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) |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1555
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 11:36:10 -
[1261] - Quote
interesting times, for every player threatening to leave, there will be two resubscribing, sitting on the bleachers, with hotdogs and popcorn (and beer) watching the show.....
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Jessy Andersteen
AdAstra. Beach Club Red Whines.
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 11:38:49 -
[1262] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:interesting times, for every player threatening to leave, there will be two resubscribing, sitting on the bleachers, with hotdogs and popcorn (and beer) watching the show.....
TRUE.
and...
WTB ARCHON 600M. If u unscribe.... :D |
Snoodaard Thrasy
Yulai Guard Yulai Federation
32
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 11:43:12 -
[1263] - Quote
So overall I can live with most of the suggestions. Some minor tweaks here and there and this could work.
One big problem I think I have is that these changes make it too easy for hostile forces to reinforce systems and farm fights if they are not interested in actually taking sovereignty.
Especially if the intention is to have smaller entities gain sov, all the big boys (Goons, PL, etc etc.) need to do is send a large roaming gang in that are not easily counterable in <30 minutes by the locals, reinforce a load of systems and they are set 2 days later with tons of potential skirmishes over nodes in numerous systems. In the current system, an SBU takes 3 hours to online, which gives you a lot more time to defend your space from reinforcement and also requires a lot more commitment on the side of the reinforcer.
Seems to me that the defenders deserve more warning than a notification 25 minutes before their low index pipe systems go into reinforce. Hence, some sort of SBU system is still in order I think. Think of a module that anchores in 1 minute, onlines in 1 hour during which it can be destroyed and stays in an invulnerable mode for 24 hours after it onlines or so before it automatically despawns afterwards. Means defenders have an hour to prevent vulnerability to their system and they know they will have to be ready for attempts at reinforcement in a 24 hour window (during the vulnerable period only of course) allowing them to prepare.
Bottom line: you need to have a chance to actually prevent reinforcement of your system, much like the current SBU system. 20-30 minutes is too short for a serious fleet formation and impossible if the locals already have large roaming fleets out. (This new systems disencourages roaming!) |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1555
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 11:44:38 -
[1264] - Quote
You live there and defend it, it is home, nothing new about that concept. Why does it seem so hard to understand that?
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Daichi Yamato
Xero Security and Technologies
2306
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 11:44:50 -
[1265] - Quote
The fact that people cannot agree who this favours and how is a good sign.
Although the 4hr period is a bit restrictive, its probably one of the easiest things to tweak when the changes go live.
EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
|
Kagura Nikon
Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness
1983
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 11:49:15 -
[1266] - Quote
Snoodaard Thrasy wrote:So overall I can live with most of the suggestions. Some minor tweaks here and there and this could work.
One big problem I think I have is that these changes make it too easy for hostile forces to reinforce systems and farm fights if they are not interested in actually taking sovereignty.
Especially if the intention is to have smaller entities gain sov, all the big boys (Goons, PL, etc etc.) need to do is send a large roaming gang in that are not easily counterable in <30 minutes by the locals, reinforce a load of systems and they are set 2 days later with tons of potential skirmishes over nodes in numerous systems. In the current system, an SBU takes 3 hours to online, which gives you a lot more time to defend your space from reinforcement and also requires a lot more commitment on the side of the reinforcer.
Seems to me that the defenders deserve more warning than a notification 25 minutes before their low index pipe systems go into reinforce. Hence, some sort of SBU system is still in order I think. Think of a module that anchores in 1 minute, onlines in 1 hour during which it can be destroyed and stays in an invulnerable mode for 24 hours after it onlines or so before it automatically despawns afterwards. Means defenders have an hour to prevent vulnerability to their system and they know they will have to be ready for attempts at reinforcement in a 24 hour window (during the vulnerable period only of course) allowing them to prepare.
