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) |
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3938
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:07:29 -
[211] - Quote
I have removed some rule breaking posts. 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.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
993
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:08:32 -
[212] - Quote
Nami Kumamato wrote:Also, Why did you have to go and create a new gimmick when hacking was there already ? (just to tie it to the Drifter lore? ) Why not allow those things to be hacked as we do now in explo ? This way maybe more of us "vagrants" will find a home and reason in a corp.
+1 for hackable structures
Also, check the first link in my sig.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Seven Koskanaiken
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
1419
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:09:11 -
[213] - Quote
4 hour timer is a bad idea making virtual Berlin Walls between players. I'd go so far as to say it was encouraging nationalism and is borderline-racist. |
Tia Aves
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
12
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:09:39 -
[214] - Quote
Master S wrote:If they proceed this update in the summer the game will die.
This thread is absolutely rammed full of golden comments like this already. If anyone wants a more balanced and thought out view as opposed to all of the mindless whining I highly suggest the thread on the EVE sub-Reddit.
But seriously absolutely excellent work CCP. It is really going to make things much more fluid and give a chance to the little guy. Now the amount of systems that an alliance will own will be directly tied to how much they WANT their space and how much they are willing to defend it. Only thing i'm not sure on is the 4 hour window, but I have no suggestions on how I would change it at this moment in time. |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate Naquatech Syndicate
1737
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:10:05 -
[215] - Quote
Querns wrote:Initial thought on this: * Mining providing defensive bonuses is probably not going to be used in any significant capacity while nullsec mining is in such a hilariously bad place. I mean, check out this mining profitability chart: http://eve-industry.org/mining/ . No one in their right mind is going to call CTA RED PEN MINING OPS to buttress their sov. Gonna need to let it sink in some more before I think of anything else, I think. Blame the market
Akrasjel Lanate
General Director(CEO) of Naquatech Conglomerate
Executor of Naquatech Syndicate
Citizen of Solitude
|
iP0D
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:10:11 -
[216] - Quote
MajorScrewup wrote:I seriously thought there was going to be more after all this time...
What did you expect. It shows the priorities in resource allocation thusfar, and resource allocation for iteration. Very very low.
|
the sargent
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:10:18 -
[217] - Quote
Cheyennes wrote:the sargent wrote:It's funny, everyone tells CCP they want a occupancy based SOV system. When CCP comes up with a system that takes the basic concept of "occupancy" and uses it as a mechanic everyone start whining about how it will ruin everything. Seriously guys calm down if it doesn't work out guess what? it will be fixed in a couple of months because of the shorter release schedule. Give the system a chance first before going "IT'S THE END!"
I mean seriously every time CCP changes something to do will null sec its "the end of null sec as we know it," and yes that is true but just because it's the end of one system doesn't mean the new system is going to be complete trash.
Damn, sorry for the minor wall of text. Says the guy with no 0.0 history in his employment history.
You're right I don't have any 0.0 employment history. Didn't feel like joining one of the big power blocs and small independent corps can't exist in 0.0 space. With some adjusting this system could actually allow smaller groups to effectively claim SOV somewhere and keep it. Is what CCP proposing perfect probably not.
However, for the first time I'm actually considering 0.0 space as a viable place i would want to go to and live in for an extended period of time, and isn't that the point of all this. To get more people to want to fly out to 0.0 space? |
ORJI
Clan Shadow Wolf Fatal Ascension
19
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:10:49 -
[218] - Quote
TL'DR
EVE=Capture The Flag |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2043
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:10:50 -
[219] - Quote
ok this is really important, Dreads just lost half of their purpose and im willing to geuss more than half of their usage. Please tell me there are plans to change that.
E: the same might be said for supercarriers |
Godfrey Silvarna
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
347
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:11:40 -
[220] - Quote
Rowells wrote:ok this is really important, Dreads just lost half of their purpose and im willing to geuss more than half of their usage. Please tell me there are plans to change that.
E: the same might be said for supercarriers I am in the market for some cheap Naglfars.
Sell yours now! |
|
Saidin Thor
The Odin Conspiracy
42
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:11:55 -
[221] - Quote
Lena Lazair wrote:Saidin Thor wrote:I'm not sure CCP has ever had to deal with IHhub logistics first-hand. Being easy to destroy may or may not be a good thing, but IHubs are a HUGE pain to place and upgrade right now. Bigger upgrades AND the IHubs themselves can only be transported in a freighter right now. There's no way a little alliance has the logistics capacity to regularly replace IHubs that roaming gangs will be destroying just for the lulz unless that changes. So? Why should a smaller alliance be able to drop and maintain an iHub? The point of this system is to make it unnecessary to do so, yet still feel like some small piece of space is "yours". Smaller alliances are being encouraged to drop a TCU and some POS's to own/live in a quiet constellation, not drop station eggs and turn every bit of their space into a major alliance powerbloc. Not every piece/benefit of the new sov system should be accessible to alliances of every size; that would be dumb. This new setup intentionally decouples this stuff for exactly this reason.
