EVE Search - Sticky:Dev blog: Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two

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)
Freelancer117 So you want to be a Hero 268	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:41:15 - [1291] - Quote Quote: I have written a status update blog looking back on Phase One of our Nullsec changes (which released in Phoebe last November) and how they have impacted the game. You can find that blog here, but for the lazy people the TL:DR is that the results are looking quite positive so far and those Phoebe changes put us in a much stronger position from which to launch Phase Two. CCP your TL:DR are your own conclusions and opinions. 1. Nullsec Population and General Activity A +23.6% increase in manufacturing jobs per day in Nullsec vs a +0.7% increase in mining volume per day in Nullsec since Phoebe. So you made building in nullsec cheaper then in hisec, only means more alts stay docked in stations to produce and nullsec is still on the Jita life support. 2. Nullsec PVP Activity Overall score for Nullsec PVP Activity: Significant overall improvement, but largely in one half of Nullsec. So this is what happens when a big alliances like N3 coalition moves space and you call it a victory 3. Capital Ship Activity You own conclussion: A wash. Continued work on engaging and balanced roles for Capital Ships will be needed in the future, especially as some of their current roles in structure shooting are de-emphasized in Phase Two. You are interested in taking away the ability of fighters to warp. Nobody wants to fly capitals soonGäó 4. Sovereignty Conquests Quote: If Phase Two is a success, we would ideally like to see a significantly higher status quo, less reliant on bursts of activity from major wars. My jaw drops to the ground hearing this much hubris from CCPgames The players will make a better version of the game, then CCP initially plans. http://eve-radio.com//images/photos/3419/223/34afa0d7998f0a9a86f737d6.jpg GÇÖChilde Roland to the Dark Tower came.GÇÖ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nY3oMRLfArU
Lurifax Common Sense Ltd Nulli Secunda 18	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:41:27 - [1292] - Quote Lord TGR wrote: 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. If you are able to camp them in, it does not matter if its 1 or 5 constellation. You dont need, dreads, supers or huge amount of dps to grind the structure. Just 20-50 ceptors to grap 10 points.
Worrff Viziam Amarr Empire 73	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:41:31 - [1293] - Quote Jessy Andersteen wrote: And people just want less large scales engagment. Wrong. A LOT of people love them. CCP Philosophy: If it works, break it. If itGÇÖs broken, leave it alone and break something else.
Norrin Zelkarr Universalis Imperium The Bastion 3	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:42:49 - [1294] - Quote CCP Phantom wrote: While the current sovereignty system worked fine for many years, we see the need for a fundamental overhaul. We are excited to present the plans for a new sov system coming early this summer including: 1) No more grinding through hitpoints 2) Meaningful combat events distributed over the whole constellation 3) Space activity results in defensive bonus 4) Designated daily "Prime time" for alliances when their structures become vulnerable Read all about this new sov system, the mechanics and the fine details in CCP Fozzie's latest blog Politics by Other Means: Sovereignty Phase Two! God, the whining in this thread. CCP, you're on the right track. Don't listen to naysayers. This new system sounds fun, dynamic, and paints a big target on the backs of the aspects of null that cause it to calcify and become boring. +1 to you.
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 396	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:43:27 - [1295] - Quote I like most of what has been proposed, although there are some serious issues that need to be looked at. 1) Prime Time, as has already been mentioned many times already, AU TZ is screwed. The US players in our mostly EU corp would be screwed. I think the duration of prime time needs to be extended to 8 hours, or just completely done away with and some other solution found. 2) Entosis link. Thise should definately NOT be able to be fitted to any interceptors or indeed anything that is interdiction nullified. I would like to see this thing limited to at the very least cruisers and above. Most of us are already sick and tired of interceptors online, as it stands this only make it worse. 3) AFK cloaky camping needs to be dealt with once and for all. It's an utterly bullsh*t mechanic that adds nothing to the game, and will only be more prevalent with this new sov system. Otherwise, most of it looks good. keep sticking it to the coalitions and landlords. Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Godfrey Silvarna Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light 361	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:44:38 - [1296] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: 3) AFK cloaky camping needs to be dealt with once and for all. It's an utterly bullsh*t mechanic that adds nothing to the game, and will only be more prevalent with this new sov system. Why?