Bottom line: you need to have a chance to actually prevent reinforcement of your system, much like the current SBU system. 20-30 minutes is too short for a serious fleet formation and impossible if the locals already have large roaming fleets out. (This new systems disencourages roaming!)
and then they cannot keep that territory later.. so no point taking space that you cannot hold. With time ccp can adjust the time lenghts and make this system work quite well.
"If brute force does not solve your problem.... then you are surely not using enough!"
For the rest hire PoH |
Recruitment
|
Worrff
Viziam Amarr Empire
73
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 11:55:40 -
[1267] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
If they succeed, they will celebrate their plan and CCP will look stupid.
I donGÇÖt think CCP need any help in that area
CCP Philosophy: If it works, break it. If itGÇÖs broken, leave it alone and break something else.
|
Snoodaard Thrasy
Yulai Guard Yulai Federation
33
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 11:56:51 -
[1268] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:
You are aware that the takeover happens in two stages right?
First the initial reinforcing. ...48 hour period... Capture event (where the real takeover mechanics are)
This is why its so easy to reinforce a structure at first. Because its not the main event.
My point is that it's too easy to generate events. I think you should have to put some effort in to force a sov holding coalition to come and defend their space. As suggested now, sov holders will be constantly farmed for fights over nodes. And considering the nature of the command node event there will be plenty of opportunity to play it out in such a way that you get kills without having to face the full force of the defenders.
I don't want to come back from an alliance roam to a reinforced system each time. Sov should not be merely about providing permanent content for farmers. |
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3943
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 11:57:08 -
[1269] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay. Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!
The Rules: 4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Suede
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:00:31 -
[1270] - Quote
Snoodaard Thrasy wrote:So overall I can live with most of the suggestions. Some minor tweaks here and there and this could work.
One big problem I think I have is that these changes make it too easy for hostile forces to reinforce systems and farm fights if they are not interested in actually taking sovereignty.
Especially if the intention is to have smaller entities gain sov, all the big boys (Goons, PL, etc etc.) need to do is send a large roaming gang in that are not easily counterable in <30 minutes by the locals, reinforce a load of systems and they are set 2 days later with tons of potential skirmishes over nodes in numerous systems. In the current system, an SBU takes 3 hours to online, which gives you a lot more time to defend your space from reinforcement and also requires a lot more commitment on the side of the reinforcer.
Seems to me that the defenders deserve more warning than a notification 25 minutes before their low index pipe systems go into reinforce. Hence, some sort of SBU system is still in order I think. Think of a module that anchores in 1 minute, onlines in 1 hour during which it can be destroyed and stays in an invulnerable mode for 24 hours after it onlines or so before it automatically despawns afterwards. Means defenders have an hour to prevent vulnerability to their system and they know they will have to be ready for attempts at reinforcement in a 24 hour window (during the vulnerable period only of course) allowing them to prepare.
Bottom line: you need to have a chance to actually prevent reinforcement of your system, much like the current SBU system. 20-30 minutes is too short for a serious fleet formation and impossible if the locals already have large roaming fleets out. (This new systems disencourages roaming!)
Most of this is not yet set to stone and by the time june comes might all change again.
