means the same capture would take 15 minutes, 20 for a 8 hour window, 30 for a 12 hour, etc). Obviously, there would need to be a ceiling to this (to prevent Alliances making ludicrous capture times through advancing their indices to the max, then opening up for 24 hours to ramp any capture into a multi-hour torture), or more likely make it a case of diminishing returns.
I know the immediate knee-jerk reaction will be that I'm attempting to make life easier for the defender, but consider two same-sized alliances, one purely EU timezone, and one 50/50 split between EU and US (or EU and RUS, or US east coast/west coast). At present, the "pure" time-zone alliance has it easier, as their players are concentrated in their Prime, while the mixed alliance has in reality only got half the population to respond in their Prime, so are more likely to burn that segment out, and be unable to respond as swiftly to threats. By being allowed to stretch their Prime, they make up for the smaller population in any given segment of time by having more time to respond to a threat, and hence making lightening raids less stressful.
There must be a wide enough minimal time. But prizes on the system enconomic troughput coudl be given. Example: standard 4 hours prime.... standard economy. 3 hours prime (I would put this at the VERY VERY minimum) -33% income. 8 hours prime- 50% extra income. Increasing value is certainly an alternative, however, my reservation with this is you are rewarding the wrong people. There is often a clear split between PVPers and PVEers, and a situation that makes life more annoying for a PVPer (since they want to be out roaming or brawling, not bug-hunting interceptors) to give benefit to the PVEers is only going to cause resentment ("Why am I having to chase Interceptors for 8 hours so the lazy bum multiboxing drone boats instead of helping out gets more isk. Screw him."). Sure, this might cause the fracturing of large groups that is a desirable aim, but fracturing it along this line would be hazardous to nullsec health (since if all the PVPers go "screw this" and split off and go in to NPC Null, the PVEers have no protection, and go back to highsec). Its certainly an alternative though (and potentially some middle ground that give a little boost in several areas might be the way)
Null sec alliances do not work like that. The COMMAND of the alliance will decide. and they will use the money from the taxes to help the alliance. Reinburse ships... etc... That is an issue for the alliance organization to solve.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|

Dark Spite
The Real OC ROC.
10
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:23:25 -
[3035] - Quote
Miner Hottie wrote:Papa Django wrote:Miner Hottie wrote:Mike Azariah wrote: 3) Goons will ruin everything. How is that different from any other point in the past few years. The do because they like to.
Actually on point 3 we couldn't ruin everything before, there were limits imposed by timers and EHP. Now we can conceivably make every sov-null system outside of the homeland burn in the space of a month. 12 000 / 3294 = ? Mmh seems you could not. Either you miss the point here or you are just trolling. Miner Hottie wrote: 10) All night shops are open 24 hours a day by rotating their staff. A large multi-timezone organization could do the same for the prime time to make things interesting for different parts of its membership.
11) If I were an Aussie alliance I would hire mercs to drag a late night prime time over to my slot so we could finish it off. Remember prime time is when the battle has to start, not end.
The primetime should be scaled with alliance size. The bigger you are the bigger should be your primetime. You are not very good at math it would seem, try 40,000/(3,294-665 (CFC space)). We can put 5 inties in every other system in null sec and still have 20,000 for home defense. As for primetime scaling with alliance size, that rubbish has been disposed of elsewhere.
This would also mean there are actually 40K PLAYERS in CFC, and the answer is that there isnt. I would like to see all players multiboxing all their alts for both these things. It would be killmail farming heaven for everyone else, unless they all have 4-10 monitors each.
|

Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
792
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:24:38 -
[3036] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Papa Digger wrote:Entosis module mechanics definately need some changes. Fitting - pg 200. No cloak activation while module is active
Cloackign is already not allowed since you CANNOT LOCK ANYTHING WHILE CLOACKED!!!
Notably, you aren't supposed to be able to MWD while cloaked, yet clever use of activation times makes the Cloak-MWD trick a quite familiar and widely used tactic. There is certainly nothing wrong with highlighting where a potential carelessness in coding could create a hilariously stupid bug.
|