epicurus ataraxia Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude 1555	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:48:03 - [1297] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: I like most of what has been proposed, although there are some serious issues that need to be looked at. 1) Prime Time, as has already been mentioned many times already, AU TZ is screwed. The US players in our mostly EU corp would be screwed. I think the duration of prime time needs to be extended to 8 hours, or just completely done away with and some other solution found. 2) Entosis link. Thise should definately NOT be able to be fitted to any interceptors or indeed anything that is interdiction nullified. I would like to see this thing limited to at the very least cruisers and above. Most of us are already sick and tired of interceptors online, as it stands this only make it worse. 3) AFK cloaky camping needs to be dealt with once and for all. It's an utterly bullsh*t mechanic that adds nothing to the game, and will only be more prevalent with this new sov system. Otherwise, most of it looks good. keep sticking it to the coalitions and landlords. you do realise that without porous borders, that systems can be protected 20 jumps away with large areas of space only occupied with ratters and bots? Interceptors, enforce local residence and defence, as they penetrate the border systems. but of course you do, hence you don't want interceptors to disturb the peace and quiet, and therefore your proposal to castrate the changes. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Snoodaard Thrasy Yulai Guard Yulai Federation 34	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:48:42 - [1298] - Quote Godfrey Silvarna wrote: Speedkermit Damo wrote: 3) AFK cloaky camping needs to be dealt with once and for all. It's an utterly bullsh*t mechanic that adds nothing to the game, and will only be more prevalent with this new sov system. Why? If you plan to take space, you plant a load of cloaky campers to bring down the index. The bullshit mechanic being that it's not counterable by reasonable standards (unless being forced to put in valuable pvp defense time for someone who is likely afk is considered worth while gameplay).
Rain6637 GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 30742	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:49:17 - [1299] - Quote Make it fun. Give Recons a bonus to cycle time on these things. Don't post on the forums, devs don't read it. Send GMs your questions with support tickets. Don't be silent.
Erasmus Grant EVE University Ivy League 17	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:50:06 - [1300] - Quote Just moving to sov null, I like the propose changes except the Primetime. I love it instead if we could blow things up or some how send troops into the station. The new mechanic changes makes us think more strategically about the battle-space and how we deploy and use forces. Using sub-capitals to fixate the enemy force and send the capital to stomp. I like the idea of not having at one point for a system. If it is going to be a constellation battle their should be a constellation perks for owning a whole constellation. There should be more structures , assets, and customization to place them to introduce a fog of war in the mix. I do not think anything less than a battle-cruiser should be able to use the Entosis Link therefore preventing frigates 'r us. T2 should be only allowed on supers and titans. There should be some pew pew involve on structures maybe first having to go through a shield or some armor depending on the station type to expose hacking points. What do you mean by remote assistance? Logi, boost, remote sebo, and etc? You do hurt mercs, but help renters. I am honestly not sure how a command nodes in another system determines who owns or controls a system. Reduce or get rid of the jump fatigue if you are using a jump bridge. If the Null sec empires are the player version of NPC empires give them the power to be such so a true sandbox can be achieve. Developers are there to make those things happen, if it is possible with reasonable moderation.
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 398	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:52:11 - [1301] - Quote Godfrey Silvarna wrote: Speedkermit Damo wrote: 3) AFK cloaky camping needs to be dealt with once and for all. It's an utterly bullsh*t mechanic that adds nothing to the game, and will only be more prevalent with this new sov system. Why? Because it's a pisspoor griefing tool that discourages people from undocking and doing things in space, while the griefer incurs zero risk while he's afk all day long. You know this, the arguments for and against have been going round and round for ever and I'm not going to get sucked in to another one. Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Kilab Gercias Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 12	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:52:11 - [1302] - Quote Speedkermit Damo wrote: 1) Prime Time, as has already been mentioned many times already, AU TZ is screwed. The US players in our mostly EU corp would be screwed. I think the duration of prime time needs to be extended to 8 hours, or just completely done away with and some other solution found. Then split the Timezones in your Coaltion. Lets say you are an Allie with Okay Nummbers in EUTZ faceing your Enemy (nearly even sides) and are outnumbering this enemys in AUTZ So set your "Primetime" to AUTZ, then the AUTZ is your defens Team. Holding your Sov and fighting LateNight/EarlyMorning fleets from the other Timezones. And your EU TZ will be your Offens. Harrassing your Enemy in there Primtime. Vola Both timezones has there Role in Sov Warfare.
