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) |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12001
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:11:05 -
[2791] - Quote
Arrendis wrote: Once again: There is not, and in all of human history never has been a problem that cannot be solved better using the application of more brainpower.
Cancer?
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Tamdra Beebort
Terrestrial Trading Consortium of New Eden
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:12:47 -
[2792] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
There isnt anything extreme about it.
Right now we have several sigs out attacking all across eve while running a highsec organisation, WH sigs and a large home defence force. We can deploy several thousand pilots to the task of attacking targets without reducing home defence.
I get that and I believe that you can and do but the next question is how long can you pilots keep it up? It is the opposite of blue balling, seems like after the first week or so of E-linking a structure to just be chased off to another would drive burn-out up. GSF is great at organizing but individuals are already complaining about having to be vigilant just to keep their space. How long will it last? Is GSF capable of continuing a "burn Null" campaign for more than a month or so. I am trying to look at this objectively because I want the game to fun and interesting to everyone.
We shouldn't get tunnel vision on one specific hull or setup to the point that it blinds us from the point of the changes, fun. We want fun fights and hell camping a station for a week may be fun to one side and not the other but with these changes the fight has to continue in different parts of space and that will probably require more that a few ceptors with an E-link and if it doesn't then the losing side deserves to lose.
If you flood a region with interceptors and it causes lots of fights, some of which escalate in larger fights then the mechanic works and if you flood a region and the occupants don't defend and lose space the mechanic works. Either way I don't see how one group can keep up a sustained offensive of system trolling without suffering burnout or without causing larger fights. Either way there will be a winner and loser and both will be determined more by activity and less by inactivity. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15398
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:13:39 -
[2793] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Arrendis wrote: Once again: There is not, and in all of human history never has been a problem that cannot be solved better using the application of more brainpower.
Cancer?
Invading Russia in the winter.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12001
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:14:21 -
[2794] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Arrendis wrote: Once again: There is not, and in all of human history never has been a problem that cannot be solved better using the application of more brainpower.
Cancer? Invading Russia in the winter.
The perpetual motion law.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
285
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:14:37 -
[2795] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Arrendis wrote: Once again: There is not, and in all of human history never has been a problem that cannot be solved better using the application of more brainpower.
Cancer?
Which has shown better results? 1 guy in a lab, or hundreds of research teams all over the place? |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15398
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:14:59 -
[2796] - Quote
Tamdra Beebort wrote:baltec1 wrote:
There isnt anything extreme about it.
Right now we have several sigs out attacking all across eve while running a highsec organisation, WH sigs and a large home defence force. We can deploy several thousand pilots to the task of attacking targets without reducing home defence.
I get that and I believe that you can and do but the next question is how long can you pilots keep it up?
We have been doing it for the last 5 years.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Ned Thomas
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
1040
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:16:17 -
[2797] - Quote
Tamdra Beebort wrote: how long can you pilots keep it up?
I have absolutely no doubt that if an organization as large as Goonswarm can reliably entertain it's members by RF'ing the rest of nullsec every few days, then they absolutely will just because they can.
Don't get lost alone - Join Signal Cartel, New Eden's premier haven for explorers!
Onward to Thera with Eve Scout
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
285
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:17:38 -
[2798] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:baltec1 wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Arrendis wrote: Once again: There is not, and in all of human history never has been a problem that cannot be solved better using the application of more brainpower.
Cancer? Invading Russia in the winter. The perpetual motion law.
Show me the solution to their of those 'problems' that came from a single mind, where teams haven't. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12001
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:18:47 -
[2799] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:baltec1 wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Arrendis wrote: Once again: There is not, and in all of human history never has been a problem that cannot be solved better using the application of more brainpower.
Cancer? Invading Russia in the winter. The perpetual motion law. Show me the solution to their of those 'problems' that came from a single mind, where teams haven't.
None of them have been solved, period.
There is no cure for cancer, no one has ever successfully invaded Russia during winter, and perpetual motion is physically impossible.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
114
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:20:27 -
[2800] - Quote
Tamdra Beebort wrote:baltec1 wrote:
There isnt anything extreme about it.
Right now we have several sigs out attacking all across eve while running a highsec organisation, WH sigs and a large home defence force. We can deploy several thousand pilots to the task of attacking targets without reducing home defence.
I get that and I believe that you can and do but the next question is how long can you pilots keep it up? It is the opposite of blue balling, seems like after the first week or so of E-linking a structure to just be chased off to another would drive burn-out up. GSF is great at organizing but individuals are already complaining about having to be vigilant just to keep their space. How long will it last? Is GSF capable of continuing a "burn Null" campaign for more than a month or so. I am trying to look at this objectively because I want the game to fun and interesting to everyone. We shouldn't get tunnel vision on one specific hull or setup to the point that it blinds us from the point of the changes, fun. We want fun fights and hell camping a station for a week may be fun to one side and not the other but with these changes the fight has to continue in different parts of space and that will probably require more that a few ceptors with an E-link and if it doesn't then the losing side deserves to lose. If you flood a region with interceptors and it causes lots of fights, some of which escalate in larger fights then the mechanic works and if you flood a region and the occupants don't defend and lose space the mechanic works. Either way I don't see how one group can keep up a sustained offensive of system trolling without suffering burnout or without causing larger fights. Either way there will be a winner and loser and both will be determined more by activity and less by inactivity.
I just noticed I wasn't posting on my main.
Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why.
Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
Shuckstar
Taking Inc Swine Aviation Labs
296
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:29:08 -
[2801] - Quote
Two step wrote:Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:
1) Expand the window to 8 hours 2) If you pick a 4 hour window, you also get a 2 hour window 10 hours from the end of your chosen window. This would mean that a US TZ window would have an opposite time that would be RUS friendly and an EU window would have AUS friendly times.
This, the prime time 4 hours needs to be changed to 8 at least.
CCP Greyscale wrote:"OK, I've read every post up to page 200, and we're getting to a point in this thread where there's not a lot of new concerns or suggestions being brought up. There will be future threads (and future blogs) as we tune details, but for now I want to thank you for all of your constructive input, and wish you a good weekend :)"
|
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2117
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:29:25 -
[2802] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:baltec1 wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:Arrendis wrote: Once again: There is not, and in all of human history never has been a problem that cannot be solved better using the application of more brainpower.
Cancer? Invading Russia in the winter. The perpetual motion law. Erectile dysfunction |
Rowells
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
2117
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:30:28 -
[2803] - Quote
Shuckstar wrote:Two step wrote:Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:
1) Expand the window to 8 hours 2) If you pick a 4 hour window, you also get a 2 hour window 10 hours from the end of your chosen window. This would mean that a US TZ window would have an opposite time that would be RUS friendly and an EU window would have AUS friendly times. This, the prime time 4 hours needs to be changed to 8 at least. Should be switched to the corps owning the structure. Offers very good flexibility. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12001
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:31:20 -
[2804] - Quote
Rowells wrote: Erectile dysfunction
That was actually solved, but interestingly enough it was solved by accident while trying to create heart medication.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
114
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:31:50 -
[2805] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Tamdra Beebort wrote:baltec1 wrote:
There isnt anything extreme about it.
Right now we have several sigs out attacking all across eve while running a highsec organisation, WH sigs and a large home defence force. We can deploy several thousand pilots to the task of attacking targets without reducing home defence.
I get that and I believe that you can and do but the next question is how long can you pilots keep it up? We have been doing it for the last 5 years.
Then this mechanic shouldn't be much of a change for your people with the exception that you may get more fights that aren't dependent on an apex force. Again, it sounds like the new mechanic would be working because either you win because they don't undock or they fight and GFs are had.
The point is to inject activity and these changes would seem to do that allowing the occupants of systems to determine the outcome by being active or inactive. Taking and holding sov by occupancy instead of HP.
Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why.
Hunter S. Thompson
|
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
285
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:39:16 -
[2806] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:There is no cure for cancer, no one has ever successfully invaded Russia during winter, and perpetual motion is physically impossible.
Right, and so using them as examples of problems that were solved better using less brainpower doesn't work. |
Kaarous Aldurald
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
12003
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:41:59 -
[2807] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:There is no cure for cancer, no one has ever successfully invaded Russia during winter, and perpetual motion is physically impossible. Right, and so using them as examples of problems that were solved better using less brainpower doesn't work.
That wasn't the point. The point is to show that there are, in fact, problems that have not been solved with more brainpower.
Perpetual motion in particular is a big, big example of that. People have been trying to solve that one for almost two hundred years.
Cancer as well. Large groups have been researching that for decades, with no real effect besides killing a lot of white rats.
"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."
One of ours, ten of theirs.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15399
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:42:43 -
[2808] - Quote
Burl en Daire wrote:
Then this mechanic shouldn't be much of a change for your people with the exception that you may get more fights that aren't dependent on an apex force. Again, it sounds like the new mechanic would be working because either you win because they don't undock or they fight and GFs are had.
The point is to inject activity and these changes would seem to do that allowing the occupants of systems to determine the outcome by being active or inactive. Taking and holding sov by occupancy instead of HP.
There are issues.
The first being the trollcepter puts too much dickery in our hands.
The second is there is no reason for any new organisation to bother trying to take a system for themselves.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Cancel Align NOW
Greater Order Of Destruction The Good Christian Society
467
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:43:15 -
[2809] - Quote
Rowells wrote:Shuckstar wrote:Two step wrote:Suggestions for addressing the timezone issues:
1) Expand the window to 8 hours 2) If you pick a 4 hour window, you also get a 2 hour window 10 hours from the end of your chosen window. This would mean that a US TZ window would have an opposite time that would be RUS friendly and an EU window would have AUS friendly times. This, the prime time 4 hours needs to be changed to 8 at least. Should be switched to the corps owning the structure. Offers very good flexibility.
I think that is good idea plus 1.
|
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
153
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:44:48 -
[2810] - Quote
Freeport mode is brilliant.
What mite b cool is if T1 ships exclusively could fit these modules . Whether it be a Velator, Dramiel, a Caracal, Retriever, Noctis, Orca, Bhaalgorn, Chimera, Rorqual, Moros, Spiketurd, Ragnarok, if it's T1 you're the man for the job. If you want Svipuls and Maledictions and Purifiers and Ishtars and Tengus with their fancy T2/T3 gimmicks, they can absolutely come along as support clearing gatecamps, murdering defenders, etc, but they just can't emit structure-weakening halitosis like you can. T1 hulls do also have the low(er) barrier to entry thing going for them.
idk lol v0v |
|
Sgt Ocker
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
348
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:47:09 -
[2811] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Ok my bad, I somehow missed that. It gives ceptors a drawback to using an Entosis so therefore I remove my objection.
I would still personally like to see Entosis tied to battle cruisers, a ceptor can freely roam until he finds the ideal spot for 2 mins of uninterrupted "kill sov" whereas a battle cruiser is going to need some sort of a support fleet to even get the the location. Seems it would create more content than a few ceptors roaming around taking sov. Ceptors are only gonna be able to take undefended sov. If it's defended then you can bring all your other ships to the party even caps and supercaps if the defence is strong enough to warrant it - although the multiple capture points and shifting positions of engagement for the fight as it comes out of RF will mean you'll want to split up your blob of caps into smaller parts. I see that as a drawback for smaller groups wishing to take and hold sov. A large group will more easily cover multiple structures coming out of RF whereas a small group is going to find defending multiple positions much more difficult.
My reasons for wanting to see the Entosis module restricted to certain hulls (Battle cruisers or Command ships) is for the smaller groups. If 4 or 5 ceptors can shoot around and RF all your sov in a few mins, then defending it once it comes out of RF is that much harder. If the group wanting to take sov from you has to risk a fleet to RF (1 command ship RFing with Entosis is gonna die fast) it brings more content (fights) than having to chase off a few ceptors.
- - - - - - - - - - - The idea of timers is not all that bad but like everything in life, the best intentions can become void if something comes up. Picking the timer for a small group who feel they can cover a TZ well enough to protect their assets, may well blow up in their face (literally) if key members or enough line members have exams at school or are required to do overtime or the wife (or husband) throws a tizzy and shuts off your computer. The initial RFing efforts with Entosis need to mean something. It should generate conflict, as much as protecting an R64, if not more.
I also feel there should be no fatigue if you are using jump bridges in your own sov. Yes this will help the larger groups quickly deploy to save their sov but that same benefit goes to smaller groups as well. If we end up with 4 or 5 structures coming out close together and can freely use a jump bridge to move from one to the other, we as a small group stand more chance of holding our sov than we would if we had to move by gates and risk gate camps setup by those wanting our sov. I'm happy to fight an enemy that is trying to RF a station we own but having to fight through gate camps to get there is going to make it much harder for small groups.
- - - - - - - - - People are asking for benefits to holding sov - No fatigue in your sov space is a big incentive.
It would have to have a jump limit, say 4 or 5 jumps free then you start accruing fatigue at normal rates. It could also be tied to your "home system", so as long as you are using jump bridges owned by your alliance within the region of your home system you get no fatigue for the 1st X amount of jumps. Outside your home region you get fatigue as usual.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
114
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:49:12 -
[2812] - Quote
Ned Thomas wrote:Tamdra Beebort wrote: how long can you pilots keep it up? I have absolutely no doubt that if an organization as large as Goonswarm can reliably entertain it's members by RF'ing the rest of nullsec every few days, then they absolutely will just because they can.
That is the point isn't it? Entertaining your pilots through activity and conflict not sitting idle and docking up when a neut enters system. As it is, docking up is a viable counter to neuts in system but soon docking up will cause you to lose you sov because the occupants are not active.
I am looking forward to watching GSF burn null to the ground because it makes the game interesting. I might even jump back into null and for the record I hope they do burn this ***** to the ground just for the tears.
Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why.
Hunter S. Thompson
|
Icikurbt
DucKtape Unlimited SpaceMonkey's Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:51:44 -
[2813] - Quote
So out of all of this is great for what you all are doing but you are going to ruin the dreads and make them useless. Does this mean your going to remove them too? Or are they the next ship your going to be revamping so they are more usefull, faster to move, and get into warp, faster locking time, jump fatigue reduction and lower the siege module duration and cost. And in doing so we would need to lock more targets while in siege.
I would like to see how this goes or just turn them into dread Hulks but you would have to create capital strip miners and include siege bonus for them... |
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
114
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:58:45 -
[2814] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Burl en Daire wrote:
Then this mechanic shouldn't be much of a change for your people with the exception that you may get more fights that aren't dependent on an apex force. Again, it sounds like the new mechanic would be working because either you win because they don't undock or they fight and GFs are had.
The point is to inject activity and these changes would seem to do that allowing the occupants of systems to determine the outcome by being active or inactive. Taking and holding sov by occupancy instead of HP.
There are issues. The first being the trollcepter puts too much dickery in our hands. The second is there is no reason for any new organisation to bother trying to take a system for themselves.
It does give you all a lot of asshat tools to play with but I don't always see that as a bad thing. Good organization, incentives and recruitment should be rewarded with the ability to pull tears and create chaos.
What would be your fix for the trollcepter?
As for new organisations, my guess would be that phase three would be some type of system buff that offers sov holding corp/alliances a reason to hold sov. They have and/are limiting apex and force projection and we are in the process of "fixing" sov mechanics and the next logical step would be to develop a way to make that sov worth holding. Through adding incentives that work off of the newly developed mechanics by introducing new structures and methods of upgrades that work off of those mechanics.
Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why.
Hunter S. Thompson
|
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
48
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 01:58:51 -
[2815] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Burl en Daire wrote:
Then this mechanic shouldn't be much of a change for your people with the exception that you may get more fights that aren't dependent on an apex force. Again, it sounds like the new mechanic would be working because either you win because they don't undock or they fight and GFs are had.
The point is to inject activity and these changes would seem to do that allowing the occupants of systems to determine the outcome by being active or inactive. Taking and holding sov by occupancy instead of HP.
There are issues. The first being the trollcepter puts too much dickery in our hands. The second is there is no reason for any new organisation to bother trying to take a system for themselves. Let's pretend CCP does not allow frigates or T3 cruisers to fit or even carry in cargo this module. What are the other issues with just the module? |
Pinkelton
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 02:00:33 -
[2816] - Quote
:Clap, Clap:
Nice way to solve the Null problem. Who at CCP said lets just take FW mechanics (that aren't really fun by the way, they are just very exploitable) and apply them to Nullsec.
The freeport idea is actually a good one. Hell camps to keep people in and out would be interesting ways to pass the time.
The Halitosis laser should be large and the smallest hull you can cram it on should be a BC. That will solve a lot of problems with people just being A-holes and provide a roll for the forgotten warhorses of yesterwars.
CCP you guys still don't understand that without providing an incentive to actually take and hold Null that it will remain a giant blue doughnut. Right now the big isk is still in highsec. You used to publicly claim you wanted to move people out to the sandbox well please keep it a sandbox. |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
48
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 02:03:05 -
[2817] - Quote
In regards to null sov. Would it be enough of an incentive if the best level 4 mission agent or high sec incursion farming was still not as good as the worst null system for income?
I'm just trying to get the basic vibe on the issue from everyone. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15399
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 02:05:38 -
[2818] - Quote
Burl en Daire wrote:
What would be your fix for the trollcepter?
Don't allow it.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15401
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 02:09:35 -
[2819] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:In regards to null sov. Would it be enough of an incentive if the best level 4 mission agent or high sec incursion farming was still not as good as the worst null system for income?
I'm just trying to get the basic vibe on the issue from everyone.
What we need is for the reward to be higher than in highsec (not by a huge amount, simple have it be on par with 0.0 level 4 missions) and to be able to host a corp/alliance in one system, 10 people is simply not enough.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Eli Apol
Pro Synergy
272
|
Posted - 2015.03.06 02:09:45 -
[2820] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Burl en Daire wrote:What would be your fix for the trollcepter? Don't allow it. And what would you say if large alliances were even more vulnerable to it by forcing them to have longer primetimes? I'm thinking 16-24 hours for someone of the size of the CFC/N3
And ofc disregarding any attempts at gaming the system with buffer alliances etc which can be countered with further limitations on sov tba. |
|
|
|
|
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 |