Rex Crendraven
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:25:14 -
[3037] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote: I would suggest more of a trade-off approach, rather than punish, punish, punish. Give players the choice of widening the window if they feel they can handle it, in return for benefits to doing so - say match the amount of Prime-time "stretch", with a commesurate stretching of capture time (For example, say a system would be a 10 minute capture against an Alliance with a 4-hour window, make it so having a 6 hour window means the same capture would take 15 minutes, 20 for a 8 hour window, 30 for a 12 hour, etc). Obviously, there would need to be a ceiling to this (to prevent Alliances making ludicrous capture times through advancing their indices to the max, then opening up for 24 hours to ramp any capture into a multi-hour torture), or more likely make it a case of diminishing returns.
I know the immediate knee-jerk reaction will be that I'm attempting to make life easier for the defender, but consider two same-sized alliances, one purely EU timezone, and one 50/50 split between EU and US (or EU and RUS, or US east coast/west coast). At present, the "pure" time-zone alliance has it easier, as their players are concentrated in their Prime, while the mixed alliance has in reality only got half the population to respond in their Prime, so are more likely to burn that segment out, and be unable to respond as swiftly to threats. By being allowed to stretch their Prime, they make up for the smaller population in any given segment of time by having more time to respond to a threat, and hence making lightening raids less stressful.
There must be a wide enough minimal time. But prizes on the system enconomic troughput coudl be given. Example: standard 4 hours prime.... standard economy. 3 hours prime (I would put this at the VERY VERY minimum) -33% income. 8 hours prime- 50% extra income. Increasing value is certainly an alternative, however, my reservation with this is you are rewarding the wrong people. There is often a clear split between PVPers and PVEers, and a situation that makes life more annoying for a PVPer (since they want to be out roaming or brawling, not bug-hunting interceptors) to give benefit to the PVEers is only going to cause resentment ("Why am I having to chase Interceptors for 8 hours so the lazy bum multiboxing drone boats instead of helping out gets more isk. Screw him."). Sure, this might cause the fracturing of large groups that is a desirable aim, but fracturing it along this line would be hazardous to nullsec health (since if all the PVPers go "screw this" and split off and go in to NPC Null, the PVEers have no protection, and go back to highsec). Its certainly an alternative though (and potentially some middle ground that give a little boost in several areas might be the way)
You come across as someone who thinks he knows how null sec alliances work while in reality you don't. |

Papa Digger
OEG The Gorgon Empire
29
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:27:47 -
[3038] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Cloackign is already not allowed since you CANNOT LOCK ANYTHING WHILE CLOACKED!!!
No need for the other changes. IF the cycle does not end when the ship get out of range and jsut FAILS at its effect at its end, its enough. If you allow cloack, you'll get 100500 Uncatchable Joe's. |

davet517
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
35
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:28:41 -
[3039] - Quote
Damned if I'm going to read 150 pages. Has anyone addressed how caps and supers will play into all of this yet? I know you can make a theoretical argument that every serious fight will escalate, but I don't see a necessary escalation path, given the mechanics as they have been described here.
Will caps and supers only be necessary for contesting moons after this patch? |

Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
793
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:29:26 -
[3040] - Quote
Rex Crendraven wrote: You come across as someone who thinks he knows how null sec alliances work while in reality you don't.
You are correct, my knowledge of the inner workings of the mighty sov-holding Federal Navy Academy is somewhat limited.
|

afkalt
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
828
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:31:38 -
[3041] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:Well, the whole trollceptor thing has been effectively demolished.... Only in the heads of those who don't want to hear about it. How about leaving it to the Devs to decide whether its a problem or not, rather than the rather biased views of posters?
On the contrary, I cannot wait to farm the kills.
A 100m, self tackling 1800 EHP ship? Yeah, that is going to have a VeryBadTimeGäó indeed.
Sure, some might burn off grid, maybe. But a bunch are gonna die hard. |

