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)

CCP Phantom C C P C C P Alliance 5376	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:16:51 - [91] - Quote Baneken wrote: That flashing crap under the first paragraph was so incredibly annoying that I had kill it with ad-block; since human eye is hard-wired to attract on flashy moving things do you have any idea how incredibly annoying it was to even attempt to read that text with that thing constantly whirling and flashing on screen ? This animation has been replaced by a still image now that links to the original animation. CCP Phantom - Senior Community Representative - Volunteer Manager

Axe Coldon 51	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:16:57 - [92] - Quote My question for the new sov mechanics, what will happen to Ihub build cost and size? I don't suppose you can make them small enough to fit in a jump freighter? It would have the benefit of allowing smaller alliances an easier path to put them in. And for combat, it puts a very expensive freighter (jf) at risk. atm unless your system you wish to have an ihub is close to a station, the preferred method is bridge the freighter with a Titan. It you make the iHUB 350k or so..then a Jump Freighter could be used instead. Likewise I would like to see all the upgrades installed fit in a jump freighter. People complain jf pilots take no risks and only jump to station. If you make this change..then additional risks will be taken with jf by those not large or rich enough to own titans. No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
Primary This Rifter 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 628	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:17:01 - [93] - Quote Aiwha wrote: Can we just bring back the POS grind? I miss the POS grind. Lets just go with POS grind and call it even. How about we just ******* trash the idea of sov rebalance altogether. It's broken, but what was worse about it was the fact that nobody wanted to do it anymore while CCP held the impending rebalance over our heads for the past 2-3 years. Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
MiliasColds The Elite Few Inc. The Methodical Alliance 23	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:17:22 - [94] - Quote 2 minutes to start the capture on t2, then and additional timer based on index to complete. and it appears that you have to maintain the module activation and lock. so this seems very reasonable. bringing many links is still helpful as it gives you continual progress if the defender has none of their own, and they just are trying to shoot or harass you away. similarly for defender multiple links can keep paused. also i did note that if you start capture on a structure it doesn't degrade to 0 without a defender using a link on it, and if there is progress it remains vulnerable until it is forced to 0 by defender or capture is completed. this is important as it means the "Prime time" only matters if you show up to fix structures, otherwise the structure can remain vulnerable indefinately.
Gypsien Agittain University of Caille Gallente Federation 23	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:17:39 - [95] - Quote Almost forgot that: /when/ Fatigue + constellation-wide sovops=1 Capitalshipsvalue=0 Just for you to know.
Primary This Rifter 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 628	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:18:19 - [96] - Quote iP0D wrote: Also, it's absolutely ironic to see what spills over now and from where. Advocate stakeholders hurray. At this point I feel like I should just tag every CSM and ex-CSM member with "shill". Reminder: CCP thinks you have no right to your alliance logos.
Nami Kumamato School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 559	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:19:49 - [97] - Quote I don't do/like SOV but even to me it looks re-tarded... " And now my ship is oh so cloaked and fit - I never felt so good, I never felt so hid ! " - Ramona McCandless, Untitled
Red Teufel Mafia Redux Feign Disorder 430	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:19:54 - [98] - Quote Anhenka wrote: As a US player in a alliance slanted towards EU for active players, I would just like to say: "Thanks CCP for stripping me of opportunity to participate in defensive timers for my alliance, now I can instead just sit around and leech off my alliance without having any chance or obligation in participating in defense OTHER THAN RATTING IN DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS" It's so refreshing to know that not only will I never be around to stop an enemy from fighting for the initial timer, but that 100% of the time, it will always come out in a period of time I won't be there for. Thanks CCP! Good news for you is that I can assume it will be like poco bashing. This also only involves sov not PoS's. And hey even better news maybe you should break away from your blob and form your own group.
Tiberian Deci Sleeper Slumber Party Test Alliance Please Ignore 33	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:21:15 - [99] - Quote Will notifications go out like they do now? Will the entire alliance get a mail that something of theirs is under attack so they can dispatch a fleet to go defend it? Or will it get RF'd and then we get notifications about RF status and the like?
Current Habit Get LP or Die Trying 30	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:21:33 - [100] - Quote AUTZ went from one of the most important and war-deciding elements to being useless sov-wise. I bet they're gonna love that.