Speedkermit Damo Demonic Retribution 398	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:53:48 - [1303] - Quote epicurus ataraxia wrote: Speedkermit Damo wrote: I like most of what has been proposed, although there are some serious issues that need to be looked at. 1) Prime Time, as has already been mentioned many times already, AU TZ is screwed. The US players in our mostly EU corp would be screwed. I think the duration of prime time needs to be extended to 8 hours, or just completely done away with and some other solution found. 2) Entosis link. Thise should definately NOT be able to be fitted to any interceptors or indeed anything that is interdiction nullified. I would like to see this thing limited to at the very least cruisers and above. Most of us are already sick and tired of interceptors online, as it stands this only make it worse. 3) AFK cloaky camping needs to be dealt with once and for all. It's an utterly bullsht mechanic that adds nothing to the game, and will only be more prevalent with this new sov system. Otherwise, most of it looks good. keep sticking it to the coalitions and landlords. you do realise that without porous borders, that systems can be protected 20 jumps away with large areas of space only occupied with ratters and bots? Interceptors, enforce local residence and defence, as they penetrate the border systems. but of course you do, hence you don't want interceptors to disturb the peace and quiet, and therefore your proposal to castrate the changes. Nope, I thought it might be nice for other ships to be seen in nullsec occasionally. *** interceptors. Protect me from knowing what I don't need to know. Protect me from even knowing that there are things to know that I don't know. Protect me from knowing that I decided not to know about the things that I decided not to know about. Amen.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11969	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:55:24 - [1304] - Quote epicurus ataraxia wrote: you do realise that without porous borders, that systems can be protected 20 jumps away with large areas of space only occupied with ratters and bots? You do realize that's not how it works? Oh, wait, look who I'm talking to. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Higgs Foton 4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation 184	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:56:04 - [1305] - Quote Ah threadnaught! Personally i find these proposals tedious. Another complicated sov mechanic in which you have to do strange stuff. I still think the best way sov was done was the old system of having sov tied to the POS. Whoever hold the majority of towers in a system had the sov. Personally i think this needs to return. Maybe with a limit (like you can set max 5 towers to sov in one system, to prevent stuff like 100 towers in a system like 49-U which has a lot of moons) or such. It was easy. It was fun because you had to DESTROY STUFF to get the sov, and there is much opportunity for rapecage.
stickz06 Caldari Provisions Caldari State 0	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:56:57 - [1306] - Quote Kilab Gercias wrote: Speedkermit Damo wrote: 1) Prime Time, as has already been mentioned many times already, AU TZ is screwed. The US players in our mostly EU corp would be screwed. I think the duration of prime time needs to be extended to 8 hours, or just completely done away with and some other solution found. Then split the Timezones in your Coaltion. Lets say you are an Allie with Okay Nummbers in EUTZ faceing your Enemy (nearly even sides) and are outnumbering this enemys in AUTZ So set your "Primetime" to AUTZ, then the AUTZ is your defens Team. Holding your Sov and fighting LateNight/EarlyMorning fleets from the other Timezones. And your EU TZ will be your Offens. Harrassing your Enemy in there Primtime. Vola Both timezones has there Role in Sov Warfare. Assuming this mechanic is staying in the game I think it should be something like: You have 3x 3hour slots for prime time, all slots must be used at any non-overlapping intervals. This will allow you to specify a larger Prime time window for your main defence, and smaller for TZ's where you are weaker. ( Or make it 3x 2hours or whatever... )
Saidin Thor The Odin Conspiracy 48	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:57:00 - [1307] - Quote After digesting the new proposal overnight, I think it has a lot of potential and opens up some interesting gameplay, but right now I think it's just TOO supportive of disruptive gameplay. In order to prevent a lot of the griefing that people are predicting, here is what I would propose: 1. Remove IHubs and roll their functionality into TCUs. Any existing upgrades installed in IHubs would be transferred over to the TCU of the system. IHub upgrades will need to be toggleable on/off, since right now some alliance anchor multiple IHubs and switch which one is active based on whether they want a cyno jammer/jump bridge/etc in the system. Since TCUs can be placed anywhere, this forces players who want to disrupt sov to bring a minimum fleet complement to deal with a POS (if that's where the alliance chooses to put the TCU) or to lay the groundwork and defang the POS before they go out to entosis link a constellation. In addition, this removes the useless TCU as proposed in the current system. Without any IHub upgrades, nullsec systems generate no value as compared to NPC null (except for the sov fuel reduction bonus, which isn't relevant to "active" use of a solar system anyways). There are no anomalies that respawn (pirate or ore), so there is no consistent activity you can do in the system outside of belt ratting or belt mining (which you can also do in highsec, lowsec, and NPC null already). 