Dark Spite
The Real OC ROC.
12
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:34:04 -
[3042] - Quote
davet517 wrote:Damned if I'm going to read 150 pages. Has anyone addressed how caps and supers will play into all of this yet? I know you can make a theoretical argument that every serious fight will escalate, but I don't see a necessary escalation path, given the mechanics as they have been described here.
Will caps and supers only be necessary for contesting moons after this patch?
Towards structures like poco's and pos maybe. Still really good ships to kill other capitals with. And in the case of triage carriers as support for subcap fleets. Wouldnt mind seeing more oldschool BS and BC fleets (no, you cannot still cannot bring a Drake to an armor fleet and expect logi to rep you). |

Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
118
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:36:46 -
[3043] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month.
I have said the same thing but it is GSF and they have all the everything. I agree that they can muster up a large portion of the player base but I don't think that they have enough pull to have much more than a few thousand players at any given time-that aren't alts-to put into action and defiantly not for more than a month or so. If that, organization goes a long way but people have lives and I don't think they have that kind of numbers or stamina.
Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why.
Hunter S. Thompson
|

Rex Crendraven
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:39:09 -
[3044] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Rex Crendraven wrote: You come across as someone who thinks he knows how null sec alliances work while in reality you don't.
You are correct, my knowledge of the inner workings of the mighty sov-holding Federal Navy Academy is somewhat limited.
Don't judge a player by his ALTs. |

Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
118
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:45:02 -
[3045] - Quote
davet517 wrote:Damned if I'm going to read 150 pages. Has anyone addressed how caps and supers will play into all of this yet? I know you can make a theoretical argument that every serious fight will escalate, but I don't see a necessary escalation path, given the mechanics as they have been described here.
Will caps and supers only be necessary for contesting moons after this patch?
I've thought about this and I think that the most they will contribute will be a massive HP pool or aid in escalations, I hope that they find a better role for ships bigger that BCs. Maybe some type of bonus to the length of the E-link or something because if we continue down this path it seems to be subcaps online.
Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why.
Hunter S. Thompson
|

Panther X
High Flyers The Kadeshi
83
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:47:57 -
[3046] - Quote
Angry Mustache wrote:You mentioned that the Entosis link will have low fitting requirements, and not disable propulsion while active.
What is there to prevent massive hordes of T2 entosis fitted interceptors from completely swarming an area and putting entosis links on everything?
All the ceptor has to do is stay within a 250km bubble of the objective, and even if hostiles show up, you just have to MWD around for 2 minutes. If the enemy is trying to entosis your objective, do the same.
What's to stop a large group from putting 1000 nerds in interceptors, and just burn through 100 systems in 1-2 hours? You've made sov easier to take, but that works both ways.
Any small group that slights a big group can expect all their space reinforced in less than 30 minutes. By interceptors.
So the future of Sov warfare is inteceptor with sov lasers, slippery petes to kill interceptors, and absolutely no fleet on fleet fighting.
Make the Entosis Link a bastion/siege module. Immobile, but with defensive bonuses. Fitting requirements for battlecruiser and above.
Welcome hordes of triple plated triple repped abaddons... battleship combat ensues.
My super smells of rich Corinthian Leather
|

Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12030
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:51:53 -
[3047] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote: LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month.
"nobody will ever have the kind of resources and organization to just make Titans whenever they feel like it. We're safe leaving it broken under the assumption that no one will ever pull it off."
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2005
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:52:05 -
[3048] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:Papa Digger wrote:Entosis module mechanics definately need some changes. Fitting - pg 200. No cloak activation while module is active
Cloackign is already not allowed since you CANNOT LOCK ANYTHING WHILE CLOACKED!!! Notably, you aren't supposed to be able to MWD while cloaked, yet clever use of activation times makes the Cloak-MWD trick a quite familiar and widely used tactic. There is certainly nothing wrong with highlighting where a potential carelessness in coding could create a hilariously stupid bug.
And that EXACT same behavior is what will prevent the abuse of the cloak. Because the active module effects do not END until the end of the cycle. Therefore the SHIP will NOT be able to stop the cycle by just pulsing a cloak.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|

