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) |
Angry Mustache
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
217
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:14:23 -
[511] - Quote
KC Kamikaze wrote:It sounds to me like all the folks complaining about the change simply don't want to fight.
If someone puts a thingy on your station to reinforce it and you put your own thingy on it then the progress is paused. So now you have a battle. Kill their guy and they have to put another one on it. To me it doesn't seem like ceptors will cut it and i think you're overreacting.
This change promotes smaller skirmish fights. Don't be such a whiney bunch of bears.
Real attempts to take sov will still escalate to epic cap fleets and t3 fleets.
There won't be fights because the optimal way to do things right now is with ceptors, petes, and Svipuls fitted with T2 sov lasers. Or with disposible T1 frigates.
If they come for you, you run for the duration of the cycle, then repeat the process elsewhere. Or you use T1 frigates and just send hundreds of the things into enemy space, they will miss a couple.
An official Member of the Goonswarm Federation Complaints Department.
|
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
659
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:17:50 -
[512] - Quote
Rowells wrote:X Gallentius wrote:xartin wrote:gment the nullsec playerbase as entire major regions of eve's active timezones will be excluded from participating in content.
Think from the perspective of an attacker wanting to capture alliance held space that is only vulnerable during EUtz.
UStz and AUtz will be completely excluded from any ability to be useful or participate. the same scenario would apply for defenders as well.
How is this different than properly stronting a timer, or a POCO timer? Defender picks his advantageous time, and everybody adjusts accordingly. stront timers can differ, this primetime thing cannot. Some towers and structures may come out at different times than others for whatever purpose.
Then how is it different from current Ihub timers?
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Minmatar Citizen160812
The LGBT Last Supper
757
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:18:35 -
[513] - Quote
Sov wack-a-mole with no benefit for doing it. Why am I not surprised? |
Bezdar22
Militaris Industries Northern Coalition.
13
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:19:26 -
[514] - Quote
Angry Mustache wrote:KC Kamikaze wrote:It sounds to me like all the folks complaining about the change simply don't want to fight.
If someone puts a thingy on your station to reinforce it and you put your own thingy on it then the progress is paused. So now you have a battle. Kill their guy and they have to put another one on it. To me it doesn't seem like ceptors will cut it and i think you're overreacting.
This change promotes smaller skirmish fights. Don't be such a whiney bunch of bears.
Real attempts to take sov will still escalate to epic cap fleets and t3 fleets. There won't be fights because the optimal way to do things with current implementation is with ceptors, petes, and Svipuls fitted with T2 sov lasers. Or with disposible T1 frigates. If they come for you, you run for the duration of the cycle, then repeat the process elsewhere. Or you use T1 frigates and just send hundreds of the things into enemy space, they will miss a couple.
i agree.. CCP is ruining the game again |
HarlyQ
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
76
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:19:34 -
[515] - Quote
McBorsk wrote:I zoned out like 20 times reading this and had forgotten 60% of it when I reached the end. You and the dabigredboat both. |
KC Kamikaze
Blue-Fire
51
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:19:50 -
[516] - Quote
Angry Mustache wrote:KC Kamikaze wrote:It sounds to me like all the folks complaining about the change simply don't want to fight.
If someone puts a thingy on your station to reinforce it and you put your own thingy on it then the progress is paused. So now you have a battle. Kill their guy and they have to put another one on it. To me it doesn't seem like ceptors will cut it and i think you're overreacting.
This change promotes smaller skirmish fights. Don't be such a whiney bunch of bears.
Real attempts to take sov will still escalate to epic cap fleets and t3 fleets. There won't be fights because the optimal way to do things with current implementation is with ceptors, petes, and Svipuls fitted with T2 sov lasers. Or with disposible T1 frigates. If they come for you, you run for the duration of the cycle, then repeat the process elsewhere. Or you use T1 frigates and just send hundreds of the things into enemy space, they will miss a couple.
That doesn't make sense. Whatever force their bring to attack your sov with is just another fleet. gilas eat tactical destroyers. There is a counter for any fleet type don't act like some simple fleet comp is just going to stomp all over this system.