Sov is, in the most literal sense of the word, worthless without any IHub upgrades. No static anomalies (for ratting or pirating), no strategic upgrades (SCSAAs, jump bridges, cyno jammers). There's no difference between a null sec system without any IHub upgrades and NPC null--except at least in NPC null you can have NPC stations that you can always dock in. |
Steijn
Quay Industries
645
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:12:22 -
[222] - Quote
Rowells wrote:ok this is really important, Dreads just lost half of their purpose and im willing to geuss more than half of their usage. Please tell me there are plans to change that.
E: the same might be said for supercarriers
just allow them to fit strip miners, job done. |
YanniMorePlz
Debitum Naturae
3
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:12:32 -
[223] - Quote
Just a slight 'concern' that I felt might be worth pointing out. I will quote from the blog:
Quote:The occupancy defense bonuses for all of these structures lock while they are reinforced and will not be affected by changes in indices over the two days of reinforcement.
Much like defensive SBUing, I feel there is potential for a defender to use an alt/spy to intentionally reinforce in order to freeze the index of a system in order to retain it's defensive bonuses. One might do this if let's say, renters have recently fled the area, and the defender does not want to lose their bonuses while being unable or unwilling to invest time to grind them back up.
A easy solution would be to have the index drop after the "lock" period from any inactivity that occurred during the lock.
Just something worth bringing up, it's small and I don't think it impacts anything in a major way. Overall great blog! |
elitatwo
Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team
586
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:12:48 -
[224] - Quote
when I suggested to make sov-warfare more faction warfare-like, I was shut down..
Turns out it wasn't such a bad idea after all.
signature
|
Tiberian Deci
Sleeper Slumber Party Test Alliance Please Ignore
41
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:13:02 -
[225] - Quote
Total Newbie wrote: there is no longer a reason to hold sov if this is implemented.... sov would only be held in strategic locations that cover a whole bunch of r-64's and 32's. The little guy wont be able to afford his sov bill, he will run out of money because he cant control the moon income..... then he leaves 0.0.... we have come full circle
If he can't pay his sov bill then he doesn't deserve the sov end of story.
Now if you think the only way to make money to pay sov bills is by using R32 and R64's, let me introduce you to this thing called ratting. You get in a ship and warp to an anom or belt and shoot all the pirates there, and then concord gives you money, it's a pretty sweet deal.
If you don't see the point in owning sov that you actually have to use to own, then you are part of the problem with nullsec these days. |
Allant Doran
Patriot Security Services New Signature
75
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:13:18 -
[226] - Quote
Just to add another player's point of view;
I'm not a huge fan of the prime time idea, as it means tiny, newbie corps and alliances will only have a shot at taking space when the big boys are already online. It also means the more drastic time-zone differences will MUCH more rarely see War.
HOWEVER, if some newbies still have the gall to attempt a system takeover, the larger blocs have to send SOME kind of response. In doing so, they spread themselves, leaving a system several constellations over, more vulnerable than it would have been if nobody had bothered. In theory, anyway, I don't know if this will work in practice. It does mean Supers and other Caps can't be everywhere at one at the drop of a hat though. Defend one attack, then realise another attack is two hours of cyno-jumping Supers away.
I also like the idea that owner Alliances have to be there. Your friends can help you in the battle but they cannot help you protect the Sov of the space itself. I think that has the potential to be a very exciting mechanic.
Sadly, none of this means anything if the Space is not worth fighting over, and it is my understanding that that is still one of the overarching issues people have with 0.0 Warfare. Why bother?
|
Callic Veratar
660
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:13:56 -
[227] - Quote
There should be one more defense bonus based on the size of the window:
`n * ([4 hour windows] - 1) * 0.2` where n = 1-6
If you have 1 window, you get the basic 1x bonus. If you are vulnerable 24 hours a day, you automatically get a 2x defensive bonus. |
Xenuria
Marcabian 5th Invasion Fleet
991
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:14:01 -
[228] - Quote
I support this.
CSM 10 Candidate
|
Total Newbie
Deadly Shadow Clan Executive Outcomes
23
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:14:02 -
[229] - Quote
the sargent wrote:Cheyennes wrote:the sargent wrote:It's funny, everyone tells CCP they want a occupancy based SOV system. When CCP comes up with a system that takes the basic concept of "occupancy" and uses it as a mechanic everyone start whining about how it will ruin everything. Seriously guys calm down if it doesn't work out guess what? it will be fixed in a couple of months because of the shorter release schedule. Give the system a chance first before going "IT'S THE END!"
I mean seriously every time CCP changes something to do will null sec its "the end of null sec as we know it," and yes that is true but just because it's the end of one system doesn't mean the new system is going to be complete trash.