159Pinky
Under Heavy Fire Mordus Angels
14
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:52:48 -
[3049] - Quote
Like this change, what I like a lot is that CCP is willing to change as we go. No doubt there will be loopholes and other issues that need balancing and need to be adressed.
One issue though: combine the jump fatigue with the prime time: make prime time related to a region. So if an alliance picks prime time for there sov in region A, they cannot pick the same time in region B. This means they'll have to move around to defend their big empire. And only when they have sov in their seventh region, they can have overlapping prime time.
This'll give larger alliance a way to split their realm into the different timezones they no doubt posses. And will prevent small roaming groups from holding down sov in multiple regions. Sure they might be able to capture it, but not hold it. |

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2005
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:53:11 -
[3050] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote: LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month.
"nobody will ever have the kind of resources and organization to just make Titans whenever they feel like it. We're safe leaving it broken under the assumption that no one will ever pull it off."
Focusing resources is MUCH MUCH easier than keeping 20 k people doign somethign incredbly boring 4 hours per day every day for months.
If you are able to make 20 K peopel WORK 4 hours per day without payment.. dude.. you would be the riuchest businnes man in THE WORLD!
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2005
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:54:10 -
[3051] - Quote
Panther X wrote:Angry Mustache wrote:You mentioned that the Entosis link will have low fitting requirements, and not disable propulsion while active.
What is there to prevent massive hordes of T2 entosis fitted interceptors from completely swarming an area and putting entosis links on everything?
All the ceptor has to do is stay within a 250km bubble of the objective, and even if hostiles show up, you just have to MWD around for 2 minutes. If the enemy is trying to entosis your objective, do the same.
What's to stop a large group from putting 1000 nerds in interceptors, and just burn through 100 systems in 1-2 hours? You've made sov easier to take, but that works both ways.
Any small group that slights a big group can expect all their space reinforced in less than 30 minutes. By interceptors.
So the future of Sov warfare is inteceptor with sov lasers, slippery petes to kill interceptors, and absolutely no fleet on fleet fighting. Make the Entosis Link a bastion/siege module. Immobile, but with defensive bonuses. Fitting requirements for battlecruiser and above. Welcome hordes of triple plated triple repped abaddons... battleship combat ensues.
its called MARAUDER with an entosis link :P
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|

Anthar Thebess
948
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:57:21 -
[3052] - Quote
Can not "contained" sansha incursion drop sov ? If you did not care to stop the incursion ....
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|

Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
796
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:59:37 -
[3053] - Quote
Burl en Daire wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month. I have said the same thing but it is GSF and they have all the everything. I agree that they can muster up a large portion of the player base but I don't think that they have enough pull to have much more than a few thousand players at any given time-that aren't alts-to put into action and defiantly not for more than a month or so. If that, organization goes a long way but people have lives and I don't think they have that kind of numbers or stamina.
It comes down to drive and commitment, and we have a lot of both. With the right direction, we have in the past engaged in some pretty wrist-slashingly self-harming behavoir in order to inflict greater suffering on others, or in order to make a point. And I imagine the first thing we'll want to do it this goes through as-is, is make the biggest, loudest point we can contrive.
And the thing is, it is in our interest to do so. I will say in no uncertain terms, I hate Interceptors. I hate chasing them (because you never catch them), and I hate flying them (because you have to disengage when anything vaguely like a fight looks at you). They are the single greatest example of risk-aversion in the game. I accept that they have a purpose (chasing and capturing those who seek to escape a fight), that they are desired to fulfill, but I feel they fulfill far too many things outside their remit, that they have no buisness doing. That said, if we get told to get in to Interceptors to show how horribly broken they will be in this current version of the rules, I damn well will do, even if I personally loathe every minute, simply because not making this point will in the long run make every other party of the game far more miserable for me. |