Kinis Deren StarHunt Mordus Angels 436	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:21:46 - [101] - Quote Quick ninja read whilst at work. - Thank goodness defensive SBU'ing appears to be a thing of the past. - I like the fact that the structures can be "mind link attacked" in parallel, rather than the current predictable serial approach that currently exists. - Overall, the new mechanism makes the battle space much more granular, rather than the predictable series of set piece battles that currently are the norm. - At this stage, I'm not really seeing how the new mechanics will encourage a break from the existing mega-coalition meta (blue donut, NIP/NAP fest, call it what you like). The dev blog really deserves a more intensive reading and I'll certainly be spending at least an hour reading it tonight. I'l be honest, I was really hoping to see jump bridges bite the dust and inject a little more travel risk into null sec. Furthermore, I was also hoping to see moon mineral collection change to an in-space player activity, rather than remain a passive process behind a huge EHP wall (yeah, let's not bother talking about the useless syphons which are easily detectable via the API). Maybe those changes are for Phase III prehaps?
Barbaydos Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation 18	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:21:52 - [102] - Quote RIP AU timezone.... so basically to get any activity in our own timezones we need to join an alliance that corresponds to our main playing times... meaning alliances full of only au or us or eu tz people..... needs more work methinks. we may as well split nullsec into 3 parts 1 for each TZ and have 4-5 different alliances in each area fight it out. I like it that CCP is doing something to break nullsec so thats its not so stagnant but the whole prime time vulnerability thing needs to be thrown under a bus.
Gilbaron Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda 1685	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:22:10 - [103] - Quote yay, FW without LP Build your empire ! Rent Space in Feythabolis and Omist Contact me for details :)
MiliasColds The Elite Few Inc. The Methodical Alliance 23	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:23:16 - [104] - Quote a note for out of timezone players (from declared prime time) you still raise indices which makes things easier to defend. you can still help with capture events that are ongoing past prime time. you can be useful attacking other alliances whose prime time aligns with your TZ you can assist allies you can contribute to general logistics you can attrack and reinforces POS and stations services doesn't seem like nothing to me
Anhenka The Cult of Personality DARKNESS. 1138	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:23:16 - [105] - Quote Red Teufel wrote: Anhenka wrote: As a US player in a alliance slanted towards EU for active players, I would just like to say: "Thanks CCP for stripping me of opportunity to participate in defensive timers for my alliance, now I can instead just sit around and leech off my alliance without having any chance or obligation in participating in defense OTHER THAN RATTING IN DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS" It's so refreshing to know that not only will I never be around to stop an enemy from fighting for the initial timer, but that 100% of the time, it will always come out in a period of time I won't be there for. Thanks CCP! Good news for you is that I can assume it will be like poco bashing. This also only involves sov not PoS's. And hey even better news maybe you should break away from your blob and form your own group. Gee, sucks if I actually like the people I fly with and the place I live in, doesn't it.
ISD Rontea ISD RUS 401	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:24:07 - [106] - Quote Change SBU BPO to Ensotis link BPO. Is this possible? ISD Rontea Vice Admiral -Æ-+-+-+-+-é-æ-Ç -¦-Ç-â-+-+-ï -+-+ -¦-+-¦-+-+-+-¦-¦-¦-ü-é-¦-+-Ä -ü -+-¦-Ç-+-¦-¦-+-+ Interstellar Services Department
marly cortez Mercurialis Inc. RAZOR Alliance 72	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:24:09 - [107] - Quote Apart from the GIF, which was poor judgement on the part of CCP in my view Alliances should CSM this one as failure to engage with this proposal is the players only true defense. Alliances should drop all Sov return to Empire and simply make the game unplayable by camping all trade hubs 'Burn it all' as one of my members just put it to me as in his view with the travel restrictions as they currently are hitting player behavior so severely, investing time and money owning Sov anywhere is going to be a worthless exercise for any Alliance and untenable for most Corporations. The own nothing, build nothing, plan nothing state this will generate flies directly in the face of the EVE ethos and achieves the console gamer ideal state, Log in, blow everything up, get blown up, log off again, That is going to get very old...VERY quickly.
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 347	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:24:19 - [108] - Quote I kinda like the sound of things, with condition it is actually well implemented in the end. I also like the goon tears. Hearing a lot of excited murmur from smaller PvP entities. After this, there might actually be something to shoot at when roaming in nullsec.
Andrea Keuvo Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 304	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:24:59 - [109] - Quote Ghaustyl Kathix wrote: Tiberian Deci wrote: Andrea Keuvo wrote: Please tell me that once the Entosis link is activated on a structure it will not be dependent on maintaining a target lock on the structure. If it does, I'm certain that some entities known for blobbing will show up with 600 ecm ships for every "fight" and sov battles will be even worse than they are now. Maybe they'll make it like triage/siege/bastion where you're immune to electronic warfare while its active. Definitely something worth bringing up. They said the ship can't receive remote assistance while it's active. I assume that'll be the same as triage, siege and bastion. I think the idea was that when the Entosis link is active you would become ewar immune similar to how you are in triage/siege/bastion.
Aryndel Vyst GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 930	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:25:09 - [110] - Quote Godfrey Silvarna wrote: I kinda like the sound of things, with condition it is actually well implemented in the end. I also like the goon tears. Hearing a lot of excited murmur from smaller PvP entities. After this, there might actually be something to shoot at when roaming in nullsec. If you can't find something to shoot at in nullsec now, you're probably not good at PVP and should stick to faction warfare. Because roams are plentiful and frequent if you care to make the effort to look.

