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) |
W Sherman Elric
Blackstone Holdings Sev3rance
11
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:18:26 -
[241] - Quote
interesting the more I think on it the more curious I am, how is this going to mess with the rental empires? should break them up nicely. But that just leaves empty space need more low sec connections to null regions. Such as branch and period basis for example. |
Xenuria
Marcabian 5th Invasion Fleet
991
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:18:33 -
[242] - Quote
Literally Space Moses wrote:You made sov harder to hold (good) but didn't give any additional incentive to actually hold it (very bad),
Seriously, you keep giving nullsec the stick, when is the carrot going to come? Let me break this down for you.
The Stick is the fee you paid the CFC recruitment officer.
The Carrot is....
There never was a carrot.
CSM 10 Candidate
|
Argus Sorn
Star Frontiers Test Alliance Please Ignore
639
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:19:21 -
[243] - Quote
Are the benefits of CSAA's as well as JB and Cyno upgrades going to be restricted to the owner of the ihub? Will there still be a restriction of a single ihub per system?
|
the sargent
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
3
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:19:34 -
[244] - Quote
Total Newbie wrote: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
Please explain how it will negatively affect the little guy. I'm being genuinely curious here not a smart a$$. like I said it could use some adjusting but as a basis to start from it seems easier for new people to get into the game of SOV since it doesn't require several capital ships plus full support fleet to take down one system. Again i don't think its perfect but from the outside looking in it looks like it actually has some potential after some tweaking. |
Mostlyharmlesss
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
149
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:20:15 -
[245] - Quote
Aryndel Vyst wrote:HEY LETS MAKE SOV EASIER TO TAKE FROM LARGE ENTITIES BUT GIVE NO BENEFITS WHATSOEVER TO THE RESIDENTS.
Do you want everyone to do high sec incursions or something?
~content creation~
Not emptying quoting.
Follow me on Twitter for the latest regarding GoonSwarm Federation and our recruitment drives!
|
Trii Seo
712
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:20:25 -
[246] - Quote
I would like to correct the statement that it's a CTF. It is, in fact, a totally different gamemode - Domination.
Sooo uh, to provide some actual criticism instead of just saying how bad Domination was, I'll ask a few questions:
- How does the following system create an incentive to go and take sov? - How does the following system in any way benefit "the small guy" who is "trying to carve out his own system?"
The effort to distribute one system being captured over a constellation to take advantage of its layout is a good idea, in fact - it might be the only good idea out of it. As it stands, unless I'm misinterpreting it, the entire system would reward evading a fight rather than encouraging it.
Viva la revolution!
|
MiliasColds
The Elite Few Inc. The Methodical Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:20:26 -
[247] - Quote
W Sherman Elric wrote:interesting the more I think on it the more curious I am, how is this going to mess with the rental empires? should break them up nicely. But that just leaves empty space need more low sec connections to null regions. Such as branch and period basis for example.
it's continuing the slow push towards the "don't ship everything to high, and don't import everything from high" mantra, which primarily is only lacking because of t2 materials (which may yet be solved) |
Tiberian Deci
Sleeper Slumber Party Test Alliance Please Ignore
43
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:20:36 -
[248] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: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.
I don't think so necessarily. Depending on how far away it is from a staging system, formup and travel times may be just long enough that you could sneak off a hac before enough DPS arrived to kill you. And if not, there's conflict, which is good! woo!
Gorski Car wrote:Xenuria wrote:I support this.
I agree...