Damn, sorry for the minor wall of text. Says the guy with no 0.0 history in his employment history. You're right I don't have any 0.0 employment history. Didn't feel like joining one of the big power blocs and small independent corps can't exist in 0.0 space. With some adjusting this system could actually allow smaller groups to effectively claim SOV somewhere and keep it. Is what CCP proposing perfect probably not. However, for the first time I'm actually considering 0.0 space as a viable place i would want to go to and live in for an extended period of time, and isn't that the point of all this. To get more people to want to fly out to 0.0 space?
How can you comment about it if you haven't experienced it? If you do not understand it in its current form, then quite frankly you have no clue about the ramifications that will even more, negatively affect the little guy
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
15
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:14:21 -
[230] - Quote
Tiberian Deci wrote: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? This is a good question. If notifications continue to go out the moment someone invades/attacks another groups sov it will undermine this new system. |
|
LT Alter
Adversity. Psychotic Tendencies.
138
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:14:49 -
[231] - Quote
With the nerf to capital ship usage cycle time, would I be able to enter triage in my carrier while I used the entosis link? |
Mirrell Tapaa
Mystery Incorporated
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:15:01 -
[232] - Quote
Timers like this in DUST failed, what makes you think they will work in eve...
Also came expecting to find out how planet sov will play a part and left disappointed. |
Godfrey Silvarna
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
347
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:15:06 -
[233] - Quote
Tia Aves wrote:Only thing i'm not sure on is the 4 hour window, but I have no suggestions on how I would change it at this moment in time. Agreed. It sounds fair, since timezones are an ever-present complicating factor in international multiplayer games, but on the other hand... Not being allowed to interact with the structures of other players for 20 hours any given day is more than a little awkward.
As an upside, you can check the map for areas where the locals are likely to be ready to defend their territory at your scheduled roaming hour. |
Gorski Car
499
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:15:39 -
[234] - Quote
Xenuria wrote:I support this.
I agree...
Collect this post
|
MiliasColds
The Elite Few Inc. The Methodical Alliance
23
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:15:40 -
[235] - Quote
YanniMorePlz wrote:Just a slight 'concern' that I felt might be worth pointing out. I will quote from the blog: Quote:The occupancy defense bonuses for all of these structures lock while they are reinforced and will not be affected by changes in indices over the two days of reinforcement. Much like defensive SBUing, I feel there is potential for a defender to use an alt/spy to intentionally reinforce in order to freeze the index of a system in order to retain it's defensive bonuses. One might do this if let's say, renters have recently fled the area, and the defender does not want to lose their bonuses while being unable or unwilling to invest time to grind them back up. A easy solution would be to have the index drop after the "lock" period from any inactivity that occurred during the lock. Just something worth bringing up, it's small and I don't think it impacts anything in a major way. Overall great blog!
my interpretation would be it would lock for the cature event, but the indices still degrade (the bonus doesn't) however if the defender wins that capture event then the next time it is reinforced it would take into account the degraded indices |
Princess Cherista
State War Academy Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:15:46 -
[236] - Quote
LOL @ groups who just spent years and trillions of isk to build a supercap fleet, that job will be done by interceptors now |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2805
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:16:22 -
[237] - Quote
Tiberian Deci wrote:GOB the Magician wrote:Still little reason to actually live in the sov. Perhaps update #37 will address this. I can think of several: You enjoy living there You enjoy living with the people there you live with You enjoy fighting your neighbors nearby . And the most important one of all - epeen.
JUSTK is recruiting.
|
Proton Stars
OREfull
23
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:17:14 -
[238] - Quote
Princess Cherista wrote:LOL @ groups who just spent years and trillions of isk to build a supercap fleet, that job will be done by interceptors now
You'll have to lol a bit louder as im sure many of them willl leave the game and cant hear you from whichever game they are now playing. |
MiliasColds
The Elite Few Inc. The Methodical Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:17:36 -
[239] - Quote
Godfrey Silvarna wrote:Tia Aves wrote:Only thing i'm not sure on is the 4 hour window, but I have no suggestions on how I would change it at this moment in time. Agreed. It sounds fair, since timezones are an ever-present complicating factor in international multiplayer games, but on the other hand... Not being allowed to interact with the structures of other players for 20 hours any given day is more than a little awkward. As an upside, you can check the map for areas where the locals are likely to be ready to defend their territory at your scheduled roaming hour.
i would suppose that the intent is that off time zone you attack other things to make the indices go down, and things, to make the system easier to cap in the 4 hour window (which is infinite if the defender is stalemated)
|
Alexei Stryker
Steiners Erben
60
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:18:12 -
[240] - Quote
I think ... Its a bit too complicated... I have to read it 2 times to understand the rules
Walking in station
|
|
|
|
|
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 |