CCP devs only trying to make it fair for all the other players and not just one sided, end of the day CCP are trying to do what is best and it only a game we are only are paying customers to CCP for a service
CCP devs have done a very good job over the years in the updates
Like to see what CCP have in plans over the (Player Own StarGates)
|
|
ORLICZ
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:00:39 -
[1271] - Quote
Edward Olmops wrote:
Suggestion: FORCE alliances to choose one DIFFERENT time window for each constellation where they hold sov. Implications: -I am a small group, 1 timezone: I can hold sov in one constellation, people will have to fight in my prime time. -I want to be bigger and hold multiple constellations: I need to be able to defend multiple 4-hour-windows in different timezones -if I want to attack CFC or N3 with a small group, I will always find a constellation where they are vulnerable in my timezone. The other way round does not work. They have to fight me where I am strongest. -if 2 large entities battle each other, there will be all sorts of shenanigans. They will have to carefully choose which constellations get vulnerable in which timezone, but generally they will be vulnerable somewhere 24/7. -basically, the more territory you have, the longer your vulnerability time gets -maybe even narrow the vulnerability window down to 3 hours and create 8 non-overlapping fixed timeslots. Own up to one constellation: you must be ready to fight for 3 hours each day. 2 constellations: 6 hours... and so on. If you have 8 or more constellations, at least one constellation will always be vulnerable. -in very large alliances, people from all timezones will have "their" constellations they can/have to defend -if an entity wants to attack a small sov holder, place AND time are in favour of the defender -if attacking a large entity, the attacker has the choice of EITHER choosing a strategically important constellation OR attack something less valuable in a maybe slightly better timezone (assuming the vulnerability windows would be visible on the starmap or the like and assuming the defender did his homework and assigned the most important constellations to his best timezones) .
very nice idea
+ The Entosis Link only for certain ships- command ships ? + Longer timers for Entosis Link ? min 20min? and for capital 40 min + Add easier way to obtain lvl 5 industry index- but less mineras in single gravi +Add 30% discount pos fuel consumption with sov (there should be reward for owning sov) +Add 15% increase pos fuel consumption during Freeport Mode ( motivate to keep sov longer- fliping stations too often should cost more)
|
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
1592
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:05:31 -
[1272] - Quote
Page 62 and the last Dev comment for this topic was about that stupid gif on page 5!.
How about, hum, interacting with this disgrunted part of your player base CCP? |
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30741
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:11:10 -
[1273] - Quote
I didn't see any mention of whether 'tosis modules will make the ship immune to ewar. Otherwise I can jam myself with an alt to exit cycle and catch reps.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Anthar Thebess
946
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:12:25 -
[1274] - Quote
Stuff will be epic. This is how the nullsec should look like from the beginning , constant fight. I wonder how long it will take for players to find a hole that will allow to overcome this.
Again big groups will prepare for this. NA will be spited to smaller alliances just to have less systems vulnerable at the same time.
There must be a benefit for owning all structures in a system. Without of this i make 3 alliances. TCU holding alliance Station holding alliance Ihub Holding alliance
I will setup different timers on each alliance so someone cannot come and ref every thing.
Capital Remote AID Rebalance
Way to solve important nullsec issue. CSM members do your work.
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30741
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:14:41 -
[1275] - Quote
Coolest Space wrote:Is it only me that felt that groups like reavers also kind of broke SOV when they could take SOV or at least disturb SOV with only 10 people in one system. And now you say 1 guy with a Entosis Link can disturb sov for a whole alliance. That only happened / happens when there's no one around to defend other than PVE farmers.
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
AlexKent
KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation
6
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:19:13 -
[1276] - Quote
Entosis Link should only fit to Bcruiser/Bship and above to prevent abuse. It will also give people a reason to fly these over cruiser and frigate hulls.
P.S.
RIP capital warfare, not sure if a bad or good thing.
|
Gypsien Agittain
University of Caille Gallente Federation
46
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:23:44 -
[1277] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Stuff will be epic. This is how the nullsec should look like from the beginning , constant fight. I wonder how long it will take for players to find a hole that will allow to overcome this.
I will setup different timers on each alliance so someone cannot come and ref every thing.
I think that's what you think and what dev's think, and that's what's gonna doom nullsec. People in nullsec (most) likes fighting, people in nullsec don't wanna spend 4h/day chasing ceptors around the constellation. With the upcoming change when a group of 20 bored space gypsies decide to attack 20 systems with 20 entosis links they're gonna harass the whole operations of hunreds of guys at the cost of nothing. And the harassed people who lived for years in null is gonna unsub or go back to lowsec/highsec.
One of the greatest issues with this change, as you can see by checking a bit posting in this thread, is that the people (most) whose happier with the changes, actually never lived in sov null nor tried to.