2. Make station services invulnerable to entosis links until the IHub OR the station has been successfully hacked. From the time either of the two structures is hacked until the end of the capture event, station services are then vulnerable to hacking by the entosis link. There should be a minimum barrier to entry and time cost if you want to disrupt sov. With the proposal as is, it's too easy to take an alt in a svipul 200KM off a station and knock out the fitting service (or something else), before anyone nearby can react. I'm not sure WHAT to do about this, but the 400% bonus to link duration for capital ships seems very harsh and and is a hack-y way of trying to balance the system. Although I understand the danger of just cycling which titan is running the link on the station and using their massive EHP buffer to negate the inability to receive reps, at the same time you're literally self-tackling for a minimum of 4 minutes (two cycles of the module if there wasn't a role increase to duration for capital ships). Maybe a 100% increase in cycle duration (giving you a minimum self-tackle period of 8 minutes--2x4 minute cycles--which is a very significant amount of time for guaranteed tackle, as any capital fisher would tell you) would be more appropriate than 400% if this is a real concern? As it is, capital ships are going to be nigh-useless for capture events. They can't consistently jump between systems via jump drives because of fatigue and jump timers, and even if they try to gate, they're stuck at each capture point for 20 minutes, minimum (not including travel time) even if they cycle a minimum of two times. Moreover, you can literally FINISH incapping a station service before a capital ship can even finish a single cycle to start their link even if your reaction time was zero. That seems...odd.
John McCreedy Eve Defence Force The Kadeshi 152	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:57:44 - [1308] - Quote Quote: Low fitting requirements, uses high power slot. This is a very, very, very bad idea and goes to the heart of all the mistakes you've been making for years in this game. Risk vs. Reward. In the first half of the decade, Eve was all about Risk vs. Reward. In the last few years there's been a continual shift away from that. The way you propose this is appallingly risk-free. Eve needs to get back to its roots of the riskiest operations result in the richest rewards and it doesn't get much richer than acquiring new space. If you introduce this module as you propose you'll end up with system/station ping pong which the entire concept of 'sovereignty' was introduced to prevent. Taking Sov should not be as easy as slapping a cloak on a frig and cruising through enemy space largely ignored, get in to position, hack the structure and then cyno in a massive fleet of ships. Taking Sov should be inherently risky and require careful planning and preparation. Any ship requiring the new module should require an escort to reach its intended target in one piece. Therefore, it should not be able to be fitting on anything smaller than a Battlecruiser and the ship should not be able to fit this module and a cloak at the same time - and I mean not fit, not leave the module fitted and offline so you can switch over when you get there. One possible solution is to make the fitting requirements for this module insanely high, but then give Command ships, for example, a role bonus that reduces the fitting requirements.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 15369	Posted - 2015.03.04 12:58:36 - [1309] - Quote So you make so we must rat to secure a system but do nothing about the fact that only 10 pilots can be supported at any one time per system at the very best. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Benilopax The Ashen Lion Syndicate The Ashen Syndicate 438	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:00:26 - [1310] - Quote I like these changes, except for the prime time as others have mentioned, we should never dictate when we can attack an object sure allow the reinforcement timer to be dictated but having a regular four hour window somewhat takes away from the element of surprise in warfare. I've always said that sov warfare would need to be broken down into spread out objectives so you could say this has been closest to what I believe sov warfare should be. But we do need more incentive to hold space hopefully that can be added before June. ...