Automatically off my ballot for agreeing with Xenuria. XD |
Slaver73
Hedion University Amarr Empire
6
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:21:23 -
[249] - Quote
so, this is a nice highsec sov system
but where is the nullsec system? |
Anslo
Scope Works Overload Everything
31214
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:21:48 -
[250] - Quote
o7 2 ur sov m8r
[center]-_For the Proveldtariat_/-[/center]
|
|
Maya Cinderfort
Exiled Tech Space Monkey Protectorate
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:22:07 -
[251] - Quote
CCP pls pls don't make me cry.
ok enough QQ
i think the idea of having an event to capture something is good in it self, but BUT the mindnuming bordom we had while we grided down our first few systems was & still is needed. you allways knew when someone attacked your TCU for lols he couldn'T do that much alone. or any structure for that matter, now a single person can come in and troll the living **** out of you.
we have some ppl roaming our systems who would fit into that role quite well. but i don't want to check on **** every 10 minutes just to avoid a stupid dragged out node capturing event.
can't we just all agree that null is together with incursions w-space one of the most profitable areas to be around. now getting new players there without much effort isn't gonna help anyone except those looking for easy kills. maybe make lowsec more entertaining for pve purposes, flood some ppl out & leave null for those who want to play longer than 4 hours a day.
if you go through with this then i hope it brings the goldenfleet times back, but probably unlikely since powerplayers can still drop a few caps on each node there is to capture.
Here's my Idea: Use those capture events for something more fun, more engaging, not life threatening, maybe make it somekind of pvp anomaly spawning in a constellation similar to incrusions giving defenders a bonus (small one). when someone wins the event:
Defender wins = no upkeep until next event spawns Attacker wins = upkeep is doubled & the doubled part payed to the Winner
when no one engages in this at all (talking far out systems) upkeep stays normal. (by not at all i mean no hostile actions taken after reinforcement ends)
BUT (again i know):
if you want to use the node event for sov:
make lets say 1 cap & below node 2 BS and below node 1 BC or cruiser and below (no T3) & 1 destroyer frigat only node. that way alot more ships get used & even expierenced frigat FWers can find a place in an alliance, that is not tackle.
|
Tiberian Deci
Sleeper Slumber Party Test Alliance Please Ignore
43
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:22:38 -
[252] - Quote
X Gallentius wrote: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.
We meet again, my doppelganging friend... |
Lena Lazair
Khanid Irregulars Khanid's Legion
255
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:23:52 -
[253] - Quote
Mo'Chuisle wrote:How the ******* **** can anyone think up a new sovereignty concept that relies on a four hour prime time window per day for the only interaction between players and not stop and scrap the whole system at that point?
It's a game. Artificial mechanics are a necessity.
I'm actually happy to see CCP finally taking a more pragmatic approach to this and loosening their historically obsessive ties to lore and realism. We don't actually live in space, we aren't in the military, and defending small pieces of EVE should not require players to maintain 24/7 vigilance or 12 hours of AFK structure grinding. Some form of artificial/gimmicky mechanic is a simple reality in the face of this fact.
And this doesn't really do anything to negate the advantages large blocs gain from being able to behave like no-lifers in aggregate, it just allows some smaller niche stuff.
That said, I agree with other comments made so far... the real key will still hinges on providing benefits to occupancy that allow higher-density life in nullsec. Larger blocs must be able to maintain their member base in smaller/denser regions of space, and in theory reward occupancy/defense/large bloc behavior with the ability to concentrate more members into fewer systems in a manner that cannot be gamed/manipulated by smaller groups (and therefore not break/allow for abuse of ISK/hr/player/system).
In particular these benefits should be roughly on par with the income/player of smaller alliances in backwater constellations. The idea should be to neither encourage nor discourage large OR small alliance sov. If you want to be a large alliance you should be able to scale up your space roughly linearly with your membership so you don't NEED to sprawl in order to maintain pilot income levels. But likewise your system income/player shouldn't be harshly punished for NOT being a massive bloc, or else we just end up with the pressures to blue we have today.