CCP's Achilles heel is that they change things on the game based on feedback from people who, actually, never tried those things. That's why the game is on it's way to doom and, unless devs erase their delusion of "we see things you don't", we'll be seeing ~20k players on tops by christmas. |
Royaldo
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch. Sev3rance
108
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:25:05 -
[1278] - Quote
"While the current sovereignty system worked fine for many years" Good joke man |
Lord TGR
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
192
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:30:36 -
[1279] - Quote
Murauke wrote:You know you could be onto something here. Another idea is to make "Your most active timezone" scale able to the amount of systems/constellations your alliance/corp holds. e.g. Alliance is across 10 systems, 2 constellations = 1.02 mulitplyer of additional active timezone. Make the amount of systems you hold directly related to the length of your vulnerability. This is gameable by using lots of stub alliances, unless you link it so it rewards bigger sizes, which is counter to the underlying premise of the changes. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1555
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:30:56 -
[1280] - Quote
AlexKent wrote:Entosis Link should only fit to Bcruiser/Bship and above to prevent abuse. It will also give people a reason to fly these over cruiser and frigate hulls.
P.S.
RIP capital warfare, not sure if a bad or good thing.
what you claim is abuse is actually the whole point of the system. You seem to have missed the devblog.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
|
Lurifax
Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda
18
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:31:00 -
[1281] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:Shodan Of Citadel wrote:Freeport Mode... Gives the aggressor docking rights and turn every battle into high-sec station bullshit.
Goal 6... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I'm sure Goons will only bring 2-300 people instead of system crushing 2-3000.
Entosis Link -turned EVE into some twisted king of the hill system where sheer number of Links win.
CCP, give machariels a bonus to juggling and the middle lane.
Did you read it. The number of links is not important. 1000 links from an attacker and 1 link from a defender and the timer does not count down.
They will bring enough for the first timer. On the second timer they will dump 250 on your station and have some 50-100 ceptors capture the nodes. With the current version taking an entire constellation will be extremely easy. |
Kah'Les
hirr Northern Coalition.
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:32:48 -
[1282] - Quote
CCP wrote: Goal #1: As much as possible, ensure that the process of fighting over a star system is enjoyable and fascinating for all the players involved
By having to be active for 4 hours each day to defend space, and then having to respond to one guy that want to griefe a alliance with his Entosis Link. This goal is allready a miss.
CCP wrote:Goal #2: Clarify the process of taking, holding and fighting over star systems
Maybe you somehow could make titans usefull again in sov war here? If enemy don't come to defend sov structures a easy DD to destouy sov structores maybe, I don't see why we need to implement new moduals for SOV war when we have these ultimate SOV war machines SUPERS AND TITANS!
Also lowering Jump Fatigue within own hold systems would make capitals usefull again.
CCP wrote:Goal #3: Minimize the systemic pressure to bring more people or larger ships than would be required to simply defeat your enemies on the field of battle.
This is not FW, if I wanted to do FW I would join that.
CCP wrote:Goal #6: Spread the largest Sovereignty battles over multiple star systems to take advantage of New EdenGÇÖs varied geography and to better manage server load.
This is some Sun Tzu art of War bullshit, and it wont work unless you manage to break up Goonswarm and NC. before you implement it.
Introducing the Entosis Link
Feel like a lazy way to get around it, and easy solution and the low skill point requierment is a minus in my eyes. I can't say this enought but null sec is not ment for everyon, people who have spent years in null build up a good amount of SP and ships you can't use in High Sec. The idea that people can harass alliances to respond to one simple ship activating his Entosis Link on their structures is just to simple. We already have have a modual that until recently was only used in null the Doomsday find a way to make it usefull in sov warfare instead of this Entosis Link. I'm cool if people have to risk titans to take systems fast, but risk a 100 mill ship is just to simple for null. |
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1555
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:33:47 -
[1283] - Quote
be grateful this was the alternative plan for nulls sov
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-30687171
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Lord TGR
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
192
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:36:02 -
[1284] - Quote
Lurifax wrote:Delt0r Garsk wrote:Shodan Of Citadel wrote:Freeport Mode... Gives the aggressor docking rights and turn every battle into high-sec station bullshit.