Bethan Le Troix Krusual Investigation Agency 173	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:25:17 - [111] - Quote Looks like a well thought out plan to me. Gratz CCP ! Will bring combat back to nullsec on a gigantic scale. Love it !
Krell Kroenen The Devil's Shadow 239	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:26:21 - [112] - Quote Dev Blog wrote: In the new Sovereignty, systems full of active occupants will be vastly easier to defend and control than abandoned ones, bustling empires with a variety of activities will be stronger than AFK ones, and disrupting your enemies everyday activities in their space will help you gain advantages both strategic and economic. More details on how we intend to begin achieving this goal will be discussed later in this blog. So AFK Cloakers will be a real popular thing now?
EvilweaselFinance BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation 437	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:26:52 - [113] - Quote the short answer is that there is no incentive to hold space in this model - it's just too easy for anyone to take it from you. you invest in your space in any way and someone will squash it for funsies. it's insanely overpowered from the attack side, and my guess is that the design team at no point considered "well, why are people going to be here to be attacked in the first place?" i am sure that the response will be "well someone else will move in!". but then we'll squash them for funsies from either our fortress region or our new home in lowsec because null just isn't worth the effort. you cannot just make sand castles insanely easy to kick over when there's no motivation to have them. what will happen is nullsec will quickly devolve into an orgy of destruction, which will be used to justify this bad design through ~statistics~ with nary a thought of what happens once that orgy of destruction finishes. that orgy of destruction will only be possible because of the years of sand castles built up under previous systems, and once those are all gone, there won't be any more. but by that point we will have a dev blog full of cherry-picked statistics about how much of a success this is and then years of stagnation that are ignored well, guess i'll have some fun in the upcoming orgy at the end of the world~~~
Akrasjel Lanate Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate 1737	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:27:43 - [114] - Quote Quote: Low fitting requirements, uses high power slot. But will they be high enough to be fitted on ships not smaller than cruisers... because you know why... ceptors. And yea... primetime. Akrasjel Lanate General Director(CEO) of Naquatech Conglomerate Executor of Naquatech Syndicate Citizen of Solitude
MiliasColds The Elite Few Inc. The Methodical Alliance 23	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:27:45 - [115] - Quote Andrea Keuvo wrote: Ghaustyl Kathix wrote: Tiberian Deci wrote: Andrea Keuvo wrote: Please tell me that once the Entosis link is activated on a structure it will not be dependent on maintaining a target lock on the structure. If it does, I'm certain that some entities known for blobbing will show up with 600 ecm ships for every "fight" and sov battles will be even worse than they are now. Maybe they'll make it like triage/siege/bastion where you're immune to electronic warfare while its active. Definitely something worth bringing up. They said the ship can't receive remote assistance while it's active. I assume that'll be the same as triage, siege and bastion. I think the idea was that when the Entosis link is active you would become ewar immune similar to how you are in triage/siege/bastion. that's probably the case if it's literally disallows remote assistance as it likely uses the same code :)
Gilbaron Free-Space-Ranger Nulli Secunda 1687	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:28:07 - [116] - Quote Anhenka wrote: As a US player in a alliance slanted towards EU for active players, I would just like to say: "Thanks CCP for stripping me of opportunity to participate in defensive timers for my alliance, now I can instead just sit around and leech off my alliance without having any chance or obligation in participating in defense OTHER THAN RATTING IN DEFENSIVE SYSTEMS" It's so refreshing to know that not only will I never be around to stop an enemy from fighting for the initial timer, but that 100% of the time, it will always come out in a period of time I won't be there for. Thanks CCP! nEUlli secunda nulli secundAU nulli USecunda Build your empire ! Rent Space in Feythabolis and Omist Contact me for details :)
RogueHunteer Perkone Caldari State 8	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:28:17 - [117] - Quote Must say this new systems looks nice and new sov system will make lot of have fun pew pew! nice job ccp! Few things I would like to maybe change on this idea is fact you place to much on IHUB and not lot of the TCU. I was hoping the TCU would effect the strategic index levels. Since you place the 25% fuel saving with the TCU. Let TCU control the strategic index levels for the STARBASES. Let the IHUB control the upgrades for system. Station is worth on it's own!
Anthar Thebess 942	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:29:45 - [118] - Quote Hole? I create alliance A , B, C A : refout starting from 9:00 B : refout starting form 11:00 C : refout starting from 12:00 If something is going bad for alliance B , i move my 3000 people to corp B to defend "final timers" , then move them to corp A , to defend something else. If not corps, i have alts that move between corporation/ alliances. We need some grace period. In order to use this device for alliance you need to be member for at least 2 weeks? Capital Remote AID Rebalance Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
EvilweaselFinance BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation 437	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:30:06 - [119] - Quote RogueHunteer wrote: Must say this new systems looks nice and new sov system will make lot of have fun pew pew! nice job ccp! Few things I would like to maybe change on this idea is fact you place to much on IHUB and not lot of the TCU. I was hoping the TCU would effect the strategic index levels. Since you place the 25% fuel saving with the TCU. Let TCU control the strategic index levels for the STARBASES. Let the IHUB control the upgrades for system. Station is worth on it's own! when you're sockpuppeting posts liking a concept you have to change characters dude, people notice when it's just the same one
Airi Cho Dark-Rising Executive Outcomes 68	Posted - 2015.03.03 16:30:09 - [120] - Quote Gypsien Agittain wrote: Almost forgot that: /when/ Fatigue + constellation-wide sovops=1 Capitalshipsvalue=0 Just for you to know. Can use gates



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.