Your alliance will need good intel and capable QRF to engage the aggressing alliance before they reinforce the structure. If everyone wants to hide in station and be pussies then yup any fleet comp will in fact do the job and you'll be homeless in two days. |
Princess Cherista
State War Academy Caldari State
6
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:21:01 -
[517] - Quote
Minmatar Citizen160812 wrote:Sov wack-a-mole with no benefit for doing it. Why am I not surprised? But but the benefit is fights....in nullified, stabbed, kitey no-commit fits |
Shalazan
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
6
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:21:05 -
[518] - Quote
At night, there are fairies. And these magical fairies can only come out in the deepest darkest night four a few hours. Now these fairies have magical wands, known by the village elders as "Entosis Links". Now, during these few hours the magic fairies can use their wands to cause trouble, reinforcing the castles of the land and making terrible timers appear on them. Now the abandoned castles take no time at all, because nobody loves them and have abandoned them, you know what that's like. But in heavily used castles, the magic fairies may have to use their wands longer and put more magic into the the castle before it falls.
Now, when these magic faeries use their special wands they become vulnerable and unable to move! During this time the knights of the castle can defend their lord and banish these fairies in an explosion. Additionally, magical wizards can also use these wands to defend their land and stop the magic of the fairies from reinforcing the land. Now, if the magic fairies are successful in reinforcing the castle, it will have a timer. When this magical hour glass is done ticking down, it will cause magical places to pop up in the area of that castle. The wizards and fairies must once again battle using their wands for control of these magical lands to control the overall castle. If the defending wizards control the majority of these lands, the castle is saved and the fairies have to wait until its dark again to attack. But if the fairies win, the castle will be locked open for all to use and visit by the gods of generosity for two days, after which another magical battle for all the land occurs, where the one who holds the majority of the lands gets the castle.
The end.
[i]Shalazan
Head Diplomat / Recruiting Officer
Internet Terrorists[/i]
|
Def Monk
Phoenix Navy Research and Development Phoenix Naval Systems
11
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:21:12 -
[519] - Quote
So, I like what's going on. The gameplay is interesting and spread out, and should result in some interesting fun. As someone who simply day-trips into nullsec, this is even a great way to force fights with locals, even without the intention of taking ownership of the space.
That said, my problems with it are quite similar to Greygal's:
Greygal wrote: - Get rid of the "prime time" idiocy. Just nuke it. - Giving defensive bonuses to systems that are actively used is Good IdeaGäó - But you need to add a penalty to NOT using systems, so that systems that are unused eventually just drop sov, or become ridiculously easy to take. - How about making those 48 hour timers much shorter in systems that have low activity levels?
My proposed solutions are a bit different though.
I understand the want for the 'prime time', but feel the current iteration is lacking. The hope was probably that smaller groups (people who can't be on in all timezones) would be able to be on when their space needs defending, but instead, this is just going to make it extremely difficult to take space from larger groups. My proposal comes in three pieces:
- First, make prime time a series of timeslots. The size (with a minimum of an hour, max 24), time of day, and number of slots (you could have a one hour slot, twice a day, in your two main timezones) would be left entirely up to the current owner. It must add up to a length comparable to size of the alliance though - that is, large blocs may have this 'prime time' required to add up to 20 hours of the 24 hour day (subject to tweaking numbers, of course).
- Second, prime times become entirely private. No need to show them to other alliances because...
- Third, the initial reinforcement can start at any time of day. Once it is reinforced, it randomly selects a time inside the prime times, as currently, after the 48 hours, in which the reinforcement ends and the capture event begins.
This system would still have the effect of enabling owners to effectively react to reinforcement. Now though, the initial vulnerability attack can happen at any time, and so this avoids larger groups stone-walling defense during those 'prime times' to stop reinforcement altogether. Last, smaller groups will be able to have their smaller vulnerability window that helps with their activity when it actually matters most (the capture event). I still don't feel like the mechanic is perfect, but abandoning it altogether ignores the vulnerability that comes with being unable to man all timezones effectively, so I feel this method addresses concerns.
The next piece would be, as Greygal mentioned, rewards for activity. I think a simple solution to the problem of inactivity would be keeping track of the index levels for all groups, regardless of whether they're the current owners. Then, the calculations could be made exectly the same as defenses, except helping the attackers.