Goal 6... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I'm sure Goons will only bring 2-300 people instead of system crushing 2-3000.
Entosis Link -turned EVE into some twisted king of the hill system where sheer number of Links win.
CCP, give machariels a bonus to juggling and the middle lane.
Did you read it. The number of links is not important. 1000 links from an attacker and 1 link from a defender and the timer does not count down. They will bring enough for the first timer. On the second timer they will dump 250 on your station and have some 50-100 ceptors capture the nodes. With the current version taking an entire constellation will be extremely easy. Some might do that in one constellation, but now notice how there's more than one constellation in the game. |
stickz06
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:37:16 -
[1285] - Quote
Assuming the T2 Entosis Link keeps its 250KM range, it should be a Super Cap only module. |
Aralyn Cormallen
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
784
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:37:30 -
[1286] - Quote
One interesting thing is having a station in a system is now a liability if it is not there for a specific purpose and a place where combat players hang out - a region with lots of stations will constantly have one or another in freeport status, undermining security. And its too late to do anything about that now, as so many regions are flooded with the things. If destructible (in attack) stations are still being ignored, it is vital that organisations can self-destruct their own, so that people can prepare their space for a future with less secure stations. |
Gypsien Agittain
University of Caille Gallente Federation
46
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:38:16 -
[1287] - Quote
Kah'Les wrote:
Feel like a lazy way to get around it, and easy solution and the low skill point requierment is a minus in my eyes. I can't say this enought but null sec is not ment for everyon, people who have spent years in null build up a good amount of SP and ships you can't use in High Sec. The idea that people can harass alliances to respond to one simple ship activating his Entosis Link on their structures is just to simple. We already have have a modual that until recently was only used in null the Doomsday find a way to make it usefull in sov warfare instead of this Entosis Link. I'm cool if people have to risk titans to take systems fast, but risk a 100 mill ship is just to simple for null.
Don't you get they wanna allow 5M sps pubbies in 60M worth ships be able to harass >100M sps, >5 years suscribing pilots?
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1555
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:39:03 -
[1288] - Quote
Aralyn Cormallen wrote:One interesting thing is having a station in a system is now a liability if it is not there for a specific purpose and a place where combat players hang out - a region with lots of stations will constantly have one or another in freeport status, undermining security. And its too late to do anything about that now, as so many regions are flooded with the things. If destructible (in attack) stations are still being ignored, it is vital that organisations can self-destruct their own, so that people can prepare their space for a future with less secure stations.
Better have some people living in it then. If you don't someone will. Otherwise, it is not your space any more,is it?
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
|
Rain6637
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
30741
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:39:12 -
[1289] - Quote
Hey CCP, another reason to make 'tosis immobile is floating outside of lock range to break cycle.
Cutting a Sensor Integrity warfare link could accomplish the same thing.
You might need to change this to be range-based, with T1 becoming valid within 25km, and T2 within 250. Make the rest of it act like a cyno with RR disallowed. This takes care of the lock range shenanigans.
[How much time did you spend thinking about this module? I'm trying to be nice but c'mon]
Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
|
Worrff
Viziam Amarr Empire
73
|
Posted - 2015.03.04 12:40:24 -
[1290] - Quote
Dominique Vasilkovsky wrote:Not even a hundred pages in 24h, people must be rather happy with this change then.
No. They just realise that CCP will do what they want whatever is said. So all this is rather pointless.
CCP Philosophy: If it works, break it. If itGÇÖs broken, leave it alone and break something else.
|
|
|
|
|
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 |