Lavayar
Russian SOBR Dream Fleet
211
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 11:59:41 -
[3054] - Quote
Looking at the proposed dynamic of structure destruction CCP should think about decreasing volume of iHUB and iHUB upgrades. I suppose it will be cargo capacity of Iteron Mark V. |

Anthar Thebess
948
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 12:06:35 -
[3055] - Quote
Lavayar wrote:Looking at the proposed dynamic of structure destruction CCP should think about decreasing volume of iHUB and iHUB upgrades. I suppose it will be cargo capacity of Iteron Mark V. No. Look for a WH and then make freighter transport ops.
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|

Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
2008
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 12:07:11 -
[3056] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Burl en Daire wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month. I have said the same thing but it is GSF and they have all the everything. I agree that they can muster up a large portion of the player base but I don't think that they have enough pull to have much more than a few thousand players at any given time-that aren't alts-to put into action and defiantly not for more than a month or so. If that, organization goes a long way but people have lives and I don't think they have that kind of numbers or stamina. It comes down to drive and commitment, and we have a lot of both. With the right direction, we have in the past engaged in some pretty wrist-slashingly self-harming behavoir in order to inflict greater suffering on others, or in order to make a point. And I imagine the first thing we'll want to do it this goes through as-is, is make the biggest, loudest point we can contrive. And the thing is, it is in our interest to do so. I will say in no uncertain terms, I hate Interceptors. I hate chasing them (because you never catch them), and I hate flying them (because you have to disengage when anything vaguely like a fight looks at you). They are the single greatest example of risk-aversion in the game. I accept that they have a purpose (chasing and capturing those who seek to escape a fight), that they are desired to fulfill, but I feel they fulfill far too many things outside their remit, that they have no buisness doing. That said, if we get told to get in to Interceptors to show how horribly broken they will be in this current version of the rules, I damn well will do, even if I personally loathe every minute, simply because not making this point will in the long run make every other party of the game far more miserable for me.
But if you try to keep that commitment for too long in a spread and non focused way you LOOSE that cohesion.
That is not MY prediction, that is known for centuries from generals experience on keeping an army cohesion for long engagements. That have been later re discovered by managers at most companies around the world. Its human nature. If you keep the decentralized into non focused tasks for too long you LOSE the capability of focusing when you need it.
So if CFC TRIES to do that .. in haklf a year they will lose a LOT of their power. But your leadership is nto dumb enough to do that.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|

Dark Spite
The Real OC ROC.
12
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 12:09:57 -
[3057] - Quote
Lavayar wrote:Looking at the proposed dynamic of structure destruction CCP should think about decreasing volume of iHUB and iHUB upgrades. I suppose it will be cargo capacity of Iteron Mark V.
Some things shouldnt be too easy, that is one of them. Plus you would be insane/too spacerich/dumb if you loaded an Iteron Mark V with something that valuable. You would probably die on the Jita 4-4 undock. |