Xade Mex Outer Void Applications Get Off My Lawn 0	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:02:58 - [1311] - Quote Okay Few things: First of all i apprichiate the changes they are in general god. even tho some dread pilots (haah phoenix joke is on you) will feel a bit less usefull, but still its okay. Disclaimer: in the following i will aruge with fountain as regeion since its my home this might or might not be the exact case in other regions but the general problems will be similar ones. Some things things bug me with the new system: -for example that 1 person is able to reinforce a system. within 10 minutes. (if you look all over eve ther is a staggering amount of systems who are unused simply because they are bad or are in a bad position on the map) http://evemaps.dotlan.net/map/Fountain#sec <- see the right part of fountain? awefull space mostly "J" security class (-0.25 or less). plain unuseable as a ratter except for having escalations there. i would make more money running L4s or Incursions than rat in this space. put up all systems in eve to be albe to sustain atleast 2-3 ratters with 60-90 mil income per hour (i think -0.46 are able to do this) Now lets keep the idea that it get 100% implemented how you say and nothing changes. now if some npc-coolguys feel like it they just have to sit in a interceptor and warp to anything in the system and force (2 minutes per t2 link) lets say 20 timers within 1 hour (im not sure if you ahve to stay on grid after the 2 minutes till the timer comes out) PER PERSON. and there is nothing we can do about it but defend the timers 2 days later. it would be a total burnout for all 0.0 alliances. you wanted to make ti less of work of grinding sov. okay. but its allready "work" to keep sov. The next issue i have is the 4 hour timer is okay. but its not good. alliances are forced from "be able to defend it 24h" to be able to defend it 4 hours against every little guy who comes along. and i hope you ahve been on fleet 4 hours a day for 2-3 weeks. THAT is work. now take it in the point of fountain: most of Fountain core is EU TZ. the fountain alliances have the choice to keep it in EU, US or even AU prime. so guess what they will take. US because AU is to low on numbers and EU is the TZ of the enemy. now i as an EU tz player loose my content. because nobody will even have the possibily to attack anything but POS and Pocos during that time. so lets say. give it another option to like "split it in 2" 2x2 hours of vounerable time. we have more to defend. the enemy has more options to attack both sides get more content. otherwise you would force me to leavy my alliance to have content. Maybe fix this by saying "only battleships are able to use this" or make it a function only Battleships are able to use (Bitches LOOOOOVE battleships) because battleships are currently ****** baldy in the Meta /sorry for swearing but there is no other way to express how it is. Cruisers are 4 times as much used as BS . Great job i would guess? somake it a t1 Battlehip mod or something like that so nobody will be able to speedtank fleets or people . battleships are easy to catch. or make the process longer. something like that (tbh the BS idea is awefull but im desperate about this shipclass) Next point. Station - Freeport mode. you punish players for having a station in the system. thats it. litterally. nothign more. just DONT. please. ccp. dont. like no. that idea is awefull. really. no. :D it seemd like a good idea and it might be way less uses than i expect it to but its a shtty mechanic. please dont let this happen. maybe make stations 2 timers nothing more. Last thing: My hope is that this only the "sov system" revamp not the entire revamp in 0.0 because if you dont change sov to a place where its really worth to be in it then you will have a game thats worse than its now. even now where its easier to hold sov people wont be bothered with it. (BL, PL, etc...) now you make it a really pain in the arese to keep sov. thats propably not the right way to do things. okay making it easiert to attack okay. but dont make it THAT easy. or that awefull to even bother sov. nearly all entitiys who live in 0.0 right now will be like "*** this" and do a PL because even right now SOV is awefull to have. now you make it more than a burden even for the most advanced coalitions. how are those 400 man alliances who have about 1 constallation able to defend a system without burning themselfes out to hell? thats all i have hope it wont be as awefull as i expect.