To put out an example, space perfectly actively used by owners would work as proposed. That means there is a 4x time for others to capture things (40 minutes for a node). Say this attacker has also managed to use the space just as actively, either through subverting the inhabitants (small groups stealing sites and ore) or a friendly alliance living there as well (who decides to betray their friend and attack). Since they cannot gain strategic index (they do not own the system), the max they could manage would be a 3.5x multiplier. This would then be used to reduce their timers: 4 / 3.5 = 1.14x, or managing to drag the timer back down to 11 minutes, 24 seconds. The owner would keep their timer of 10 minutes.
Likewise, if the owner does not have any use of a system and has simply held it for a long time, they can manage a multiplier of 1.5x. If the attacker has been using the space as above, and has the 3.5x multiplier, it would only take 4 minutes and 17 seconds (1.5 / 3.5 = 0.4286x of 10 minutes) to capture a node, making it much easier to take abandoned space if they have been living there unopposed. If the owner still decides to show up to defend the space they're not using, they still have their 10 minute timer.
Last, if a group has no activity AND they have just recently taken the space (ie, like a big bloc taking space just because they can and moving on in a large sweep), they would have a multiplier of 1x. Another group with 3.5x results in only taking 2 minutes and 51 seconds to take the nodes, which is significantly short.
Greygal wrote: Where are the economic improvements? Is that coming this year also? Just curious.
Last, I'd also be interested in this. All this should make for a much more fun and dynamic system for taking null, but what's the point of people taking it in the first place? I'd much rather live in another space and not have to worry about defending it against other people. Normally, I am all for WH space being the most dangerous, and therefore the most profitable, but with this new system, the individual will need much more incentive to want to have to put up with a much more involved defense, and in turn, dangerous space considering the quicker turnover (though, that could fall on alliance management to give those incentives through the top-down moon mining profits, but I feel something more COULD be done). |
Sir SmashAlot
The League of Extraordinary Opportunists Intergalactic Conservation Movement
150
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:21:23 -
[520] - Quote
I like the purposed ideas. I like the vulnerability window, however a rigid 4 hour window does go against current EVE organizational structures which over time as alliances grow they usually span all time zones.
I expect that this vulnerability window will be tweaked numerous times as this will be a major sticking point for content generation.
Some groups will want to focus on a specific time zone, they will benefit under this system. Successful alliances that offer great culture and experiences for their members, under this system will be forced to choose which time zones get A,B,C areas of content. I do not see breaking up these large entities as a good thing, but maybe I am wrong.
A scalable system might be a possible option where alliances choose their vulnerable windows and size but receive X, Y, Z benefits for accepting greater risk. This would allow time zone focused groups the best opportunity to defend their space, but also allow larger entities the ability to give their member base the full gambit of content by accepting more risk.
Interesting times ahead! |
|
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
4201
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:21:40 -
[521] - Quote
Are the HP and Anchor/Online times for IHUBs and TCU's being adjusted? |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2059
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:21:54 -
[522] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Rowells wrote:X Gallentius wrote:xartin wrote:gment the nullsec playerbase as entire major regions of eve's active timezones will be excluded from participating in content.
Think from the perspective of an attacker wanting to capture alliance held space that is only vulnerable during EUtz.
UStz and AUtz will be completely excluded from any ability to be useful or participate. the same scenario would apply for defenders as well.
How is this different than properly stronting a timer, or a POCO timer? Defender picks his advantageous time, and everybody adjusts accordingly. stront timers can differ, this primetime thing cannot. Some towers and structures may come out at different times than others for whatever purpose. Then how is it different from current Ihub timers? You cant have timers spread across 24hrs anymore with this. Only four. Not every (in fact not many) alliances are single-TZ. |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
92
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:22:06 -
[523] - Quote
Total Newbie wrote:I finally figured out the reasoning behind this change.
Pre- Jump Fatigue it was normal to see 50K + people logged in.
Post- Jump Fatigue you're lucky to see 40K
After this change I imagine it will be around 25K
Hence, they have finally solved the lag problem. You didn't read the first devblog and look at the pretty graphs did you...
More players in nullsec since the changes. More activity in nullsec since the changes. More pvp in nullsec since the changes.