EDIT: which pretty much all comes back to carrier ratting and anomaly distrubtions, since moon goo is not a line member income stream. |
HarlyQ
Amok. Goonswarm Federation
67
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:23:58 -
[254] - Quote
Looking to buy supers to refine into minerals for these new mods. |
MiliasColds
The Elite Few Inc. The Methodical Alliance
27
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:24:05 -
[255] - Quote
Maya Cinderfort wrote:CCP pls pls don't make me cry.
ok enough QQ
i think the idea of having an event to capture something is good in it self, but BUT the mindnuming bordom we had while we grided down our first few systems was & still is needed. you allways knew when someone attacked your TCU for lols he couldn'T do that much alone. or any structure for that matter, now a single person can come in and troll the living **** out of you.
we have some ppl roaming our systems who would fit into that role quite well. but i don't want to check on **** every 10 minutes just to avoid a stupid dragged out node capturing event.
can't we just all agree that null is together with incursions w-space one of the most profitable areas to be around. now getting new players there without much effort isn't gonna help anyone except those looking for easy kills. maybe make lowsec more entertaining for pve purposes, flood some ppl out & leave null for those who want to play longer than 4 hours a day.
if you go through with this then i hope it brings the goldenfleet times back, but probably unlikely since powerplayers can still drop a few caps on each node there is to capture.
Here's my Idea: Use those capture events for something more fun, more engaging, not life threatening, maybe make it somekind of pvp anomaly spawning in a constellation similar to incrusions giving defenders a bonus (small one). when someone wins the event:
Defender wins = no upkeep until next event spawns Attacker wins = upkeep is doubled & the doubled part payed to the Winner
when no one engages in this at all (talking far out systems) upkeep stays normal. (by not at all i mean no hostile actions taken after reinforcement ends)
BUT (again i know):
if you want to use the node event for sov:
make lets say 1 cap & below node 2 BS and below node 1 BC or cruiser and below (no T3) & 1 destroyer frigat only node. that way alot more ships get used & even expierenced frigat FWers can find a place in an alliance, that is not tackle.
everyone keeps saying 10 minutes, ITS ONLY 10 MINUTES IF YOU HAVE 0 INDICES. so yes they can take the systems you have but don't use, if you use them no it's more like 30-40 minutes. which you should be able to kill him in. |
Touchie Mc TwiddleHands
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:24:41 -
[256] - Quote
First off: great stuff, finally at least SOME way for small gangs to provoke a response.
However, there are some issues:
With these changes it is about time to implement a proper "Coalition" system. A lot of players are complaining about the prime time issue, preventing them from taking part at huge sov battles of their alliances due to timezone restrictions. This is a valid point of course, but there is also a very easy solution (that has been mentioned here multiple times already) - splitting current alliances into timezone branches. You can still be a member of Goonswarm, Brave Collective or whatever - your alliance name simply changes to "Goonswarm EU" etc. Of course this is still effort and does not have the greatest looks, but people are going to have to, and WILL adapt as usual, just like after Phoebe. However, CCP should support this transition as much as possible, by adding a proper Coalition system. Alliances should be able to create and join Coalitions (Hey, you could even name your coalition Brave Collective etc so you can still 100% identify with your buddies in other timezones!). They would be visible in-game just like alliances, and provide basic management features such as a Coalition chat, an overview state ("pilot is in my coallition"), standings and, maybe, shared access to the new sovereignity overview. This would allow the current big alliances to keep their names and identities aswell as provide sov combat to members of all timezones.
Another issue I see are Entosis links, particularly the T2 version on Frigate and (T3) Destroyer hulls. 10km/s Interceptors with lockrange mods are bad enough, but a 20+ km/s Svipul with T2 Entosis would be close to invulnerable. Therefore these links (or, at the very least, the long range T2 version) should be limited to Cruiser hulls and above - smaller ships would still play a big role in the new sov fights by scouting Command Nodes and intercepting hostile ships with Entosis links. |
Elona Solette
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:24:52 -
[257] - Quote
Could I suggest that the 'prime time' setting is optional?
Forcing some alliances who may be comfortable with defending across all time zones into a form of TZ apartheid seems a little counter productive in a social game.
I understand the logic behind the TZ setting but don't think making it optional, providing more choices, whilst retaining the overall aim of allowing smaller groups to hold space would be a problem. |
X Gallentius
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
2805
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:25:13 -
[258] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote: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. I can see how groups can be baited into fights if they are too quick to react to an attack. Also, minimal time investment by "attackers" to bait a fight as well.