Aiyshimin Fistful of Finns Triumvirate. 430	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:03:22 - [1312] - Quote Doctor Fabulous MD wrote: Zip Slings wrote: 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. this thing locks at 250 in sniper mode while going 7km/s , and it locks at 190 in speed mode, while going 11km/s (9kms if you dont use snakes+quafe zero) and will speedtank any sniper fit in the game at that speed and range. http://i.imgur.com/t29IKHD.png (yes thats a whole 3 dps at 190km) sniper fits are setup for 100% max tracking, with the smallest guns that will reach optimally at that range + appropriate ammo, hence their lack of targeting range in that graph. If you can find me a fit that tracks anywhere even close to well ill be shocked. It also goes too fast to probe down, and can do the cloak mwd trick so hard its 30km out of a bubble before the MWD stops cycling, so its pretty much uncatchable at gates. Anything that lands on grid that is capable of actually catching it and tackling it (only other T3 destroyers fit with a scram), it can just immediately overheat MWD and burn towards a safe until the no-warp timer runs out (2 minutes max), warp off, cloak, wait for them to leave, then fire up the sov laser again. Even with the SLIM possibility of getting caught, its at very most 200 million lost, meanwhile if an alliance loses a fully upgraded ihub, its billions + weeks of effort and freighter convoys. Extremely balanced. It's still not an interceptor, and will die to an instalocking Svipul like every small ship atm. Anyway, it can't take sov, just initiate the counter, and the locals respond with their own sov beam. To lose the fully upgraded ihub etc, the attackers need to win 10 plexes, just flying around with the sov beam does nothing.
GsyBoy Hooded Underworld Guys Northern Coalition. 12	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:04:26 - [1313] - Quote Everything has been said. Appreciate the efforts but just doesn't hang. D- please try harder.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11969	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:05:46 - [1314] - Quote So here's the part that stuck me the most, after I read it through a few times. Where are the farms and fields? Where is the reason to actually live there, the reason to jump through all these hoops to plant your flag in a system? I see a huge buff towards system disruption. Neat. I see the removal of structure grinding. Also nice. But I see little reason to put up with the headache of sov mechanics in the first place. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Lowjack Tzetsu Astrocomical Warped Intentions 0	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:08:13 - [1315] - Quote Well the devs have officially boasted the idea for sov being based on a game of whack a mole. I mean seriously, I don't want to spend the 4 hours of my prime time gaming running around constellations trying to defend sov. Especially when it doesn't take a genius to figure out how bad this idea is when the attacker can generally have zero risk to take someone else's space. Honestly, whats the point of attempting to hold sov. Let the next guy come take it away from you, and then grief him till he quits the game. When he quits the game its more fun for me, and less money for CCP.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 152	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:08:43 - [1316] - Quote Some random thoughts (from somebody not involved into sov so far) - creative approach, good thoughts were made to make it balanced - the new mechanics look constructed and artificial, much more like a "game" than a universe simulation ... I'm looking forward to your lore explanation of command node anomalies - the fixed prime time will make multi-timezone alliances dysfunctional (which is bad IMO), either the prime time is put on the actual prime of the leading majority in the alliance or around downtime together with recruiting some Aussies as police squad - the new system will make it very easy for random groups to mess with sov / station services to provoke fights or just get some ganks, as a NPSI fan I like that, but ... - the number of conflicts will increase, but in favor of big blocks. Small entities will likely have a hard time defending their home - with attackers just reinforcing things for the tears or press them into dependency Question, will NPC corpies be able to aquire a station for their NPC corp? I'm my own NPC alt.
Kaiserin Schlacht Rolling Static Gone Critical 4	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:09:27 - [1317] - Quote I think the general direction of this seems interesting, definitely needs tweaking. initial reaction ; The link thing seems rather artificial and strange The prime time thing even more so Other than that, seems fine tbh Just make sure to buff ns income
Nami Kumamato School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State 577	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:11:31 - [1318] - Quote I find the lack of dev replies disturbing... " And now my ship is oh so cloaked and fit - I never felt so good, I never felt so hid ! " - Ramona McCandless, Untitled
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 152	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:17:20 - [1319] - Quote Nami Kumamato wrote: I find the lack of dev replies disturbing... I see this a a good sign, they are busy incorporating the feedback. I'm my own NPC alt.
Benilopax The Ashen Lion Syndicate The Ashen Syndicate 438	Posted - 2015.03.04 13:17:42 - [1320] - Quote Nami Kumamato wrote: I find the lack of dev replies disturbing... I also find the lack of CSM posts disturbing... ...

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.