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/where-we-stand/ < for your convenience |
M1k3y Koontz
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
659
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:22:14 -
[524] - Quote
Schmell wrote:Man, chaos is coming.
What are gonna do with sov upgrades? They grow for like month, and won'be viable in current state when a system can switch owners like 3 times a week
Sov can already change in three week's time, but nobody has the nearby enemies nor willingness to do so.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
|
Box thatmunches
Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:22:53 -
[525] - Quote
fairly new with all toons.... maybe time to give up game for a while.. just getting used to null. to create a cluster **** seams to b the goal here |
HarlyQ
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
76
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:23:41 -
[526] - Quote
na'Vi Ronuken wrote:I think what you will end up seeing is coalitions consolidate to mega alliances based on TZ and corps would be tasked with living in their own consttillation.
This dev blog also does not describe what happens when sov flips while a super is in build. The supers go kaboooooooom it's obvious they don't like supers so they will just go POOF. |
Evelgrivion
Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder
341
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:24:55 -
[527] - Quote
I wonder if alliances, other than the original attacker and original owner, should be penalized during the Freeport capture event, for the sake of discouraging third parties from jumping in and having an easy time of things, while someone else does all the grunt-work for them. |
Novacrow
Blue Tridents Sev3rance
13
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:24:58 -
[528] - Quote
Entosis module should deactivate propulsion modules, and the T2 variant should be made to have a max range of 100-150km. |
Sarel Hendar
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:26:59 -
[529] - Quote
Interesting changes. Some good, some less so...
Freeport idea is good. Discourages not showing up for second reinforce battle as is currently in vogue.
Is there any sane reason to have Infomorph Psychology as controlling skill for the entosis module? We have a perfectly good and logical skill that could be applied here: Hacking.
I'd recommend restrictions on entosis module so that it can't be fitted into frigate- or destroyer-class hulls. Otherwise we'll have troll-fitted T3 Destroyers or Interceptors that'll be MWD-orbitting at 200 kilometers and nearly impossible to stop or hit.
Idea: In a twist to command nodes, you could have in addition to normal ones "variant" command nodes that have to be probed out and capturing which is worth slightly more than "regular" command nodes (eg. something like 1.1-1.3 "regular" ones). Nothing overwhelming, just some edge to the side willing/able to have a combat prober in fleet...
Timezone segmentation could be problematic. Needs thinking about.
ECM interactions with entosis will need thinking about. 200-Falcon troll fleets aren't fun for anyone.
Capital- and Supercapital roles will need thinking about. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1522
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:26:59 -
[530] - Quote
Zedah Zoid wrote:If mining is going to play a role here (and I think it should) then please, PLEASE, CCP bring back scannable ore sites. Both in WH and Null space. AFK cloakers will be less scary to miners and miners are more likely to get help from combat pilots if they have a least some small chance of seeing the probes that are their impending doom.
Down with ore Anoms, bring back ore Sites. If you must keep ore Anoms in high sec so the noobs can find them on the overlay, then do that but there's no need to handicap everybody in null with the ore Anom mechanic. It's terrible and it makes mining nearly impossible.
Even though wormhole space was trolled mercilessly, when we dared to suggest this, it is regardless, still a good idea, ore sites should require scanning.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
|
Zomgnomnom
Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS.
58
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:27:04 -
[531] - Quote
Wow.... just wow.
There are so many problems with this it is hard to believe that people who apparently " play in sov" helped come up with it.
Can we please ask that before the end of CSM voting that the CSM transcripts of this are released. This way we know who to throw onto the trash heap and never dream of re electing again.
Seriously..... This is so bad I think you just gave me cancer.... |
Total Newbie
Deadly Shadow Clan Executive Outcomes
31
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:27:07 -
[532] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Total Newbie wrote:I finally figured out the reasoning behind this change.
Pre- Jump Fatigue it was normal to see 50K + people logged in.
Post- Jump Fatigue you're lucky to see 40K
After this change I imagine it will be around 25K
Hence, they have finally solved the lag problem. You didn't read the first devblog and look at the pretty graphs did you... More players in nullsec since the changes. More activity in nullsec since the changes. More pvp in nullsec since the changes. http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/where-we-stand/ < for your convenience
Uh huh. Pretty graphs say whatever they want to say. Doesn't make them true. I live in null, and I just disagree there are more players here..... If there were, in fact, more players in null, road trips wouldn't be a necessity.
|
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
55
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:27:57 -
[533] - Quote
Callic Veratar wrote:I'm really confused. So, if the defensive window is not during your availability you have nothing to do and if it is during your availability you can't do anything else.
So... living in nullsec means you spend all your time defending sov and that's it?
Unbelievable
Your place seems to be the highsec dude ... |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
167
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:28:09 -
[534] - Quote
Princess Cherista wrote:Hendrink Collie wrote:Professor Headmash wrote:So if I'm part of an alliance that holds Sov, instead of doing different things every time I log in to keep me intrested and logging into the game.....I'm going to be constantly flying around chasing captor gangs griefing our sov?
Seems legit. No offense, but if you can't quickly deal with a ceptor gang using a module on your sov structures, you shouldn't even bother holding sov. Show me how to tackle less than 2 second aligning interceptors that dont want to be caught.
That's the point - I don't have to tackle it, or even kill it. Hell, I don't even need to chase it. I can park a defensive link at 0 on the module in a RLML Caracal and wait until the Ceptor pilot gets either bored or suicidal.
Remember, only one offensive and one defensive link will be allowed at a time. You have to be able to control the entire grid, or your opponent can just sit there and stop you without bothering to kill you.
Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
|
Nina Lowel
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:29:04 -
[535] - Quote
So Alliance A wants to remove Alliance B from X Space. Alliance A has one TZ, alliance B has another. Alliance A can't do much to alliance B because alliance A doesn't have any alliance B TZ presence.
What does this do? Ensures that the large coalitions get even larger so they have full coverage of all TZ's.
Way to go CCP. It's a good thing I had absolutely zero hope in you actually fixing sov to begin with, at least now there's no real let down. |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
93
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:29:11 -
[536] - Quote
Total Newbie wrote:Uh huh. Pretty graphs say whatever they want to say. Doesn't make them true. I live in null, and I just disagree there are more players here..... If there were, in fact, more players in null, road trips wouldn't be a necessity.
Anecdotal evidence versus actual statistical evidence...nice
Also read the damn devblog, it explains why some areas of null have been quieter whilst there's been an overall increase across the whole game outside of your anecdotal situation. |
KIller Wabbit
The Scope Gallente Federation
886
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:29:26 -
[537] - Quote
"A clear visual effect shows which ships are applying Entosis Links." Will this also be apparent from brackets? Most large fleet fights require zooming out considerably. Even zoomed in, visual identification would become near impossible if the ship carrying the link is buried in a fleet of 100 - unless we're gonna get that Hot Pink Pony skin effect that has been clamored for!
CCP .. always first with the wrong stuff
CSM .. CCP Shills with a vacation plan
|
Hilti Enaka
State War Academy Caldari State
10
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:29:43 -
[538] - Quote
Quote:This means that Entosis Linking will replace shooting of structures in every part of the Sovereignty system. After the June release, shooting of structures will not play any part in Sovereignty.
\o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/ \o/
|
Ranamar
Valkyries of Night Of Sound Mind
81
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:30:28 -
[539] - Quote
EvilweaselFinance wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:Tia Aves wrote:If anyone wants a more balanced and thought out view as opposed to all of the mindless whining I highly suggest the thread on the EVE sub-Reddit. /r/EVE is an anti-CFC circlejerk, so that's hardly surprising. I'm sure everyone there supports these changes out of spite. when it comes to this, its not so much an anti-cfc circlejerk as a bunch of people who no longer hold sov people who hold sov but hate us realize how bad this is
My alliance holds sov. The internal reaction? "This may unironically be the best thing that ever happened for our alliance." |
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
93
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 19:31:17 -
[540] - Quote
KIller Wabbit wrote:"A clear visual effect shows which ships are applying Entosis Links." Will this also be apparent from brackets? Most large fleet fights require zooming out considerably. Even zoomed in, visual identification would become near impossible if the ship carrying the link is buried in a fleet of 100 - unless we're gonna get that Hot Pink Pony skin effect that has been clamored for! Just put a defensive link on it, fight the fleet battle then find the needle once the haystack is removed :) |
|
|
|
|
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 |