Small groups will not be able to hold sov indefinitely, but they will be able to take sov or at least get some fights. If the large alliance brings too much, then they just bugger off and blue ball. Over time, after several rounds of blue balls, the larger alliance will forget about non-critical systems and prioritize which systems they want to spend effort.
Every now and then they'll steamroll an area they don't use, but eventually those systems will flip back to the locals who will use blue balling + easy timers to get what they want.
Also, cockbag gate camps FTW.
JUSTK is recruiting.
|
Baneken
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
481
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:25:42 -
[259] - Quote
I have finally read all of that blog and so far the proposed system seems like a solid proposal for replacing the current sov system.
|
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
306
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:26:42 -
[260] - Quote
I really like these changes a lot. |
|
Rita Zechs
Large Rodent Hunters
3
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:27:31 -
[261] - Quote
The important metric regarding the success of a sovereighty mechanics change was the amount of goon tears.
This looks like an awesome change. |
Tiberian Deci
Sleeper Slumber Party Test Alliance Please Ignore
47
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:28:06 -
[262] - Quote
Touchie Mc TwiddleHands wrote:First off: great stuff, finally at least SOME way for small gangs to provoke a response.
However, there are some issues:
With these changes it is about time to implement a proper "Coalition" system. A lot of players are complaining about the prime time issue, preventing them from taking part at huge sov battles of their alliances due to timezone restrictions. This is a valid point of course, but there is also a very easy solution (that has been mentioned here multiple times already) - splitting current alliances into timezone branches. You can still be a member of Goonswarm, Brave Collective or whatever - your alliance name simply changes to "Goonswarm EU" etc. Of course this is still effort and does not have the greatest looks, but people are going to have to, and WILL adapt as usual, just like after Phoebe. However, CCP should support this transition as much as possible, by adding a proper Coalition system. Alliances should be able to create and join Coalitions (Hey, you could even name your coalition Brave Collective etc so you can still 100% identify with your buddies in other timezones!). They would be visible in-game just like alliances, and provide basic management features such as a Coalition chat, an overview state ("pilot is in my coallition"), standings and, maybe, shared access to the new sovereignity overview. This would allow the current big alliances to keep their names and identities aswell as provide sov combat to members of all timezones.
Another issue I see are Entosis links, particularly the T2 version on Frigate and (T3) Destroyer hulls. 10km/s Interceptors with lockrange mods are bad enough, but a 20+ km/s Svipul with T2 Entosis would be close to invulnerable. Therefore these links (or, at the very least, the long range T2 version) should be limited to Cruiser hulls and above - smaller ships would still play a big role in the new sov fights by scouting Command Nodes and intercepting hostile ships with Entosis links.
If all these people are so similar and want to do everything together, why don't they either (a) fold into the same alliance or (b) fold into the same corp?
Also they said the entosis links would make you stationary while active I believe, much like a cyno except you can't receive remote reps. |
EvilweaselFinance
BUTTECORP INC Goonswarm Federation
452
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:28:37 -
[263] - Quote
MiliasColds wrote:everyone keeps saying 10 minutes, ITS ONLY 10 MINUTES IF YOU HAVE 0 INDICES. so yes they can take the systems you have but don't use, if you use them no it's more like 30-40 minutes. which you should be able to kill him in. systems with mining indexes are few and far between so you're looking at systems with mil5 and sov5 as your best-case scenario, and most important systems actually have too many people in local to effectively watch local while ratting so their mildex is not at 5 |
Maya Cinderfort
Exiled Tech Space Monkey Protectorate
2
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:28:38 -
[264] - Quote
MiliasColds wrote:
everyone keeps saying 10 minutes, ITS ONLY 10 MINUTES IF YOU HAVE 0 INDICES. so yes they can take the systems you have but don't use, if you use them no it's more like 30-40 minutes. which you should be able to kill him in.
points is i still don'T want to check after one red doing his thing. like realy no ty |
Total Newbie
Deadly Shadow Clan Executive Outcomes
26
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:28:53 -
[265] - Quote
Trii Seo wrote:I would like to correct the statement that it's a CTF. It is, in fact, a totally different gamemode - Domination.