Yroc Jannseen
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
68
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 12:11:55 -
[3058] - Quote
Kagura Nikon wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Burl en Daire wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month. I have said the same thing but it is GSF and they have all the everything. I agree that they can muster up a large portion of the player base but I don't think that they have enough pull to have much more than a few thousand players at any given time-that aren't alts-to put into action and defiantly not for more than a month or so. If that, organization goes a long way but people have lives and I don't think they have that kind of numbers or stamina. It comes down to drive and commitment, and we have a lot of both. With the right direction, we have in the past engaged in some pretty wrist-slashingly self-harming behavoir in order to inflict greater suffering on others, or in order to make a point. And I imagine the first thing we'll want to do it this goes through as-is, is make the biggest, loudest point we can contrive. And the thing is, it is in our interest to do so. I will say in no uncertain terms, I hate Interceptors. I hate chasing them (because you never catch them), and I hate flying them (because you have to disengage when anything vaguely like a fight looks at you). They are the single greatest example of risk-aversion in the game. I accept that they have a purpose (chasing and capturing those who seek to escape a fight), that they are desired to fulfill, but I feel they fulfill far too many things outside their remit, that they have no buisness doing. That said, if we get told to get in to Interceptors to show how horribly broken they will be in this current version of the rules, I damn well will do, even if I personally loathe every minute, simply because not making this point will in the long run make every other party of the game far more miserable for me. But if you try to keep that commitment for too long in a spread and non focused way you LOOSE that cohesion. That is not MY prediction, that is known for centuries from generals experience on keeping an army cohesion for long engagements. That have been later re discovered by managers at most companies around the world. Its human nature. If you keep the decentralized into non focused tasks for too long you LOSE the capability of focusing when you need it. So if CFC TRIES to do that .. in haklf a year they will lose a LOT of their power. But your leadership is nto dumb enough to do that.
It wouldn't take half a year. It would talk a single six week patch cycle for it to be made clear how hilariously broken things are. |

Chi'Nane T'Kal
Interminatus Aeterna Anima
317
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 12:13:14 -
[3059] - Quote
Besides the complaint that the new system will be open to trolls (which may or may not be adressed) the question still remains where the place of capitals or supers will be in the new meta.
So how about this:
Create a new structure, the Super-Hub. Only one can be set up per constellation.
- increases the effect of indices of selected iHubs in the constellation (owner could chose which to link) - this might or might not include the entosys link multiplier effect for those iHubs - can only be affected by entosys links of CAPITAL ships
ONLY if you want that to be even more of a conflict driver: - also allow to select iHubs to decrease the effect for
P.S. Also, the idea someone brought up of randomly distributing prime time windows over constellation was largely ignored. IMO that's a brilliant idea, since it (randomly) determines the value of a constellation for a lot of alliances - especially generating a different value for people from different timezones. |

Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
119
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 12:14:15 -
[3060] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:Burl en Daire wrote:Kagura Nikon wrote:LOL. I DARE YOU to really convince 20 thousand players to do that all the time. At least fro more than 1 month. I have said the same thing but it is GSF and they have all the everything. I agree that they can muster up a large portion of the player base but I don't think that they have enough pull to have much more than a few thousand players at any given time-that aren't alts-to put into action and defiantly not for more than a month or so. If that, organization goes a long way but people have lives and I don't think they have that kind of numbers or stamina. It comes down to drive and commitment, and we have a lot of both. With the right direction, we have in the past engaged in some pretty wrist-slashingly self-harming behavoir in order to inflict greater suffering on others, or in order to make a point. And I imagine the first thing we'll want to do it this goes through as-is, is make the biggest, loudest point we can contrive. And the thing is, it is in our interest to do so. I will say in no uncertain terms, I hate Interceptors. I hate chasing them (because you never catch them), and I hate flying them (because you have to disengage when anything vaguely like a fight looks at you). They are the single greatest example of risk-aversion in the game. I accept that they have a purpose (chasing and capturing those who seek to escape a fight), that they are desired to fulfill, but I feel they fulfill far too many things outside their remit, that they have no buisness doing. That said, if we get told to get in to Interceptors to show how horribly broken they will be in this current version of the rules, I damn well will do, even if I personally loathe every minute, simply because not making this point will in the long run make every other party of the game far more miserable for me.
I have no doubt in what you have said but realistically it probably won't happen because herding over a thousand players for more than a moth just to troll a system pushes the boundary, yeah a few hundred here and there and maybe a week or two at a time but I seriously doubt that even GSF has the pull to keep its numbers high and the attrition low for more that a month of boring, tedious play, especially if they are having to do it on multiple alts, lets face the facts, there aren't as many GSF individual players are there are members. How many play in BRAVE just to have more fun/hour?
Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why.
Hunter S. Thompson
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 136 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |