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 [?]

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)
SilentAsTheGrave Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 18	Posted - 2015.03.04 03:59:47 - [1081] - Quote Rowells wrote: Ncc 1709 wrote: will be fleets of T3 destroyers orbiting at 180km doing 15km/s+ cap stable nuking station services etc And all you need is one ship with your own link to stop them. Any additional ships will be for picking off the T3s Shhh... Don't ruin his narrative.
Soleil Fournier StarFleet Enterprises 30	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:11:12 - [1082] - Quote Following up on earlier suggestions, I think that the number of players it should take to activate timers should increase from 2 to 5. Group gameplay is important to eve, and sov in particular should require groups of players to complete objective. By making it so someone with their alt can just go about completing objectives willy nilly lessens the need for grouping and increases cat and mouse greifing. I think 5 is a reasonable number to require. I would also consider making it to where the more entosis modules you put on an objective the faster it completes, but with a cap of lets say 10 so that further encourages grouping, without making it to where the bigger blob you bring the better your chances.
Kyonko Nola SniggWaffe WAFFLES. 10	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:14:26 - [1083] - Quote M1k3y Koontz wrote: Kyonko Nola wrote: I would strongly suggest you make the modules ship size specific. Otherwise there will be 100 inties circling around the objective all the time In which case an atron (to halt the inty's progress) and a few HACs will have a shooting gallery. I sincerely encourage WAFFLES to try that 100 inties thing. What I am concerned is that with other things happening around the grid, a gang of inties with the module running all the time orbiting 250 km will be hard for the defenders to actually do something about them. Best case, it would be annoying. There are a lot of factors involved and I think that it is extremely disadvantageous for the defenders. But what do I know about SOV. And I do not speak for my corporation, just inputting my opinion for ccp to consider. Also Waffles. KitKatSimKatKo
S3ND3TH Czerka. Out Of The Void 18	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:20:14 - [1084] - Quote Gizznitt Malikite wrote: Tykonderoga wrote: The prime time idea is garbage. The module to reinforce structures will be abused by ceptor pilots with pirate implants or a bazzillion people in ceptors. Think CCP! I know that no one in the company actually plays the game anymore, but think! Why is it that people think a fleet of ceptors is uncounterable? i think it has more to do with mobility. you can't just blockade the gates with bubbles.
Sniper Smith Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 314	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:27:11 - [1085] - Quote There's a lot here.. and I'm not sure how well this change will work out, but it's worth a try. Now there are some things I'd like to suggest. First is to bring activity into the picture. And I'd like to tie it in to the Primetime thing. I both like and dislike the primetime feature. It makes sure that you can defend your sov when you are strongest, but you've just made it so having multi-tz alliances isn't gonna be much fun for at least half of them. So, here's my idea. You have your 4hr Window. This window will apply to your MOST ACTIVE system. In terms of PvE. In terms of Mining. Industry. No matter what happens that system is only open in that timeframe. Now you have your LEAST active system. That system has a chance of being vulnerable +/- 12hrs on either end. Lets say the chance is 25%? Now the rest of the systems go on the bell curve, and their activity affects what the chance of it hitting is, and their 'rank' affects the chance of it being vulnerable in that extra time. So your middle or the range system could end up being +/-3hrs with a 12% chance of it being vulnerable in those additional 6 (3+3)hrs. This means your core systems are the safest systems. They will virtually always be during your prime time. But those forgotten systems. Those systems you are rarely in, have a much greater chance of hitting outside your prime time, Or in turn, more squarely in the prime time of another Alliance. Two. Incursions. Have them attack SOV. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. They should go after SOV, POS's, etc. Unlike the Empires where the Sansha know they have no chance to Hold the ground, they should try in Null. If ignored when when the Incursion Withdraws, there should be No POS's left, and sov and stations should be transferred to the Sansha, along with local rats and anoms.. You'd need to retake it same way as any other alliance. Three. Give Outposts, iHubs, etc POS Guns. So they can blap that little frig that is going to turn off your services just for lol's. It's kinda silly that a large POS can have defaces but an Outpost can't? Anyway.. just my ideas. I honestly have no idea how this is going to play out.,. I can see it turning into another FW Farce of everyone flying frigs cause why not.. Or I can see this driving some real conflict.. I donno. It's a tossup.
Mr Omniblivion GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 420	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:28:59 - [1086] - Quote 1) Remove r64s from moons 2) put those in moving entities like incursions 3) provide more scaling benefits to owning sov
S3ND3TH Czerka. Out Of The Void 18	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:29:51 - [1087] - Quote i think we should go back to having to smash 20-100 pos's in an small area to take sov. i enjoyed the hours and hours of mind numbing structure bashing. remember, it can always be worse. a lot of criticism on this thread, but not a lot of solutions offered. i think this change will actually be good. i know the community will find a way to twist it in a way the devs did not foresee or intend, but anything that makes smaller fights happen more often, bigger fights happen less, removes a lot of structure bashing, helps smaller groups get out to null without being overwhelmed, and makes fielding 2 carriers in a fight not turn into fielding 500 carriers in a fight, are all good things. the biggest things to remember are that there is no change that can't be undone and get on the test server to check these things out. your opinion actually matters there and you have the power to give good ideas on there.
OldWolf69 Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance 173	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:29:59 - [1088] - Quote Add instalock ability to all the ships, restore dps, range and all the nerfed things. THEN it will be a great change, and we will have a really nice thing. Errrr.... this would not work as intended. CCP, how about making the defenders weapons shoot backwards? At least there won't be any imbecile fails of the attackers and we all would see a lot of amazing videos of hordes of small cheap bullshit killing everyting and being pro. Would be a marketing hit also. "Doable by 2 month old chars" would smash every competition.
Joshua Blue Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda 5	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:30:07 - [1089] - Quote N+1 is no worse under the changes than it is now. N+1 will always be possible, and in a sense I agree with it - the better organised and committed alliance should always win. Dominion moved sov warfare substantially in favour of the defender. This is moving it back towards the attacker, which is sorely needed in order to free up space. It'll seem unfair and unbalanced, simply because of what we're used to currently. Remember that all it it takes to stop a sov attack is one Entosis link from one defending alliance member. With 250Km range, that's actually pretty damn easy. For a well defended and occupied system you will have 40 mins to stop an attack. And to stop an attack all you need is ... Effectively any vulnerable period is reduced by 40 mins. You only have to intermittently stop the attack during a 40 min cycle and it resets. The Prime Time zone sucks - it forces Alliances to be single TZ, and reduces vulnerability to 4 hours out of 24. It should change it so that your sov structures are vulnerable for three periods of between 3 and 6 hours, for a 12 hour total in any 24 hour period. The capture mechanic of multiple command nodes in multiple systems in the constellation is awesome. You should only be able to put up a POS if you have a TCU in system. That should be incentive to hold Sov - currently there appears to be none. Rental empires are dead. It was bound to happen, and CCP have been flagging it for a while. RIP. Time to move on. Supers are no longer required for sov bashing. This sucks for us, but is good for the game as a whole. Let's see what they come up with for supers in future before crying too much. Shoot me. I like the changes.
Sniper Smith Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 314	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:30:13 - [1090] - Quote Oh and one other thing since people are talking Interceptors and such with these things. Make the module work like Bastion Mode. Can't move, can't get reps, but get bonuses to your local tank.

1nverted What Could Go Wrong Overload Everything 0	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:31:11 - [1091] - Quote I love the bulk of these changes, especially the command node mechanic and the constellation focus. As an autz player however I share the concerns of others regarding the autz being excluded from sov warfare to an even greater extent than under dominion sov. Under dominion sov, autz could not participate in the structure fights timed for EU/us prime. However we could participate in the reinforcement of structures to generate those timers. Under this system we can't even do that. Could you please consider tweaks to these mechanics to allow us to participate on the fringes as we did before? One idea I have quickly thought of is requiring an alliance to pick two 'primetimes'. The four hour prime already included and then a secondary time of perhaps one to two hours. This secondary time couldn't be with, say, five hours of the prime time. A ustz alliance would therefore be forced to chose a secondary time in eutz or autz. Some ustz alliances with no eu tz could be forced to chose autz. The sov laser could be made to cycle longer in the secondary period as well. This may be a bad idea but I think a number of players have recognized that the prime time mechanic is very exclusive as currently expressed. Could you please make it more flexible? I accept that autz may gain additional value in devaluing sov indices as autz can be a popular time to rat for some alliances. Good work so far!
Zhalon Forging Industries Silent Infinity 47	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:34:20 - [1092] - Quote 1) I'm worried it is to easy for sov holders to be harassed by frigates with an entosis link and just disable structures/services with no plan to come back and actually fight for them....no fights would be generated just trolling. 2) I like the prime time setting...the aggressor should have to deal with time zone issues...defender should have this advantage 3) I like the freeport concept. 4) I worry about the role of capitals now with no structure grind...I'm sure you have something for POSes that will make capitals necessary.... 5) I see how this would divide up fights, but I don't see how this stops someone from bringing the numbers. 6) Holding sov space and grinding the indices isn't valuable enough and in some ways just makes you a target to cloaky campers. I think you should looking at the rewards for holding sov....not sure how you address cloaky campers. Idea: Command nodes should have gates. Only defending and attacking alliances can take the gate. Attacking alliance can only have one more ship inside than defending alliance. A defender/attackers allies can secure the gate so that enemy reinforcements are blocked. This maintains fights for all and makes sure that attackers can't overwhelm defenders with 100 pilots. I think the idea could be flushed out more and you could incorporate capitals but only with cynos on the command node....capitals couldn't take gate.
Alexandre Bellenger ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 59	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:36:35 - [1093] - Quote The biggest problem these changes fail to address is the actual need for owning sovereignty, as others have stated. With lower income rates than most other areas in the game (see https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5547866#post5547866), the only reason to own sov in the current state of the game is A) to build supercaps and B) to plant your flag in space for E-PEEN factor. Content creation is stagnant (which these changes do somewhat address), but without incentive no one in this game will want to create said content. Aside from a needed buff to nullsec and reasons to live in it, there must also be less of a reason to own so much space. For nullsec players, the #1 staple source of income and incentive to live in null is nullsec anomalies. Missions, incursions, tower reactions, etc can all be done elsewhere, but the level of anomalies present in null can be found nowhere else. The larger your sov nullsec alliance, the more members you have wanting this level of income. So the more members you have, the more anomalies you need to keep everyone happy and staying in your alliance. Anomalies are capped at a certain amount per system, so you can only have so many members utilizing a single system. This is the sole reason why major power blocs own entire region(s). An alliance like Goonswarm Federation can and would gladly live in 10-20 systems if the system simply allowed for it. A larger population density in individual systems would allow for greater content, less mass ownership of systems by powerblocs, and therefore greater opportunity for smaller groups to take sovereignty without being contested by said powerblocs. How to do so? The answer has been thrown at you for months now, by anyone from random pubbies like myself to well known bloggers. Allowing mission agents in nullsec stations allows for infinite population density in a single small area. Agents implemented in the form of rented teams forces the top of the alliance to put money into providing for the members, something that must happen in more diverse ways than just SRP. But nontheless, mission agents in nullsec would solve the population density problem and allow for alliances to live in much smaller areas, with the same numbers. If implemented, alliances would naturally find themselves drawn to central hubs, where standing fleets and safety in numbers provide a greater benefit than simply spreading out to the far corners of the region. As alliances coalesce, some constellations will find their occupancy indices tick down, and suddenly a nearby NPC null or Lowsec dwelling alliance may find themselves being able to contest these systems and, after enough harassment, able to take them. In the current eve, were most systems in CFC space are being used, the taking of such systems simply wouldn't be allowed to happen.
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2063	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:39:30 - [1094] - Quote so to further the idea may i present you the tech II rokh Role: Flag ship Caldari Battleship bonuses (per skill level): 10% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret optimal range 4% bonus to all shield resistances Flag ship bonus: 10% reduction in signature radius per level 10% reduction in reload time for shield repair systems role bonus: can fit Entosis Link tech II abbadon: Amarr Battleship bonuses (per skill level): 5% bonus to Large Energy Turret damage 4% bonus to all armor resistances Flag ship bonus: 10% reduction in signature radius per level 10% reduction in reload time for Armor repair systems role bonus: can fit Entosis Link tech II hyperion: Gallente Battleship bonuses (per skill level): 10% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage 7.5% bonus to Armor Repairer amount Flag ship bonus: 10% reduction in signature radius per level 10% reduction in reload time for Armor repair systems role bonus: can fit Entosis Link tech II mael: Minmatar Battleship bonuses (per skill level): 5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret rate of fire 7.5% bonus to Shield Booster amount Flag ship bonus: 10% reduction in signature radius per level 10% reduction in reload time for shield repair systems role bonus: can fit Entosis Link the idea is only flag ships can use the Entosis Link. the Entosis Link makes it so you cant warp or get remote repair so having a ship like the old tier 3 battleships which all get a native tank bonus will help them survive attacks. To add to thier ability to survive they get a signature radius reduction which will help against incoming dps. also the roload time bonus is meant for auxiliary repair units to keep up ability to tank incoming dps. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
S3ND3TH Czerka. Out Of The Void 18	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:40:50 - [1095] - Quote Kyonko Nola wrote: M1k3y Koontz wrote: Kyonko Nola wrote: I would strongly suggest you make the modules ship size specific. Otherwise there will be 100 inties circling around the objective all the time In which case an atron (to halt the inty's progress) and a few HACs will have a shooting gallery. I sincerely encourage WAFFLES to try that 100 inties thing. What I am concerned is that with other things happening around the grid, a gang of inties with the module running all the time orbiting 250 km will be hard for the defenders to actually do something about them. Best case, it would be annoying. There are a lot of factors involved and I think that it is extremely disadvantageous for the defenders. But what do I know about SOV. And I do not speak for my corporation, just inputting my opinion for ccp to consider. Also Waffles. an interceptor could probably only target out to maybe 150km with mwd, sebos, and maybe even signal amps and rigs just maxing it out on distance. but a couple things that would need to be known are what happens when the ship gets out of range or loses lock? what if it mwds or gets knocked 260km? and what happens when they are jammed? could a hostile target, start the hack, then when defenders warp ongrid get jammed by an ally and then be able to warp off? likely the successful activation of the module will start a timer to inhibit warp. if this is the case then being in an interceptor and unable to warp is not so good. just need a faster ship to run him down. i hope it doesn't completely inhibit movement. if so, then something like a blackbird or a scorpion would be a good choice because it will probably be like a cyno and mids will still work. if the module is made to fit larger ships mostly then you know what else this means.......new ships with bonuses to taking sov. maybe a set of heavy destroyers that can get a bonus to capture.
OldWolf69 Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance 173	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:41:04 - [1096] - Quote ...just restore firepower, range and add instalock to all subcaps. Let's make this the bloodbath we all deserve.
KIller Wabbit The Scope Gallente Federation 905	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:44:48 - [1097] - Quote Proton Stars wrote: I have now actively posted in this thread for just under 3 prime times, yet I work a rolling shift pattern so I'll only be effective on my alliances prime time one week in 4. Guess I'll play elite or one of the x series on the other three weeks.... Corner cases are a *****.
Altirius Saldiaro Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 308	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:48:55 - [1098] - Quote Zhalon wrote: 1) ....not sure how you address cloaky campers. No local, no afk cloaker. The answer is to just delay local and actually make nullsec challenging to live in. Guard your gates, scout the routes to your home. There should be consequences for being lazy nullbears.
Zip Slings Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous 68	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:49:57 - [1099] - Quote Kyonko Nola wrote: M1k3y Koontz wrote: Kyonko Nola wrote: I would strongly suggest you make the modules ship size specific. Otherwise there will be 100 inties circling around the objective all the time In which case an atron (to halt the inty's progress) and a few HACs will have a shooting gallery. I sincerely encourage WAFFLES to try that 100 inties thing. What I am concerned is that with other things happening around the grid, a gang of inties with the module running all the time orbiting 250 km will be hard for the defenders to actually do something about them. Best case, it would be annoying. There are a lot of factors involved and I think that it is extremely disadvantageous for the defenders. But what do I know about SOV. And I do not speak for my corporation, just inputting my opinion for ccp to consider. Also Waffles. Show me the inty fit that locks at 250. Show me the inty fit that can lock at 250 and tank a sniper Muninn. Show me the inty fit that can lock at 250 and outrun a speed fit PVP inty/pirate frig.
Kerrat Braban Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 19	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:50:05 - [1100] - Quote How it could be done (my opinion only) Only living in a system increases the SOV index for the Alliance Living gives SOV points. Living meaning NPC kills, PvP Kills and losses, mining, PI, exploring, industrial activities, maybe even hours presence x number of pilots and other activities I sure forgot. Structures (incl. POS and POCOS) increase the rate at which the index is going up (only increases rate, don't gives points by itself). Competing structures? Maybe? Several competing alliance indexes are possible, the alliance with highest index (by a margin) has SOV, if margin is too small it's "Shared" (or "Contested" depending on # PvP kills), if no one reaches the minimum margin the system is unoccupied. No more bashing, no more structure turning (which still is no fun ... 40 minutes orbiting with a link on?), though that could be still incorporated ONCE A SYSTEM CHANGED SOV. BTW you forgot the POCOs in your draft? They still have to be bashed, right?

Zip Slings Southern Cross Incorporated Flying Dangerous 68	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:51:05 - [1101] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Zhalon wrote: 1) ....not sure how you address cloaky campers. No local, no afk cloaker. The answer is to just delay local and actually make nullsec challenging to live in. Guard your gates, scout the routes to your home. There should be consequences for being lazy nullbears. correct. this system changes how you think about null. If you have a strategically important system that you want to keep, act like it and have a standing fleet to protect your damn space.
Orontes Ovasi Nex Exercitus Northern Coalition. 18	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:54:04 - [1102] - Quote I'd rather have POS sov than a literally useless mechanic that encourages fleeing as soon as enemies appear and reinforcing things elsewhere than it does combat. Let alone making supers/caps near worthless in nullsec, encouraging horrid mono-tz borefests where US Nulli and RUTZ Stainwagon will literally never fight again. And to all the retards arguing that you just entosis link a gang of 30 with your own, what do you do when that gang splits into 2-3? And roams reinforcing and shutting down systems for the 4hr primetime they have? Question though: Will reinforcing the industry service with the entosis link cause jobs to be canceled? Because that'd be hilariously broken. Kudos though, I thought that a change that more encouraged stagnation/defending wouldn't be possible after phoebe and the introduction of jump fatigay, clearly I was incorrect.
Zan Shiro Alternative Enterprises 588	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:54:24 - [1103] - Quote Maybe someone could explain to me...what is the benefit to population/activity based bonus for defense. CCP wants pvp. 0.0 this usually involves the road trip experience. Can't take the whole gang with you since someone has to keep bonuses up. Soooo....how is this sponsoring PVP? It seems to be sponsoring turtle tactics with current space held and little to no road trip action plans for the future. Less pvp potentially as I see it really. Well that and why are null bear heavy crews looking to get a boost form this? Those people you have to raise taxes to 100% to get out of the pve ship and into a pvp ship to you know...pvp. Avoiding pvp till corps has to do this tax rate change....should not be encouraged with a bonus imo.
OldWolf69 Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance 173	Posted - 2015.03.04 04:56:29 - [1104] - Quote Altirius Saldiaro wrote: Zhalon wrote: 1) ....not sure how you address cloaky campers. No local, no afk cloaker. The answer is to just delay local and actually make nullsec challenging to live in. Guard your gates, scout the routes to your home. There should be consequences for being lazy nullbears. How about someone removes security from hisec so u have to pay attention to the hisec miner fuelling your afk camper? Oh, the tears, the tears...
Cr Turist Burning Napalm Northern Coalition. 44	Posted - 2015.03.04 05:01:58 - [1105] - Quote Karbowiak wrote: EvilweaselFinance wrote: Karbowiak wrote: Am i the only one wishing that we'd get the old pos warfare sov system back? no, i liked that and it was significantly better in a lot of ways than this or dominion it was completely broken by AOE doomsdays protecting cynojammers, but that's gotten fixed, and fuel blocks exist now True story. Plus with the POS system, you could take a system in about a day, instead of spending a week taking on system. Yes you had to steamroll a system with lots of dreads, but compared to the current system, or the proposed one, you atleast had a light at the end of the tunnel. Meh, whatever.. i never ever thought i would say this but i agree. bring back the whole pos system or something like it. i mean people complain about grinding but it leads to hot drops, fights, and bitter old vets (anyone who was around during the pos sov years knows what i mean) but i doubt it matters since CCP has already stopped reading this thread as can be noticed by the lack of dev feedback or of answering any questions.
Ser Berus GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 23	Posted - 2015.03.04 05:05:53 - [1106] - Quote Just so we're clear, this is a perfect illustration of why using the development indexes as they are today is so hilariously stupid: http://i.imgur.com/n84nWAH.png Sure is a lotta mining happening in that there nullsec, yep Edit: theta squad, sov backbone of the goonswarm federation
FT Diomedes The Graduates Forged of Fire 856	Posted - 2015.03.04 05:07:11 - [1107] - Quote Infrequent wrote: All of these null anom bear tears, my god this is a gold mine. Can't wait for these changes, if you're threatening to leave null or infact Eve in general because CCP are actually making educated decisions on Eve's most prominent issue, good because the game really does not need people like you. Keep it up CCP, once things get ironed out, tweaks made, numbers crunched, we'll have us a fantastic set of changes coming to null that'll finally work to get it out of it's sorry state. Eve needs every player it can get and keep. The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
Milla Goodpussy Federal Navy Academy 174	Posted - 2015.03.04 05:07:51 - [1108] - Quote Cr Turist wrote: Karbowiak wrote: EvilweaselFinance wrote: Karbowiak wrote: Am i the only one wishing that we'd get the old pos warfare sov system back? no, i liked that and it was significantly better in a lot of ways than this or dominion it was completely broken by AOE doomsdays protecting cynojammers, but that's gotten fixed, and fuel blocks exist now True story. Plus with the POS system, you could take a system in about a day, instead of spending a week taking on system. Yes you had to steamroll a system with lots of dreads, but compared to the current system, or the proposed one, you atleast had a light at the end of the tunnel. Meh, whatever.. i never ever thought i would say this but i agree. bring back the whole pos system or something like it. i mean people complain about grinding but it leads to hot drops, fights, and bitter old vets (anyone who was around during the pos sov years knows what i mean) but i doubt it matters since CCP has already stopped reading this thread as can be noticed by the lack of dev feedback or of answering any questions. lol you honestly think fozzie was going to communicate on this epic thread right now?? you remember when greyscale tried it and was countered left and right.. he left the building claiming he was sick...(and went home to hide in his cave)
Barbaydos Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation 24	Posted - 2015.03.04 05:09:35 - [1109] - Quote Cr Turist wrote: Karbowiak wrote: EvilweaselFinance wrote: Karbowiak wrote: Am i the only one wishing that we'd get the old pos warfare sov system back? no, i liked that and it was significantly better in a lot of ways than this or dominion it was completely broken by AOE doomsdays protecting cynojammers, but that's gotten fixed, and fuel blocks exist now True story. Plus with the POS system, you could take a system in about a day, instead of spending a week taking on system. Yes you had to steamroll a system with lots of dreads, but compared to the current system, or the proposed one, you atleast had a light at the end of the tunnel. Meh, whatever.. i never ever thought i would say this but i agree. bring back the whole pos system or something like it. i mean people complain about grinding but it leads to hot drops, fights, and bitter old vets (anyone who was around during the pos sov years knows what i mean) but i doubt it matters since CCP has already stopped reading this thread as can be noticed by the lack of dev feedback or of answering any questions. usually they wait about 24 hours so that people can get the collective rage out and a semblance of rational thought starts to reappear... plus the actual changes proposed here dont take effect for a few months so they have time to troll through the threadnought
Vic Jefferson The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple 190	Posted - 2015.03.04 05:36:26 - [1110] - Quote Gregor Parud wrote: Aryndel Vyst wrote: HEY LETS MAKE SOV EASIER TO TAKE FROM LARGE ENTITIES BUT GIVE NO BENEFITS WHATSOEVER TO THE RESIDENTS. Do you want everyone to do high sec incursions or something? ~content creation~ No they want 0.0 to be owned by people who actually want to fight, not carebears who hide behind blues while creating alts to shoot people who don't shoot back. Excessive suicide ganking is symptomatic of a stagnant null. No matter what the system is, how people actually fight, you aren't going to get much fighting if there's nothing to actually fight over. There's plenty of empty regions where you could fight purely for the sake of a fight, but some people, or some political structures, evidently need a narrative or purpose to do so. Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X



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

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.