Sooo uh, to provide some actual criticism instead of just saying how bad Domination was, I'll ask a few questions:
- How does the following system create an incentive to go and take sov? - How does the following system in any way benefit "the small guy" who is "trying to carve out his own system?"
The effort to distribute one system being captured over a constellation to take advantage of its layout is a good idea, in fact - it might be the only good idea out of it. As it stands, unless I'm misinterpreting it, the entire system would reward evading a fight rather than encouraging it.
We will not question Dear Leader when he gives us a sandbox to play in, and we will not allow common sense to creep into this argument
|
Olya Tsarev
Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:29:07 -
[266] - Quote
I do love the complaining these dev blogs generate. It's usually the same four or five people sharing their hyperbolic responses. ^_^ |
Total Newbie
Deadly Shadow Clan Executive Outcomes
26
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:29:54 -
[267] - Quote
the sargent wrote:Total Newbie wrote: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 Please explain how it will negatively affect the little guy. I'm being genuinely curious here not a smart a$$. like I said it could use some adjusting but as a basis to start from it seems easier for new people to get into the game of SOV since it doesn't require several capital ships plus full support fleet to take down one system. Again i don't think its perfect but from the outside looking in it looks like it actually has some potential after some tweaking.
I sent you an eve mail.
|
Tiberian Deci
Sleeper Slumber Party Test Alliance Please Ignore
47
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:30:28 -
[268] - Quote
Mostlyharmlesss wrote:Aryndel Vyst wrote:HEY LETS MAKE SOV EASIER TO TAKE FROM LARGE ENTITIES BUT GIVE NO BENEFITS WHATSOEVER TO THE RESIDENTS.
Do you want everyone to do high sec incursions or something?
~content creation~ Not emptying quoting.
I'm convinced that every sov holder that cries about lack of benefits doesn't want to actually fight anyone, they just want it to be easy to sit on what they have and continue making money and not fighting people. This isn't to say that there is no merit to the 'lack of benefits' claim, but no one complaining about it has presented one yet. |
Resgo
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
58
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:30:42 -
[269] - Quote
So, I can understand the desire to spread out conflicts to avoid 4000 ships in a ti-di CF. How does this work to prevent encouraging a game of stealth bombers where a new strategic fleet concept of 250 stealth bombers going out and attacking 250 different systems simultaneously? This sounds like an awesome setup for constant annoyance and trolling. Coordinating a defense of all those systems and travel time involved would take more time than the capture. Now having the vulnerability windows also pretty much means home turf advantage for defenders but also assumes the alliance in question has a prime time. Many of the larger alliances have multiple and forcing a choice screws some of the players and is more likely involve choosing prime times that are less convenient for potential attackers then based upon your own availability. With the ease of flipping systems how does that affect things like super capital production (assuming with these mechanics there are any reason to have them or build them)? Since you don't destroy I-Hubs is the payment for sov upgrades going to be on an hourly basis rather than current time table? What incentive is there to take the I-Hub? If someone else has to pay the upgrade bills and the TCU determines system ownership an upgraded I-Hub sounds like a liability rather than a bonus. I get its benefits without actually having to pay for it if I let the other guy keep it. |
Nyan Lafisques
Fairly Ganked
12
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 17:31:24 -
[270] - Quote
Maya Cinderfort wrote:MiliasColds wrote:
everyone keeps saying 10 minutes, ITS ONLY 10 MINUTES IF YOU HAVE 0 INDICES. so yes they can take the systems you have but don't use, if you use them no it's more like 30-40 minutes. which you should be able to kill him in.
points is i still don'T want to check after one red doing his thing. like realy no ty
So basically you don't want to have to protect your space? |
|
|
|
|
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 |